Re: [microsound] maths science and electronic music

["W.C Schrimshaw" <W.C.Schrimshaw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

i would be interested to hear how people relate to this idea of separating
process from product with regard to music, as is suggested below. in my
personal experience and through conversation with other musicians
associated with the microsound community, the process is often the piece,
as much as the aesthetic produced. it often seems that what is new about
much digitally mediated music is its processual content and the
problematization of ideas of authorship and subjectivity that these
processes often bring about.
to separate the process from the product, to hide the labour behind it,
would destroy a lot of the meaning that can be recognised in much digital
art and music.... perhaps?

> I am exploring the concept that music, maths and science are not
> intrinsically linked. I would like to hear your views on the subject.
>
> This may seem a question with an obvious answer to most, as alot
> electronic musicians believe that music, maths and science, are
> intrinsically linked. However i would like you to consider music as a kind
> of thing in itself. That is, as an entity in its own right.
>
> To make this rather garbled concept of mine a bit clearer, i have found an
> unsatisfactory analogy (its unsatisfactory because it has some flaws).
> Here it is:
>
> Okay when you switch on the light at home, you experience it as Light, and
> light only. When you talk about it to someone, you talk in terms of the
> tone or whatever...you know you might say "this light is to bright" or
> "maybe we should dim the lights". What you dont do is talk about the
> complex history of invention that has led up to the possibility of
> artificial light. When the light is on, you dont experience it as a fusion
> of electronics, and truth table logic. You experience it as an entity in
> its own right.
>
> It would seem a slightly bizarre occurence if instead of someone refering
> to the quality of light tone in a room, they started spouting abstract
> equations. That is to say the language of science and mathematics has
> nothing to do with the appreciation of light as an entity, or ideal thing.
> Light comes on you can see, you pecieve it in qualitative terms.
>
> So mathematical and scientific discussion is out of place in qualitative
> discussion, but it is accurate in disscusions on how light is made.
>
> so i guess im saying, macking music can be mathematical and scientific,
> but music as the finished product is not?
>
> {told you the reasoning was a bit shaky but you get the idea}
>
> It is, if you like, the seperation of process and outcome.
>
> let me know what you think
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Do you Yahoo!?
>  Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site!


http://www.altho.org
arts community


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: microsound-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: microsound-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
website: http://www.microsound.org