Re: [microsound] music is the ultimate incorruptible

[Derek Mason <derek.mason@xxxxxxxxx>]

David,

Well spoken.  I could not agree more.  I have been both listener and composer with a recording.  Language is music with a tempo and rhythm.  It is our distinction of various sounds placed together that determine communication.  Hearing and knowing the direction of the train, you know it is the one you need to get.  The sound is interpreted as communication.  The baby cries and the mother/father responds.


> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "David Powers" <cyborgk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> If you as a listener, listen to something as 'music," it is music 
> within that context. The question of communication is irrelevant. 
> Actually, "communication" is more properly the realm of car horns 
> and ambulance sirens, and not of music. Music is interesting 
> precisely because it refuses to communicate. It's ambiguous.
> 
> Consider the case of a field recording:
> 
> Scenario 1: A train is screeching along over my head. I'm late for 
> work and in a hurry. I don't hear any music. Nothing is being 
> communicated. It's just random noise that happens to be occurring.
> 
> Scenario 2: Someone walks by with their mini-disc player, records 
> the very same train, and releases it on a CD-R entitled "the 
> Sublime Sounds of Chicago". I buy the CD and listen to it at home. 
> I hear the very same train as in Scenario 1, but now I hear it as 
> music. I think to myself, "the sounds of Chicago really are 
> sublime."
> 
> The sounds in 1 and 2 are the same (ignoring the limitations of 
> recording technology for the moment). Only my perception as 
> listener has changed. However, at no point did the actual creator 
> of the sound, the TRAIN, intend to communicate.
> 
> ~David
> 


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