Re: [microsound] re: Theoretical Resources for Microsounders

[jeff gburek <tsazmaniac@xxxxxxxxx>]

> i don't see microsound as being synonymous w/ noise
> at all.
> or, noises CAN be microsounds, but conflating the
> two concepts
> seems to erode the meaning of microsound.....

i wouldnt say it needs to be synonymous but in
microsound repesent as a liminal plane: what is
considered material for music now was once probably
not considered musical at all but rather noise. art
must exist at the threshold of rejection and hold
there. that microsound is some sort of academically
codifiable entity perhaps suggests problems for its
definition as art. if there is to be a radical
alterity in art works, must it not risk the edge? for
me the edge is in the rejection by the bourgeousie
that calls it noise. erosion may be the very meaning
of microsound. abrasion is an energy. nothing can be
synonymous with noise. noise can never "syn".  






j.ff gbk

http://www.futurevessel.com/orphansound/

http://www.mattin.org/desetxea.html

http://www.djalma.com

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

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