Re: [microsound] anyone up for a .microsound project?

[Visa Kuoppala <visa.kuoppala@xxxxxxxxx>]

Nice points... I guess it depends a lot on how conceptually you view the 
material. I was personally not viewing the sounds conceptually at all 
but more as pure "sound objects" (to use Schaefferian terms). And as 
simply sound objects, they would almost certainly sound more interesting 
were they of better quality...

Best,

Visa


Owen Green kirjoitti:
> Can't it be both?
>
> As representations of 'pure' phenomena - and not ones we could ever 
> directly hear, it's worth noting - the files' limited bandwidth and 
> dynamic range can be understood as inhibiting.
>
> As representations of an (imperfect) reconstruction of some phenomena, 
> we hear the results of, e.g., technical ambiguity (in the construction 
> of a sound from sensor data) and of choices (made about *how* to sonify,
> how much to clean up, the resolution at which to publish online etc.).
>
> For me, it's the messy ambiguity that I find 'meaningful character' in...


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