Re: Audio Files
by freestyle trombonist (04.25.04 06:56 pm)
As a student of music myself (not a visual artist) and a friend and associate of many student and professional composers and musicians, I find this discussion going in a rather dangerous direction. Visual artists presuming to include "sound art" in their own works? This seems to imply to me that they think the medium of sound is simplistic enough to be included under their own umbrella- that composers of 'music' are either not doing a good enough job at exploring the aural realm or simply that their craft is not something requiring the same intense study that visual artists go through! One can not simply go from the installation of architecture or sculpture to the installation of sound; sound installation is an art form of it's own.
And believe me, sound is an art form that is being studied and devoloped quite well, in music schools and in the real world. Of course, I would LOVE to see musicians and visual artists collaborating more. I'm sure that a great many artists would like to include the aspect of sound in their works. However, to presume that one can push the boundaries of sound simply because they are pushing other boundaries is as arrogant as a musician taking photographs for his band's album cover and calling himself a photographer. Not to say, of course, that it is impossible to cross the boundaries, but to enter the realm of sound simply on the basis of one being a visual artist is somewhat of an insult to sound as an art form.
Re: Audio Files
by all i got was this lousy (04.25.04 09:17 pm)
what are your qualifers to be a
real 'photographer', aside from taking pictures and from what direction may the ever so holy 'realm of sound' be approached ?
Re: Audio Files
by freestyle trombonist (04.25.04 09:35 pm)
heh, i don't have qualifications for who can call themselves a photographer- i'm not one! hehe, anyway, sorry that was so bombastic or whatever. i guess i was in a weird mood when i posted, and now that i have determined that this forum is pretty casual i can step down off my high horse and have a good friendly debate.
so yeah, the realm of sound.. i dunno. i guess the only point i was trying to make is that you can't just tack on speakers to a room and call it artistic sound installation. cause there are serious composers delving into that world at a pretty deep level, and the discussion that was posted made it seem like these visual artists don't really understand the depth of what is already going on in the world of sound.
i mean, cage is the most obvious name in this discussion. and satie, heck, he was just a minimalist- he never really worked with 'sound' outside of a musical perspective. varese was actually one of the first people to think about the applications of technology- tape and other, even stuff that hadn't been invented yet- in music. steve reich is a guy who's doing a lot with music and sampled sounds, in the world of 'concert' music. and then, even beyond the 'classical' world, there's bands using samples to create new worlds of music- the books, for example.
i guess i'm just saying that this stuff is already going on, and it's pretty serious- if a visual artist wants to incorporate sound into his stuff, he should check it out. maybe he can collaborate, maybe it will inspire him to go deeper into the world of sound.
i apologize again for seeming like a dickhead with a soapbox. :)
Re: Audio Files
by cali forya (04.25.04 09:37 pm)
dear mr. musician,
thank you for a really satisfying complaint
about the development of your 'craft' in order to achieve what you consider 'art'.
also,
welcome to the art world. would you care for a glass of wine?
no? how about a nibble of cheese?
Oh, gosh, i have forgotten to take out my earplugs.
It helps to wear them. Lately I have been listening
to the sound of my blood
as it pumps through my veins. In other words dear mr. musician,
please do not assume that you
understand what qualifies as
'art' per se from the artist
point of view.
if i want to make a gd peice of artwork and i
want to use sound to do it
i'm going to.
it's quite different, because in the art world
you are not a policeman,
as you may be in the music
world. in the artworld. in the artworld. IN THE ARTWORLD.
cheers,
cali
Re: Audio Files
by all i got was this lousy (04.25.04 09:50 pm)
?peing you had answers i am going threw an identity crisis.
i can respect your position ... i knew alot of kids in grad school who i felt opted for 'sound' as a cop-out, and i really can't say that i have been impressed with 99% of the 'sound Art' i have been exposed to.
I wonder however about sound pieces that are not 'composed' I saw the schematics for one at a bianneal (i think) that was a large dark room that triggered that sounds of cars as you walked across.
And I am going to have to say that there is no one way to approch a subject. If the Artist has the inner need they will figure it out regardless of training.
Re: Audio Files
by thegreatdecay (04.25.04 10:06 pm)
People have all the freedom they want to do what they want to do. This much is true. Championing it by putting it in the position to make a declaration of public recognition and importance? Herein lies the need for a debate.
ArtForum is the magazine of Visual Art. Seldom can it declare itself a publication about the performing arts, visual arts, literature, etc. It specializes in the aesthetics of what human sight senses. "Sound Art" is a phenomona that many are suddently undertaking as an experience in experimental "art." As Freestyle Trombonist states, many of the name drops and nods to people like Cage will come up. People like Jim O' Rourke are being selected for major "visual" art exhibitions like the Whitney Biennial. However, so many of the questions as to what constitutes as "art" that have been asked in the 20th century have been answered without explanation, if answered at all. We stare at something and say, "this is art" and give mundane answers, despite many facts that 1.it commonly fails to UTILIZE or MASTER the aesthetic principles that many hard-working disciples of the art making process learn 2. it ROMANTICIZES ideas rather than properly presenting or illustrating them to us in the most visually literate of methods.
Now, we need not even look at "art." We must 'hear' it. The bar has been lowered to the point where ANYONE can walk across it. And it becomes a problem because we still use our old methods where some get recognition over others, like there is a scale from which to base it on. Why bother with theater? Why bother with music? If there is no difference between "Sound art" and music, why bother with the titles? Why place them in seperate environments and treat them as individual creations? The art world that we all aspire to say that we are either followers of or are particpants in have acquired all aspects of the arts and entertainment world. The subjugation of expression has not been set free; the purpose of definition and reasoning has been imprisoned. We further insult musicians and finely-tuned purveyors of organized sound who have been trained or efficiently disciplined in their craft, by saying there is in interest in those who create these concoctions of noise. Where does the difference between sound art and music lie? What constitutes that one belongs in a gallery while the other belongs in a concert hall? What seperation between the aesthetic principles does the placement of a title on the piece give?
Re: Audio Files
by cali forya (04.25.04 10:08 pm)
It's true. Just yesterday I realized that
I knew how to knit. I just went and bought
some supplies and now I have a scarf.
I had failed to teach myself
from a book many years ago.
Yesterday, however, it made sense without one.
Re: Audio Files
by thegreatdecay (04.25.04 10:18 pm)
And to clarify, I'm not saying that it isn't beautiful to hear the rustling of a piece of paper, or the wind blowing from the rooftop of a NYC skyscraper. However, what context do you place it in? What content do you add into it? And once again, I submit that the artists I am in reference to, as well as in reference to being, is a "visual" artist, and often these sound artists have little control or well efficient self-discipline to control the sound they aspire to utlize.
Simply said, you can very well go to a conservatory, fart in a french horn, and call it sound art. But now, under what conditions are you able to place it into a gallery and define it as art? Honestly, very little examination into the principle fibers of well-crafted, EFFICIENT "visual" art for a "visual" gallery, but a LOT of "conceptualism" (althought these days I just hear a lot of bullshit). Like I have said before, the bar has been lowered to the point where anyone can walk over it.
Re: Audio Files
by thegreatdecay (04.25.04 10:21 pm)
to cali forya:
I cannot tell if that's sarcasm or not. Let me just say, you utilized your talents, didn't you? You hardly bunched up a pile of fabric and said "wa-laa", correct? You brought craft into it. That helps shine light on my argument.
Re: Audio Files
by all i got was this lousy (04.25.04 10:38 pm)
if someone says it is art it is art. now we can argue over if it is good or not and about the importance of craftmans ship you got any examples off hand ?
Re: Audio Files
by thegreatdecay (04.25.04 11:22 pm)
I think it's ultimately an opinionated judgement to say whether it's "good" or "bad". It'd be more effective and beneficial for the world to ask whether it's "Effective" or "ineffective" as a piece.
Also, if you need to ask me under what conditions would qualify a piece as "effective or "ineffective", then I think you would lack the qualities of an authoritative viewpoint, wouldn't you? The fundamentals of art making, are those elements lost or unknown to you? The principle components of art and the many ways we can read into a piece? The seperation of a work's content, context, and concept? How these can change from one piece to another, yet how important the artist's control over their ability to let the audience read into their piece, to communicate the point they mean to convey is?
Throughout any form of human expression researched, what conveys as an "effective" piece is how well the artist can communicate themselves. How they can submit their passions onto the platform they communicate from, to better themselves and their audience. The problem stems from this; A lot of artists these days create one-liners, which gives them lee-way to appropriate "cheat" methods in the creation process. It would seem proper, use cheap devices to create cheap shots, correct? However, within the context of time they become dated, faded, and jaded, unable to speak to anyone, even those of their own time. That is how we've been able to disregard what we feel as "effective" and "ineffective", not "good" or "bad", terms which can ultimately, in most people's mouths, result in overly opinionated instead of fact-based arguments.
My support of freestyle trombonist simply lies in the fact that even the existence of "sound art" being created by "visual artists" and being placed with utter importance into "visual art" galleries belittles the existence of musicians and purveyors of organised sound, as well as further lowering the standards of what a visual artist is capable of. Of course everything can be art. But when stating that everything that is art is worthy of being placed in a prestigious gallery or public setting for acclaimed pieces, one has to scrutinize. Even more so, stating that everything that is art is worthy of being in a space deservingly reserved for "visual" art should warrant scrutiny as to what kind of art "this" particular artform, or "that" particular artform is, and why an artform of a sonic nature isn't being presented in a more deserving setting for it, such as a concert hall, so that it ends up in a gallery space, because that just isn't true. It has been recognised and observed and presented within that context, where it can truly shine.
Re: Audio Files
by penelope (04.25.04 11:23 pm)
Artist Harrell Fletcher did this sound art—and it is interactive too. Sometimes what you "don't know" can create good art.
Assignment #29
Make an audio recording of a choir.
REPORTS:
Record people making a sound that starts low and rises to an amazing crescendo, as if they are singing in a choir. You can make the sound alone, or preferably with a group of kids, an actual church choir, or all of your co-workers, etc. Your song can be very simple, just a rising tone, or it can be more melodic and ecstatic—either way you should make it as beautiful as possible (actually what you should try to do is make the most beautiful, wonderful sound you have ever heard). Provide us with a recording that is between 5 and 40 seconds long. Make sure the sound builds! Your song will appear on the web site by itself, and we will possibly also be included in a mix of all of the sounds together forming one giant choir.
ACCEPT THIS ASSIGNMENT
D O C U M E N T A T I O N >
The following audio formats are acceptable:
-Digital formats: .mov .wav .aiff .mp3
-Analog sent on either a cd or cassette tape (no mini cassettes please)
-Mini-digital (MiniDV), or video tape (we will just use the sound)
Send Yuri the recording using either our UPLOAD PAGE (digital formats only) or via postal mail (all other). The recording should be labelled with the actual guest's name, and the names of the actors.
Mailing address is:
Learning To Love You More
Assignment # 29
963 63rd Street
Oakland CA 94608
Put the original recording in a safe place for possible future exhibition.
Mac users!
If you have a Macintosh computer using OSX click here to find out about an easy way to record your vocal piece for us.
Questions? Email us.
- - - E X H I B I T I O N !
Selected joyful sounds will be a part of the 2004 Whitney Biennial in New York from March until May. Send your joyful sound by February 17 to be considered for that.
Re: Audio Files
by thegreatdecay (04.25.04 11:29 pm)
what I meant to write in one passage is "That is how we've been able to disregard what we feel as "ineffective" and remember as "effective." Terms like "good" or "bad", terms which can ultimately, in most people's mouths, result in overly opinionated instead of fact-based arguments.
Re: Audio Files
by thegreatdecay (04.25.04 11:36 pm)
Penelope, so basically someone is going to get the acclaim of a genius for essentially playing sound editor? Amalgamating sounds he didn't even create? Wow "Found" sound art. We're already there.
Re: Audio Files
by all i got was this lousy (04.25.04 11:38 pm)
ok whatever "ineffective" &"effective" guy
now show me the Art
Re: Audio Files
by thegreatdecay (04.25.04 11:52 pm)
Exactly. "Show" me the art. Not "listen", "show."
The instinctual response explains it all.
Re: Audio Files
by all i got was this lousy (04.26.04 12:01 am)
ok thegreatdecay you fucktard do you have any examples
Re: Audio Files
by thegreatdecay (04.26.04 12:06 am)
If it's not enough for you to talk theory because you're a visual type of guy, one example of what I feel is well crafted and "effective(since you love that term)" would be Sandy Skoglund. She took lessons in ceramics just to create the clay kittens in her "radioactive cats" installation. That's dedication. That's using human expression, utilizing and mastering a particular artistic outlet, to communicate and get a point across. She utilizes such visual aesthetic involving color theory, composition, visual rhythm and the positive/negative space balance. She uses the way our eyes perceive things to emphasize focal points, invoke linear tactics that move our eyes across, and she controls exactly how she wants us to view it, regardless of any personal content of the elements she uses, i.e if you have a thing against cats it would be a poor excuse to deny her ability to communicate the ideas she conveys.
Visually, in issues of craft, she made impressive ceramic cats. She handled the camera very effectively. She assembles her installations with careful consideration. She has something to say, and what she has to say isn't some shallow sentence or comically casual commentary. You wanted an example, you got one.
Re: Audio Files
by freestyle trombonist (04.26.04 12:06 am)
"if i want to make a gd [sic] peice of artwork and i
want to use sound to do it
i'm going to."
that's perfectly fine. just don't assume you're doing anything new and innovative in the world of sound if you haven't bothered to explore what those who have delved seriously into it have done.
all i got was this lousy: "I wonder however about sound pieces that are not 'composed' I saw the schematics for one at a bianneal (i think) that was a large dark room that triggered that sounds of cars as you walked across."
that is, in fact, a rather ingenious form of composition. a serialist influence (the composer leaves it to chance- it will sound different per each different person walking through), and the use of modern technology to simulate a real environment- like foley with a twist!
Re: Audio Files
by freestyle trombonist (04.26.04 12:09 am)
penelope- what makes that 'sound art?' what distinguishes it from anything a 'musician' has already done? because yes, it has already been done. and, i imagine, more effectively.
Re: Audio Files
by all i got was this lousy (04.26.04 12:29 am)
my X-studio mate was almost Sandy Skoglund's assistant, want to talk methods ?
i thought we were talking 'Sound Art' ?
freestyle trombonist, apolpgies 'composed' was the wrong term. what would have been more 'effective' 'classical compostion' / 'traditional' ?
i am very very well versed in cage and 'chance' & the use of modern technology
reich (via Beryl) and glass seem to be working increasingly with video
it has been my experance that reading about this stuff is far more intresting then experanceing it in the first person and although some of the Artists have a sence of humor the 'audince' over all is often drab boring and take them selves way the fuck to seriously.
Re: Authoritative Viewpoint
by ellipsis (04.26.04 12:36 am)
great decay,
I could be in the reading but,
I'm not following a few things about your argument:
I can't adjust to understand what exactly you are referring to as an authoritative viewpoint. Don't these critical tools of analysis impede your ability to respond to the artwork as a communication outside of logic? Doesn't the content and inner dialogue give shape to the work inself?
Also, where does subjectivity fit in, beyond skill and the "you have to hand it to him/her" for knowing the rules of the game of artmaking... I can think of a lot of examples where content does turn someone off to seeing the work and the modes of expression used by the artist in the piece.
Because, I guess I use your process backwards. When I like the content or the sensual appeal of a piece, I then notice the expression, the whys of the composition, what's unique about the layout, etc.
Could this be a difference in the process of painting to sculpture/installation...?
Re: Audio Files
by ellipsis (04.26.04 12:39 am)
When I say "outside of logic", I don't mean that art operate using logic; I think it's its own inner logic.
Re: Audio Files
by freestyle trombonist (04.26.04 12:40 am)
i have no problem with reich and glass using video- i mean hell, that's a pretty easy medium to master.
Re: Audio Files
by thegreatdecay (04.26.04 12:51 am)
Me and freestyle essentially are talking about the faults of the term "sound art."
We can talk about installation/sculpture/ceramic/SOUND ART simultaneously, can't we? Didn't you know, the dialogue of one visual outlet can transcend into the dialogue of another? Linear qualities in painting can be applied to the linear qualities in printmaking; dynamic, the intensity palettewise of a line, varying width/broadness. We can "see" it. If you can apply these visual qualities to sound art without crossing the boundary into placing or defining "linear qualities" of a sound art piece in a sonic or musical sense, then we might be able to talk about sound art, as opposed to music if you can elaborate the difference, being placed in the context of a visual arts gallery such as the Whitney Biennial.
Re: Audio Files
by freestyle trombonist (04.26.04 12:52 am)
and what do you mean reading about this stuff is more interesting?? different trains and city music, man- that shit's deep. and sometimes pretty hilarious.
Re: Audio Files
by freestyle trombonist (04.26.04 12:54 am)
yeah, thegreatdecay hit the nail on the head.
Re: Audio Files
by freestyle trombonist (04.26.04 01:01 am)
"I wonder however about sound pieces that are not 'composed' I saw the schematics for one at a bianneal (i think) that was a large dark room that triggered that sounds of cars as you walked across."
no, composed was the perfect word. what makes you think modern 'composers' are still writing the same way as they have for hundreds of years?
"If the Artist has the inner need they will figure it out regardless of training."
this is true. however, here is my main point. if an artist has the inner need to add an auditory aspect in any way to their visual art and they have not bothered to explore the vast sea of 'aural art' that has been made by those more seriously involved in the craft then themself, then it is extremely presumptuous to think that they are pushing the envelope in any way. in addition, their piece is not nearly as effective as it could be, had they examined all the 'aural art' that had come before them.
Re: Audio Files
by sybil (04.26.04 01:09 am)
www.roxanne.org/
Guard your gate!
There are always exceptions to anyones "rules".
Fucktard indeed.
Re: Audio Files
by zipthwung (04.26.04 01:14 am)
If people accept what I say as a kind of truth I am an authority.
Craft makes what I say right more oftener.
If everything I say is right something is wrong.
When you are right all the time its time to get it wrong.
www.angelfire.com/
Ants under my skin dude. That is so wrong.
Re: Audio Files
by thegreatdecay (04.26.04 01:21 am)
ellipsis,
Not really. Knowledge is power, isn't it? Being able to express the internal, isn't that what it's about? So in this case, I used "authoritative" to explain to the responded (whoever that was) that in terms of art, you should know that "good/bad" is opinionated, whereas "effective" is something we've learned in art school critiques as having facts to base an analysis i.e "complimentary colors contrast and enhance each other, don't they?"
This can help one very "effectively" if they wanted to execute a "yin/yang" appraoch of illustrating negative viewpoints color-wise. And it's something intuitive to our visual perceptions; black and white are considered polar opposites to us, it isn't such a socially imprinted characteristic as much as it is scientific.
As for content and and inner dialogue "giving shape to the work itself", not necesarily. Content, context, and concept all work in a balancing act. Content-wise, you could have a dog in the piece. What context is that dog in? What concept uses the dog to communicate the message? If some breakup of composition (aesthetic element 1) was formed between a blue dog (color, element 2) and an orange background (creating space, element 3) a)it helps the piece get your attention b)it helps the dog stand out as the main focal point from which to start viewing itc)with that breakup of positive/negative space and sharp, contrasting colors, something in you will respond with it if executed effectively with the artist's knowledge of controlling aesthetic principles.
Your overemphasis on content can be contemplated with several examples, are Jenny Saville's paintings ugly because they are of grotesquely obese women? Are Schiele's models any less effective because they were erotic images of ten year old girls? It's not a difference in the artmaking process, but rather cultural bias. Some people use "shock" tactics to lure people in (like Hirst) but you know what? Back in the 19th century Cassatt's little girl, fully dressed and lying down on a chair, was, content wise, vulgar and considered to be a lucid statement on the erotic potential in all females. It was "shocking." Some who were culturally biased to it failed to acknowledge Cassatt's abilities. Learn to let go, and you notice the art for what it is. Cassatt, in fact, was a feminist who would rather the female image take a step forward than a step back. It was in her aesthetic principle, that such an intense, deep light blue was held in background to the less intense figure of the foreground; background and foreground were held in regards as similar. This would pave way for Picasso and cubism.
At some point from now, the content won't be so shocking and we'll have to deal with how the piece was made. Some of us will see how fooled we were. That's where it hits us.
You don't necesarily need to go to school to understand how it works. However, for the unintuitive, understanding what it is helps the communication process. Some are just plain fluent, others need to take classes. But we can't all just say "aye caramba" and call ourselves experts in Spanish, now can we?
Re: Audio Files
by all i got was this lousy (04.26.04 01:47 am)
" pushing the envelope "
- is that important ?
can a sound track, performance and sonic scupture be understood in the same way ?
after years of shooting 'experimental' music and a number of courses there seems to be a second gen sound of striving for the Avant Guard that becomes painfully repitious.
give me that old time rock and roll.
Re: Crack Philestines
by zipthwung (04.26.04 01:55 am)
Re: Audio Files
by zipthwung (04.26.04 01:57 am)
Actually my faveorite sound art is this recording by some french dude of a shooting range, but slowed down. I heard it on WFMU at like two in the morning.
Have you ever heard a bullet go by? It whines like an insect.
Or so I hear.
Re: Audio Files
by all i got was this lousy (04.26.04 02:33 am)
reich and glass collaborate with video artists
it strikes me suddenly that i don't even have a clue as to what you mean with 'sound' that is pretty broad.
Re: Audio Files
by zipthwung (04.26.04 02:33 am)
And the phone just won't stop screaming
Please leave my party now in peace
Cause undercover comes so naturally
Overdone and dull routine
Cause they tap our calls
And listen through the walls
And hide in every hall watching me
Here they come
Saying Where have you gone
What have you done
Are you wearing a wire
Are you playing dumb
Just how long have you ben standing there
What exactly did you hear
Stealing heaven you will sure catch hell
And then you'll know too well
When you are fired
Here they come
Saying Where have you gone
What have you done
Are you wearing a wire
Are you even aware
Where have you
What have you done
Are you wearing a wire
In a van on the corner there's a posse
All with headphones on by and audio board
And a gun in a cheap suit shrugs who
They pay a made mint to decipher every word
And this is what he heard:
And the stars keeled over cut cards
And the dealer set a fire for the cops
Where have you gone
What have you done
Are you wearing a wire
Are you even aware
Where have you gone
What have you done
Are you wearing a wire
Are you wearing a wire
Will you show me where
Re: Audio Files
by all i got was this lousy (04.26.04 12:00 pm)
www.artforum.com/
i missed this article
Re: Audio Files
by thegreatdecay (04.26.04 12:41 pm)
zipthwung:
I don't accept what you are saying. Therefore, by your definitions, you have no authority.
How precisely does craft further your so-called "truth?"
There is no "right" here. I give my viewpoint. It's just who's viewpoint has more reason to it.
I'm not "EFFECTIVE" all the time. I even corrected myself earlier on, mistakingly misphrasing a statement.
Oh, like I said, there is no wrong. There can be a time when I'm ineffective, but my statement has been defending itself pretty well. I haven't lost my cool. I'm not trying to lay a new foundation of thinking about art. It's just one simple concept after another on my end of the discussion. If you can make a more effective approach than me, feel free to try.
Burst and Blo0m: I don't accept what you are saying. Therefore, by your definitions, you have no authority.
How precisely does craft further your so-called "truth?"
There is no "right" here. I give my viewpoint. It's really about who's viewpoint will eventually sound more reasonable.
I'm not "EFFECTIVE" all the time. I even corrected myself earlier on, mistakingly misphrasing a statement.
Oh, like I said, there is no wrong. There can be a time when I'm ineffective, but my statement has been defending itself pretty well. I haven't lost my cool. I'm not trying to lay a new foundation of thinking about art. It's just one simple concept after another on my end of the discussion. If you can make a more effective approach than me, feel free to try.
Also Ellipsis:if content becomes your initial visual reception, then how does your brain pickup abstract art? What's the first thing you go for in a Rothko? Do you search for something representational, or recognizable? You'd still need to reassess things such as line, form, space, these elements of a visual piece to even attempt to find something that can be construed as "content" in non-representational art.
There is one for everything.
by sybil (04.26.04 12:47 pm)
www.archpro.com/
and they all decay.
Re: Audio Files
by cali forya (04.26.04 01:09 pm)
First of all, most artist I have ever met have taken
music lessons (years of them) or have been in
bands. People in bands are 50/50 self taught.
Secondly, figuring out how to drag it into a gallery
is half to 60% of the
flipping equation.
Look to Col. Sanders for strength. That poor guy approached 300 different sources
before someone bought his chicken
recipe.
Third, the bar has been lowered? Screw that! Do you know how hard it is to
make a crappy peice of art
work on a flimsy peice of
paper that you know is full
of acid and the paint is just dye?
Any child can do it, but can you as a skilled
'crafter' of archivally sound structures
do it? I have trouble.
Fourth, one liners.......dated......just what does dated look like in 500 years? Quality over quantity seems to be the old rule. Quantity over (dare I say it) quality the new rule. Is it too soon to be breaking the new rule. Would it just look like you were applying the old rule at this point? Well, greatdecay, would it?
Fifth and final, I left music because it was too sexist. Plus, most musicians thought that art was 'dead'.
Making songs- now that is the epitome of one-liners. I learn how to make painitngs
by listening to pop music.
Sound art is free. If you can count, you can do it.
Re: Audio Files
by ellipsis (04.26.04 01:11 pm)
Also Ellipsis:if content becomes your initial visual reception, then how does your brain pickup abstract art? What's the first thing you go for in a Rothko?
What Rothko intended:
The Space
Re: Audio Files
by vinniecarozza (04.26.04 01:42 pm)
during my lunchbreak i tried to make some sense of this long thread so as i ate i looked all around the space and tried to find something that stopped me. there is all this stuff on the wall that i never even notice, old posters taped up and thumbtacks, etc. so as i scan around i realize that it all sucks, but im gonna try to get into the big poster of some plantlike lillypad form with little fish in the water and big water droplets that shine and the tagline that reads: Pennsylvania: Theres no end to the beauty of nature, no limit to its pleasure, etc....
so i imagine that its a rothko with its space and then i slowly pick out each of its individual boring details until i could actually go either way. and it really wouldnt matter. now i dont know whether i hate it or am indifferent to it.
then right next to it i find the best spot of all. occupying an approximate rectangle of 30 x 22 inches or so is the faded wall and sticky residue of tape and dirt and grime set free from where it was once covered by a poster.
i know which space i like better.
then i compared the sound in my head of chewing raw carrots and brocoli to the elliott smith mp3. again a tough choice.
i guess i like "art" that i cant understand and my music in 4/4, sometimes a 3/4 for change.
Re: Finger Lickin Good
by zipthwung (04.26.04 02:14 pm)
>How precisely does craft further your so-called "truth?"
Truth is reproducible - I know that's the scientific model.
Photography lies. So does sound. Like in those films where they splice toogether an incriminating message from an answering machine tape. Boy did that get easier.
"Hi this is Larry Gagosian, and I'd like to offer you a show"
Now there may have been a better shoulda coulda woulda - which is where most of Brooklyn comes in. There are three million artists lined up on the runway for a show. It's no secret - so what makes three million artists bad? I see a lot of BAD art - and it is BAD - because it just IS. SO then I felel BAD and I look for REASONS, but its still bad. I guess thats what people mean when they say it's "difficult" sometimes.
I love Rothko.
Re: Audio Files
by aaadamtakesover (04.26.04 02:43 pm)
I never really liked those really experimental bands
that deal with sound but I guess Pink Floyd were my first love so I like the idea of sounds.
but in my art I can't do that. there are songs to go with certain parts in my body of work but I will be very honest I can't play music very well. I am now working on some small basics but it'll take a lifetime to get any good at it.
but I can sometimes make very dark haunting lyrics.
what I'm interested now in is melody. Pink Floyd I think were super experimental for their time but the Beatles had melody which I am trying to acquire.
and it isn't easy at all. I have ideas for melodys but then what to put it and where to put it.
the song structure has to be tight and the lyrics have to make seemingly sense. which my writing never does but like john lennon or van morrison those guys could take a song in a complete turn of direction and it still fits in context with the songs.
corey is a genius musician but now he's painting.
the fool. he was supposed to help me out with these songs but everytime we get together he's
mumbling about his girlfriend.
oh well it's not like they matter, I don't want to be a musician per' se but I want to have songs that make my stories work better. like tolkien.
Re: Decomposition-ing
by zipthwung (04.26.04 02:46 pm)
Beethoven's gone, but his music lives on,
And Mozart don't go shopping no more.
You'll never meet Liszt or Brahms again,
And Elgar doesn't answer the door.
Schubert and Chopin used to chuckle and laugh,
Whilst composing a long symphony,
But one hundred and fifty years later,
There's very little of them left to see.
They're decomposing composers.
There's nothing much anyone can do.
You can still hear Beethoven,
But Beethoven cannot hear you.
Handel and Haydn and Rachmaninov
Enjoyed a nice drink with their meal,
But nowadays, no one will serve them,
And their gravy is left to congeal.
Verdi and Wagner delighted the crowds
With their highly original sound.
The pianos they played are still working,
But they're both six feet underground.
They're decomposing composers.
There's less of them every year.
You can say what you like to Debussy,
But there's not much of him left to hear.
Claude Achille Debussy— Died, 1918.
Christophe Willebald Gluck— Died, 1787.
Carl Maria von Weber— Not at all well, 1825. Died, 1826.
Giacomo Meyerbeer— Still alive, 1863. Not still alive, 1864.
Modeste Mussorgsky— 1880, going to parties. No fun anymore, 1881.
Johan Nepomuk Hummel— Chatting away nineteen to the dozen with his mates down the pub every evening, 1836. 1837, nothing.
death moves in
by cali forya (04.26.04 02:58 pm)
death draws closer
sooner or later your skeleton wins
cause it doesn't need
food and it don't need
clothes
decay sets in first
and it doesn't apologize
if you give it fight you might
earn your weight in young flesh
but, that's it
cause your skeleton wins in the end
you are an object
everlasting
your bones are everlasting or they are glue or soap
or ash
Re: Audio Files
by thegreatdecay (04.26.04 03:04 pm)
> > figuring out how to drag it into a gallery
is half to 60% of the
flipping equation.
So those people have been attempting to get a gig for their band in the galleries, huh? And with Sound art, they've found their opening? Is that what you're trying to get at?
> >Look to Col. Sanders for strength. That poor guy approached 300 different sources
before someone bought his chicken
recipe.
Yet it isn't being placed in a gallery, it's being made in restaurants and mass produced for mass consumption.
> >Third, the bar has been lowered? Screw that! Do you know how hard it is to
make a crappy peice of art
work on a flimsy peice of
paper that you know is full
of acid and the paint is just dye?
Any child can do it, but can you as a skilled
'crafter' of archivally sound structures
do it?
Well, according to you, if I was a child(and my parents will always think of me as their "child"), then yes! I can!
> >I have trouble.
Obviously...
> >Fourth, one liners.......dated......just what does dated look like in 500 years? Quality over quantity seems to be the old rule. Quantity over (dare I say it) quality the new rule.
So are we going to award that chapter on 21st century art in the art history books to that unskilled artist who made a million notebook paper doodles, instead of that art who made only ten masterpieces?
> >Fifth and final, I left music because it was too sexist.
I'm sorry, I was not aware that pitch, time signatures, and dynamics had a sexual preference of one over the other. Which one is it, men over women? Women over men? Intersex over all?
> >Plus, most musicians thought that art was 'dead'.
Well, one of my favorite indie rock bands, Cursive, only told me that "art is hard." , not that it was dead. Would all musicians be aware of the state of "visual" art? Even the ones who don't check up on it's current state of affairs?
> >Making songs- now that is the epitome of one-liners.
Well, some musicians make songs. Some make entire scores.
> >I learn how to make painitngs
by listening to pop music.
Oh, did that Britney Spears song "Toxic" warn you about drinking Turpentine?
> >Sound art is free. If you can count, you can do it.
I count...one, two, three, cali knocked out. :)
Don't be so mad, cali, t'is only a debate. I mean, c'mon, someone called me a fucktard, and I simply just laughed at it.
Re: Audio Files
by aaadamtakesover (04.26.04 03:09 pm)
that must have sounded really fucktardish.
well the only thing I know about sound art
is from what I read about carreles Gomez
but I have never seen his art. or heard it.it does sound interesting. to have a painting that is a drum.
when I was eighteen I designed this instrument
chair.
what I find in the artworld is that there really is nothing new. it's best for artists to appropriate
more popular methods to get their point across.
like for instance a sound of a car dropped ontop of a glacier drving off into the oblivion is possibly never been done, but it's not going to sound a whole lot different from a car trapped in new york city when the blizzards come. the point is if I were to do all that. it would have to be accessible according to the abstract
scenerio.
for instance a large white wall or canvas with a picture of a beach ball. all by itself and no sign of movement or life, and then to have the sound of a car driving on a glacier and then crashing.
and then on the side there of the painting you could put a automobile engine. lets say that it's a myth you are creating. the engine you get is from a junkyard but the car you used on the glacier is still somewhere in the fucking ocean. and that has nothing to do with a white canvas with a small colorful beach ball in the middle or the engine on the floor. but the sound makes it all make sense and then I'd put a little drawing with
small red marks and they indicate movement see.
like a line represents principle, but a repetition of lines represent that of a principle movement.
cover that with a light pink and then white.
pink of course is the color of birth. rebirth and it predominates unless you are a baby coming out of your mothers womb and then it's all blury and whitish. so now your not just reborn into the abstract scenerio your a baby in it and that little ball is going to teach you a few lessons.
that would bring it all together I think. but I could be stupid and I could be dead wrong.
AW
song of my mythical art piece I made on talkback
by aaadamtakesover (04.26.04 03:18 pm)
sometimes I write like a little child
sometimes I sing like a girl
sometimes I feel like an old man
peering out at the world and seeing what
really matters
but you don't matter...
sometimes I color bright primary colors
other times I destroy them with black
here is a sound of color
someone having a heart attack.
there are things I don't remember
there are things I never forget
but really I'm just a baby
what will you teach me now?
only the sound of a white wall
or a car riding on to oblivion
dropping out into wombs
from a glacial cliff.
Re: Audio Files
by thegreatdecay (04.26.04 03:22 pm)
Ellipsis:
So if Rothko wanted you to check out the space, then he wanted you to notice one of visual art's aesthetical elements. Isn't it a little easier if the components of visual design in itself is "content?"
Zippy!!!:
> >Truth is reproducible - I know that's the scientific model.
Lies are reproducible as well. For example, say, photographs! Your "truth" on the definition of "truth" has a glitch in it somewhere.
Boy, did THAT get easier...
> >"Hi this is Larry Gagosian, and I'd like to offer you a show"
I don't think I said anything about Gagosian so I won't comment.
> > I see a lot of BAD art - and it is BAD - because it just IS.
Well, I mean, if it JUST IS, if there's no honest reasoning as to specify it's appropriation as "bad", then perhaps a good amount of that "just is" is just personal taste. Do you dislike their overall structure i.e composition? Do you not like their linear qualities? Is the color inapropriately placed for your tastes? Do you not like the puppy they placed in?
a) It is possible to seperate aesthetical analysis from personal tastes during an art critique. We had to do that in studio class. Perhaps you should do that.
b) Even if you think it's "bad" art, does it make it's statement? Does it say what it wants to say? How well does it make that statement?
c) After deciphering it's statement, it's content/context/concept, how well was it made?
And the cycle comes around again, stressing my points.
And once again, how can we apply these ideals into analyzing sound art in a visual sense? Can we "see" the sound? Can we see the production of sound? If by that simple standard of witnessing sound created, what becomes important then, the image we see, or the sound that we hear? And wouldn't that image of sound creation or simulation have better context in an arena such as, oh say, a concert hall? A setting where sound can further find a better niche than the confines of space we call a "visual" arts gallery?
I think that stating that the traditional standards of classical music and musicianship is dead is similar to saying that painting is dead, or sculpture, ceramics, printmaking, visual design communication is dead. Nothing is dead if it's still alive. Not all composers are creating what we misconstrue or stereotype as "classical concert pieces" and "operas" with what we assume are the "same ole" time signatures, chord progressions, loud/soft dynamics, etc.
> >I love Rothko.
Meeeeeeee too.
Cruel to be kind, in the right measure
by all i got was this lousy (04.26.04 03:25 pm)
Oh, I can't take another heartache
Though you say you're my friend
I'm at my wits end
You say your love is bonafide
But that don't coincide
With the things that you're doing
When I ask you to be nice
You say you gotta be
Cruel to be kind, in the right measure
Cruel to be kind, it's a very good sign
Cruel to be kind, means that I love you
Baby, you gotta be cruel to be kind
Well, I do my best to understand dear
But you still mystify, and I wanna know why
I pick myself up off the ground
And have you knock me back down
Again and again
And when I ask you to explain
You say you gotta be
Cruel to be kind, in the right measure
Cruel to be kind, it's a very good sign
Cruel to be kind, means that I love you
Baby, you gotta be cruel to be kind
Well, I do my best to understand dear
But you still mystify, and I wanna know why
I pick myself up off the ground
Re: Audio Files
by cali forya (04.26.04 04:06 pm)
I love the abuse.
Debussy.
Also, you must open the door before you can
walk through it.
Elephant? What elephant?
I only see a lamp.
Re: Audio Files
by thegreatdecay (04.26.04 04:25 pm)
Sybil:
Wow. You just unwrote the past 2000 years, man. Way to be. You've certainly made me convinced.....
....just kidding. :)
This and That
by sybil (04.26.04 04:48 pm)
It used to be this and now it is that.
Got tired of that.
Now it is this.
Soon this will be just like that and this will be that.
It used to be this and now it is that.
Got tired of that.
Now it is this.
Soon this will be just like that and this will be that.
It used to be this and now it is that.
Got tired of that.
Now it is this.
Soon this will be just like that and this will be that.
Re: Audio Files
by freestyle trombonist (04.26.04 04:48 pm)
"First of all, most artist I have ever met have taken
music lessons (years of them) or have been in
bands. People in bands are 50/50 self taught."
wow, you know, you're right. i mean, hell- what's the use of going to school for MUSIC? if people in bands can teach themselves to rock, then why am i paying good money to take classes and lessons in jazz? it's not like i need steve davis, who played with the last incarnation of art blakey and the jazz messengers and who toured with chick corea and who is in new york all this week with horace silver, to tell me what i'm doing wrong with my trombone playing! i can sit on my ass and do that at home, for FREE.
besides, the history of jazz isn't even important. who needs history? it's the NEW shit that's what's going on NOW! i'm gonna go out and do my OWN thing. oh, and then i'm gonna teach myself to paint, and come up with new innovative techniques all on my own, i've never even HEARD of fucking Rothko, or whoever!
(why am i debating on an art forum if i've never heard of rothko? i dunno... why is there a debate on 'sound art' on a 'visual art' forum with people who have never heard about george antheil's ballet mechanique?)
you make music sound so easy.
Re: Audio Files
by cali forya (04.26.04 04:52 pm)
why are you so flipping defencisve?
Look at it this way,
someone is trying to open a door for you.
They know how to open doors.
You know how to craft sound.
RESPECT, you ninny.
NINNY NINNY NINNY!
Re: Audio Files
by all i got was this lousy (04.26.04 05:00 pm)
hey i may even own ballet mechanique ! sweet huh !
may i knee at your pantheon o
pretention ?
Why sound now?
nice try
Re: Audio Files
by freestyle trembonist (04.26.04 05:46 pm)
Okay, really, I'm just puffing up because I've spent so much time and money trying to get a little respect from those around me(mostly MBA types) who raise an eyebrow and smile when I tell them MY music is Hard WORK. And, well, IT IS! But now I come across this bit in ArtForum and it starts all over again! Visual artists doing sound!!! I mean I know how hard it is to be an artist and all but really...music is like so much harder. It requires So much discipline! Visual arts is just a smearing task. Ears are not so easy to fool! I'm guessing that when you tell people you are an artist they don't laugh. haha Whatever. I'm just lashing out because of my own iinsecurities. Humor me.
Discipline
by cali forya (04.26.04 06:49 pm)
? smearing task?
you really are lost.
go away mr. musician.
just go away. make a cd or something
on your home computer.
you are nothing but a barbarian
with a kazoo.
Worm files.
by cali forya (04.26.04 07:18 pm)
I didn't mean to call your instrument a kazoo.
And I don't smear without good reason.
And I don't walk into the auditorium and tell them what colors to paint the walls.
All I meant was- consider the fact that what looks simple, may in fact require more discipline than you can imagine. That you are in a new environment with a different set of standards that are not obvious and are not the same as the music world unless your in a print shop which is different for some reason.
That thing about the notebook paper artist is a good place to start. It could happen. And it's okay. It's even cool. Why does that bother you?
smearing task
by sybil (04.26.04 07:53 pm)
Worm discipline
you say trombone I say trembone let's call the whole thing off
even politicitans do it
by sybil (04.26.04 08:13 pm)
When the little bluebird
Who has never said a word
Starts to sing Spring
When the little bluebell
At the bottom of the dell
Starts to ring Ding dong Ding dong
When the little blue clerk
In the middle of his work
Starts a tune to the moon up above
It is nature that is all
Simply telling us to fall in love
And that's why birds do it, bees do it
Even educated fleas do it
Let's do it, let's fall in love
Cold Cape Cod clams, 'gainst their wish, do it
Even lazy jellyfish do it
Let's do it, let's fall in love
I've heard that lizards and frogs do it
Layin' on a rock
They say that roosters do it
With a doodle and cock
Some Argentines, without means do it
I hear even Boston beans do it
Let's do it, let's fall in love
When the little bluebird
Who has never said a word
starts to sing Spring spring spring
When the little bluebell
At the bottom of the dell
Starts to ring Ding ding ding
When the little blue clerk
In the middle of his work
Starts a tune
The most refined lady bugs do it
When a gentleman calls
Moths in your rugs they do it
What's the use of moth balls
The chimpanzees in the zoos do it,
Some courageous kangaroos do it
Let's do it, let's fall in love
I'm sure sometimes on the sly you do it
Maybe even you and I might do it
Let's do it, let's fall in love
Re: Audio Files
by thegreatdecay (04.26.04 08:19 pm)
Sybil:
Wow. You just unwrote the past 2000 years, man. Way to be. You've certainly made me convinced.....
....just kidding. :)
Re: Audio Files
by thegreatdecay (04.26.04 08:54 pm)
This is where the line is drawn. The offended musicians and visual artists within this forum; the disagreements between aesthetic principles importance over content, etc.
As I mentioned before, this is simply a debate. A discussion. Yet, people have to insult. I only come with my viewpoints, fact based, without expressing any opinion based "fact" whatsoever.
The line becomes drawn at this: what I have repeatedly asked is, if you can somehow visually analyze this alleged "sound art" to me using the visual aesthetic elements that comes with the knowledge of intellectually speaking within a visual arts context without crossing borders to explain it in a sonic or musical context, then maybe sound art has a right to have it's place in a visual arts gallery alongside "VISUAL" art. The beauty of an object can be visually expressed. The beauty of the the sound it creates or invokes, is seperate. It must be talked about in a sonic fashion. Not visual. We can see sound being created and used, emulated, and simulated. However, we can say the same for any performance of music. The "sonic" arts, the usage, utilization, simulation, etc. of sound. The art of pitch, frequencies, of reactions that are sensed by our ears. These things belong in a musical context, not of a visual one, a context that requires we sense things with our eyes. Can you sense sounds with your eyes? Does the noise of a car honking, or falling, cause a sensual reaction to your pupils, or retinas? It's been shown to give a sensual reaction to our eardrums. To the parts of us that pick up sound. This is the line to be drawn. Don't place the sensual activities of the ear and the components that create it into a setting deservingly reserved for sensual activities of the eye and the components that create it.
Not to say that these artforms don't have similarities. In a sense, all artforms do. TO SOME EXTENT. If the art critics of the world can be free of their bias as the "rebel" art world, responsibly explaining to me, upon these basic principles of visual arts aesthetic, how "sound art" can be held in the context of the "visual arts" as "visual" pieces over "sonic" pieces, then please say something.
Now i know I've got to Run away I've go Get away you don't really want any more.
by all i got was this lousy (04.26.04 09:20 pm)
www.amazon.com/
Re: Audio Files
by thegreatdecay (04.26.04 09:37 pm)
This is where the line is drawn. The offended musicians and visual artists within this forum; the disagreements between aesthetic principles importance over content, etc.
As I mentioned before, this is simply a debate. A discussion. Yet, people have to insult. I only come with my viewpoints, fact based, without expressing any opinion based "fact" whatsoever.
The line becomes drawn at this: what I have repeatedly asked is, if you can somehow visually analyze this alleged "sound art" to me using the visual aesthetic elements that comes with the knowledge of intellectually speaking within a visual arts context without crossing borders to explain it in a sonic or musical context, then maybe sound art has a right to have it's place in a visual arts gallery alongside "VISUAL" art. The beauty of an object can be visually expressed. The beauty of the the sound it creates or invokes, is seperate. It must be talked about in a sonic fashion. Not visual. We can see sound being created and used, emulated, and simulated. However, we can say the same for any performance of music. The "sonic" arts, the usage, utilization, simulation, etc. of sound. The art of pitch, frequencies, of reactions that are sensed by our ears. These things belong in a musical context, not of a visual one, a context that requires we sense things with our eyes. Can you sense sounds with your eyes? Does the noise of a car honking, or falling, cause a sensual reaction to your pupils, or retinas? It's been shown to give a sensual reaction to our eardrums. To the parts of us that pick up sound. This is the line to be drawn. Don't place the sensual activities of the ear and the components that create it into a setting deservingly reserved for sensual activities of the eye and the components that create it.
Not to say that these artforms don't have similarities. In a sense, all artforms do. TO SOME EXTENT. If the art critics of the world can be free of their bias as the "rebel" art world, responsibly explaining to me, upon these basic principles of visual arts aesthetic, how "sound art" can be held in the context of the "visual arts" as "visual" pieces over "sonic" pieces, then please say something.
Re: Audio Files
by cali forya (04.26.04 11:09 pm)
Dear GREATDECAYINGMAN,
I am mad at you because you use semantics to turn the meaning of what I said into what you want me to have said in order to make yourself feel potent.
That, " I will always be my parents child " may hold true on some level in your head, in the census, whatever, not everyone has the luxury of parents in a real sense.
Because you made me mad, I see you as a insidious boob and request that you please slap yourself in the face twenty times. I am certain that this is an verbal illustration that any blind person would understand.
As for sound art in visual art areana- since when is music sound art? I always saw them as two entirely separate ideas.
It has occured to me that you are Michael Fried and in that case please forgive me for any anger I have caused you as you are God. Also, I have never made a peice of sound art except for in 4-D class because they made me and if you like you may have a painting for free as your book Manet's Modernism has been a great help & inspiration to me.
Aural Art?
by cali forya (04.26.04 11:57 pm)
Negative love
Skeptical lies beneath the frown
Negative love
You’re always putting other people down
Then they’re gone
As they fade away well who’s to say that you were wrong?
Negative love
The radio’s playing my request
Negative love
You lie before me unimpressed
Why say yes?
When you know all the ways to say “no” best?
Please don’t make an exception for me
Don’t make an exception
There’s no hope for me and you
‘Cause I’m a little negative too
Cynical you
I see the look that’s in your eyes
Cynical you
And it’s saying I don’t sympathize
No surprise
Only the naīve believe in love and other lies and
Please don’t make an exception for me
Don’t make an exception
There’s no hope for me and you
‘Cause I’m a little negative too
I’m a little negative too
We’re the wrong side of one
I should change my name to John (?)
Or maybe we’re onto something
Could we end up positive after all?
Please don’t lower your standards for me
Don’t lower your standards
There’s no hope for me and you
‘Cause I’m a little negative too
There’s nothing for me and you
Cause I’m a little negative
I’m a little cynical
I’m a little negative
I’m a little critical
I’m a little negative too
Re: Audio Files
by all i got was this lousy (04.27.04 12:34 am)
Sometimes it’s like someone took a knife baby
Edgy and dull and cut a six-inch valley
Through the middle of my soul
At night I wake up with the sheets soaking wet
And a freight train running through the
Middle of my head
Re: Audio Files
by zipthwung (04.27.04 05:49 am)
"multidimensional simultanaiety, " a.k.a. "the jam"
Motherfuckers!
Page motherfucking 18 in the house
February 1996
Art fucking Forum
oh yeah, and
www.amazon.com/
sound is motherfucking metaphorical.
I kill you all with my hard ass references.
Re: Audio Philes
by zip (04.27.04 07:40 pm)
Ed Ruscha told me a story upon his return to US after an exhibition of his art in UK a few years ago. He has been friends with Mick Jagger for many years and they had gone out with their wives to a club, dining upstairs in a private area, unseen to those below. Mick got up from table and looked over balcony to see what was moving the bodies on the dance floor. Within seconds, something extraordinary happened: One by one the dancers stopped dancing and began applauding, and the music stopped. The applause rose to a crescendo, Mick turned around and sat back down after acknowledging the reception. Ed told me "It was fuckin' incredible man".
I asked him if a fire had started, would it have stopped the applause? He said "no". He's proably right.
————————————————————————————————————————
thumbwax, Jul 08 2001
“If we are going bust, we will go bust big.”
by all i got was this lousy (04.27.04 09:11 pm)
“If we are going bust, we will go bust big.”
“If we are going bust, we will go bust big.”
“If we are going bust, we will go bust big.”
“If we are going bust, we will go bust big.”
Re: Adios Files
by sybil (04.27.04 11:27 pm)
www.drexel.edu/
hup hup hup hup hup hup
www.tjs-newport.demon.co.uk/
by all i got was this lousy (04.27.04 11:35 pm)
"what's a poor boy to do"
Re: Single Files
by zipthwung (04.27.04 11:50 pm)
Won’t I be behind my peers after college if I spend 3 or 4 years in the Army?
The truth is that you will be years ahead due to leadership responsibility, maturity level and practical real world experience. A typical college graduate beginning in a Fortune 500 company sees little management responsibility for 5-7 years. A typical Second Lieutenant on the first day in their new unit is handed a 30-soldier platoon, $10 million worth of equipment and given a mission that is their responsibility and theirs alone. Your peer in the Fortune 500 company will not see that level of responsibility for years. If you were an employer…who would you hire first?
*******************
10 million dollars worth of equipment dude.
bust big dude bust big
by all i got was this lousy (04.28.04 12:57 am)
jeu.frcd.free.fr/
by zipthwung (04.28.04 01:53 am)
"Close only counts in horshoes and hand grenades"
Re: Audio Files
by sybil (04.28.04 02:18 am)
24.121.15.226/
Are all mediums happy?
Is it something I can reach?
www.indiana.edu/
by zip (04.28.04 03:23 am)
Oracle Coracle
Row Row Row
Silas Marner's
spinning yarns
Flow Flow Flow
Prey tell.
Re: Audio Files
by alethx (06.03.04 05:07 pm)
It is Berlin, Germany, 1820s, a very smart guy is teaching his students at the university about the death of art, it is his belief that it will be impossible for art to EVER reach such a concordance between the "idea" and the medium as the Greeks achieved it. Sculptures at the temples had a very specific function: being vessels of the gods, being a place in which the gods could take shape in a tangible world.
Fast forward to the present, and we continue, beyond expiration date, struggling, to facilitate "ideas" (as collective or personal ideas, emotions, experiences...) to find a place of their own, outside ourselves in a world of materiality. No matter if the media we use belongs to other realms, or it is "new" or "old," no matter if we are defined as "visual musicians" or "sound artists," "gurus" or "dogs," these names and categories have began to play such a restrictive role when it comes to what is at stake at this moment in time, the exploration of the other side of materiality.
Re: Audio Flies
by thingsthatgo (06.03.04 07:43 pm)
the exploration of the other side of materiality
Like the sound of that—cool,
For this youth now has the quest begun and upon hearing the word started the travel—first to the barbershop.
Joe, can you tell me where to find the explosion on other-side of materiality?
Nope, can't say I’ve heard of it, young one, but sure sounds like it needs a haircut...yah...yah...yah.
Next youth went to the drug store, and shocked at first to find them self-online—once moved through the door.
For a few minute youth found 'd' delight in moving back and forth between the street—touching reality, and past the door—touching all those online drugs, and really having no sense at all. After getting over the ecstasy of difference, moved over to the couch (did I tell you online it's all possible), took of shoes and rested back with the question still burning bright. Doc? Can you tell me where to find the explosion on the other-side of materiality?
Sure I can
So when did you begin....
Five minutes later and 200 bucks out pocket youth, head clear and sparkly, headed off for more direction... next, the coin-o-mat.
Re: Audio Files
by thingsthatgo (06.03.04 11:30 pm)
This ale cat, Cali, is pushing a lot of buttons within those few lines. It’s not a matter of agreeing with a concrete message—the forming or a bunch of words that suggest a clear state of reason, it's in the unreasonable that starts to unfold.
Who needs to think about it too much to get the gist that the glamorizing of the new and the old, and how it works; the back and forth shuttle of flavor and currency that a lot of art-text continually dishes out; the delineations upon delineation, the augmentations of how much and how many, once separated, can be brought back to the position of kudos...
while, cali, your delicate and considered postings are equally enjoyable when stuck at a computer for too long, though is a reader expected to agree?
Re: Audio Files
by alethx (06.04.04 12:28 pm)
it's in the unreasonable that STARTS to unfold... ("your" finger freund...right on the wound!!!... love you eternally)
about the explosions...going on for a while i guess, need to feeeeeeeeeeeeeel them, &... then, after a while...their sounds will HIT you. yeah...you know, sound-waves travel slower than light waves...takes time. but anyway, there is something about VISION that stinks... awfully. slow speed could only be in the advantage.
and on top on the vitamins and mineral pills, do not forget to "navigate" with your ships upside down, wet, wet, wet hair, very, very recommendable.
I'm Unreasonablue- Unreasonayou
by cali forya (06.04.04 06:27 pm)
What is unreasonable about
wanting punctuation marks at the
end of sentences?
We used to have over one hundred
cases to contend with.
Now, jeez, I only learned two.
I don't totally understand.
I want to hear your voice when YOU
say it.
I want to see your face when you
express yourself.
Because something is definately MISSING.
Something is getting lost in translation.
Idjit Files
by i spam u spam (06.04.04 06:39 pm)
Hi Audrey,
Unreal priciiiiing for Viiiiiagra!
www.volomules.biz/
Gino Christie
Reeemove Heereeee
www.volomules.biz
someone kaiser whirligig amaranth fault sic laidlaw gauss flowchart exacter truculent image hear gilt impresario danube brass turnstone .
sadism quest subsistent coupe cabinetmake befall calhoun lexington accustom bandage trivial domesticate blameworthy dolt .
extolling whence bonnet milan boyhood medley hurtle accolade demure blackboard dobson .
wills stanch convene lomb sneak base baden cryptanalyze lignite usaf deceit quintic nitrous quadriceps nitric alumina mi concede covary civil photogenic quanta census cadre pitiful dominate amort super brookside accurate finny .
elegiac devotion arboreal forth nucleus gases voice sag rod suite dirt afraid biconcave cheek troublesome catawba vernacular chilblain tel transform fontaine bulb codetermine discreet angel create dreadful dogleg raucous breakup chubby reedy generosity wilkinson spoil natalie whitman primary sportsmen reserpine .
eerie delineament stripe fresnel chlorate gadgetry donkey berea offshore gorgeous cold database hibachi anti merry physik aeolus invest patriarch thicken andy saguaro capsule ignoramus .
inheritance loss perspicuity diluent fog chronology bogy tibetan comma foolhardy decree metallurgy pearson awash aloha hen stumpage jowl arithmetic alumni locomote predicament odyssey thousandfold stein shark difficulty headstand megabit .
deprave atlantis lampoon lee mclean azalea grenoble startup apprehend squash morley attend alpert atrocious beside stereo creon configuration composition jazzy bangor capacity momentum .
agricultural excelsior blomquist precept cannot pocus kremlin ehrlich constellate chairman guyana salle endothelial diminution aloe acquiescent diverse quasar convulse shrew beatrice digest bitten import perimeter secondary cupful dreary yea deja aristocratic westchester delicate arid demoniac hart .
decorticate cramer urinary seltzer adipic antioch adair repent testament bremen conscientious tenor bluet paranormal apotheosis multiplexor .
beseech forlorn plagued depress farcical bellamy intersperse ulcerate bordello domesday walpole flog presumptuous .
liverpool suppressible spatterdock trihedral beplaster dnieper cursive disrupt cameraman hoop conciliate deferred lind senora scurry astride jeres breast .
shulman actor ingratiate mathematik derbyshire elapse chart dither ophthalmic chevy dignitary coefficient sneer somerset piddle collier prior spaniel maryland dot eigenvalue germinate bequeath furlong domicile scope laugh aye regiment conferred botulism jonquil ethiopia emulsion .
blockade empire flipflop smoothbore morpheme elba doorbell mammalian tommie hifalutin awoke anywhere expressive bay doctoral cucumber shedir canaveral compunction .
Re: Audio Files
by thingsthatgo (06.04.04 11:04 pm)
There was an assortment of fruit on the breakfast table, one large and watery wearing a pinstriped suit. I heard coffee perking behind and went to get up. Pin reminded I got home late last night, though it was after twelve before I left my work. I was hungry and wondered if pin understood it’s fate, still I heard don’t worry, you start — I’ll get it.
Coffee came and I looked at pin smiled and said you must be crazy! COM’ on, I’ll race ya to the gate.
Quite, I'm trying to think.
by cali forya (06.04.04 11:45 pm)
"Eat me Sally," Jacob called, "because I
fear I've feared too long."
"No. You eat me my Jacob son. For it's fear
of doing that leaves undone."
shain.trcol3.com/
by all i got was this lousy (06.04.04 11:55 pm)
He felt like he was riding a wild steed. Her booted legs flexed up and down as she maintained a sitting position while he straddled her lap. Sally- Robert, please eat me. Sally removed her lacy panties. Robert complied and kneeled before Sally still sitting up in the driver's seat. He stuck his head between her legs and he felt a movement. The robot had stretched her legs out and was trying to rub the boy's cock with her boot shafts as he licked away. Her crotch tasted subtly like bazooka bubble gum. Sally grabbed Robert by the back of the neck and began to scream loudly. He heard her mumble under her breath "Make me cum like a real girl!” Robert soon felt the wave of her orgasm as he thought that she would rip his neck off. After Sally's orgasm, she pushed Robert back under the dashboard and positioned her boots on either side of his cock, resting her heels on the ground in front of his testicles.
Re: Audios Flies
by zip (06.05.04 01:36 am)
The tough of the track
With the wind
And the rain that's beating down on
Your back
Your heart's beating loud
And goes on getting louder
And goes on even more 'til the
Sound is ringing in your head
With every step you tread
And every breath you take
Determination
Makes you run never stop
Got to win got to run 'til you drop
Keep the pace hold the race
Your mind is getting clearer
You're over half way there
But the miles they never seem to end
As if you're in a dream
Not getting anywhere
It seems so futile
i tihnk im in love
by spawn of spam (06.05.04 10:19 am)
A major medical breäkthrough in Science has enabled
a team of 14 expert doctors to create a pīll that
has been designed specifically to enlarge the male
penīs by length and width.
The tests conducted over a 360 day period show that
out of the 17,000 Males from around the world who
participated in our survey, the average gäin after
4 months of taking PGF-3 pīlls was 3.02 Inchës!
Amazing, Permanent results that will last.
inconvenient.jfd4b3n.com/
Some are bewilder'd in the Maze of Schools,
But the silence was unbroken, and the stillness gave no token,
The winged Courser, like a gen'rous Horse,
This I whispered, and an echo murmured back the word, "Lenore!"
His tender heir might bear his memory:
His tender heir might bear his memory:
Re: Audio Files
by alethx (06.05.04 11:07 am)
...the ESSENTIAL vitamins and minerals that MightyMouse wanst us to take before flying away....
Re: Broom Files
by zip (06.05.04 01:10 pm)
Book of Shadows CD
A Handy Guide to Wicca For Novices & Dilettantes
You get The Complete Book of Spells and Shadows, Wicca Desktop Themes, Wicca WAV and MIDI files, Wicca and Pagan software, and tons more! Everything you ever wanted to know and a whole lot more on this exclusive CD.
cgi.ebay.com/
WICCA MIDI dude.
Re: Audio Files
by centiment (07.12.04 04:32 am)
Ok.........
Years later.......
My comments.
First I`m surprised by the way the debate had been separated between a few specialist scholars/artists that wrote in between themselves in their coccoon and then never read nor reply to the few people (less than 10) that posted in this talkback. Artists should reply to these talkbacks and make these interfaces livelier.
The participants mentioned a lot of american artists, and they seemed to agree on the importance of many names while forgetting many others. (Example: Throbbing Gristle as a big landmark meeting points between many converging fields: performance art/ experimental or "sound" music / pop music).
Electro-acoustic music was barely touched, when this category of "music" is at the centre of the problematic.
For someone who had both studied music and art, It`s obvious to me that music had a strong
history in using sounds before the artworld began to play at discerning what they could "appropriate" from it and exhibit their choices in their "broken music" exhibits and whatnots.
The major difference that I see between sound art (the way it is conceived by the artworld) and the various fields of "experimental music / electro-acoustic music / concrete music /sound music" is that, while music tend to bent toward the abstract, the vast majority if not simply the majority of sound art pieces deal with the conceptual.
The conceptual in the sense that the "how", "when", "where" and "what"
of the sound count inasmuch if not much more than whatever is actually heard.
It`s really easy to dismiss a piece of "concrete music / electro-acoustic music" as sound art. Visual art people should learn to replace "music" in its own tradition and category, that prevailed years before they even realize it existed.
Usually in visual art, the terms "process" and "concepts" amount to similar definitions.
I think in music, process and concept can mean radically different things. I can be a composer and decide of the poor concept that I want to illustrate a poem with a concerto. The idea is boring but the process and sounds I use to illustrate might be very intriguing. Music is primarely an abstract form of art, keen toward the "emotional" (emotion is a term that is not such a taboo in the abstract field, compared with the usual wittiness of general conceptual art, when they are often various degrees at interpreting artworks that forces you to draw back from and reflect on first sight emotive response).
My definition of sound art:
1) I think music (wrether it is musique concrete or plain pop music) "escapes" music and becomes "art" when you can link pertinent extraneous elements toward its making. Basically, it is as though we would stop looking at Fluxus performances as being art appropriating a musical format, but rather as being worthy as the actual sound events they generated. So.... launching papers in the air becomes really the "music of the activity",
moving across using the medium of a concerto metaphorically, but raelly about
linking the conceptual image of launching sheets in the air to its music.
If a concert is adorned with images, they would only work as art if there is a conceptual element that link them in a precise enclosed process (endorsing meaning with form). Otherwise the event becomes simply a musical concert with illustrative imagery, or like the music in a Jeremy Blake video, that is cutely nice, but could be interchanged with a variety of other music.
2) Rodney Graham is "allowed" by the artworld to use pop music in his art because it is linked conceptually (60`s, drug, old film and pick-up technologies, etc..). It`s really not important in art if you use pop music or plain non-harmonical "sound objects", only that the preponderance and/or importance of the sound or musical element will make the piece be categorizeable as "sound art" or not.
Problematic:
A lot, and I do mean a lot, of "sound art" is actually more coherent with the history of abstract or illustrative concrete / electro-acoustic music than with sound art. Whereas any techno musician proving that their beats are enhanced by visual grids or moving across computer interfaces automatically become "sound artists", depending if these interfaces have any conceptual artistic value
away from simply demonstrating new ways at synthesizing sounds and composing music, as it always been done traditionally.
Conclusion:
Cause And Effects of anything that is extraneous to the sound/music is totally
inherent to the grasp/understanding/interpreting of sound art,
while in music it`s really not necessary. Even in 4.33 by John Cage, you presumably
don`t need to let anything interact with your appreciation of any soundcape as being
potentially musical. It already too abstract a piece to be sound art. And I tend to believe that, however abstract your source or
material may be in "sound art", you need
pretty solid conceptual arguments to support it against the traditional "exhibitional" tradition of the Artworld..
Otherwise you`re back to Cage and prior.
Cheers
Cedric Caspesyan
centiment@hotmail.com
Re: Audio Files
by centiment (07.12.04 04:48 am)
Addendum:
I don`t need to understand harmonics to enjoy Bach, but if I see a piece by Steve Roden in a gallery, it`s pretty inherent to my understanding of "sound art" that I decide how important (or not) it is that
the actual piece was made with pieces of glass
(that may or not accompany the piece visually).
If I do not accord that importance, than I`m afraid Steve Roden is back at doing music,
which should never ever mean a derigative.
(I think he does both quite well)
Cheers,
Cedric Caspesyan
centiment@hotmail.com
PS:
The whole abstract VS conceptual
debate....While the show at Sculptural Centre was full with sound art, the Art In General garden felt like one artist staging he concerto of more conventional music, but I may have lost many of the artists intentions along the way.
Re: Audio Files
by zipthwung (07.12.04 01:47 pm)
Derivation aside can you qualify the following as aart:
1) What a Way to Make a Living
A copy machine with a built in loop of "Nine to Five" that plays as long as it is copying. Paper tray two is loaded with and asortment of Astrobrite type paper. Disco ball.
2) Eco Station
An office intercom fully loaded with Vivaldi. Depending on the weather, one of the appropriate Four Season's plays.
3) Ding Dong
Door chime sounds in the CEO's office every time someone enters or leaves the building.
4) Sound Shooter
Pricing gun that is linked to a thousand sound effect MP3 playing muzak system. New soound for every price tag made.
5) Supermarket Barkathon
Supermarket equipped with surroundsound in every aisle. Sounds of wild dogs triggered at various points along the way. For example, you might hear some growling in front the of the gourmet crackers or a tug of war in front of the Men's interest magazines.
Re: Audio Files
by centiment (07.12.04 06:52 pm)
>>Derivation aside can you qualify the >>following as aart:
1) Actually that machine would be fun. Is it sound art ? Hmmm.....Sound Art would be that
the machine makes an alleatory composition
out of the sounds of the sheets coming out each time you press "copy". Or some similar process. In your example the music is important but accessory to the main focus of the work (blandness of workspaces? I dunno).
Is the choice of the track "9 to 5" so important or do we get the point simply with the glitter sheets and any disco tracks ?
2) Yes that would be sound art. The conceptuality of recontextualizing Vivaldi and mocking (or confronting) musical pictorialism makes sense to me.
3) Err....well if you want to play Duchamps, let`s pretend it`s really meant as an art piece....than what ?...what is the focus of the work? The sound ? Or isn`t it simply a signal
used to connect two remote and "hierarchized" spaces. It really depends on the artist, but if the piece is about a musical office muzak triggered by the goings-in-and-out of the employees, than it`s definitely sound art. Here you are proving that the issue of sound art is really a case by case analysis. Sound Art is not Art With Sound. I never assumed that either.
4) Not sure....Ressembles the photocopier example. Let`s imagine this as a multiple
(some object invented by Tom Sachs). So then, that machine has an inbuilt mp3 player filled with cute love songs that can relax you down while you do your job. Hmmm..... I`m tempted to say it`s sound art. There`s no glitter sheets here, only the music, and while the photocopyer could have played anything danceable (club music) from any era, let`s imagine this machine is effective only with certain perticularly sweet love ballads (muzak). I think it`s a sound art multiple but a lot of people wouldn`t agree because it uses musical appropriation instead of triggering its own music. But the piece indeed only functions through the use of music/sound. By the way, the title of your multiple is lame. Ask me about titles before proceeding to fabrication. ;-)
5) Sound Art too. There`s only sound here, but it functions within the conceptuality of framing that supermarket. It`s a strong idea
if you can think of other places where it would function even better. Invite me to this work when you`ll have selected and proceed. I`ll publish a book about it.
See...many artists will make huge complex compositions out of dog barks, but the fine line between "art" and "music" becomes really thin. And in those cases, I believe the historicity of music should always prevail, in those categorizations.
This said, a piece of soundwork entirely
made of dog sounds using perticular parameters or concepts (dogs recorded while
their owners are leaving the house, etc..),
can be Sound Art. I don`t think it`s important
if a piece is "pure music" or not to the hears to become "Sound Art". This really is about what is going on conceptually. I`m sure they are people who made music in the past that were actually making Sound Art without them knowing. But they are also many "sound art pieces" that are not conceptually pertinent to be tagged anything else than music (musique concrete). Bring me in any sound art exhibit or event and we`ll debate that, piece by piece.
The User are a fine example of artists doing music that is also sound art because their
concert are often highly conceptual.
Cheers,
Cedric Caspesyan
centiment@hotmail.com
Re: Audio Files
by centiment (07.14.04 01:08 am)
Duh,...I thought the question was:
if the works qualified as "sound" art.
Cedric Caspesyan
centiment@hotmail.com
Sonic Praxis after all this jazz
by phasehead (08.23.04 08:47 pm)
There is a whole new strain of interesting sonic minimalisms and phenomenlogical repitition that are being explored by practictioners often outside the art institution context— rather in clubs or less structured occasions. They employ what can be analogous as process oriented operations — one's that aurally and performatively unfold for the listener. Like a super-deformed comeback of 70's minimalist at times. Some that I'm interested in NYC especially include: Dion Workman, Double Leopards, New Humans, Orthrelm, Wikkid, some Black Dice, etc.