Re: (More) Cool sounds from outer space & canada.com ?


Subject: Re: (More) Cool sounds from outer space & canada.com ?
From: sylvi macCormac (macCormac@shaw.ca)
Date: Sun Jul 31 2005 - 15:34:33 EDT


Mr T aka Dr Mutt aka Rrrr.U.G.Ruff

you wrote " What art is is an intangible, but illustration is obvious "
? obvious to who ? only when it comes with Adverts ... for NASA or
Canada.com ...

tisk tisk .. now we are pre-maturely ejaculating as well as ... or was
that you eh ? ... is it so 'obvious' that your DNA is flaming others ?
and you think you are cool or beautiful ? i suppose we better get our
Dic-tionay upgraded ... ;-) how does profound or georgeouas sound ..
filtered through th scientific lenses ?

but then i'm NO music critic working for th mainstream press ... which
does not usually touch EA eh ? each to their own liking ... and money
making payolas ... i can see you do not like that which others describe
as kewl & bootiful :-) is it art or reality TV ?

maybe if your 'inivis-able' scripts did not come injected prematurely
with insults you wouldn't get th same reply ... go ahead 'hit us with
your best shot' ... one's confusion is clarity to others ...and visa vi
... i'm sure i'll hear all aboot it in th mainsteam press .. after th
long weekend ;-)

think i'll forego th fight over Han's Island / Saturn ...

wouldn't ya know NASA's cameras are really pointing at us eh ?

s aka MCsquared aka working undercover of th mixing board

electroacoustics@canada.com wrote:

> There has always been a difference in the visual arts
> between illustration and art. What art is is an
> intangible, but illustration is obvious. I see these
> recordings as being illustration, and the hype is that
> they 'come from Saturn'. What you are bringing up now
> is more confusion to the issue.
>
> If you find these illustrations beautiful, then that is
> totally up to you, but to me this is an abuse of the
> language. How would you describe something even more
> beautiful? You are at the end of the line in one
> sentence and to go beyond requires something infantile,
> like saying, beautiful beautiful. I don’t know what
> this type of 'jumping to the extreme end of
> possibilities' behavior is called, but premature
> ejaculation comes to mind.
>
> I initially asked the originators of this thread to
> explain why they thought the recordings 'cool', and the
> answers that came back were because they were
> 'beautiful'. I thought I was asking a simple question,
> but what I got seemed to be insults and the emperors
> new clothes.
>
> T
>
> On Sun, 31 Jul 2005 06:46:18 -0400, "Shane Turner"
> wrote:
>
> >
> > In that case x-ray photography and stellar photography
> > is a "sham" also,
> > after all, the images are taken outside of the visible
> > light spectrum, and
> > converted down to visible wavelengths. Better not look
> > at those x-rays, I'll
> > be "duped!" I wonder if I thought an image of the
> > horsehead nebula or the
> > pillars of creation was beautiful, would I be guilty
> of
> > "duping" others by
> > somebody's standards?
> >
> > Come to think of it, I'd better not listen to a
> > thunderstorm either. After
> > all, all that random, naturally-occuring expansion of
> > air waves can hardly
> > be listenable or beautiful.
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: <electroacoustics@canada.com>
> > To: <cec-conference@concordia.ca>
> > Sent: Saturday, July 30, 2005 8:03 PM
> > Subject: Re: (More) Cool sounds from outer space!
> >
> >
> > > Yes right. 'Hear' is the important word. No one is
> > > hearing anything of whatever the original data might
> > > have been before it got converted, so stop it with
> the
> > > 'its from Saturn' crap. Its from a lab on earth, and
> > > its a sham, and a bad one at that, and the 'cool'
> and
> > > 'beautiful' people who apparently have only three
> > > adjectives in their vocabulary (between them) are
> > > duping others into thinking this space junk is
> > actually
> > > worth a listen. Its data. Garbled, distorted, data.
> If
> > > you think its worth something, then try
> contemplating
> > a
> > > glass of water until the bio-matter inside makes it
> > > undrinkable.
> > >
> > > R. Mutt
> > >
> > >
> > > On Sun, 31 Jul 2005 02:36:34 +1000, "miriam clinton
> > > (iriXx)" wrote:
> > >
> > >>
> > >> whats more - what could be cooler than being able
> to
> > >> /hear/ something
> > >> that is intangible as well as being from the visual
> > >> spectrum?
> > >>
> > >> Jean-Marc Pelletier wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > They're beautiful, surprising sounds created by
> > >> auroras that are more
> > >> > interesting by themselves than most ea out there.
> > > How
> > >> can this _not_
> > >> > be cool.
> > >> >
> > >> > Jean-Marc
> > >> >
> > >> > electroacoustics@canada.com wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> >> Would you care to explain why you think this is
> so
> > >> >> cool? I must be missing something.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> TC
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >> On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 12:34:20 +0900, Jean-Marc
> > >> Pelletier
> > >> >> wrote:
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >>> This was also referenced on /.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > > http://image.gsfc.nasa.gov/poetry/sounds/sounds.html
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> Very, very cool.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >> 99% of aliens prefer Earth
> > >> --Eminem
> > >>
> > >> www.iriXx.org
> > >> www.copyleftmedia.org.uk
> > >
> >



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b27 : Sat Dec 22 2007 - 01:46:09 EST