Re: Narrative and Semantic (I), and Why


Subject: Re: Narrative and Semantic (I), and Why
From: Kevin Austin (kevin.austin@videotron.ca)
Date: Tue Oct 11 2005 - 23:31:48 EDT


I find the discussion central to the field of ea. I work in an area
(ea) in which nothing is fixed.

Today in class we listened to a 4 - 5 second fragment from Gobeil's
Le vertige inconnu, about 15 - 20 times in 30 minutes. As far as I
can tell, almost no one in the class heard it the same way after 30
minutes of re-listening and critical analytic hearing and discussion.
I do not believe this was caused by the subtle transformation of the
file on the CD, but rather changes of perception and focus.

The more I deal in this area, the more I feel that the field of ea
analysis was side-tracked for a long time by the ideas of Pierre
Schaeffer and those who took up the idea of "objet sonore" and
"écoute réduite". The premise is / was that there is a 'thing' called
an "object", and this object exists outside of oneself, and that with
'reduced hearing' (an internal process probably), one would be able
to 'hear'.

(http://www.comm.uqam.ca/~GRAM/C/term/mus/must150.html)

From my understanding, which is not strong in this area, the
proposition is that there are external objects, not internal
processes.

How the more general thread(s) of 'Your dear Eliot and Richard' are
to me important, for a significant block I have found for many
students has been the 'linguistic' concept of 'an object', be it
sonic or as proposed, "narrative". For me these are 'processes', and
"hearing" is (partly) about having a 'faster ear' that is able to
pick-up finer and finer levels of detail, while also processing other
levels of the aspects of sound, and these are (almost) all learned
(and therefore strongly cultural).

The fine(r) sifting of "innate" (?) psychoacoustic aspects (Haas
effect for example) and those which are 'learned' (sic), for example
the concept of constancy (exemplified by masking), and identity
(exemplified by the concept of "same", and families of sounds,
relationships and transformations).

These are 'simple' ideas, they simply are not easy, IME.

Your perception and organization of this may be quite different from mine.

Best

Kevin (other A)

At 15:58 -0500 2005/10/11, Larry Austin wrote:
>My dear Eliot and Richard:
>
>I'm sorry, but this thread/dialogue is really boring and exploitive
>of the list's thrust...electroacoustic music. Would you take your
>conversation/exhibition off-list, please?
>
>Your erstwhile colleague, nevertheless,
>
>Larry Austin
>



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b27 : Sat Dec 22 2007 - 01:46:13 EST