Re: encouraging polemics and reflection...


Subject: Re: encouraging polemics and reflection...
From: Rosemary Mountain (mountain@ua.pt)
Date: Sat Feb 13 1999 - 07:08:36 EST


Douglas Doherty wrote:
>
> ... (after quoting my earlier note)
>
> I feel this is a bit general and getting too tied to the technology when it
> is the sound that is important; it is the characteristics of the sound that
> make it "spacey" and "trippy", or earthbound. In the end motor skills are
> not necessary to give a sound a convincing sense of physical reality, just
> knowledge, skill and patience. Knowledge of sound and how it works
> (acoustics AND psychoacoustics), skill at the technology, and patience
> because the theory can only take you part of the way.

I agree that my original comment was "a bit general" and that the
effects could easily be "simulated" without motor skills, and conversely
-- returning to JF Delannoy's comment the other day -- that motor
movements are not the only evocation of human physicality.

> In addition, motor skills can also result in "spacey" sounds.

Of course!

But I meant to refer to some striking correspondences between our
perceptual parsing strategies and human motor movements -- for instance
our inability to distinguish temporal order just beyond the limit at
which we can play notes on a keyboard or violin, for example (around
20/second) and also an apparent upper limit of the period which can be
directly perceived as regular which corresponds nicely to a cycle of
slow limb movements (there is a limit to how slow we can walk!)

There are of course many other factors, but I am finding it interesting
to realize, rather belatedly, that we hear things the way we do partly
because of the "configuration" of our bodies and those of the bodies
around us.....

====+++====+++====+++====+++====

  Dr. Rosemary Mountain
  University of Aveiro
  Communication & Art Dept.
  P-3810 Aveiro, Portugal



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b27 : Wed Jun 11 2003 - 13:08:51 EDT