Re: observances


Subject: Re: observances
From: KEVIN AUSTIN (KAUSTIN@vax2.concordia.ca)
Date: Sun Jul 18 1999 - 07:21:39 EDT


I wrote:

>> The posted article (very useful, again thanks), presents an uncommonly
>> complete model for the selection process, criteria and group thinking.

Larry also postulated:

>I think it represents, on the other hand, a model for contemplating the
>group navel (def.: The depression in the surface of the abdomen where
>the umbilical cord was connected with the fetus).

[A contemplation of the navel may reveal truths beyond belief. The navel
is the point of disconnection of history, and the creation of a new
individual.]

It all depends upon your models honey (and your navel). Place a copy of
Computer Music Journal, Organized Sound, Keyboard Magazine and The Wire
next to each other (for example ... since there are a number of others
too), and read them less for specific content than for orientation. Which
magazine corresponds to which kind of competition. (To this list could be
added Leonardo, Wired etc, these being of a more general arts orientation
-- and of course the once and magnificent Source.)

While ICMC has gossip about who done what, when and to whom, it focuses
to explain to others (largely in the field), what specific words 'mean',
and how to apply them: thus The Computer Music Tutorial. CMJ also
includes extensive reviews, more frequently descriptive than highly
opinionated. Five line staves and notes have been known to turn up, but
they are more 'abstract' or 'demonstrative', than applicable. (See
below). The word electroacoustic turns up, but a definition is avoided.
Note who advertises, and what they advertise. Annual CD: quite 'academic'.
<yikes!> MIT publishing academic material ... wot' neXt? Not cheap.

The acousmatypes find solace in Organized Sound, Bourges and
'electroacoustic / sonic art' organizations. The word acousmatic turns
up, and is (sub rosa) argued about. Not much by the way of five line
staffs and notes. Auditory Scene Analysis and On Sonic Art are basic
'references'. Check out who advertises (and who publishes OS). An annual
CD, also somewhat 'academic'. They are Cambridge, CMJ is in Cambridge.
Not cheap.

Keyboard Magazine (and similar) work to explain the field in more general
terms: a kind of common ground that includes pop music gossip, and
apologizes when it gets "too techinical" (but it still goes cover some
technical elements). Music notation is a regular aspect, but is mostly
'applicable' in nature, or educational in terms of learning certain
aspects of music theory. Quite 'topical', and pretty much 'in the center'.
(Read a Keyboard magazine from 1984 to get a sense of where it is / was.)
Note the 'sister publications'. [I start by reading all of the
advertising, but that means little since I also read the comics first in
the daily newspaper ... ].

The Wire reviews CDs and talks about who, where and when (from what
little I have read). Opinion is an important aspect of the publication.
Not cheap. The CDs appear to be wide ranging compilations. 'Definition'
of terms is left largely to the reader: text tends towards poetic rather
than pedantic.

The use of the term 'digital' arts needs a bit more chewing.

mmmmmmmmm... or is that ooooooohhhhmmmmmmmmmmmmm

Best

Kevin
kaustin@vax2.concordia.ca



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b27 : Wed Jun 11 2003 - 13:09:02 EDT