On 3 Apr 2008, at 4:47 PM, alex wrote:
>
>> (Cascone describes this much more elegantly than I ever
>> could).
>
> Please paste in any particular passages you feel relevant...
I'd recommend reading "Grain, Sequence, System": Three Levels of
Reception in the Performance of Laptop Music
published at
http://www.hz-journal.org/n4/cascone.html
an interesting passage:
"Music performed on a laptop is lacking in one element: its unique
existence at the place where it happened to be created. Laptop music
adopts the quality of having been broadcast from an absent space-time
rather than a displaced one. In other words, a score most likely does
not exist and the sounds themselves are unable to reveal a
recognizable source. The laptop musician broadcasts sounds from a
virtual non-place; the performance feigns the effect of presence and
authenticity where none really exists. The cultural artifact produced
by the laptop musician is then misread as "counterfeit," leaving the
audience unable to attach value to the experience."
>
> I think almost the opposite -- that recordings have led us to believe
> that music somehow exists outside of a cultural event. Music
> events are
> complex social rituals of which sound making is only a part.
> Remember a
> music event you really enjoyed. How many aspects of this event were
> transmitted to you via sound pressure waves? If you took away all the
> others, would have have enjoyed it at all?
very interesting arguments. In my experience this varies widely. I
can think of several performances of Early Music that I've seen
during which absolutely nothing mattered but the sublime performance
of the music. And the deep sense of gratification came from knowing
that I could never have that exact experience again, unlike the
ability to click 'repeat' on my cd player. Those kinds of experiences
are rare, I agree, but that is not to say that they are impossible.
But maybe pursuing this further would be a little like begging the
question.
>
>> I think there surely is a relationship between the two, that one can
>> reinforce the other. Although with live coding I prefer to emphasize
>> the act of cerebral effort than human movement.
>
> But cerebral effort is human movement in conceptual space, and the
> point
> of live coding is to codify that.
very nicely said! I had never thought of it that way before.
Marcel
Received on Thu Apr 03 2008 - 15:58:25 BST