On extended, boundless, vibratory and in-the-now sympathy music
http://jeromejoy.org/
|| NEWS
|| BIO
| SHOWS
| CATALOG
|| PROJE
(C)
TS
| MP3s
| CDs
| VIDEOS
|| BIBLIO
| STUDIES
| DOCUMENTATION
| PH.D.
| EDU
| COLLECTIVE JUKEBOX
| NOCINEMA.ORG
| CONCERTS FILMS
|| AUDITO
| QWAT?
|| home
| contact
|
| 🔎
|
Last changed - French time: 2015/05/12 04:00
>
Recent changes
B
I
U
S
link
image
code
HTML
list
Show page
Syntax
!!1. Introduction Over the last few years my research has focused on the definition of “auditorium” and how it cannot remain unmodified in this digital and networked age. I propose that it is necessary to explore the subtle difference between what is “producing” an auditorium and what “is” an auditorium. What we discern as a listening space for the production and reception of music and sound – the audio perceptions and experiences that we can have, now largely surpass the specific physical structures and architecture dedicated to audiences and to sound propagation (concert halls, venues, esplanades, etc.). Enlarged and invisible, sensible and sensory enveloping forms are now developed beyond the perimeters of our perception: from environmental ambiances and atmospheres to internet auditoriums and larger invisible listening structures and membranes – as transparent, evolving, and emergent as they are. We have to examine these “spaces”: their architectural filiation with places and rooms, their plasticity and ductility. Their propensity to be built, planned, settled and landscaped for listening; their ability to locate and seize listeners and to be explored by sound productions designed to be listened to. It is our interest to explore hidden forms of sound and musical structuring “by” space and “by” spatial components: forms, processes and energies of sound spatialisation, immersion and propagation. Propelled by sound intensity, spectrum, phasing, filtering, delay effects, and so on, they involve or emerge from reactions, interferences, and feedback of/with the space. That is why the author is opening several hypothesis that cover musical and sound production and “manufacturing” (music composing, interpreting, playing); reception and perception (the listening); the presence and co-presence in the spaces and places (audiences). This also includes sociotechnical contexts and usages that allow interconnections between sound and musical actions; operations and members of an audience; reactions, responses, and properties of the “listening” space, all being perceived as coherent, seamless, and homogeneous (that is producing an “auditorium”). Rather than conceiving and producing a sound or musical operation as action in time and in space, the act of listening consists of activating a space (in time) and to be conscious of that space. This research involves what the author considers as an extended “music” for expanded and expanding auditoriums, i.e. an idiomatic music for correlated and “tuned” spaces and for members of audiences attuned to a homogeneous and co-constituted setting or field, as virtual and intangible as it is, in which they consider they are co-present and participating “in space” and “in time”. This also implies the prospective development of a music “by” environment, i.e. based on and structured by impact and feedback of spaces: when music and environment are intermingled, collaborate together resonate and “oscillate”. Thus, as attuned listeners we could explore an idiomatic music and new aesthetic experience based on properties of sound propagation in acoustic-networked, tuned and connected spaces. It should be understood that the notion of mobility is not at the very core of my research. However, because the auditorium could be considered as a perceived space (the listened to space and the listening space) where sound is propagating with some constraints, thus obtaining certain (acoustic and aesthetic) effects. Because its structure has continuously evolved alongside musical history and the history of architectural listening-buildings – from rooms (where listeners are maintained in a certain disposition) to spaces (where the audience can move, choose a listening point, trajectory or itinerary and visit the space) – plasticity and ductility are now new aspects of what we understand and consider as an “auditorium”, beyond an ideal type of listening space that is conceived of as static in nature. Thus, questions involving the notion of mobility certainly imply modifications of aspects of these auditoriums. To landscape an auditorium, beyond the boundaries of our sensorium (up to what seems and appears to be out of our reach), requires us to map, sound and probe a space, a milieu or an environment, to experiment an immersion and to continuously evaluate a combination of spaces dedicated to the listening and to the organisation of and interaction between listeners. For this paper and in order to examine the question of mobility in listening, I'll call on two examples: works by Akio Suzuki followed by Hugh Davies’s and Karlheinz Stockhausen's approach to intuitive music. I will then propose a brief approach to environmental aesthetics related to “grasping” the environment or fluctuating, flowing and floating element(s), component(s), or propertie(s) in an environment, related to our position and mobility. {br}{br}{br}----
Password
Summary of changes
↓
↑
العربية
Čeština
Deutsch
Schweizerdeutsch
English
Esperanto
Español
Suomi
Français
עברית
Hrvatski
Magyar
Italiano
Nederlands
Português
Português brasileiro
Slovenština
臺灣國語
downloads
> Download mp3s
> Download videos
> Download texts
> Academia.edu
[
Edit
] [
History
]
[UP]
[
List of all pages
] [
Create page
] [
Erase cookies
]
1995/2020 — Powered by
LionWiki 3.1.1
— Thanks to Adam Zivner — webmaster & webdesign : Jérôme Joy — Author : Jérôme Joy — Any material is under copyleft
©
with in-line & in-text attributions —
http://jeromejoy.org/
— Hosted by
nujus.net
NYC since 2007, and by
The Thing
NYC (between 1995-2007 — Thanks to
Wolfgang Staehle and the Thing team
).