Johannes' points about music and sound are an important part of what I've
been looking at, in particular virtual/augmented reality performance art
that employ both the visual and aural. Unfortunately Toni Sant's paper is
behind a paywall for me, so I can't ascertain what aspects of Second Life
are being discussed, but it is one of the specific environments that I have
been looking at as well, having started working with it about two years
earlier in 2006.
Best,
Dennis
~~
If your first move is brilliant, you’re in trouble. You don’t really know
how to follow it; you’re frightened of ruining it. So, to make a mess is a
good beginning. — Brian Eno
On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 2:50 AM, Goebel, Johannes <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> I am following the exchange as an "outsider" and as such I would like to
> throw a couple thoughts into the mix.
>
> I do understand that the topic of the month refers to "Art History" and as
> such has a specific focus. Which is just fine as we have to limit
> ourselves as much as we are limited by/limiting our interests. And already
> that is encompassing way too much as we can see in the current discussion
> and the multiple threads which are being followed.
>
> There is a smaller thread in this exchange which addressed explicitly the
> underpinning technology and its relation to "what is done" - though
> certainly that is a major condition which is implicitly addressed in every
> contribution.
>
> A major other area of lists and platforms that influenced the development
> probably as much as what is mainly addressed in this exchange are the
> software-developer-and-user communications in the realm of "computer in
> the arts". Many software packages were developed by individuals who were
> also artists and who maintained a highly active exchange with artists who
> were "users" of the software. These exchanges (also over lists) actually
> show where the rubber met the road in a production sense (with the mostly
> tacit aesthetic implications). And these list-discussions were and are
> extremely important as they reveal the relationship of "new" and "media".
>
>
> Secondly - and less importantly for this discussion - I would just like
> to point out again that there is so much to be observed by looking over
> the river to the other bank - to music and "sound". All major festivals
> since the Ars Electronica have included music - but a cross-discplinary
> exchange also in the historical perspective has never really taken place
> (from my limited perspective). Again I do understand that your are
> discussing "Art History" - but the "new media" platform cannot be limited
> to "visual art" with sound being a secondary ingredient which everyone
> likes and uses but is hardly reflected with the same rigor in its
> relevance to "new media art".
>
> What can be learned historically is that because of lower bandwidth and
> computing requirements, many technologies and artistic directions took off
> in this area before the visual use could bloom (with whatever kinds of
> blossoms). And there was always a tight relationship extending from the
> musical to the visual domains using the same fundamental technology
> (though in a prejudiced way I would say much less so in the reverse
> direction).
>
> To give you a couple of ideas: A UNESCO survey of "computer music" in
> 1977/78 (Bill Buxton) listed scores and scores of entities worldwide that
> were working in the area (and yes the ones in the US used email and
> r-logins etc when they were part of a university that was connected to the
> ARPA net - I once worked on a computer system on the east coast while
> being on the west coast because my sound file was too large to back-up on
> the west coast system). And when I started the music group at ZKM in
> 1990, we established immediately internet connections so Rick Taube (a
> composer and programmer who I had hired to develop Common Lisp Music etc.)
> could be connected with his mother ship in the US and could have the
> exchange with other people using his software.
>
> Footnote end.
>
|