johannes,

if i follow the argument here correctly, what you say is that music
(and by analogy we can say for our current discussion: art) made with
digital devices is fundamentally different from acoustic forms of
music, and that it is different not because of styles or genres, but
because of the basic technical conditions of the digital apparatus,
right?

but does this technical description say anything about the artistic
dimension of the work, would you also say that it takes works made
with digital devices into a 'different aesthetic field'? (in that
case, it would be an argument, i assume, for setting 'media art'
apart from non-digital forms of artistic production?)

before i venture into arguing agains this i'll wait to see whether i
understood you correctly.  ;-)

greetings,
-a


>It is becoming clear that “electronic music” and “computer music” means
>neither genre nor style, neither form nor sound, neither structure nor
>construction. This area can also not be clearly differentiated in the sense
>of instrumentations such as the string quartet, piano or symphony orchestra
>can, nor can genres such as the symphony, musical comedy, violin concert or
>sound installation refer to it. In its technical, historical and aesthetic
>conditions, the material of “music out of the electric socket” stands in a
>completely different context to the music it produces as compared to the
>case of acoustic musical instruments. This is because, first, the computer
>ushered in a completely new idea of what a tool can be, which also changed
>the idea of the “instrument” in the sense of music. Secondly, it is also
>because tone/sound is no longer produced directly with the player’s breath
>or body. The physical-acoustic relationship has fundamentally changed. The
>representatives of diverse directions may claim for themselves that they
>have always held the professorship for the true artistic use of electronic
>media. And, for history, it may make sense to apply the term “electronic
>music” to only certain areas that can be clearly demarcated by their
>aesthetics. Yet even the term “computer music” includes different
>definitions that stand opposite each other. Almost 20 years of the
>digitalization of electronic sound production and manipulation into a broad
>and easily accessible commercial base documents how we no longer need to
>discuss if technology is being or should be used musically. Instead, we need
>“only” talk about how it is used.  And this relates directly to the cultural
>context in which it resonates, from where it originates and for which it is
>used.