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.
If your first move is brilliant, youíre in trouble. You donít really know
how to follow it; youíre frightened of ruining it. So, to make a mess is a
good beginning. ó 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
> 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
> 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.