IDM Mailing Archive

Karkowski played at FCMM in Montreal at absolutely deafening -- literally -- volume. Chunks of the ceiling were falling down and he succeeded in frying at least one of the venue's speakers. Karkowski/Sensorband managed to ruin a set of 23Five's speakers at their recent SFMOMA performance as well (despite extensive sound-checking, they vastly exceeded the agreed-upon limits). Those excesses are disrespectful to both the audience and the venue, in my opinion. Philip --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

quoted 8 lines Karkowski/Sensorband managed to ruin a set of 23Five's speakers at their

> Karkowski/Sensorband managed to ruin a set of 23Five's speakers at their > recent SFMOMA performance as well (despite extensive sound-checking, they > vastly exceeded the agreed-upon limits). > > Those excesses are disrespectful to both the audience and the venue, in my > opinion. > > Philip

Well, this is really what I was curious about, but who do the venues think they are booking? I could tell _exactly_ what Karkowski's show was going to be like, before he came to Chicago, just by some of his writing online. I'm surprised that people like this are invited to shows knowing full well what they are interesting in doing with sound, and that the audience is just paying blindly to go to shows. I don't blame the artists at all for this; their intentions are pretty clear. I personally thought that the constant noise level from Atari Teenage Riot was more troublesome to my ear than the dumbtype performance, but there again, I knew what to expect from both shows. I just don't get what these audiences are reading or expecting, or if they're going into shows completely oblivious. What exactly to patrons of the MCA expect anyhow? Jesus, most of those shows are not particularly gentle at *all*. You have to be pretty open-minded to go to shows like Cremaster 2 or even Christian Marclay (who was just FANTASTIC). For crap's sake, it's a *CONTEMPORARY* art museum. For at least the last fourty years that has meant that almost anything goes. People were shooting themselves in the 60s and 70s and that was considered art. What department of slappy a silly smile on your face do they think they are donating to, anyhow. But I digress. I was really trying to find out more from the list about the politics of music. You've quite obviously got some "noise" politics (embattled with enviromental noise, fight din with din, so to speak) and more subtle uses of noise (like Ryoji Ikeda using it poetically), then others who use sampling to disrupt ownership of sound (such as Plunderphonics' Beck work, for example). I'm just curious what else is going on. I'm very interested in the idea that others are using sound not as some ethereal, b-line to the emotional centers of the brain, but as concrete "statements" or manipulations of other ideas and how they can connect to sound. For instance, take some "big brain" concepts like post-structuralism, Marxism, feminism, post-colonial theory, etc. Are people producing work, composing and trying to apply these concepts to sound? There has been some talk about minimalism and it's relationship to current audio explorations, and also of Deleuze, so I'm curious what else is out there. Blah, blah, blah...;0 __________________________________________ Christopher Sorg Multimedia Artist Instructor The School of the Art Institute of Chicago http://csorg.cjb.net csorg@artic.edu --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.314 / Virus Database: 175 - Release Date: 1/11/02 --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

At 09:04 PM 3/6/02 -0600, Christopher Sorg wrote:

quoted 7 lines But I digress. I was really trying to find out more from the list about the

>But I digress. I was really trying to find out more from the list about the >politics of music. You've quite obviously got some "noise" politics >(embattled with enviromental noise, fight din with din, so to speak) and >more subtle uses of noise (like Ryoji Ikeda using it poetically), then >others who use sampling to disrupt ownership of sound (such as >Plunderphonics' Beck work, for example). I'm just curious what else is >going on.

I guess relatively famously you have Terre Thaemlitz's stuff, although I've never really heard a direct connection between liner notes and actual compositions... same goes for Mouse on Mars, if you read interviews with them. They certainly at least see a political context for what they're doing, but probably many are like that. I certainly view listening to ummm.... ambiguous (open-ended?) music as having a political component to it in this world of propaganda and emotional bombardment. In another thread Philip Sherburne (I think) also recently mentioned a track by Matthew Herbert released under his alias Radio Boy, which uses the products of globalisation to construct a piece of music about that, ie. a Big Mac box, a Nike shoe, etc. are the actual sources of the sounds you hear. Similarly, Ultra Red go in for manipulating the sounds of environments they see as the results of globalisation... going into the huge ...um.. what do you call those zones where laws are really laxed and foreign companies can do what they like (oh that's right, countries ;) ... anyway, one of those areas where the sweatshops are on the Mexican border. Those are some of the more explicit examples of people using a "big" concept to guide the process of what they're doing. Michael np. 'Arbor' - Greg Davis (as good as it's made out to be!) - http://www.ampcast.com/jetjaguar --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org