Just to try to steer something back on-topic...here goes:
I realize this discussion has come up ad-nauseum, but I think there are
some things about laptop performance that I haven't seen discussed (at
least in the last year), especially in regards to acousmatic music,
tape pieces, etc. Keep in mind that much of what I'm saying is, of
course, IMHO.
I would suggest that the "acousmatic" (see
http://www.filmsound.org/chion/acous.htm for a definition) tradition (from
the greek philosophers to musique concrte and beyond) would probably be
the most fruitful exploration of this idea; I think it has been put into
practice for much longer any sort of laptop experimentation. Certainly,
academic music has "adjusted" to public performances of tape/CD
music. This hasn't really transferred to "pop" origins of laptop music.
In some ways, there really isn't a way for the laptop to *not* be
acousmatic. There is no way to directly indicate a source for the
sound; the source *IS* the laptop, but it isn't at the same time. For
samples, the source is actually instruments, cars, voices, etc. The
challenge is the abstraction that the laptop represents; performers are
presenting themselves as the originator (acoustic), yet the source itself
is acousmatic (hidden from view).
Music and musical performance, at least in a popular framework, still
remains convinced of the artistic genius, the modernist
assumption. Laptop performers are still presenting themselves center
stage, as if it truly matters where they sit during a performance. For
the acoustic performer (or even electric), there is a direct correlation
between the producer and the product; a coronet player blows his horn and
a sound results. For the laptop performer, there isn't just a lack of 1-1
correlation between act and action. There actually is no correlation
unless it is invented. Pushing a button or moving a knob will never
relate the same thing between performers, so there is no connection, no
language, to learn about how the sounds are produced.
I generally think that attempts at demonstrative approaches to laptop
music are typically either funny or just plain ridiculous. If you've ever
seen someone perform with any sort of gesture body suit, you'll understand
what I mean. Sure, it can be kind of neat to see someone play a light
organ- controlled laptop, but it's really a way of getting around the
interface, an interface that has no specific and inherent gestural
relationship to the acoustics produced. It's strange, too, when
performers like Kid606 take center stage. The laptop is no longer an
issue; it may as well be a CD player. These tactics don't really address
any of the interesting issues that the "laptop as instrument" problem
introduce, rather, they tend to recreate this rock-star attitude. And I
do think that the problem is interesting and deserves more focused
attention.
It's also interesting to think of other ways that the audience is engaged
in these sorts of shows; by using video projections. The concept of the
acousmatic, as introduced by Pythagoras, was to remove all
distractions; to focus on the sound, the content of the speaker. Video
typically serves to further the distraction in laptop performances. In
only two instances have I seen the video somewhat directly relate to the
sound being produced, first, in a Carsten Nicolai performance, where the
pong-like graphics move in relationship to the sounds. In this, I think,
the relationship appears to be tenously arbitrary. I had an incredible
experience with Coldcut's AV shows, too. Form and content were so tightly
wound together. In the other instances (for instance, Plaid), the video
seemed to serve merely as a distraction from the completely unremarkable
activity of clicking a mouse behind a laptop.
At any rate, there is a lot here to explore. Some of it, of course, is
opinion. Some people *need* to relate sound to source during a
performance; I suppose they feel that is what they pay for. Yet people
purchase CDs, listen to the radio, and go to huge concerts where you can
barely see the performers, much less their instruments. So I think there
are other possibilities.
In preparing for a radio show, I had the recent revelation that I
don't have the sort of challenges that I normally face in a live
situation. You can either be a passive or active (preferable) listener,
but you certainly aren't going to be *looking* for anything. It was a
radio-programmer whose opinion that much of the work (laptop audio, that
is) actually comes across much better on the radio than in live
performance. Perhaps more laptop musicians should get shortwave licenses or
start 98.7 WIDM or something...
At any rate, I'd like to hear more about this. I'm not an expert on
acousmatic music or tape pieces, or even Pierre Schaefer's work (which
seems to be the sort-of-modern take on acousmatic music).
Some interesting articles on acousmatica:
music:
http://www.sonicartsnetwork.org/ARTICLES/ARTICLE1996DHOMONT.html
http://www.personal.leeds.ac.uk/~muswlw/pubs/wlwthesis/wlwthesis_abs.html
http://www.cta.dmu.ac.uk/mtirg/nowalls/sublime.html
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Christopher Sorg/20goto10
Multimedia Artist/Instructor
The School of the Art Institute of Chicago
http://csorg.cjb.net
csorg@artic.edu
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org
For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org