I am going digital!

Yesterday I was on a train to the Vienna airport. The twins in the photo sat next to me. The train stopped at a station and the train going in the opposite direction stopped next to us. The twins started waving to the passengers on the other train, yelling Allo!, Allo!.

The game went on more or less like this: one would yell Allo! and the other followed after a brief delay. The process went on at an increasingly faster tempo until their father told them to stop. 

Control-K!

The amazing thing about this is that I could not see the twins (I took the picture without actually looking at them). I just listened to their voices. It was as if you had a single voice and some sort of high quality digital delay or granulation process had been applied to it. Both voices sounded absolutely similar but their combination produced strange, wonderful, evolved and ever changing patterns. Almost as if produced by an artificial ... digital process. 

I was returning home after a three-day conference  where the latest digital signal processing techniques making use of Kyma were revealed and analyzed. I wonder if I could have had the ability to listen to the digital twins the same way, or have noticed them at all, had I not been immersed in this technology for so long. 

Am I listening digitally to an otherwise analogue world? Am I going digital at long last...?

Contemporary music (1)

In 1977 John Cage performed his Empty Words, a text piece based on the writings of Henry David Thoreau at Milan’s  Teatro Lirico. Halfway through the performance, the audience --mainly comprised of art students-- started to react to Cage’s exercise in the de-construction of Thoreau’s text and did so by clapping their hands, booing, yelling and whistling while Cage, undisturbed, went on with his performance. And he went on for 3 hours! 

Recently I listened to excerpts of a recording of this performance I had never heard before. A personal experience I advise you all to attempt.

Contemporary music is more than a label found on the CD bin of any, hitherto ubiquitous but now almost defunct, record store. Contemporary music is any music produced today. Even a recording or a concert of a viol consort made today with period instruments, respecting every performance and technical procedure of a particular musical age or a particular composer is contemporary music. And it therefore reflects the contemporary view of this age. Less so than perhaps an original composition written today, but a recording of music from yesterday, that respects the artistic values of the time it was written, teaches us a lot about today’s values.

Music died when it turned into a commodity. This is not a new and exciting novelty. It is rather an outcry for a situation that has become totally unbearable. On the one hand the proliferation of music or music-like products through every corner of human activity is a terrible nightmare. Instead of giving us, music professionals, a broader market to work with this proliferation turned music into such a banal activity that its value is completely defaced. The value of music —as an extra-ordinary act, as the exception,  but also as the rule, is lost. Listeners, in turn, lost their right to this value of music. As listeners, the only responsible solution is to shut our ears. 

Moreover, now it is possible to write whatever music you want, any sound, any trend is possible, there are no taboos. It is acceptable to use whatever language or mixture of languages available, whatever musical tradition or vocabulary from whatever musical period. But it is precisely now that the musical world has become more conservative and even reactionary than ever. There’s not even room for outrage. Where is the outrageous music for an outraged audience like the one that booed the first performance of The Rite? Where are the outraged art students that reacted to Cage’s Empty Words?

Music today is a repetition of known, trusted and accepted musical formulas, used individually or mixed with some video for the extra kick. The “peppered cocktail”, as Panikkar once characterized shallow inter-cultural relations. 

No risk, no chance taking. No deeper than your skin either. Just superficiality. No one dares to step outside these familiar grounds. Everything you hear today has been created decades if not centuries ago. Thanks to the wider communication between different cultures today, “mix and match” is easier but even that is usually based on something created or discovered decades ago at best. Again no risk.

On the other hand, the digitalization of all stages of musical production, while giving us unsuspectedly powerful tools, also brought blandness, conformism and redundancy. Click here for an interesting view on this subject that I subscribe.

We all have to conform to the rules of the software, if we dare being different —software  immediately turns it into something bland or adds its own noticeable and permanent petit arrière gout. And the new software is also a tool for redundancy because it is now possible to program computers with all the familiar and conservative formulas and do it repeatedly and effortlessly. The musical outcome is not even admired for its musical value but rather for the value of the programmer's accomplishments. Push a button and you can repeat the formula ad nausea. You can program chord changes into the computer and pretend that you are Charlie Parker’s rhythm section, you can “perform” a four-part fugue a la Bach by singing into the contraption. The computer will do the rest. You don't even have to investigate the foundations of your extraordinary musical accomplishments. In fact why should you? The machine outputs these great and convincing results, why bother...? 

Applications such as Improvisor or Improvox are great teaching utilities, but what they do really is to turn an act of labor, love and ingenuity into chewing gum. And they are destroying the students that they were supposed to serve. Ignoring how a four part harmony came about is as bad as ignoring that chicken don't come from the fridge. Even though the musical formulas used came to us from a strong tradition and after a long evolution, disregard for this tradition and for what it stands for has never been so obvious.

There still seems to be room for the unusually gifted, for some unexpected and spectacular musical discovery, that only real talent can produce, but this is becoming rarer and the whole (including the talented) of the musical world today is the picture of society: well behaved, conform to the rule, unadventurous, meaningless, unpalatable like nouvelle cuisine, disgusting like a frozen meal. 

And you get to hear all this unbearable cacophony people call music everywhere, in elevators, malls, restaurants, phones, concert halls, jazz clubs!! And iTunes and all others make it convenient and easier than ever to import all this trash into the intimacy of your own private and sacred ears. 

Music seems to have lost all its sense of purposefulness and its capacity to be a major driving force in all aspects of human endeavor. Big public ceremonies have no grandiose music written exclusively to accompany them. So grandiose that its grandiosity still survives today. Where are today’s Gabrieli or Haendel? Where are the mothers that sang lullabies to their children? The Philips pavilion for the Brussels World Fair and the German pavilion for the Osaka Expo in 19070 were designed for composers, by composers. Ask  any government or public institution today to allow itself to be projected to the world through the music of an iconoclastic composer. Would Germany let itself be represented by a music personality as Stockhausen? Would Philips care to invite a a composer like Varèse to help define the major theme of its pavilion? I doubt it...

The jingle is the sole monarch  in the kingdom of the absolute reduced attention span.

Is it really music's golden era, like I often hear people characterize this 21st century?

Feeling

Just got back from Koli, Finland where I attended the Soundscapes 2010 conference. The Finnish organizers should be proud of this carefully planned and wonderfully produced gathering dedicated to the discussion of “Ideologies and Ethics in the Uses and Abuses of Sound”. An event marked by a growing interdisciplinarity as Barry Truax noticed.

In my view the Koli conference marks a new era in soundscape studies. Hildergard Westerkamp and others have pointed out to the importance of listening and to the central role that the perceptual subject has played in soundscape studies since its very inception. 

Environmental, social and media studies have largely ignored the approach that soundscape studies pioneered. Listening is a part of feeling. Feelings is what is largely in need in these days of incertitude and of the unaccounted activity of the “markets”...

A promising future thus stays ahead of us, not only because soundscape studies have an edge that can and will undoubtedly be applied to other areas of research and scholarship, but also because, as further development of this model becomes necessary, new work will inevitably await us. Soundscape studies are heading towards the future.

The Koli conference also served another highly important and meaningful purpose. I don’t know exactly how many members the World Forum of Acoustic Ecology has. But I suspect that each one has particular reasons to belong to this unique  group. In this wonderful diversity however there is one key figure —also unique and consensual— that most probably drove us all into this area, that still bonds us and symbolizes the origins and strength of this movement: R. Murray Schafer. 

Leading soundscape studies into the future is the best homage to him and to his vision.

(the photo is by architect, soundscaper and friend Marc Crunelle to whom I thank.)

Ambisonics

I have been writing about ambisonics for a local professional magazine. Writing on this subject brought back thoughts on the problem of spatialization of electronically produced acoustic signals. It also made me realize how this has been a recurring theme in electronic music and how badly the problem has always been dealt with. It made me think again on how this eminently elegant solution —ambisonics—, conceived by Michael Gerzon (seen here in this ca. 1971 photo setting up his first tetrahedral Calrec microphone system) solved the problem, for electronic music but also for any field in which electronically produced or broadcasted sound is involved. And all he got in return was general undeserved indifference, I’m afraid.

Only financial determined factors have prevented me from having fully embraced this wonderful technology a long time ago, but this will hopefully change.

Soudscapes of war (2)

The charge of the deaf brigade continues. Now it’s the “sound cannon”. Something called LRAD whose “shrill warning tones can be heard at least 1,600 feet (500 meters) away and depending on the model of LRAD it can blast a maximum sound of 145 to 151 decibels — equal to a gunshot — within a 3-foot (one meter) range,” MSNBC says.

At these levels the operators themselves may soon be saying: “Hear you LRAD and clear! Ay least I used to...”

“Originally designed for the U.S. Navy, LRADs can emit ear-blasting sounds so high in frequency they transcend normal thresholds of pain. While they are used everywhere from Iraq to the high seas for repelling pirates, LRADS are being increasingly employed as a crowd-control device.” the Star says. 

They should also try them on rating agencies... I say!

Sound cannons were used in Pittsburgh during the G-20 summit (see photo) and the Toronto police may be using them during the upcoming summit at the end of the month. 

If you‘d like to have an idea on how these things sound click here. If you are interested in finding out more about sonic weaponry read this.

The sound cannon is the only weapon guaranteed to backfire! 

Ps- here's an article on the subject of sound and war you might be interested in.

(photo by Brian Blanco / EPA)

Soundscapes of war (1)

South Korea will be reinstalling powerful speakers in 14 different locations along the demilitarized zone that separates it from North Korea.  

The loudspeakers which are being re-installed now were deactivated by the South Korean authorities six years ago. North Korea, which used radio as a propaganda tool in the past to glorify Kim Jong-Il, the “sun of the 21st century”, now threatens to blast the speakers. South Korea claims that the goal of this gigantic operation is to spread propaganda on freedom and democracy. “One group of loudspeakers on the Seoul side can be heard more than 20 kilometers” into North Korea in the quiet of the night, AFP says.

The blast of the sun of the 21st century’s combat with democracy and the freedom to speak louder, here is the theme of this gigantic 21st century electroacoustic extravaganza. 

Vuvuzela

”What’s in a name?”, asked Juliet. “That which we call a rose

by any other name would smell as sweet?”

What’s in this name? 

That which they call a vuvuzela would it sound less dreadful or less threatening by any other name?

The sound of the vuvuzela became a symbol of the football supporter’s enthusiasm for their teams. It’s being used as a sort of iconic sound of FIFA’s World Cup 2010 in South Africa.

A recent study by Dr. De Wet Swanepoel of the University of Pretoria's department of communication pathology, and Dr. James Hall of the University of Florida, however, found evidence that this sound turned symbol of this sport event can lead to permanent hearing loss. “A real risk of noise induced hearing loss.”  Another previous study, totally disregarded by the FIFA authorities, had already alerted to the inevitable consequences of the exposure to the vuvuzela’s high intensity sound level.

FIFA refused to ban the vuvuzela after finding out about these risks and supports it.

We’ll support our national teams until deafness do us part...

Au naturel

A recent article in The Telegraph describes the characteristics that separate “natural” from “un-natural” music and “explains” why audiences dislike the latter. This has raised some heated criticism. 

I didn’t know that there was such a thing as “natural” music. I always thought that there’s nothing “natural” about writing some symbols of sounds on paper and later have some musicians grab mallets, bows or use complex mechanisms such as a piano or an organ to recreate those sounds.

But according to these theories, certain types of music  may be  more “natural” than others...

This raises a personal and difficult to deal with question. Are we producing “un-natural” music, those of us who have been using electronically produced “un-natural” sounds or real sounds from our acoustic environment? Am I artificial? A cyborg of sorts...?

The title of the article is in itself an outrageous statement. We learn that audiences hate modern classical music. I always thought that audiences hated any attack on their aesthetic beliefs and on their culturally wired values. And I also thought that it all depends on the package and the wrapping. Audiences that may hate modern classical music, love it, accept it and fully understand it in the context of, say, a movie.

But I didn’t know this was “natural”. Otherwise I would have changed my musical lexicon years ago... 

Throughout the history of western music, scandal and outrage have surrounded a lot of “natural” music, that seem perfectly “natural” now, and the same scandal and outrage were present in many other forms of art.

What is “natural” music? Even if you can prove that there may be a common element that crosses different and seemingly opposite cultures, who would want to build an entire art form solely based on that? 

As Collin Holter puts it “Of course music with readily perceptible patterns is easier to grok. Crossword puzzles consisting of thematically related clues are, I imagine, easier to complete than the other kind.” 

So it is easier and more “natural” to let a patient die of leukemia than to replace that natural bone marrow... 

Avatar

I just watched the movie Avatar. It is indeed an astonishing experience. The movie will most probably start a new trend in the industry. Great, revolutionary production, hot subject... totally disappointing sound and music!

It is incomprehensible that such a high profile work, so rich and adventurous in the visual techniques employed, tackling such an all-embracing and delicate subject, that constitutes such a challenging visual experience, should sound like his. Its use of music ranges from the totally banal to the scarily corny and some of its sound effects will probably trigger a 10-point Richter scale earthquake or speed up continental drift, if the theaters where this film is shown happen to stand on the right fault line. Often during the projection, I had to cover my ears.

Should we enforce higher musical standards for such tall characters? Yes, I don’t really see a 3 m tall Na’vi producing music of such a poor quality... 

The monster of lake loudness

I recently stood at the Park St. station of the Boston T waiting for my train to get back home. Suddenly a horrible, piercing,  incredibly loud sound started. I tried to move away from it only to find out that it was impossible. A “network” of boxes similar to that small red one on the top left corner of the photo. They were spaced  about 5 m from each other and provided a completely homogenous sound field from which one could not escape. I moved through the platform and grabbed my iPhone —running a wonderful app named SPL which turns the iPhone into a sound level meter— and measured about 106 dB at 2-3 m. This value is not 100% accurate, but it gives you a fair idea of what was going on.

All the passengers seemed to reflect the disturbance this annoying sound caused, many tried to protect themselves by covering their ears with the hands. 

I don’t know if this was some sort of malfunction, a drill or a real accident but everybody was trying to run away from this inferno, and the expected communicational value of this “signal” soon became totally lost.

I cannot imagine any MBTA official, or the  “acoustic” engineers who “designed” this system to deliberately expect that such an aberration can actually work, or give credit to a poorly designed emergency system like this one. On the other hand, they might have their ears in such a poor condition that they themselves don’t realize how harmful this is to their passengers.

Anyway, if you happen to be in Boston, have to take your 5 o’clock T and find yourselves in the middle of this incredible cacophony, you’d better carry some really heavy duty hearing protectors or prepare to sue the company. 

This way they might have to redesign the entire system...

We’re still awake and still singing

According to the Media Daily News “The (American) Senate may green-light legislation compelling advertisers to turn down the sound on commercials. But although much of the public is annoyed by the high volumes, a minority feel the government should get involved in the issue.”

Daniel Levitin writes in his wonderful book The World in Six Songs “The surprise, predawn attack was a gruesome innovation in prehistoric warfare. The attackers would wait until their opponents were in deep sleep and attack just an hour before dawn, sometimes in complete silence, sometimes with a fanfare of menacing instruments, creating as much noise and mayhem as they could to terrify their victims. (...) Those bands of early humans who were unable to develop a strategy for fending off such attacks were killed. Their genes did not endure in the population.”

Whatever compelled bands of primitive people to turn that volume knob increasingly up during commercials we will never know... 

What we do know however is that, still according to Levitin, “A few clever humans did develop countertactics —no doubt as a direct consequence of the increased size of their prefrontal cortex (...) These countertactics may well have involved staying awake at night and singing as a way to broadcast, ‘We’re awake, and we are here.’ “

Still singing after all these years...

Pilgrimages

I always find it fascinating and moving to watch music students carrying their instrument cases, going to or coming from their music  school, to take their classes or returning home from them. It is the same all over the world. I’ve seen it in Boston, Utrecht, Budapest and a few other great music centers. They flock into their schools with the sole goal of learning and mastering their instruments to make music. 

It looks like a godless religious experience where they tenaciously pursue these rites with the discipline and devotion of an acolyte. But they are not driven by the fear of committing any sinful act, to avoid possible punishment or as a consequence of a fabricated code of conduct. They worship  music. 

Music is to me a far more enrapturing experience, more capable of enticing the righteous attitude, of bringing out a sense of togetherness and communal feeling than any religion. 

Astute religious leaders have taken advantage of this power of music, long before their faithful followers did, only to surreptitiously add a spurious, useless and parasitic role to the music: to serve their religious experience. But music is the (a) religious experience! 

As all the music students, carrying their instruments in and out of their music schools, have always known...

Fortunately I am not blind...

Practising sports may be hazardous to your health

At least to your aural health... Not that long ago, the newspapers reported that a study on the effects of golf practicing on the ear concluded that the use of  thin-faced titanium drivers to propel the ball further could cause serious damage to one's hearing. Not the standard thicker stainless steel drivers mind you. The reports quoted a researcher who found evidence of temporary and even permanent cochlear damage due to the use of these drivers. Ping G10 was the worst producing over 130 decibels.

Tennis anyone...? Well, you better keep your ear plugs close by. Tennis is also a source of aural concern. Julian Treasure of the blog Sound Business writes about the racquet's racket. "Grunting, screeching, shrieking" by one player during the game can seriously affect the other player's concentration and game. The problem has become so serious that the International Tennis Federation’s thinking about adjusting the players code of conduct, "which could mean noisy players being muted permanently." There's even a list of the current top five noisiest players —the A(N)TP?— Treasure writes:

"5. Venus Williams 85 decibels Equivalent to: A food blender, city traffic (from inside a car).  

4. Serena Williams 88.9 decibels Equivalent to: A truck passing by at 10m or a farm tractor. 

3. Monica Seles 93.2 decibels The inspiration for the famous Centre Court ‘gruntometer’. Equivalent to: an electric drill, a motorcycle at 25 ft, or a power mower.

2. Maria Sharipova 101 decibels Equivalent to: A jet flying over at 1000 ft, a typical house stereo at maximum volume, a table saw. A walkman at maximum level.

1. Michelle Larcher De Brito 109 decibels (apparently) Equivalent to: A night club on the dance floor, front row at a rock concert, a jet taking off, a car horn."

Please, forgive this burst of patriotic fervor but the noisiest tennis player in the world is Portugal's Michelle De Brito. 

And she's only 16! 

Imagine the possibilities! I can assure you that we are all very proud of Michelle's performance here, although we will soon not be able to hear her, literally!

If only she'd use titanium thin-faced tennis racquets too...

A new meaning for “ear-witness”?

Otoacoustic emissions (OTE) constitute a well known phenomenon, first observed and described, if I am not mistaken, by David Kemp in the 70's. The news these days, at least for me, is that OTE is the latest addition to the  biometric techniques chest. 

The ear produces a unique sound signature, which can identify you in  a way similar to your fingerprints. 

Forget the musical ear, the thinking ear, the absolute ear. The ear produces sound! An accusing sound. We belong to the deaf culture. We are endowed with the guilty ear. 

Don't you dare play by ear, it may be held against you.