I think this article's take on how sound interacts with people is very interesting and something I haven't given much thought to. I especially like how the author mentions that sound is different depending upon one's life and its construction (i.e. The sounds surrounding humans and the sounds surrounding frogs and how each perceive them are different because of their differently constructed "universes." I also think its interesting how math was originally found in music, through meters, timing, etc before it was found visually. When I think of music, my first thought isn't about the math behind the sounds, but then again I'm not a musician. Moreover, a quote from Jacques Attali mentions that today's music really is nothing more than "self-glorification" and "growth of the new industrial-sector." I don't really agree with this sentiment. I think a lot of mainstream music follows this, however, that doesn't mean meaningful music isn't being made. Putting an opinion as strong as that on the entire music industry is quite unfair to those trying to make strides in what we listen to.
David Dunn's approach to creating sound compositions seems quite different from John Cage. Cage's approach to sound composition though abstract, is very calculated. For example, during his performance of Water Walk, Cage timed when he would produce certain noises and in what order they would occur. However, Dunn's method of working in nature seemed to be far more up to fate to comprise his compositions. I think however, both of the composers were aiming for different results. Cage aimed to break rules of music and sound composition whereas Dunn seems to want to show and exhibit systems and relationships in nature through sound.
コメント