URL: http://journals.cambridge.org/jid_OSO

Language(s): English

Keyword(s):

Digital Aesthetics ,  Genres and Categories [G&C] ,  Access (to Electroacoustic Music)

Abstract:

This article explores possible strategies for appraising electroacoustic and computer music to enhance ‘marketability’. It is proposed that the specific aesthetics, characteristics and function of a work may be more salient features than those of the medium of composition (e.g. computer) to many listeners. It is suggested that the common practice of focusing on chronology, geography and specific schools is becoming less relevant due to a proliferation of home studios, the internet, and an increasing saturation of electronic sounds in new media contexts. On the other hand, aspects of form, mood, timbral palette, rhythmic complexity, etc., may become very useful bases for choosing works for a compilation CD or concert programme. The inadequacies of musicians’ discourse for describing such attributes leads to the incorporation of analogies from visual and performing arts as well as a discussion of other possible approaches to ‘labelling’ and the inherent dangers in such a task. In conclusion, it is proposed that the time is ripe for shuffling the categories and regrouping composers’ works according to aesthetic preferences, regardless of the percentage of electronic/computer content.

All references of the same author:

(English)

Mountain, Rosemary (2001a). Caveats from a Dyed-in-the-wool Futurist
Mountain, Rosemary (2001b). 'Sculpting' Sound: The Story of the CEC
Mountain, Rosemary (2003). Creating and Contributing. The Expensive Spirit of Marcelle Deschênes
Mountain, Rosemary (2004a). Theories Market: Open for Trading
Mountain, Rosemary (2004b). Marcelle Deschênes
Mountain, Rosemary (2005). The Internet: The Untended Garden