Re: technology and the average listener

[Mary Jo Watts <mwatts@rci.rutgers.edu>]

Bengt Christensson wrote:

> I talked to one of the engineers who was involved in the programming, and he
> had ideas about equipping every person in the room with an infrared
> identifier to let the system adaptively change the sound according to where
> you were. This would allow you to "walk/dance around" in the listening room.
> This technique though, requires that much more information about the
> recording room is provided to the system than is the case today, such as
> transfer functions, location of microphones, etc.  They also estimated that
> the pure computer power needed wouldn't be available until at least 3 years
> from now.
> Next steps would probably involve holographic images of the performers... (I
> whish more people took the time to go to live concerts :-))
> 

Now what in the world would GG have thought about taking all this
trouble to simulate the concert hall?!!! AB-so-LUTE-ly Ab-SURD (recall
his inflection walking around the shopping mall in the _Toronto_ video.)
Isn't that a misguided effort (to cite McLuhan) to "make the new
technology do the work of the old?" As much as I admire Gould, I know I
wouldn't want a holographic image of him moaning away to Beethoven in my
living room! 

I'm all for excellent sound systems but how much are they really a part
of the musical experience? I suppose for the expert listener or the
really enthusiastic (and wealthy) amateur, these aural experiences would
be amazing intellectual experiences but what about me?  Er, I mean what
about people who don't really know much about the inner workings of the
composition but want to have a roll as an active listener?  It seems to
me that technology such as this would simply reify the hierarchy that GG
talks about of composer->score->performer->listener.  How much of the
ecstasy of musical art in private spaces really has to do with sound
technology? Aren't CDs good enough to do the job?  What will the audio
DVD offer in terms of musical experience that the CD doesn't?  (I know
they're coming but unless Sony puts GG's entire catalogue on a
two-or-three box set for $40, forgetit.)  

I'm MUCH more interested in technology that will engage the listener in
the ideas and sensuality of the composition.  I dream of cheap
technology that will empower us all to be more engaged with Art (music
included) so that we may forsake Art in institutions and live art.  Give
me a Walkman or boom box any day over an infrared holographic home
concert hall!  Let's ban Art!  Donations to support this endeavor can be
sent to me in care of TGGMCBCH (pronounced tug-muc-bach-um)-- the Glenn
Gould Memorial Crusade to Ban Concert Halls.


-M. Jo Watts

P.S. If you're interested in Gould's ideas about CD-ROMs (i.e. his "kit
concept" of music) I recommend Peter Gabriel's 1995 interactive
published by his company, Real World. It's called _Eve_  and you
navigate a world looking for sound clips which you then can use to
create pretty convincing music and videos.  The atmosphere is unique
because the four levels were designed by contemporary artists: Yayoi
Kusama (who has a current exhibit at MoMA which is on its way to Tokyo),
the late Helen Chadwick, Cathy de Monchaux who was nominated for a
prestigious Tate Gallery award recently, and photographer Nils Udo. The
music samples are out-takes from 4 Gabriel songs.
http://realworld.on.net/eve/