http://www.emf.org/emfinstitute/aldrich/aldrich.html N. B. Aldrich What is Sound Art? Copyright !!" N. B. Aldrich #nter$iews with ...

. %eph %erman Annea &oc'wood Chris (ann Al$in &ucier Stephen )itiello #ntroduction Sound Art as nomenclature for the wor' of a growing *ody of artists is in common usage. (a+or presenters and world,wide opinion leaders in the contemporary art world such as the Whitney (useum of American Art- the Cartier .oundation for Contemporary Art- (ass(ocathe /ayward 0allery in &ondon and the #CC in 1o'yo routinely present Sound Art. Smaller $enues regularly featuring 2or in some cases entirely dedicated to3 sound installations ha$e appeared in most ma+or cities. .esti$als in many different countries focus on the wor' of Sound Artists who now recei$e ma+or funding from pu*lic and pri$ate granting institutions around the world. Sound Art has arri$ed. #t4s hot. But what is it? #s Sound Art music? #s it distinct from traditional music in some meaningful way? #f so- what is the distinction? # came to this pro+ect with no particular thesis. # wanted to as' a di$erse group of artists whose wor' # find interesting- e5citing- challenging and intriguing- and who are considered Sound Artists- a*out their wor'. What did they thin' of a categorical Sound Art? # opened each inter$iew with some $ariation on the 6uestion: 7What is Sound Art?-7 then let the con$ersation organically proceed from there. # came rather 6uic'ly to reali8e that though # may ha$e had no conscious thesis- # had an agenda. # found myself returning repeatedly to a few areas of in6uiry in my pursuit of the topic 6uestion. Surely the 'ey to unloc'ing Sound Art lay in discerning difference 2$is,a,$is music3 in these areas: the sound material used in the construction of the wor'- or what the piece is made of9 the foundational ideas of structure 2especially as it contrasts to traditional musical structure3- or how the piece is made9 the intent of the wor'- or why the wor' is made9 and the mode of pu*lication of the wor'- or how is the piece intended to *e heard. 1hese were the parameters of my in$estigation. Not surprisingly- # found these parameters coincided more e5actingly or less e5actingly to the artists ideas of their wor' depending on the artist. 1here is no definiti$e consensus. 1hat in itself is an important ac'nowledgement. Sound Art is as di$erse as the group of artists that it comprises. But Sound Art is a categorical reality. #t has arri$ed and it has arri$ed from somewhere andmuch li'e me with this pro+ect- it too has its agenda. 1he artists # inter$iewed are moti$ated to in6uire and to present their wor's in a conte5t we pre$iously considered music. So- what is Sound Art? 1he stuff of musical composition has certainly undergone radical change since WW##. With the ad$ent of magnetic tape- sound recording *ecame 2relati$ely3 ine5pensi$e- easy- edita*le and redo,a*le. 1he composer could now utili8e any sound that was recorda*le as material and mold that material into wor' as different from the popular song or the traditional symphony

as the sound of the wind and water is from the sound of a string section. 1his musi6ue concrete- as :ierre Schaeffer coined it in ;<=<- *egins a line of musical thin'ing that continues $igorously today and that *ranches into some of the most important and stimulating wor' associated with Sound Art. But not +ust the idea of capturing 4any sound4 informs the new musical aesthetic. #n short order- with %ohn Cage 2in William4s (i5- ;<> 3 as with others to follow- the 4found4 sound is appropriated as material. 1he artist need not necessarily record what he or she o*ser$es- *ut can use what the world pro$ides to reflect the way the world ismuch the way $isual artists did at the *eginning of the century 2i.e. Bra6ue and :icasso in their papier colle and collage wor'9 ?uchamp with his readymades3. And if recorded audio material can *e appropriated for compositional use- why not translate the sounds that inaudi*ly surround us? Broadcast sounds are e$erywhere waiting to *e recei$ed- and the uni$erse is *om*arding us with a steady palette of audio information to *e decoded and incorporated in the artistic process. :ro*a*ly no other pre$iously held musical characteristic has *een so radically changed in the last >! years as the notion that a discrete field of carefully groomed- mathematically,related fre6uencies is the sole legitimate content of music. And this shift in e5pectation of content naturally ad+usts the listening process in general. &istening to 2and for3 all sounds as potential material for artistic construction heightens the sense that *eauty is o*ser$a*le in the day,to,day world9 aesthetic material is always around you- all you ha$e to do is notice. %ohn Cage4s notion of silence is +ust this: Silence is not the a*sence of sound- *ut the sound that happens apart from the listener4s e5pectation 2or the composer4s control3. Am*ience. 1his is all fundamentally important today9 elemental in the rethin'ing of what ma'es up musical composition. 1here is also a fundamental shift in conceptuali8ing the instrument which is *orn of the technology of the latter half of the !th century- particularly with the ad$ent of the computer. 1he tape machine *egins to *e thought of as an instrument. Certainly a microphone is considered *y many artists today as a primary instrument. And with the ad$ent of the computer- the a*ility to capture and manipulate sound 2or anything else that can *e reduced to data3 is amplified e5ponentially. Computers also pro$ide the calculating power to create sounds that had not pre$iously e5isted. 1hough audio synthesis *egan as an analogue ad$enture in a few discrete la*oratories run *y $isionary pioneers- it e5plodes into the mar'etplace and the art world at large when it communes with computer technologyparticularly the personal computer. 1he creation of new sounds or radical modification of e5isting sounds through any num*er of powerful and fascinating off,the,shelf filtering systems is commonplace today. /owe$er- one of the most interesting things a*out the computer as an artistic tool is the opportunity to interpret any information *y translating it into a common language: computer code. #n this translation process- a sort of hyper, synaesthesia ensues in which all the trac'a*le components of e5perience can *e capturedprocessed and re,e5pressed as a different e5perience 2i.e. sound *ecomes $isual- motion *ecomes audi*le- any discrete acti$ity can *e calculated and repac'aged for the senses3. Su*se6uently- interface and instrument design start to define new models of musical 2and o$erall artistic3 acti$ity. New models of musical acti$ity imply new ideas of structure- of methods for construction. #t is not surprising to note that with the introduction of new material into the musical le5iconnew and inno$ati$e thin'ing a*out how that material wor's compositionally also arises. #n the ;<>!s- %ohn Cage with indeterminacy and chance operations- #annis @ena'is with stochastic composition- Aarlhein8 Stoc'hausen with statistical composition all *egin to model methods of composition that more and more lead the composer away from the traditional role of constructing an e5acting map of what a musical piece sounds li'e toward a

place that more readily accepts the free,ranging material now at the composer4s hand. Againit is Cage who *rea's most radically from tradition *y introducing intentional randomi8ation as an integral part of the compositional process. #f the world we percei$e is in great part the result of the random *eha$ior of the uni$erse- should the art we ma'e conform to that process? #sn4t a*solute determinism an inaccurate reflection of the uni$ersal order? With this line of 6uestioning Cage directly challenges the traditional thin'ing of how a musical wor' is structured. But it is with the rise of the Conceptual Art mo$ement in the mid,;<B!s that not only is the how of composition redressed- *ut the why. #f art is to *e socially rele$ant- the Conceptualist declares- it must transcend the notion of the aesthetic o*+ect. 1he (odernist4s pretension that formalism is the true realm of Art- with its champions 2such as %ac'son :ollac'3 formali8ing their innermost wor'ings in *ursts of e5pression- is re+ected. .orm is grammar- content lies elsewhere. Content lies in ideas. And ideas lead to critical thin'ing which unifies artistic endea$ors with philosophy- psychologypolitics- sociology- ecology and en$ironmentalism- indeed any human pursuit in which the mind is critically engaged. Art in general *ecomes a metastructure for cultural goals. Composers now need to e5plore how the world operates and use their wor' to reflect that e5ploration- which- of course- har'ens *ac' to Cage. .ield recordings are not +ust aesthetic o*+ects- *ut philosophical re$er*erants. 0ame theory as a compositional practice models theories of social organi8ation and human interaction. So- much as the computer offers an opportunity to translate information from one medium to the ne5t- the artist now thin's of the same translation when creating wor': how is ecology reflected in sound- how is social organi8ation reflected in compositional structure- how is political acti$ity reflected dramaetc. As music had pre$iously opened up to all sounds- the art world now opens up to all disciplines. 1hough the art o*+ect continues to *e produced and the intuiti$e manifestation of the indi$idual remains at the core of the artistic impulse- the notion of the artist as social o*ser$er and commentator is out of the *ag. 1here is another interesting ramification of the Conceptual Art mo$ement which has 6uite an impact on the music world 2and the new )ideo Art world as well3. 1he Conceptual Artistsmostly from the ran's of the )isual Arts- in their anti,esta*lishmentarianism re$olted against the 7gallery system7. #n their refusal to create aesthetic o*+ects merely as commodities for consumption they sought to lea$e the art gallery *ehind. 1hey preferred- theoretically at leastto demateriali8e the wor'. Art4s true merit lay in its ideas- not in the o*+ects which are the *yproducts of those ideas. A 2perhaps metaphorical3 $acuum was created since the presentation and sale of an idea was 2intentionally- from the artists perspecti$e3 pro*lematic. (usic and $ideo thus had an opportunity to present themsel$es in a new forum: the gallery en$ironment. As this new forum *ec'oned to the musician- it created the need for a new form and that form *ecame the installation. #t is perhaps here that Sound Art truly comes into its own as music gets the opportunity to manifest itself in a way that is less a*out performance and more a*out e5isting in time and space. 1he art installation is a product of Conceptualism in that it see's to *e a wor' of art which is not an art o*+ect. #t is an en$ironment. #t is a place where the audience is participating- orrather- completing the art wor' through e5periencing the en$ironment. #n the conte5t of music it is the opportunity for pu*lication without performance. #t is also the opportunity for an audience to engage wor' in their own time- the time they spend wal'ing through the spacerather than *e presented with a form that can only *e engaged only in its own time. 1he performance of a piece of music and the recording of a piece of music- in contrast to the installation- *eha$e e5actly the same- *oth *eing fi5ed in the temporal relationship they will

ha$e with the listener. 1his new audition en$ironment frees the listener from that fi5ed relationship. Stay for fi$e minutes or stay for fi$e hours- the decision is the listener4s. 1he installation also offers a different spatial conte5t from the traditional music performance- *e it li$e or recorded. A traditional music performance will e5pect the audience mem*er to ha$e a static spacial relationship to the sound- e$en if the sound is spatially animated and mo$es a*out the performance space. 1he listener4s position in the space will only incur minor $ariations in e5perience- and that is the goal. 1he installation- howe$er- in$ites the listener to create his or her own spatial relationship to the piece *y mo$ing through it and creating an indi$iduali8ed path or se6uence. 1his intended personali8ing of the e5perience is the uni6ueness of the installation as a mode of pu*lici8ing a wor' of art. So the areas of material- structure- intent and mode of pu*lication seem to *e 'ey places to loo' in trying to distinguish how music might ha$e come to *e considered Sound Art. 1he protestation that Sound Art is as much a semantic mo$e as anything else is at points supported in the following inter$iews- *ut then again- the artist wor'ing in the post, Conceptual Art world may see no distinction *etween wor's of self,e5pression and wor's of social criti6ue- they are part and parcel of the same acti$ity. %ust as the notion that the sound of traffic or the wind is musically on par with the sound of the guitar or clarinet is no stretch for the post,Cagean musician. 1he landscape of audio composition today is as *road and rich as it has e$er *een and the artists wor'ing in that landscape utili8e many new and fascinating ideas in their pursuits- challenging traditional notions of music- listening and awareness while creating new compositional standards and aesthetic milestones as they go. # would li'e to e5tend my most sincere than's to the artists who conceded to participate in this in6uiry. 1he thought and care and time they offered was gracious and the ideas and e5periences relayed are enlightening.

N. B. Aldrich August ;"- !!" Broo's- (