Sound Research WIKINDX
Sound Research WIKINDX |
|
|
Displaying 1 - 20 of 26 Parameters |
| Altman, R. (Ed.). (1992). Sound theory sound practice. New York: Routledge. |
 
|
| Added by: Mark Grimshaw-Aagaard 14/12/2004, 20:18 | |
| Altman, R. (1992). Afterword: A baker's dozen terms for sound analysis. In R. Altman (Ed), Sound Theory Sound Practice. (pp. 249–253). New York: Routledge. |
|
| Added by: Mark Grimshaw-Aagaard 04/11/2004, 11:57 | |
| Altman, R. (1992). General introduction: Cinema as event. In R. Altman (Ed), Sound Theory Sound Practice. (pp. 1–14). New York: Routledge. |
|
| Added by: Mark Grimshaw-Aagaard Last edited by: Mark Grimshaw-Aagaard 18/04/2005, 16:26 | |
| Altman, R. (1992). Introduction: Four and a half film fallacies. In R. Altman (Ed), Sound Theory Sound Practice. (pp. 35–45). New York: Routledge. |
|
| Added by: Mark Grimshaw-Aagaard 23/04/2007, 21:17 | |
| Altman, R. (1992). Introduction: Sound/history. In R. Altman (Ed), Sound Theory Sound Practice. (pp. 113–125). New York: Routledge. |
|
| Added by: Mark Grimshaw-Aagaard 26/10/2004, 11:56 | |
| Altman, R. (1992). Introduction: Sound's dark corners. In R. Altman (Ed), Sound Theory Sound Practice. (pp. 171–177). New York: Routledge. |
 
|
| Added by: Mark Grimshaw-Aagaard Last edited by: Mark Grimshaw-Aagaard 27/01/2006, 08:51 | |
| A reminder that sound could not be recorded/stored (unlike image) until the latter quarter of the C19th. The science and theorizing of sound is a relatively new subject and younger than that of image - the reason why sound theory often uses terminology borrowed from visual science. | |
| Altman, R. (1992). Sound space. In R. Altman (Ed), Sound Theory Sound Practice. (pp. 46–64). New York: Routledge. |
|
| Added by: Mark Grimshaw-Aagaard 16/02/2006, 07:28 | |
| As the image on screen flits about incessantly drawing our eyes hither and thither, it is the sound track, with its constant scale, that provides stability and an anchorage. "It is thus the sound track that provides a base for visual identification, that authorizes vision and makes it possible. The identity of Hollywood spectators begins with their ability to be auditors." | |
| Summarizing 1930's film sound theoretician J.P. Maxfield "the sound track must carry, independently from the image, all the information necessary to reconstruct the "real" space of the scene (that is, the one represented by the image)." | |
| By the end of the '30s, sound scale/image scale proportionality had been discarded in favour of (dialogue) intelligibility. The notion of the internal auditor (point-of-audition) was developed -- the spectator is required to identify with or inhabit the body of an on-screen character who will hear for us. Reverberation is used to identify sound intended for this character (little or no reverb) or not (greater ratio of reverberated sound to direct sound). The spectator is inserted into the film narrative "at the very intersection of two spaces [film space and the internal auditor's space (the character's body)] which the image alone is incapable of linking, thus giving us the sensation of controlling the relationship between those spaces." (p.61) | |
| An important point here is the relation between sound scale and image scale and the effect on film sound of single microphone technique, multiple mikes, mixing, sound editing, microhpone placements etc. In the early '30s, the emphasis was directed to authentic spatial recording (with a human body analogy) but, with the development of condensor microphones (required to be close to the sound source) and boom technology, this shifted to an emphasis on clarity (of dialogue). This had implications for mixing in post-production leading to the contruction of a sound track rather that its recording. By the end of the decade, attempts to match sound scale accurately to image scale had been all but discarded. | |
| Altman, R. (1992). The material heterogeneity of recorded sound. In R. Altman (Ed), Sound Theory Sound Practice. (pp. 15–31). New York: Routledge. |
|
| Added by: Mark Grimshaw-Aagaard 14/10/2004, 12:19 | |
| "Systematically, the name of a sound refers to the production of sound and not to its consumption, to the object making the sound rather than the person perceiving it." | |
| "If there were no connection between the apparent sound event and the original sound source, recorded sound would not have its extraordinary capacity for idealogical impact. ... Between the illusion of reproduction and the reality of representation lies the discursive power of recorded sound." | |
| "What our ears are doing is a form of narrative analysis." | |
| Belton, J. (1992). 1950s magnetic sound: The frozen revolution. In R. Altman (Ed), Sound Theory Sound Practice. (pp. 154–167). New York: Routledge. |
|
| Added by: Mark Grimshaw-Aagaard 26/10/2004, 14:44 | |
|
Discussing the battle between mono and stereo film sound in the 1950s: "Through its usage as an element of spectacle and through its identification with the genres of spectacle, stereo sound became associated for audiences not so much with greater realism as with greater artifice." He remarks later (p.160) on comments made by others that there is a comparison to the transition from B&W to colour where colour was seen by audiences as indicative of fantasy, spectacle and animation -- the opposite to B&W which signified realism. |
|
| Claims that magnetic sound (surround) in the 1950s was the first instance of off-screen dialogue actually emanating from off-screen. Microphone placement during recording (close to the sound source rather than at the camera's subjective position) and theatre speaker placement created this effect. "The effect was decidedly theatrical ... spectacularizing the concept of voice off." | |
| Discussing the fourth (surround) sound track of 1950s' magnetic stereo recording, Belton argues that while travelling sound might have been more technically realistic (than mono from behind the screen), it drew attention to itself and so was perceived as artifice "violating the timeworn conventions of stylistic invisibility which governed Hollywood filmmaking practice and which insured that the audience's access to the events which unfolded before them would be unmediated (that is, realistic)." | |
| Boden, M. A. (2004). The creative mind: Myths & mechanisms. 2nd ed. New York: Routledge. |
|
| Added by: Mark Grimshaw-Aagaard Last edited by: alexb44 17/09/2026, 03:29 | |
|
On values and creativity
"I said earlier that ‘new’ has two meanings, and that ‘surprising’ has three. I didn’t say how many meanings ‘valuable’ has – and nobody could. Our aesthetic values are difficult to recognize, more difficult to put into words, and even more difficult to state really clearly. (For a computer model, of course, they have to be stated really, really clearly.) Moreover, they change: who will proudly admit, today, to having worn a beehive hairdo or flared trousers in the 1960s? They vary across cultures. And even within a given ‘culture’, they are often disputed: different subcultures or peer groups value different types of dress, jewellery or music. And where transformational creativity is concerned, the shock of the new may be so great that even fellow artists find it difficult to see value in the novel idea. Even in science, values are often elusive and sometimes changeable. Just what ‘simplicity’ or ‘elegance’ means, as applied to scientific theories, is something that philosophers of science have long tried – and failed – to pin down precisely. And whether a scientific finding or hypothesis is ‘interesting’ depends on the other theories current at the time, and on social questions too (might it have some medical value, for instance?). Because creativity by definition involves not only novelty but value, and because values are highly variable, it follows that many arguments about creativity are rooted in disagreements about value. This applies to human activities no less than to computer performance. So even if we could identify and program our aesthetic values so as to enable the computer to inform and monitor its own activities accordingly there would still be disagreement about whether the computer even appeared to be creative." Parallel to intelligece. Intelligence is also tied to several value parameters, and as Boden argues, creativity is one of them. Those who accumulate great wealth and thereby power are often viewed as intelligent, but the two need not have any correlation, for example. What constitutes value is often what is viewed as succesful, but surely that is a reduction of such a rich concept. |
|
| Chion, M. (1992). Wasted words. In R. Altman (Ed), Sound Theory Sound Practice. (pp. 104–110). New York: Routledge. |
|
| Added by: Mark Grimshaw-Aagaard 26/10/2004, 10:29 | |
| Claims that where visual blurring in film is a rhetorical device to signify unconsciousness, the same doesn't apply to blurring (deliberately making unintelligible) speech. We "hear only a technical process, instead of a subjective experience." This is mainly because sound is not as easy to selectively eliminate as image (by turning away for example). | |
| Curtis, S. (1992). The sound of the early Warner Bros. cartoons. In R. Altman (Ed), Sound Theory Sound Practice. (pp. 191–203). New York: Routledge. |
|
| Added by: Mark Grimshaw-Aagaard Last edited by: Mark Grimshaw-Aagaard 13/02/2020, 12:23 | |
| In terms of film [sound], Curtiss defines the term 'diegetic' as "that which is accessible to the characters of a film". | |
| Live-action films tend to use indexical sound where there is a direct, causal relationship between the sign and the signifier, the sound and the object. Cartoons only use iconic sound "... indexicality is impossible in a cartoon." | |
|
Rather than use diegetic/non-diegetic, Scott uses isomorphic and iconic for music/effects in cartoons -- the former particularly in cartoons which have been animated to a pre-determined musical beat (hence difficulties with former terminology). "If isomorphic relations refer to those governed by rhythm and movement, then iconic relations pertain to analogous relationships between visual events and the timbre, volume, pitch and tone of the accompanying sound." Here, 'isomorphism' means same-shape whereas 'iconic' is used in a semiotic sense (C.S. Peirce) -- as an anology between the sound and the object. |
|
| Talking of early Looney Tunes production technique: although much of the music was composed and dubbed on after the animation, a musical beat was usually decided upon before artwork began. A reversal of the usual (film production) sound/image hierarchy. | |
|
Although distinctions (certainly in practice) are clear between dialogue/music/effects in feature films, the distinction is less clear in animations (particularly early cartoons) and sometimes not there at all. This is particularly noticeable where the music is used for sound effects (he discusses this later as isomorphic and iconic sound) as played by the orchestra. Although owing a debt to the musical accompaniment of silent film, this was often a function of the difficulties in post-production mixing (loss of music quality) or of using a single microphone to record all sound simultaneously. By 1933, technological advances enabled dialogue and music (+ FX) to be recorded separately and mixed/dubbed later (hence cartoons of this period now have (clear) dialogue over the music. |
|
| Ďurovičová, N. (1992). Translating America: The Hollywood multilinguals 1929-1933. In R. Altman (Ed), Sound Theory Sound Practice. (pp. 138–153). New York: Routledge. |
|
| Added by: Mark Grimshaw-Aagaard Last edited by: Mark Grimshaw-Aagaard 16/10/2006, 12:00 | |
| Grimshaw-Aagaard, M. (2018). What is sound (studies)? In M. Bull (Ed), The Sound Studies Companion. New York: Routledge. |
|
| Added by: Mark Grimshaw-Aagaard 27/12/2017, 09:20 | |
| Grimshaw-Aagaard, M. N. (2019). Presence and biofeedback in first-person perspective computer games: The potential of sound. In M. Filimowicz (Ed), Foundations in Sound Design for Interactive Media. (pp. 78–94). New York: Routledge. |
|
| Added by: Mark Grimshaw-Aagaard Last edited by: Mark Grimshaw-Aagaard 04/01/2024, 08:27 | |
| Grodal, T. (2003). Stories for eye, ear, and muscles: Video games, media, and embodied experiences. In M. J. P. Wolf & B. Perron (Eds.), The Video Game Theory Reader. (pp. 129–155). New York: Routledge. |
|
| Added by: Mark Grimshaw-Aagaard Last edited by: Mark Grimshaw-Aagaard 22/08/2006, 08:23 | |
|
Takes Brenda Laurel (Laurel 1993) to task for comparing the computer metaphorically to theatre since the human faculties required for theatre "are neither exhaustive nor exclusive to theater." |
|
| "...a purely linguistic model may seriously impede descriptions of those media like video games that rely on a series of nonverbal skills." | |
| "...video games and other types of interactive virtual reality are simulations of basic modes of real-life experiences. This means that cognitive psychology provides many advantages as a tool for describing video games compared with a semiotic approach." | |
| Klimek, M. P. (1992). Imagining the sound(s) of Shakespeare: Sound and adaptation. In R. Altman (Ed), Sound Theory Sound Practice. (pp. 204–216). New York: Routledge. |
|
| Added by: Mark Grimshaw-Aagaard 01/11/2004, 10:44 | |
| Lastra, J. (1992). Reading, writing, and representing sound. In R. Altman (Ed), Sound Theory Sound Practice. (pp. 65–86). New York: Routledge. |
|
| Added by: Mark Grimshaw-Aagaard Last edited by: Mark Grimshaw-Aagaard 03/03/2006, 13:09 | |
| "Those aspects of a sound which mark it as authentic are never simply self-evident "attributes" of that sound. Only their inscription within a system allowing or requiring them to become perceptible gives them a semiotic import within that system. Thus, the supposed unique attributes of an original sound become significant and, to a certain degree, perceptible as such only through their constitution as signs -- precisely that which is not unique." | |
| ""real" space is simply not an issue for most images on screen -- their scale and angle are functions of narrative emphasis, not of more or less precise perception." | |
|
Developing Altman's description of 1930s sound recording/representation development (spatial fidelity giving way to intelligibility): "A recording with a high degree of reflected sound, or some other indication of spatial signature, is linked to sound considered as an event, while closely-miked sound, with a relatively "contextless" spatial signature, is linked to sound considered as an intelligible structure -- as a signifying element with a larger structure." Although this is usually aplied to speech, Lastra points out that it also applies to sound FX. |
|
| Discussing the notion of an 'original' sound prior to recording and reproduction: "...the primary ideological effect of sound recording might be creation of the effect that there is an "original" independent of its representation." | |
| Here, Lastra is paraphrasing Chrstian Metz to whom what is important is the functional or narrative use of sound in film rather than whether a sound is authentic or not. "...what matters is the ability to identify the source of the sound. ...the sound event must be legible -- it must be recongnizable across a series of different contexts as a culturally defined signifying unit. Against the definition of sound as an essentially unrepeatable event, Metz describes sound as an eminently repeatable and intelligible structure." | |
| Makes the interesting point that, when discussing a recording of sound, much of our understanding of what that sound will be like is derived from assumptions (culturally and technologically derived) as to how that sound was recorded. The sound is therefore pre-structured for us before we get to even hear it. | |
| Lawrence, A. (1992). Women's voices in third world cinema. In R. Altman (Ed), Sound Theory Sound Practice. (pp. 178–190). New York: Routledge. |
|
| Added by: Mark Grimshaw-Aagaard 27/10/2004, 16:00 | |
| Lefort, C. (2014). Maurice Merleau-Ponty (D. A. Landes, Trans.). In Phenomenology of perception. (pp. xvii–xxix). New York: Routledge. |
|
| Added by: Mark Grimshaw-Aagaard Last edited by: Mark Grimshaw-Aagaard 10/09/2023, 08:16 | |
| Although Merleau-Ponty later studied touch, he could only do this "through the relation between seeing and the visible, for this relation reveals most clearly and all at once the exteriority of the world for the body that opens up to it, the distance of things in front of the body, their absolute alterity, the body's folding back outside of everything that it captures and yet its implication in the visible, the turning back of the visible upon itself that constitutes it as seeing and that causes it to perceive from the very foundation of being to which it adheres." |