Networked_Music_Review

Interview: Adam Nash

adam3.jpgAdam Nash is a new media artist, composer, programmer, performer and writer. He works primarily in networked real-time 3D spaces, exploring them as live audiovisual performance spaces. His sound/composition and performance background strongly informs his approach to creating works for virtual environments, embracing sound, time and the user as elements equal in importance to vision. Adam’s work has been presented in galleries, festivals and online in Australia, Europe, Asia and the Americas, including SIGGRAPH, ISEA, and the Venice Biennale. He also works as composer and sound artist with “Company in Space” (AU) and “Igloo” (UK), exploring the integration of motion capture into real-time 3D audiovisual spaces. He is currently undertaking a Master of Arts by Research at the “Centre for Animation and Interactive Media” at RMIT University, Melbourne, researching multi-user 3D cyberspace as a live performance medium; and he’s a Lecturer in “Computer Games and Digital Art” in the School of Creative Media at RMIT University.

You will need to download the free Second Life client to access Adam’s work in Second Life. Or you can see video documentation of some of his works. URLs can be found at the end of this interview.

Adam will be answering reader’s questions in the comments section below until January 31, 2008.

Helen Thorington: I understand that you do not think of yourself as a sound artist in Second Life. I wonder if you would explain why?

Adam Nash: I think of a realtime 3D multi-user environment (3D MUVEs), like Second Life, as a post-convergent medium. This means that no single media-element (sound, vision, sociality, network, time, etc) takes precedent, rather they all exist equally in a symbiotic relationship, without which none of them could exist.

unsung_song_16_small1.jpg[Image: Unsung Song #16: Blue Sound Ground]

Helen: Do you have any musical training? Do you play any musical instruments? Does this help or hinder your explorations?

Adam: I don’t have any formal musical training, but I do play a few instruments badly, chiefly the drums and keyboards. I have many years’ experience playing in bands and making music for soundtracks and performances. I also have quite a lot of experience as a live performer in performance art, dance and movement. Like all experience, it both helps and hinders my explorations in 3D MUVEs. While I am able to build and expand upon musical performance techniques, I assume that the same experience severely hampers my ability to see potential in a new environment. I really love music, but I think new environments like this reveal music as an outdated concept. I still think music is useful – indeed I release a lot of my own music under a Creative Commons license via my net-label at www.concentrated-sound.net – but anachronistic. I was first drawn to realtime 3D back in 1997, when I first encountered VRML, and it struck me as a very similar environment to the inside of my own head when I was creating music for performances. It is a spatial environment in which sounds can be animated in a way that is easy to visualize but impossible to achieve in the physical world. It is a logical next step to see the environment as the performance environment as well as the composition environment, and from there quickly grows the concepts that I explore in 3D MUVEs, basically audiovisual environments that users navigate within to create their own unique experience from the elements provided by me. It’s like the composer’s mind, the instruments and the venue all rolled into one.

Helen: Tell us about composing sound for Second Life. You have called it a “technically very limited and frustrating environment.” What are the limitations and frustrations? Are there redeeming features?

Adam: Composing sound for Second Life, or any 3D MUVE, is fun, because of this ability to provide the basic audiovisual elements and then leave the user to arrange (ie, navigate) the elements as they please. This is an extremely exciting and satisfying way of working, because it removes the need for arrangement – a skill, different from composition, that is absolutely crucial in linear music. There’s nothing wrong with arrangement (often in linear music it is the thing that turns something great), but often there are an unlimited number of potential ways of arranging a piece of music and the musician is forced to choose only one.


From: Infra_Assemblage

Also, with this idea of the melding of the composition environment and performance environment, the act of creating work is often enormously enjoyable because you get to fly around and through your ideas, trying out different ways of navigation that you may never have realized were possible when conceiving of the piece. It’s like a slightly more concrete iteration of the limitless imagination scape in which all these ideas are found.

The technical limitations of Second Life are significant and many. The main limitations, for me, are the lack of a proper modeling hierarchy, and a few things to do with sound, like the 10-second limit per file and lack of control over falloff. There is also an undocumented limit to the number of simultaneous sounds that can be played. On the other hand, there are a lot of positives about working within limitations, as the artist is forced to be creative and come up with novel solutions. It also means many formal decisions are made prior to starting work, which in some ways makes things easier. Like most things, it is both blessing and curse.

unsung_song_2_c.jpg[Image: Unsung Song 2: Crescent]

Helen: Avatars play an important role in your work by activating the sound. And yet you have “core problems” with them. “The avatar concept”, you say in July’s empyre discussion “is the one I find the most troubling, and it also grows from the 3d-space-as-physical-simulation misassumption. There is no need to concentrate presence into one cohesive point (an avatar).” I wonder if you would explain what you mean by this, and perhaps suggest alternatives.

Adam: Well, if avatars play an important role in my work, it’s because they play a very important role in Second Life itself. The problems I refer to are both technical and conceptual. First, the analogy of a single point of presence, from which the rest of the world is perceived, and in which the rest of the world perceives you, arises directly from our physical world, where our sensory organs are coalesced in a single unit and cannot be separated. Recently, humans have been able to spread out perception and presence through technological mediation, for example cameras, telephones, radio and the internet, and I think we are certainly slowly moving away from the concept of a single point of perception and presence, but mostly it is still how we negotiate our physical existence.

But, it is a very underexamined concept in realtime 3D, and particularly in Second Life. This is true of the entire physical world analogy that controls the working concept of Second Life. Even though it may seem natural to use 3D space to recreate physical space, that is only one possibility, and certainly not the easiest, because it can never recreate physical space, only represent it. Once we move into the sphere of representation, different modes of perception are required (one never actually walks on a map).

Because the system to which our bodies are subject (ie, physical space) is now being represented, we need also to represent our bodies, not recreate them, otherwise things quickly get confusing and the representation becomes limited in usefulness. This happens as soon as we move our ‘camera’ away from our avatar – we are no longer seeing and hearing via our avatar’s eyes and ears, rather we are perceiving from whatever point in the 3D space that our ‘camera’ is at. Yet, within this synthetic space it is perfectly feasible that we could perceive from both the position of the camera and the position of our avatar. This is not difficult or unusual, in fact we are already doing it twice simply by having a default avatar in Second Life. The first, significantly, is the physical/virtual superposition, where my physical body is seeing and hearing my avatar see and hear – already I have two points of perception (literally and conceptually). Then there is the ‘over the shoulder’ point of view that SL avatars default to, behind and above the head of your own avatar, really a camera that is following your avatar. It is seeing and hearing your avatar see and hear. So now I am seeing and hearing my camera seeing and hearing my avatar seeing and hearing. I am simultaneously perceiving from three different points, literally and conceptually. I think this is one of the reasons so many people feel so disoriented when first encountering realtime 3D space.

Since it is possible, indeed common, to perceive from two or three points, then it’s a small step to expand the number of points of perception arbitrarily, both in space and in time (lag and multiple private chats are both examples of multiple points of perception in the temporal dimension that all SL users are comfortable with).

Practicing the agency of presence via multiple points perhaps seems a more subtle or difficult concept, but again SL users constantly deal with others via multiple points of presence. For example, most users quickly become comfortable with the idea that another user may not be seeing and hearing the scene from their avatar, or that they may be simultaneously dealing with the physical world and the synthetic world and the mediation device itself. Indeed, SL specifically acknowledges this via the device of having the avatar’s eyes and head follow the user’s mouse pointer when dealing with the user interface. This means that others’ avatars are, variously, a presence notifier (the person is logged in), a mouse, a representation, none of these things, all of these things and potentially many more things besides.

unsung_song_9_a.jpg[Image: Unsung Song #9:Corona]

Helen: I can fly alone through your installations and activate sounds. I can get friends to move through them with me and produce different sounds. I can play with the work and it changes. Isn’t it in fact important for your work to have the avatars’ presence concentrated in one space?

Adam: In that sense, the avatar is serving the standard function of a mouse pointer for 3D space. Again, this is mainly because of the restrictive working analogy of Second Life itself, which enforces this role for the avatar, and it’s true that some of my works are a specific comment on, and working within, that restriction. But, it is not necessary for the user’s avatar to be concentrated in one space. Ideally, for many of the works, the user would be able to branch off avatars and move spatially through works in different ways simultaneously. Similarly for time. Or, to be able to interact with different works simultaneously in space and time.

Certainly, I consider all the pieces in, say, Seventeen Unsung Songs to be all parts and aspects of the same work, quite literally. Sonically, they are all constructed from the same rational scale that I devised, based on a fundamental tone of 77Hz then proceeding in intervals of ratios over 7. All of the pieces use this scale, and one of the pieces (Blue Sound Ground, which users pass through at the entrance) contains all of the sounds used in all the other pieces, both as a conceptual readying and also a technical device to load as many sounds into the user’s cache as possible. Visually, also, all the pieces are clearly very strongly related, sharing colours methods of distributing colour across hue, saturation and opacity spectra. It would be ideal if they could be experienced in multiple modes over space and time.

ramonia3.jpg[Image: Anahata,The Mute Swan]

Helen: Have you considered what kind of work you might produce if in fact presence were not concentrated in one point? If presence were distributed over time, location, data and media?

Adam: I think it implies a more involved work, a work where the user experience becomes extremely important to the work. The extent of the user interaction over multiple points determines, to large extents, how the work develops and emerges. Works could take dynamic notions much further. For example, currently we can trigger a certain sound or animation based on sensed data about an avatar’s position and other metrics – this could be expanded to include many different aspects of the nature of the user’s engagement with the work. It suggests work that exists across environments, building on gameplay techniques to build a performative and experiential vocabulary cooperatively between artist and user. This is tremendously exciting and suggests a kind of work that could accompany users through time and space, growing and changing together. This kind of thing would start to approach the mechanics of true non-linear interactivity.

Helen: It seems to me that your work adds new parameters to sound/musical composition. In most of the networked musical pieces I’ve heard or seen described, this has not been true. Music remains music, separate or separable from other things, like the space in which it is played and its audience. And while I find this very difficult to talk about, what you introduce has to do with audience immersion and presence in the space; and audience activation of the work as a result. Thinking of the participant, I think of words like “experiential” (experiencing through the movement of my avatar-body as it explores the space you have created), the bringing into existence of music/sound. Thinking from the point of view of the music/sound, it’s not like filling a space with pre-determined sound (as so many of us have done in RL), but rather creating a dimensional space with potential… And that the two constitute a unique approach to creating and experiencing music.

I’m reminded of NOX Son-O-House, a public pavilion that is both an architectural and a sound installation that allows people to not just hear sound in a musical structure, but also to participate in the composition of the sound. It is an instrument, score and studio at the same time. A sound work, made by composer Edwin van der Heide, it is continuously generating new sound patterns activated by sensors picking up actual movements of visitors.

Is this similar to the work you’re doing?

Adam: Oh, well, I certainly hope so. I’m not familiar with that work, but it sounds very similar conceptually to the process I touched on earlier, where the compositional environment, the performative environment and the experiential environment converge, and the resulting symbiotic relationship reverberates back and forward throughout the previously distinct stages, merging them into a new, post-convergent environment of interactive, emergent, audiovisual experience.

Helen: Given the desire for multiple avatars to simultaneously/collectively activate your installations, how do you reconcile the absence of avatars or the single avatar interacting with the piece with your intentions?

Adam: I’m not sure I fully understand this question, but most of my pieces can be experienced at multiple levels in terms of number of avatars, length of time spent, familiarity with 3D space, etc. Again, this is related to my desire for an approach to the medium that is not tied to a physical world analogy of a single person with a single body. Even though SL is a multi-user space, it doesn’t preclude single users, and this is true of my work too, I hope. Some works are probably more satisfying aurally when used with other people (eg, Rarer Air), but other works are designed for individuals to interact with different elements of the SL experience, besides the social, in which case the number of avatars using it doesn’t really matter too much (eg, The Space Between). Yet others are unaffected by the number of avatars accessing them (eg, Appolinarium). I really try to explore many different aspects of the realtime 3D MUVE environment in all my different works, so its difficult to align all the work with an over-riding desire on my part.


From: Bell Garden

Helen: Have you created sound installations in other virtual worlds? If yes, can you talk about the similarities and differences, pros and cons?

Adam: Again, I really don’t think of them specifically as sound installations, but yes I have worked in many different virtual worlds/environments over the past 10 years or so, including VRML/X3D, ActiveWorlds, Blaxxun/Contact, Unreal, Torque, Quest 3D, Multiverse and even GEM in Pure Data. Differences are mainly technical, with VRML/X3D being by far the freest and most able to accommodate large scale, unrestricted concepts. In practice, it’s always had some problems dealing with lots and lots of simultaneous sounds, but I think that Niall Moody has solved that with his Helian browser, though I haven’t had a chance to use it – I’d like to but SL has got the mindshare at the moment, so that’s where curators want you to work. It’s a shame VRML/X3D never gained wide acceptance in the media arts community. As for the other environments I mentioned, they’re all commercial products to greater or lesser extents, except for Pure Data, so they all have significant technical restrictions that arise as a function of the commercial aims. Multiverse looks interesting in terms of extensibility and freedom, but again I haven’t had a real chance to properly check it out. I’m trying to at the moment with my colleague John McCormick, but again we’ve been commissioned to do a mixed reality piece using Second Life, so that takes up most of our time. Pure Data (known as pd) is the opposite, it’s open source and specifically designed for audio. With the GEM library in pd you can use OpenGL to create responsive 3D environments, and John and I have been working with that a little, with promising results. Most of these environments have things that they do better than others and things they do worse. SL does a lot of things poorly and a few things well, with its popularity being its chief advantage at the moment.


From: A Rose Heard at Dusk

Helen: You refer to your SL pieces as “audiovisual sculpture” and “site-specific installations.” Can you talk about the difference, and what makes Seventeen Unsung Songs site-specific, but not A Rose Heard at Dusk?

rose_heard_at_dusk.jpg[Image: A Rose Heard at Dusk]

Adam: I guess “audiovisual sculpture” refers to all my work in 3D environments, whereas something like Seventeen Unsung Songs is a collection of inter-related audiovisual sculptures that were commissioned by Sugar Seville specifically for an island that already existed, therefore it is “site-specific”. It wouldn’t be possible to recreate Seventeen Unsung Songs in its entirety without having an island that was very similar to East of Odyssey, but it would of course be possible to install individual pieces from within that show in different places.

Helen: What do virtual worlds offer you as an artist that real world spaces don’t?

Adam: To me, this comes back to my concept of the post-convergent medium. The physics of realworld spaces make it impossible to attempt such things as continuous realtime dynamic animation of arbitrary numbers of sound and vision sources based on continuous realtime sensing of presence and other metrics. However, the comparison still considers the primary role of virtual spaces to be a recreation of physical space, which is not what I think. The kind of art that I have ever attempted in real world spaces has always been primarily performative and very different from virtual work. I guess there was a point of crossover when I was still working with The Men Who Knew Too Much and looking to combine real world and virtual art, but since 2002 any work I’ve done that involves so-called mixed reality has chiefly been in the service of others like Igloo, but then I tend to do the music/sound and some performance. I don’t see virtual spaces as a separate reality, I very much see virtual space as wholly contained within the real world.

Helen: We’re seeing more and more artists combining sound/music and moving images/video, referring to themselves as a/v artists and VJs. Why do you think this is?

Adam: I guess it’s a natural progression from a past that had discrete partitions between all sorts of experience, as a result of both technical and conceptual limitations. As media starts to converge, and access to both the means of production and means of distribution becomes easier, it becomes more viable technically to enact the kind of concepts that naturally emerge. In particular, two generations of music video and clubbing combine with more meme-like concepts of emergence and networks to create a desire to operate across a range of media. Most people’s media vocabulary is of a sufficient level of sophistication that practitioners are driven to explore new modes of expression to engage meaningfully with an audience.

Helen: Are there any other artists working in the same vein as you?

Adam: Plenty of really interesting artists operating in Second Life, many of whom share aspects of exploration and practice with each other, myself included. Some who come to mind are Gazira Babelli, Annabeth Robinson/AngryBeth Shortbread, Christopher Dodds/Mashup Islander, Bingo Onomatapoeia and the Avatar Orchestra Metaverse, DC Spensley/Dancoyote Antonelli, Brad Kligerman, Juria Yoshikawa, Keystone Bouchard, Daruma Picnic, Christine Webster/Wildo Hofmann and Andrew Burrell/Nonnatus Korhonen. That’s just a short list, there are lots of people doing lots of interesting work all over Second Life.

Helen: Who are some of the artists you most admire?

Adam: John Power, John McCormick, Burno Martelli and Ruth Gibson (Igloo), Bruce Mowson, Melinda Rackham, George Clinton, Prince, Greg Egan, Yoko Ono, Morton Feldman, Brian Eno, Mark Rothko, Laszlo Moholy-Nagy. There are so many artists whose work I really appreciate, but those are the ones I genuinely admire.

Helen: Do you have predictions for sound art trends, developing technologies, the 3-D web? Have you any thoughts on what the future impact of immersion/presence might be? Do you think it might make “play” and “fun” more important to our lives.

Adam: I think we’re entering the post-convergent era, where distinctions between sound, vision and other media elements will cease to be meaningful. I definitely think play and fun will become more important as 3D environments grow in acceptance, alongside the growth of computer games as a medium. I certainly think that games, in the broadest sense, are the artistic medium of this century. Simulation and modeling will be of enormous importance to society and we will learn a lot from artists and practitioners of games and virtual worlds, and vice versa. The distinction between real world and virtual world will cease to be meaningful. We’ll see a convergence of networked experience via 3D, something like a 3D web but much deeper and more enjoyable than that phrase suggests. I definitely think we’ll see a move beyond the use of 3D space as just for representing physical spaces. The multiple points of perception and presence that we’ve already talked about will grow in acceptance and utility, along with an expectation that art will manipulate this.

Helen: Thank you, Adam, for this great interview.

Visit the following URLs for more information on Adam’s work:

seventeen unsung songs: http://yamanakanash.net/secondlife/unsung_songs.html
a rose heard at dusk: http://yamanakanash.net/secondlife/rose_heard_at_dusk.html
anemochord: http://yamanakanash.net/secondlife/anemochord.html
eudemonia stellata http://yamanakanash.net/secondlife/eudemonia_stellata.html
infra assemblage: http://yamanakanash.net/secondlife/infra_assemblage.html

For information on Adam’s other projects, go to: http://yamanakanash.net/projects.html

Videos of some of his works are available for viewing at: http://www.waystowave.com/adam/secondlife/movies/


Jul 13, 2009
Trackback URL

5 Responses

  1. Networked_Performance — Interview: Adam Nash:

    […] but mostly it is still how we negotiate our physical existence…” Continue reading Interview: Adam Nash by Helen Thorington, Networked Music Review. Dec 19, 19:09 Trackback […]


  2. Peter:

    Hi Adam,

    Sorry for the lateness of these questions. I have been meaning to post them since I first read your interview weeks ago (but needed to give it a second reading and only now got the time). Your work and your interview are really interesting and provocative, and I hope these questions reflect that. Thanks!

    Best,

    Peter

    1. Regarding the idea of Second Life as a post-convergent medium, isn’t this also a description of First Life, i.e., the real world? I mean, if you have a virtual sound installation playing in a virtual museum in Second Life, what differentiates it from that same installation in a First Life museum (assume the installation is stationary and could be reproduced in the physical world), other than its ‘virtualness’?

    2. You state “I really love music, but I think new environments like this reveal music as an outdated concept. I still think music is useful – indeed I release a lot of my own music under a Creative Commons license via my net-label at http://www.concentrated-sound.net – but anachronistic.” This seems to propose the idea that art made for a single sense is somehow ‘less’ than art made for all the senses (something Wagner tried to get at, right?). Take radio documentaries for example: many audio documentaries would not have nearly the same impact if combined with a visual component, and vice versa for certain visual works. The same, in my view, goes for composed music. With ‘listening’ already a de-emphasized act in our culture, doesn’t the idea that music (without visual or interactive components) is outdated serve to further de-emphasize the act? Won’t there always be a place (and need) for art that plays to a single sense (even if technology allows otherwise)?

    3. What you suggest in your answer to Helen’s last question – “Simulation and modeling will be of enormous importance to society and we will learn a lot from artists and practitioners of games and virtual worlds, and vice versa. The distinction between real world and virtual world will cease to be meaningful. We’ll see a convergence of networked experience via 3D, something like a 3D web but much deeper and more enjoyable than that phrase suggests.” – reminds me a bit of a movie we are all familiar with: “The Matrix”. And I wonder if things wouldn’t actually move in the opposite direction – that as virtual converges with real, as it becomes the default to have our physical space augmented by virtual space, that the distinction between the two, and the ability to separate them when desired, will become ever more important to people. The future you suggest reminds my of the existence of the characters within The Matrix before they were ‘freed’. In that world, people who couldn’t differentiate between virtual and real were essentially slaves, while those who could differentiate placed great importance on the ability to do so. The Matrix is obviously not a model for how people actually behave (far from it I think), but don’t you think the that the desire for these things to become inseparable represents a particular western viewpoint the privileges the beneficial potential of new technology in a way that other cultures might not? If the distinction between real and virtual worlds ceases to be meaningful, who will it cease to be meaningful to?


  3. Adam Nash:

    Hi Peter, thanks for your questions, I’ll attempt to answer them in order, though of course there’s crossover between them.

    1). “1. Regarding the idea of Second Life as a post-convergent medium, isn’t this also a description of First Life, i.e., the real world? I mean, if you have a virtual sound installation playing in a virtual museum in Second Life, what differentiates it from that same installation in a First Life museum (assume the installation is stationary and could be reproduced in the physical world), other than its ‘virtualness’?”

    Adam:
    Assuming the installation is stationary and could be reproduced in the physical world is the crux, as that is exactly the point, these works are not stationary and can not be reproduced in the physical world. This is not a matter of solvable, physical, technological limitations. Your example of a virtual installation in a virtual museum, indeed the question itself, implies that virtual space is simply and only a recreation of physical space. But not only is there no need to recreate physical space, it is not possible, unless you are the universe itself. Having said that, I agree that “First Life” can also be described as a post-convergent medium. Most artforms and their attendant media, however, can not.

    But this really speaks to a broader issue, more properly addressed in response to your Question 3 below, of understanding that “second life”, “virtual reality”, “mixed reality” and other associated terms are really clumsy phrases, mostly born of marketing (it is no coincidence that Second Life proved to be the first “it” platform of multi-user realtime 3D, as it consciously and meticulously exploited that ostensible similarity with the physical world, a convenient marketing conceit since the physical infrastructure supporting the product lends itself perfectly to the Real Estate model of the physical world, ie, servers on racks).

    There is no other reality, there is only reality and it comprises way more than simply the physical world we humans sense with our extremely limited physical senses. Second Life, or any other realtime 3D environment exists wholly as a subset of reality. The term ‘virtual’ is a furphy, it means nothing. To be initally distracted by a superficial first impression of similarity with known precedent (the ‘rear-view mirrorism’ of which McLuhan spoke) is to participate in the cycle of technology uptake. This phase soon gives way to a creative hybridism that melds precedent with new ways (of doing old things) and suggests ways to do new things. In music, we have seen this when synthesisers were expected to imitate real world sounds, a phase which quickly gave way to exploring synthesisers for their own qualities, integrating them into known methodologies and sounds, augmenting and growing the field of music.

    2). 2. “You state “I really love music, but I think new environments like this reveal music as an outdated concept. I still think music is useful – indeed I release a lot of my own music under a Creative Commons license via my net-label at http://www.concentrated-sound.net – but anachronistic.” This seems to propose the idea that art made for a single sense is somehow ‘less’ than art made for all the senses (something Wagner tried to get at, right?). Take radio documentaries for example: many audio documentaries would not have nearly the same impact if combined with a visual component, and vice versa for certain visual works. The same, in my view, goes for composed music. With ‘listening’ already a de-emphasized act in our culture, doesn’t the idea that music (without visual or interactive components) is outdated serve to further de-emphasize the act? Won’t there always be a place (and need) for art that plays to a single sense (even if technology allows otherwise)?”

    Adam:
    There are a couple of different threads here. Yes, I absolutely agree that there will always be a place for art that plays to a single sense. It is music that I think is outdated, not sound. And when I think of music, I think of the profit-driven system that dominated the second half of the 20th century, a system that is now in crisis thanks to the liberation of the means of production (affordable digital machines) and the means of distribution (the network). It is a system that tried to de-emphasise listening, by continuing the tiresome romantic heroic notion that only the specially gifted were capable of creating music, when in fact we all know that all people are capable of creating music all the time. That system contributed also, I believe, to a simplification (of sound itself) of the kind I hope will be ushered away by the symbiotic complexity of the post-convergent era. Music, without interactive components, is very similar to television and can in fact de-emphasise listening as experience. Certainly, if you want a linear experience in which you have no input and do nothing to seed or continue its existence then recorded music is there for you. Whether you are there or not is irrelevant, it exists as a pre-ordained linear entity separate from its listeners. And sometimes that is all you want. I’m talking here of recorded music, because a live gig is an entirely different and interactive experience where the ‘listeners’ become far more like ‘users’ (or ‘interactors’ as Justin Clemens phrases it), shaping the music with the musicians, responding, interacting – an experience that could hardly be described as a single sense experience. Really, though, are there any ‘single sense’ experiences? In practice, the act of listening is accompanied by, and activated with, a host of multi-sensory experiences. So many people these days listen to iPods while moving about within society – the music being listened to therefore comprises only one aspect of an enormously complex multi-sensory experience (meta)physical experience. In that sense, single sense artforms certainly have a role in the multifarious experience.

    I hope it is clear that I am not denying the validity of extant forms (this was the point I was trying to make by declaring that I still make lots of music and release it via creative commons on my net label), but that there is so much more to do than what we have done so far, and ways in which to do it. Many, many ‘outdated’ forms are more popular now than ever before – magazines, books, movies, music – and while this may be a function of a rapidly increasing (affluent) population, and one would be unrealistic to deny their validity on those grounds, it is also perhaps due to an increase in ‘consumer power’ as it relates to the media/culture sophistication of people in general. However, it doesn’t mean that such forms have some kind of moral imperative over yet-untried forms simply by virtue of tradition. Despite the music industry’s efforts, I think listening is actually more valued now than it was even twenty years ago, and this is partly due to a confluence of digital enabling technologies and the network. As an example, a listen to hip hop reveals a deep, subtly layered experience in listening, an historiographical recombining and referencing of both musical events and the situations in which they occurred. It enacts the knowledge that music/art has a retroactive power rooted in peoples’ experience, and invites listeners to engage with that process.

    To summarise, I am trying to say that music is a documented and understood form that will always be loved by us, but that there is emerging a post-convergent artform to contribute to, reflect, augment and criticise this hyper-connected, symbiotically converged world.

    3). 3. What you suggest in your answer to Helen’s last question – “Simulation and modeling will be of enormous importance to society and we will learn a lot from artists and practitioners of games and virtual worlds, and vice versa. The distinction between real world and virtual world will cease to be meaningful. We’ll see a convergence of networked experience via 3D, something like a 3D web but much deeper and more enjoyable than that phrase suggests.” – reminds me a bit of a movie we are all familiar with: “The Matrix”. And I wonder if things wouldn’t actually move in the opposite direction – that as virtual converges with real, as it becomes the default to have our physical space augmented by virtual space, that the distinction between the two, and the ability to separate them when desired, will become ever more important to people. The future you suggest reminds my of the existence of the characters within The Matrix before they were ‘freed’. In that world, people who couldn’t differentiate between virtual and real were essentially slaves, while those who could differentiate placed great importance on the ability to do so. The Matrix is obviously not a model for how people actually behave (far from it I think), but don’t you think the that the desire for these things to become inseparable represents a particular western viewpoint the privileges the beneficial potential of new technology in a way that other cultures might not? If the distinction between real and virtual worlds ceases to be meaningful, who will it cease to be meaningful to?

    Adam:
    First, I’d like to make it clear that I was saying what I think will actually happen, not necessarily what I want to happen. Having said that, though, I do think the Matrix thing is a very inaccurate and misguided analogy. The Matrix was a fable about power and control that, apart from superficial similarities to Gibson’s Neuromancer (itself a wholly 20th century product), has almost nothing to do with current developments in technology, specifically multi-user realtime 3D. As I said in answer to the first question, the so-called virtual world is wholly a subset of the real world, and that is what I mean by removing the distinction between them. This distinction between ‘real’ and ‘virtual’ is misleading in that it implies that digital realms are somehow outside of the experience of humanity, which of course they cannot be. It is analogous to saying that a person’s memory is not part of reality, or that a story is not, or a movie, or a song, or a telephone conversation. This distinction is purely a reaction to the novelty of the technology, and is already disappearing as we come to understand that it is not without precedent, it is merely the expression of a mathematically possible space. When compared with other aspects of our reality, such as quantum physics or octopii, it seems rather unremarkable. Since this mathematical space is capable, to a point, of representing some of the mathematics that ostensibly govern some of our experiences in physical space, it is natural that some people will remark upon that similarity when first encountered. But this is really the same as mistaking the map for the territory, or running out of the cinema in fear of the approaching train, and these issues were well worked through and beyond in the 20th century.

    I’m not willing to speak on behalf of other cultures, as I am ignorant of them, but if anything it seems a peculiarly Western rationalist concept to suggest that there is only one reality that is right and separate. The refusal to acknowledge any form of imagined, potential, mathematical, conceptual or spiritual experience as ‘real’ seems to define only the Western industrial era and in practice was already out the door in the latter half of the 20th century when markets started to acknowledge potential futures as valuable, when the brand became the product, when people came to understand en masse the difference between what the powerful said and what they meant, and when the web was seriously taken up.

    The kind of separation that you refer to in your question I think talks more about notions of so-called ‘augmented reality’ (another highly misleading term, as if we didn’t already have that without technology!), GPS, hyperspatial tagging and whatnot. These practices form part of the reaction to the ability of the mathematical space to crudely represent aspects of physical space, and there is no doubt that simulations and modeling will continue to increasingly contribute to our understanding of physical phenomena. This interaction with physical space is not something I’m particularly interested in, but I think it is what you are referring to in your question, and hopefully it represents some of our first small steps towards an interactive understanding of existence that acknowledges a complex and symbiotic layering. Evidently we need technological devices to help us do that, but it is not necessarily a technological phenomenon, as might be demonstrated by the Australian Aborigines’ 100,000 year old method of unwritten mapping through Songlines, a part of their enormously complex Dreamtime reality. Without wishing to trivialise something I have no hope of understanding (and while acknowledging the Wurundjeri people as the traditional custodians of the land on which I live and type these words), it does seem like an incredibly advanced version of our crude hyperspatial tagging or GPS systems.

    However, I’m more interested in exploring post-convergent multi-user realtime 3D space for its audiovisual interactive potentials in exactly the ways that it is *not* related to the physical world. It is, for us, a new form that has much to be experimented with and I am really looking forward to the next 10 years, when we’ll see the development of interactive experiences of the like we’ve only just begun to imagine. Second Life is, in many ways, the most limited and limiting expression of multi-user realtime 3D space technologies available today, so one imagines with excitement the kind of experiences that will emerge once the technology has been more integrated into our daily existence, and is seen simply as another medium in which to operate.

    Thanks so much for your questions Peter, I do hope I’ve been able to at least partially address some of the interesting issues you raise. Adam


  4. Disquiet » tangents / Sound Art (Furlong, sonochemical, toys …):

    […] Adam Nash, whose sound work has been exhibited within the online simulation zone Second Life, at transition.turbulence.org: “I really love music, but I think new environments like this reveal music as an outdated […]


  5. Networked_Performance — "Cantata Park" by Metamatic Collective:

    […] 1 (2006) [Teleport to Mashup Park, Marni (206, 35, 23)] — by Metamatic (Christopher Dodds and Adam Nash) — is an interactive, spatialised sound sculpture built in the virtual world Second Life. The […]


Leave a comment

Interviews

Current interview:
Robin Meier, Ali Momeni and the sound of insects

Previous Interviews:

Tags


livestage music sound performance calls + opps installation audio/visual radio festival instrument networked audio interactive experimental electronic workshop video participatory writings event mobile exhibition concert live collaboration electroacoustic environment nature reblog distributed soundscape field recording net_music_weekly improvisation software history locative media space public noise recording immersion voice acoustic sonification lecture generative conference body tool sound sculpture net art art + science VJ/DJ light diy remix site-specific perception mapping film visualization listening laptop algorithmic multimedia city urban data wearable architecture open source game virtual biotechnology sound walk spatialization webcast hacktivism robotic image score platform electromagnetic new media cinema ecology found news composer telematic interface streaming residency interviews/other sensor dance circuit bending synesthesia physical political notation intervention object controller broadcasts conversation narrative second life responsive mashup place technology ambient social network symposium motion tracking hybrid intermedia augmented spoken word livecoding text phonography auralization acousmatic upgrade! gesture opera aesthetics mixed reality resource theory processing 8bit orchestra nmr_commission wireless device toy wireless network theater web 2.0 presentation community surveillance p2p 3D copyright soundtrack research podcast sample feedback psychogeography social chance interdisciplinary tactile recycle interview language systems code emergence presence cassette privacy free/libre software media play chiptune newsletter place-specific archives avatar education haptics activist surround sound audio tour glitch hardware tactical identity bioart asynchronous business tv tangible composition animation jazz transmission arts apps tag e-literature collective microsound relational synchronous Artificial Intelligence conductor convergence reuse simulation ubiquitous synthesizers im/material
3D 8bit acousmatic acoustic activist aesthetics algorithmic ambient animation apps architecture archives art + science Artificial Intelligence asynchronous audio audio/visual audio tour augmented auralization avatar bioart biotechnology body broadcasts business calls + opps cassette chance chiptune cinema circuit bending city code collaboration collective community composer composition concert conductor conference controller convergence conversation copyright dance data distributed diy e-literature ecology education electroacoustic electromagnetic electronic emergence environment event exhibition experimental feedback festival field recording film found free/libre software game generative gesture glitch hacktivism haptics hardware history hybrid identity im/material image immersion improvisation installation instrument interactive interdisciplinary interface intermedia intervention interview interviews/other jazz language laptop lecture light listening live livecoding livestage locative media mapping mashup media microsound mixed reality mobile motion tracking multimedia music narrative nature net art networked net_music_weekly new media news newsletter nmr_commission noise notation object open source opera orchestra p2p participatory perception performance phonography physical place place-specific platform play podcast political presence presentation privacy processing psychogeography public radio reblog recording recycle relational remix research residency resource responsive reuse robotic sample score second life sensor simulation site-specific social social network software sonification sound soundscape sound sculpture soundtrack sound walk space spatialization spoken word streaming surround sound surveillance symposium synchronous synesthesia synthesizers systems tactical tactile tag tangible technology telematic text theater theory tool toy transmission arts tv ubiquitous upgrade! urban video virtual visualization VJ/DJ voice wearable web 2.0 webcast wireless device wireless network workshop writings

Archives

2017

Dec | Nov | Oct | Sep | Aug | Jul
Jun | May | Apr | Mar | Feb | Jan

2016

Dec | Nov | Oct | Sep | Aug | Jul
Jun | May | Apr | Mar | Feb | Jan

2015

Dec | Nov | Oct | Sep | Aug | Jul
Jun | May | Apr | Mar | Feb | Jan

2014

Dec | Nov | Oct | Sep | Aug | Jul
Jun | May | Apr | Mar | Feb | Jan

2013

Dec | Nov | Oct | Sep | Aug | Jul
Jun | May | Apr | Mar | Feb | Jan

2012

Dec | Nov | Oct | Sep | Aug | Jul
Jun | May | Apr | Mar | Feb | Jan

2011

Dec | Nov | Oct | Sep | Aug | Jul
Jun | May | Apr | Mar | Feb | Jan

2010

Dec | Nov | Oct | Sep | Aug | Jul
Jun | May | Apr | Mar | Feb | Jan

2009

Dec | Nov | Oct | Sep | Aug | Jul
Jun | May | Apr | Mar | Feb | Jan

2008

Dec | Nov | Oct | Sep | Aug | Jul
Jun | May | Apr | Mar | Feb | Jan

2007

Dec | Nov | Oct | Sep | Aug | Jul
Jun | May | Apr | Mar | Feb | Jan

2006

Dec | Nov | Oct | Sep | Aug | Jul
Jun | May | Apr | Mar | Feb | Jan

2005

Dec | Nov | Oct | Sep | Aug | Jul
Jun | May | Apr | Mar | Feb | Jan

2004

Dec | Nov | Oct | Sep | Aug | Jul

What is this?

Networked_Music_Review (NMR) is a research blog that focuses on emerging networked musical explorations.

Read more...

NMR Commissions

NMR commissioned the following artists to create new sound art works. More...
More NMR Commissions

Net_Music_Weekly

"Two Trains" by Data-Driven DJ aka Brian Foo

Two Trains: Sonification of Income Inequality on the NYC Subway by Data-Driven DJ aka Brian Foo: The goal of this song is to emulate a ride on the New York City Subway's 2 Train ... Read more
Previous N_M_Weeklies

Bloggers

Guest Bloggers:

F.Y.I.

Feed2Mobile
Massachusetts Cultural Council
networked_performance
Networked: a (networked_book) about (networked_art)
New American Radio
New Radio and Performing Arts, Inc.
New York State Council on the Arts, a State agency
New York State Music Fund
Turbulence
Upgrade! Boston

Turbulence Works