The Canadian composer R. Murray Schafer coined the term "schizophonia" to describe a peculiar aspect of the 20th century (and after) experience of sound. In the real world sound is encountered in relation to the specific physical mechanisms that produce it. Modern electro-acoustic techniques produce sound in a different way - by separating it from its original sources and rendering it capable of coming from both everywhere and nowhere. We can uncouple the experience of sound from the direct experience of the bodies that produce it.
In a way, this is what all media do - allow us to gain knowledge or perception independent of the particular experience with respect to which information or perceptible phenomena are produced.
Schizophonia is, in the world of electro-acoustics, a purely physical phenomenon. Barry Truax notes, however, that this is a "nervous" word - that it resonates in some way with internal states as well as external conditions. I wonder if there are any particular social or psychological expressions of schizophonia? Or whether the experience of sound in the digital age points us away from the physical world of sounds towards the technically-mediated manipulation of noises.....
A blog to support CMNS 253 at Capilano University
Followers
About Me
- Ted Hamilton
- instructor in the Department of Communication at Capilano College, N. Vancouver, BC
3 comments:
What a lovely new word for me to put in the holster. Quick draw. Then shoot 'em dead(intellectually of course).
To answer your question of social of psychological instances of schizophonia, I began to ponder on our most basic of communication tools which is speech. For example: After your class I initiate conversation about the subject tackled with my friends. My nose is colored brown I know. And in this exchange, I reiterate what you said. Now can my version of your information be disconnected enough from it's source to claim schizophonia? What if my friends tell their friends and so on and so forth?
Lets say my friends refer to the topic but not you. Can we say that this links up with an experience where the source/authority comes from nowhere yet everywhere, due to the fact that it's unstated.
Great post; really helped deviate from the books.
Cheers
LukeWarmSalsa
im not sure i entirely understand what your getting at, however i do have my owm personal views of digitalized music. It seems to that the seperation of sound from the instrument that produces it is another example of "the system" colonizing the "life world". By this i mean that it seems that by digitalizing sound it sets a new standard of what instruments should sound like... ex. unless somebody playing a guitar can produce a studio quality sound, their ability is inadequate for mass approval, thus they need to digitalize their music for approval. i think the same can be seen in photography as well... looking thru flickr, almost any picture taken on an oldschool analog camera is criticized for one reason or another; usually about crispness of detail, or contrast of colours. where as the pictures that get the most praise are often digitally manipulated by programs like photoshop.
these processes i feel are really creating a duality of sorts where the representations have greater social value than the realities.
Schizophonia seems such a wild word.I'd choose the beauty of analogue over digital in the realm of mixed diverse sounds any day. I can consciously focus on a single source, at least. Digital has taken 20 years to approach the quality of analogue and most of it still takes a distant second.
Analogue is what I hear in my headphones right now ;)
Post a Comment