harsh NW

No ideas, no changes, no development, no entertainment, and no remorse
User avatar
JLIAT
Merzwow
Posts: 447
Joined: Fri Jan 10, 2020 4:30 pm
Has thanked: 8 times
Been thanked: 97 times

Re: harsh NW

Post by JLIAT » Fri Feb 28, 2020 1:12 pm

I think noise regarded as not about listening is a similar move to that made by Duchamp, non retinal art, or the more recent 'conceptual poets' in which reading is no longer significant.

In terms of 'pushing the envelope' they seem to be as far as one can go. If we use Art as a indication what follows is the replacement of modernist orthodoxy with post-modernism. Art re-gains content, as has PE. There's a problem with HNW and HN in the lack of lyrics, so maybe PE with meaningful content will be the next 'thing', or already is?
"Cage's 4'33" = 273 seconds −273.15° C = absolute zero."

User avatar
pickle
Noise Person
Posts: 40
Joined: Fri Dec 27, 2019 2:13 pm
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 11 times

Re: harsh NW

Post by pickle » Fri Feb 28, 2020 2:35 pm

as an interesting exercise, some of these envelope pushers could go a distance toward winning me over if, in spirit of scientific or artistic inquiry, they were to subject their ears to regular doses of exceedingly loud harsh noise, over say a full month. wouldn't have to be every day. but a statistically significant percentage of time. and report back on that. and then square that with the conclusion that there is greater artistic value in not listening. otherwise it just kinda feels incomplete. like telling me the ultimate in mountain-climbing is not to climb the mountain in the first place. okay fine. you could be right about that. but first you gotta climb the mountain...

User avatar
JLIAT
Merzwow
Posts: 447
Joined: Fri Jan 10, 2020 4:30 pm
Has thanked: 8 times
Been thanked: 97 times

Re: harsh NW

Post by JLIAT » Fri Feb 28, 2020 3:13 pm

Image
"Cage's 4'33" = 273 seconds −273.15° C = absolute zero."

User avatar
RUBBISH
Merzaniac
Posts: 1321
Joined: Fri Nov 22, 2019 5:37 pm
Location: Home
Has thanked: 907 times
Been thanked: 652 times

Re: harsh NW

Post by RUBBISH » Fri Feb 28, 2020 6:15 pm

pickle wrote:
Fri Feb 28, 2020 2:35 pm
as an interesting exercise, some of these envelope pushers could go a distance toward winning me over if, in spirit of scientific or artistic inquiry, they were to subject their ears to regular doses of exceedingly loud harsh noise, over say a full month. wouldn't have to be every day. but a statistically significant percentage of time. and report back on that. and then square that with the conclusion that there is greater artistic value in not listening. otherwise it just kinda feels incomplete. like telling me the ultimate in mountain-climbing is not to climb the mountain in the first place. okay fine. you could be right about that. but first you gotta climb the mountain...
...and now I got rather severe tinnitus and 30%(one ear) hearing loss that will get worse as i get older.
Not even joking.
Last edited by RUBBISH on Sat Feb 29, 2020 5:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Reynard The Fox Says Fuck You
How quickly the creepy becomes commonplace.

User avatar
JLIAT
Merzwow
Posts: 447
Joined: Fri Jan 10, 2020 4:30 pm
Has thanked: 8 times
Been thanked: 97 times

Re: harsh NW

Post by JLIAT » Fri Feb 28, 2020 6:31 pm

Well mountain climbing is about climbing mountains, Art is about making art, and music about making music. But it doesn't follow that music is about making sounds.

Pat follows in the great tradition of Beethoven... ? :-)
A PIECE FOR ORCHESTRA

Count all the stars of that night
by heart.
The piece ends when all the orchestra
members finish counting the stars, or
when it dawns.
This can be done with windows instead
of stars.

1962 summer
Yoko One - grapefruit Music.
These users thanked the author JLIAT for the post:
RUBBISH (Fri Feb 28, 2020 6:31 pm)
Rating: 11.11%
"Cage's 4'33" = 273 seconds −273.15° C = absolute zero."

User avatar
Pigswill
Noiser
Posts: 130
Joined: Tue Dec 24, 2019 5:46 am
Has thanked: 239 times
Been thanked: 130 times

Re: harsh NW

Post by Pigswill » Sat Feb 29, 2020 6:11 am

JLIAT wrote:
Fri Feb 28, 2020 9:37 am
Pigswill wrote:
Fri Feb 28, 2020 5:12 am
Industrial, noise, etc, is visceral. Many musicians in the genres have been aware of it, too, pursuing interests in things like chaos magick which is personal study in finding what resonates with your body and mind.
Maybe, but the origins of Industrial and PE was different. Use of images and lyrics deliberately to confront social mores. And nothing to do with “ chaos magick which is personal study”...
It was an attitude that certainly led to that. I don't disagree that it was to confront social mores. A lot of the genre got its start from post-war fallout and poverty. It forced artists to find new, unconventional paths since they didn't have the money or access to a lot of resources. Some artists found a force of this in things like chaos magick. Certainly not most, but prolific ones have been vocal about it (Coil and Sleep Chamber come to mind). I brought it up because, despite it being a minority vocalization, it seems to speak towards the attitude of the genre overall.
JLIAT wrote:
Fri Feb 28, 2020 9:37 am
Pigswill wrote:
Fri Feb 28, 2020 5:12 am
A lot of art here is visceral, which is at odds with the intellectual, or the realm of academia.
Agreed a lot of people in noise maybe anti intellectual, and anti academia. However a lot of the originators of Noise had academic backgrounds, were influenced by sources such as Fine Art... I mean the ICA was where TG began... How many others went to Art School... were influenced by movements such a Dada and Fluxus... So sure its not that an academic background is necessary, but why the perceived antipathy to it by some?
I don't think it's really an antipathy. Rather, the academic study appeals to a certain aspect of music for the musician that something like noise can't easily fulfill. On the other hand, noise, sound, and generally messing around with sounds will appeal to another aspect of music that can't be found in academics.

Most of the members of TG had some kind of musical knowledge and used it to make excellent compositions. Other times they would scream into delay effects and it would still end up sounding good. They have been good at knowing when to do either, which is one of the reasons why they're a great band.

The study and knowledge of music is important. But what I'm trying to get at is, if one wants to know about noise, there isn't much that can be done in terms of conventional academic study. Rather, it would make more sense to listen and experiment to appeal to the instinct.
JLIAT wrote:
Fri Feb 28, 2020 9:37 am
Pigswill wrote:
Fri Feb 28, 2020 5:12 am
If you try to understand it from an academic standpoint, you may end up understanding it less than if you spent the time listening and creating the sound.
Again true, to a certain degree, but ignoring the academic standpoint has its downside also. As in you end up adopting the 'style' without the content. Which is maybe noise Muzak. Or maybe thinking the use of nutsy imagery, and reference to child pornography, extreme violence and rap-e is advocating those things, as opposed to using them to confront an audience's pre conceptions of Art.
True, to a point. A lot of people use shocking imagery just because they know it will provoke a strong reaction and will reward them with attention. In that case, it's neither advocating for what the imagery represents, nor getting the audience to consider their ideas of art. It's basically trolling :P
JLIAT wrote:
Fri Feb 28, 2020 9:37 am
Pigswill wrote:
Fri Feb 28, 2020 5:12 am
Shakespeare's famous lyric comes to mind here
William Shakespeare - Romeo and Juliet wrote: A rose by any other name would smell as sweet
If it was called "static" or "unpleasant sound" or "Jehovah's Witness repellent-core" or whatever else, it could still identify the same exact music. People would probably argue those too. "Just how unpleasant of a sound are we talking here when we discuss unpleasant sound? ...". Basically, the name comes from a description of the sound. But the name is not the description.
Or the concept is not identical with the object. The whole mess of what is noise and what is not only echoes philosophy. Aristotle's categories. Abandoned in modern science for the bell curve, species are not set divisions but merge, are family resemblances. Such an approach to Noise categories might be 'useful' – 'Don't ask for meaning ask for use'.
That's also a good way of putting it.
JLIAT wrote:
Fri Feb 28, 2020 9:37 am
Pigswill wrote:
Fri Feb 28, 2020 5:12 am
Other genres can't escape this either. What's the academic consensus on rock versus metal? Metal is harder than rock, but how much harder, quantifiably? Does glam rock become shock rock if it's presented to a crowd of homophobes, and how can we measure this? It's becoming less focused on what the sound actually is in favor of trying to break down an arbitrary name that's used for it.
The above fails @ ' academic consensus ' academics earn their living by doing quite the opposite. Well become notable for doing so. Lets be critical. Are you opposed to academic biology in favour of magic. Do you think the analysis of the corona virus as misguided as some analysis of rock music? Or of sub atomic particles, electronics... computing? Or is the academic seen by some as a threat to their ideas regarding music. OK, given this threat, do we turn away, ignore it, accept it, or attack it. Close down all the research departments, or just those we dislike? I'm not a philosopher, or physicist, but i'm aware that they are a threat.
Biology and music aren't very similar, so this isn't a very strong analogy. What if we turned this around? Does noise threaten the academic? What if we extinguished all music that wasn't penned on music sheets for conventional instruments?
JLIAT wrote:
Fri Feb 28, 2020 9:37 am
And BTW you can study rock music @ university, maybe a waste of time, IDK.
Most people would probably call this a waste of time :lol:
JLIAT wrote:
Fri Feb 28, 2020 9:37 am
There is a lot to be said in the above, and the same goes for all music, and art. It even goes for much if not all of science.

The study involves the experience, knowledge, and understanding of what 'is', and then in the creative arts, and in science, create or discover something if not new then different.

A process which gave us HNW, and the gear with which to make, record and communicate it.
I think we're basically on the same page.
I enjoyed your post.

User avatar
pickle
Noise Person
Posts: 40
Joined: Fri Dec 27, 2019 2:13 pm
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 11 times

Re: harsh NW

Post by pickle » Sun Mar 01, 2020 8:26 am

JLIAT wrote:
Fri Feb 28, 2020 6:31 pm
Well mountain climbing is about climbing mountains, Art is about making art, and music about making music. But it doesn't follow that music is about making sounds.
no argument there. and i admit the mountain-climbing example probably wasn't the best advised.

i should have noted up front how inherently biased my take would be. the harsh experience of noise has been a major feature of my life longer than seems healthy (or unbiased). i almost automatically expect, if not demand, that any take on noise, noise that imo can only be experienced when it is harsher than the ear can healthily tolerate, be informed by a dedicated harsh experience of noise. perhaps all criticism is so informed, but i'm not, yet, convinced it is. if it were so informed, i'd be curious if the critics, i mean, those of the envelope-pushing persuasion, would care to share notes on their personal experience of it.

i both like and hate this idea, that the only way to really experience harsh noise is when it is legitimately harsh or damaging to the future ability to experience it. going the whole hog, the ultimate end of harsh noise would be when the listener is no longer able to hear, which i think harsh noise would necessarily have to entail at some future point. which may ironically or not be coming to the same conclusion as the aforementioned envelope-pushers, but from a direct, experiential, vantage. what i am very tempted to regard as the real deal.

if this process is to be regarded as creative, both on the part of the noisemaker and the noisereceiver, then also toward the ultimate termination of the creation. not terribly far i think from the idear of a suicidal god.
Last edited by pickle on Sun Mar 01, 2020 2:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
JLIAT
Merzwow
Posts: 447
Joined: Fri Jan 10, 2020 4:30 pm
Has thanked: 8 times
Been thanked: 97 times

Re: harsh NW

Post by JLIAT » Sun Mar 01, 2020 10:04 am

pickle wrote:
Sun Mar 01, 2020 8:26 am

…. the harsh experience of noise has been a major feature of my life longer than seems healthy (or unbiased). i almost automatically expect, if not demand, that any take on noise, noise that imo can only be experienced when it is harsher than the ear than healthily tolerate...
What you are talking about it seems is a sensational response. And there are critics who take a similar tack. However, in extreme cases it will cause damage, but that is not the same as seeing sensation as not the main criteria for making art. I mean a bomb is nothing more than an extreme noise making device. And if you want, its a fairly simple process to make oneself deaf...

So HNW presents 'music' as just noise, or then just a concept. It defines a limit. One can not push that any further, in terms of sensation.

Nothing new there, turn of the 19thC same happened both in Art and Music.

Or take PE, which originally presented imagery to disgust, imagery which now it seems the audience crave.
"Cage's 4'33" = 273 seconds −273.15° C = absolute zero."

User avatar
pickle
Noise Person
Posts: 40
Joined: Fri Dec 27, 2019 2:13 pm
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 11 times

Re: harsh NW

Post by pickle » Sun Mar 01, 2020 11:58 am

i apologize if i seem to be popping out ideas randomly as they occur to me, because basically i am. i don't have any unifying concept or theory. nothing really to tie anything together. just my experience listening to noise, and the fact that i enjoy the experience.
JLIAT wrote:
Sun Mar 01, 2020 10:04 am
pickle wrote:
Sun Mar 01, 2020 8:26 am

…. the harsh experience of noise has been a major feature of my life longer than seems healthy (or unbiased). i almost automatically expect, if not demand, that any take on noise, noise that imo can only be experienced when it is harsher than the ear than healthily tolerate...
What you are talking about it seems is a sensational response.
i would agree. but i would also like to suggest there's more to it than that. if i were to try to summarize things i've posted in this thread it would probably read "there's more to it than that". you say the early pe pioneers were trying to disgust people. there's more to it than that. stapleton describes pre-whitehouse bennet as a "well known pervert". or the late keith brewer of taint and mania fame, his slogan "perversion at all costs" and in his liner notes "pervs are encouraged to contact taint". were these people merely trying to shock and disgust? or were they more on that old chestnut of seeking out people of similar predilection? i'd be aiming for the latter here.

some of the concepts being proposed, i think, deliberately ignore of a range of potential contributing factors. that is to say, can strike as deliberately reductive. nothing can penetrate the iron-clad dome of a self-reinforcing concept.

to suggest that a person who absolutely does not wish their hearing any damage actually on some level craves that damage is, well, it's probably freudian. if it is true it is also, let's say it, funny as hell. entertainment, enjoyment, craving, self-irony, deliberately reductive concepts. i dunno. i think all of it can sit healthily together in the same line. because i don't have the answers. and i don't think i've been persuaded that anyone else does either.

as for the bomb as ear-destroying device. um, yes, destroying the ears is certainly one potential function of a bomb. leaving out of course its myriad other destructive capacities. but a better analogy might be a recording of a bomb, replay of which can be controlled or reduced such that the actual destructive capacities may fit the confines of an iron-clad self-reinforcing concept.

so still for the me the question remains, is the h part of hnw at all relevant to this or any discussion. one of the contributors to this thread says they don't regard static as harsh, and then later informs us that listening to that static has over time reduced their ability to hear by 30%. that's harsh. and i think something more than a few contributors to this forum can identify with. it is interesting, and it is evidence to me, as ever that

there's more to it than that

User avatar
JLIAT
Merzwow
Posts: 447
Joined: Fri Jan 10, 2020 4:30 pm
Has thanked: 8 times
Been thanked: 97 times

Re: harsh NW

Post by JLIAT » Sun Mar 01, 2020 1:04 pm

pickle wrote:
Sun Mar 01, 2020 11:58 am
i apologize if i seem to be popping out ideas randomly as they occur to me, because basically i am. i don't have any unifying concept or theory. nothing really to tie anything together. just my experience listening to noise, and the fact that i enjoy the experience.
No need to apologize, or am I giving anything like a deep and thought through response. This is a forum, not an academic paper...
pickle wrote:
Sun Mar 01, 2020 8:26 am


i would agree. but i would also like to suggest there's more to it than that. if i were to try to summarize things i've posted in this thread it would probably read "there's more to it than that". you say the early pe pioneers were trying to disgust people. there's more to it than that. stapleton describes pre-whitehouse bennet as a "well known pervert". or the late keith brewer of taint and mania fame, his slogan "perversion at all costs" and in his liner notes "pervs are encouraged to contact taint". were these people merely trying to shock and disgust? or were they more on that old chestnut of seeking out people of similar predilection? i'd be aiming for the latter here.
Not sure if Bennett was a rapist, nutsy, and child molester... but obviously was attracted to these, as well as de Sade, but cites Yoko Ono as his main musical influence. It's one thing to be attracted, another to commit. And those that do don't normally advertise these actions, as they end in prison if they did. Its clear that rock and roll is associated with fame, money, and also sex and drugs. So sure 'there is more to it.' But here we are I thought talking about HNW and not Industrial and PE. And my point was HNW hasn't the potential to raise these ideas as much as PE. OK you can be a HNW 'artist' as neo Fascist or Marxist, its only by the packaging and titles you would know.
pickle wrote:
Sun Mar 01, 2020 8:26 am

some of the concepts being proposed, i think, deliberately ignore of a range of potential contributing factors. that is to say, can strike as deliberately reductive. nothing can penetrate the iron-clad dome of a self-reinforcing concept.
OK – my point is HNW is not in itself capable of putting over such concepts. It is essentially minimally music, if considered music at all.
pickle wrote:
Sun Mar 01, 2020 8:26 am
to suggest that a person who absolutely does not wish their hearing any damage actually on some level craves that damage is, well, it's probably freudian.
This seems though (ignoring the Freudian cliché) not what you were saying, more you enjoy the experience of HNW knowing it will probably damage your hearing. Ear plugs are not uncommon amongst listeners to live HNW. In your case I think you seemed to say you enjoy the sensation of the effectively damaging noise.
pickle wrote:
Sun Mar 01, 2020 8:26 am
if it is true it is also, let's say it, funny as hell. entertainment, enjoyment, craving, self-irony, deliberately reductive concepts. i dunno. i think all of it can sit healthily together in the same line. because i don't have the answers. and i don't think i've been persuaded that anyone else does either.

as for the bomb as ear-destroying device. um, yes, destroying the ears is certainly one potential function of a bomb. leaving out of course its myriad other destructive capacities. but a better analogy might be a recording of a bomb, replay of which can be controlled or reduced such that the actual destructive capacities may fit the confines of an iron-clad self-reinforcing concept.
As you say, there's more to it than that, I mean Audacity is free, you can use the generate white noise and bass boost to make your own HNW and play it at whatever volume you wish. I did a series of works “War” which was based on hearing that the Taliban – not being allowed music – played sounds of battles on their cassette players. Not sure if its true. I also made a series based on US A bomb tests...http://jliat.com/bravo.mp3 Which were popular in Japan! I was told.
pickle wrote:
Sun Mar 01, 2020 8:26 am

so still for the me the question remains, is the h part of hnw at all relevant to this or any discussion.
one of the contributors to this thread says they don't regard static as harsh, and then later informs us that listening to that static has over time reduced their ability to hear by 30%. that's harsh.
Static in itself isn't harsh, white noise at low levels is used for helping sleep, and meditation, and was used as torture by the British Army at high levels. I think the US used Heavy Metal... HNW has three components, Wall, which is a continuous slab of sound, I first came across this during the 'Back to Mono' thing of Phil Spector. Noise, as in lack of “musicality” tunes, pitch, rhythm etc. All of which needs to be Harsh, i.e. loud.
pickle wrote:
Sun Mar 01, 2020 8:26 am
and i think something more than a few contributors to this forum can identify with. it is interesting, and it is evidence to me, as ever that

there's more to it than that
Maybe, and maybe for some. But not for others. And though one may think Church architecture, pond landscaping and Hayricks are significant, I doubt so for Monet. So at times the subject is significant, at others its a mere pre-text.
"Cage's 4'33" = 273 seconds −273.15° C = absolute zero."

Locked