Hence the need to write about the classification ideas I have instead, maybe indicate a deeper structure than arrows and symbols seem to.
Thinking about classification in terms of sound design. There is obviously a narrative to Flanear – a Melbourne CBD soundscape. Perhaps not narrative in a linear sense, but definitely a progression of impressions to recreate a situation. Sooooo.
First thoughts kept dancing around Russolo’s six families of noises as leading categories. This made me think about envelopes, how different sound events were packaged. Glasses tinkling, cars accelerating, enharmonic crescendos; trams crossing tram tracks, out of time pedestrian crossing, fragmented repetition suggesting constant movement. This was all very patricular, keeping true to Schaeffer and focusing on the sound object or event, how is it constructed? Although these qualities determine how I edit the sounds and create my samples, titles are still given quite literally (buskerdrums, glasses, intram etc.).
Defying A. Ward, perhaps:
… one of the archivist’s main responsibilities is to preserve or re-establish the ‘provenance’ of the documents is his care so that these circumstances will remain clear to future users. As life goes on so archives naturally tend to form series whose parts are interrelated and interdependent. Much of the evidential value of archives is lost if these series are split up and rearranged according to some scheme unrelated to their provenance. The arrangement and intitial description of archives should always reflect their provenance and function, rather than their physical form or their subject content.
(1990:2, A Manual of Sound Archive Administration. Hants, England: Gower.)
I am demonstrating that although [so far] I am focusing on the physical forms of sounds to archive them, the very fact that they are displayed in a multi-channel fashion allows me to preserve “provenance”.
And so to exhume a narrative. Returning to sound design, I’m begin to think about the samples in terms of ambiences and effects. These two components create a spatial soundscape, each combination with their own unique characteristics. Busy shopping street or cafe culture or road? Several dull background pedals or sporadic single sonic events?
This approach raises an opportunity to think more about audiovisual aspect – do I want to introduce some sort of ‘Foley’ category/tag that does use the visuals a bit more? I want to represent both movement and stillness where appropriate, in a manner that complements the overall effects of the soundscape.
Need to keep returning to Chion’s Audio-Vision (1994) if I go down this way, to understand how and what an audience will infer as sound-reality.
Attali and G. Ward speak of a blindness in urban surroundings, indicative of the spectacle society (Debord), treatable through Situationists tactics; and so can all this ultimately be archived? Evaluation and aesthetics in terms of Russolo, Schaeffer and Debord to satisfy what Chion, Attali and both Wards consider important.
SO first draft of classifications…
- Titles: What and where (will have to start getting more specific with titles as I begin collecting more samples – these will have to be able to be organised in a single folder)
- Tags: Highlight similarities and differences (fragmented, continuous, inside, outside, rhythmic, tonal)
- Categories: Ambience (more consistent sounds identifiable with physical spaces), Effect (specific sonic events which occur variously throughout the CBD) or Complex (unique complex aural events, conveying personality or colour)
And on to videodefunct soon to see how these all work out. And then tweak. Then redo. And over and over and hope it develops. Or I develop.
I’m a bit hopeless inconsistent when it comes to tagging. I do like to hang onto the idea that perhaps an experiemental and unsure approach to tagging will help develop the project more than if, say, I had already formed a routine tagging habit that was difficult to adapt. But I’m sure than can still happen.
