Well he may be simplistic in his approach...but I don't think the
'purity illusion' thing is actually completely lost on him...
"but composed images with most of the creative work done in the field"
He is at least admitting there that recording itself is a series of
creative choices. While he does use words like 'documentary' I don't
think he is making claims that are completely out of line. Really
nature recording can be or not be 'documentary' as much as a film can
be so. Some documentary films 'seem' very 'raw/real' even though that
is an illusion. So it can be with nature recordings I would say. I
don't think just using the word 'documentary' or 'raw' implies some
total 'voice of god' purity ethic in the recording.
I would take issue with the word 'unaltered' that he uses though...you
are right...that is misleading. There's obviously a lot more too what
we are doing than is in the article.
Danny
--- In Wild Sanctuary <> wrote:
>
> Old, it certainly is. This is a pretty good example of a very
> elitist, academic and limited perspective - one shared by very few
> serious recordists and true artists. Problem is that Rothenberg (name
> spelled wrong in the article) does not now and never did understand
> the "art" of natural soundscapes and what they represent. (Either
> that or he refuses to acknowledge what is essential).
>
> All such recordings are an illusion, at best. Sometimes one can
> capture the essence of a place with a constant stream of data.
> Sometimes not. The biggest claim by some is that there is "pure"
> stuff out there. The only thing "pure" about this claim is the horsy
> manure of the premise. There is no "unaltered" sound. Every choice a
> recordist makes in the field, whether mic system, data capture tech,
> where to aim the mics, what time of day/season one records, which
> parts of the data to include in a program (whether CD, media for
> video, or public space performance) constitutes a form of edit. A CD
> allows 74 minutes of stereo audio data at 16 bit/44.1kHz. Choose the
> segment you'll include and, voila!, a major edit. Of the 31 natural
> soundscapes I've created for CD media, four are made up of
> composites. So Rothenberg, again, has not done his homework.
>
> We have to think of what data best represents a sense of place and
> time and represent it to the best of our art and craft. The
> Rothenbergs of the world do not set the standards. They have no
> authority in that department. You're the only ones who do.
>
> Bernie Krause
>
>
>
> >http://www.sierraclub.org/sierra/200007/mixedmedia.asp
> >
> >Have you all seen this one? I know it mentions some of us. But I
> >thought it was a nice little concise piece. What do you make of the
> >comparison to us being at the stage of photographers 100 yrs ago?
> >
> >Danny
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >"Microphones are not ears,
> >Loudspeakers are not birds,
> >A listening room is not nature."
> >Klas Strandberg
> >Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Wild Sanctuary
> P. O. Box 536
> Glen Ellen, CA 95442
> t. 707-996-6677
> f. 707-996-0280
> http://www.wildsanctuary.com
>
|