Bernie Krause wrote:
> ...that gets back to my original question, James. What's the
> distinction between "realism" and "impressionism?"
I'll chime in to say that the term "realism" sends my thinking along
the lines of targeted species recordings and fairly straight-ahead
ambient soundscapes, while "impressionism" brings to mind more abstract
"sound art" that may include bits and pieces of the above along with
possibly other sound elements and often more extreme processing.
Bernie wisely concluded:
> One (in sound) is either a good illusionist, or not. To me nothing
> about the end product matters more.
This point has been made here many times before that sound recording is
entirely an illusion. I suspect that perhaps one thing that makes for a
good illusionist in this craft might be managing the expectations of
the listener by the totality of how a recording is packaged and
presented.
Curt Olson
|