naturerecordists
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: New Soundscapes & realism

Subject: Re: New Soundscapes & realism
From: "dug winningham" dugwinningham
Date: Thu Jan 12, 2012 1:55 pm ((PST))
re: this thread, i am sure most of us have seen/heard this attenborough cli=
p, i am curious what category this bird's anthropogenic vocal recording wou=
ld fall into?

http://www.metacafe.com/watch/520900/amazing_lyre_bird_mimics_everything/

- Dug



On Jan 12, 2012, at 4:44 PM, freitojos wrote:

> Jonh,
> I think it is not a good thing to think all antropogenic sound is bad. Th=
e bad antropogenic sound is noise. We can't avoid antropogenic sounds and t=
he naturescapes are antropogenic visualy here in Portugal, absolutely impos=
sible to avoid it here in south europe. So it must exist good antropogenic =
sound, I know it exists for shure in my memory. So in my recording I am not=
 going to avoid good antropogenic sound, I am going to avoid noise or bad a=
ntropogenic sound. Recording soudscapes must be pedagogic in the sense that=
 it can teach how to avoid make noise and make only good antropogenic sound=
.
>
> regards,
> Jos=E9
>
> --- In  "hartogj" <> wro=
te:
> >
> > Hi Robin,
> > I wrote:
> > "The word "nature" might however have a specific meaning in the context=
 of this group."
> >
> > You responded:
> > "The variety of responses in this thread demonstrates otherwise."
> >
> > The responses have brought up some interesting ideas, but the small han=
dful of group members who have participated in this discussion so far, incl=
uding myself, cannot realistically pretend to speak for the greater (2031) =
membership of this group - therefore little or no consensus has been demons=
trated.
> >
> > I still think nature sound recording and natural soundscape recording i=
n the context of this group as well as a general nature sound audience rema=
ins in the domain of nature rather than culture - even if as you and a few =
others point out that culture and nature are indeed inseparable.
> >
> > As an artist, as well as an advocate of natural ecosystem conservation =
and restoration, I am inclined to keep "nature sound" and "natural soundsca=
pe" within a definition that on the most part discourages inclusion of anth=
ropogenic noise whenever possible. Why? - because I believe a recording of =
nature taken without inclusion of noticeable anthropogenic noise can promot=
e conservation to a general public more than can a recording extended to in=
clude periods anthropogenic noise.
> >
> > I believe the natural rhythms and voices in a recording, aside from ant=
hropogenic, can promote consciousnesses in appreciation for natural ecosyst=
ems better than a recording with anthropogenic sounds included. I also beli=
eve that a nature recording without anthropogenic noise has a higher value =
to a nature sound consumer audience.
> >
> > John Hartog
> > rockscallop.org
> >
>
>










<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Admin

The University of NSW School of Computer and Engineering takes no responsibility for the contents of this archive. It is purely a compilation of material sent by many people to the naturerecordists mailing list. It has not been checked for accuracy nor its content verified in any way. If you wish to get material removed from the archive or have other queries about the archive e-mail Andrew Taylor at this address: andrewt@cse.unsw.EDU.AU