Hi Dug,
Bad antropogenic sound, I think. Attemborough saids "even the original was =
mistaken" perfect imitation. So we must use Ockam razor and don't multiply =
categories. So If the perot imitates the voice of man it is a bad anthropog=
enic sound.
Jos=E9
--- In dug winningham <>=
wrote:
>
> re: this thread, i am sure most of us have seen/heard this attenborough c=
lip, i am curious what category this bird's anthropogenic vocal recording w=
ould 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. =
The bad antropogenic sound is noise. We can't avoid antropogenic sounds and=
the naturescapes are antropogenic visualy here in Portugal, absolutely imp=
ossible to avoid it here in south europe. So it must exist good antropogeni=
c sound, I know it exists for shure in my memory. So in my recording I am n=
ot going to avoid good antropogenic sound, I am going to avoid noise or bad=
antropogenic sound. Recording soudscapes must be pedagogic in the sense th=
at it can teach how to avoid make noise and make only good antropogenic sou=
nd.
> >
> > regards,
> > Jos=E9
> >
> > --- In "hartogj" <hartogj_1999@> wrot=
e:
> > >
> > > Hi Robin,
> > > I wrote:
> > > "The word "nature" might however have a specific meaning in the conte=
xt 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 h=
andful of group members who have participated in this discussion so far, in=
cluding myself, cannot realistically pretend to speak for the greater (2031=
) membership of this group - therefore little or no consensus has been demo=
nstrated.
> > >
> > > I still think nature sound recording and natural soundscape recording=
in the context of this group as well as a general nature sound audience re=
mains in the domain of nature rather than culture - even if as you and a fe=
w others point out that culture and nature are indeed inseparable.
> > >
> > > As an artist, as well as an advocate of natural ecosystem conservatio=
n and restoration, I am inclined to keep "nature sound" and "natural sounds=
cape" within a definition that on the most part discourages inclusion of an=
thropogenic noise whenever possible. Why? - because I believe a recording o=
f nature taken without inclusion of noticeable anthropogenic noise can prom=
ote conservation to a general public more than can a recording extended to =
include periods anthropogenic noise.
> > >
> > > I believe the natural rhythms and voices in a recording, aside from a=
nthropogenic, can promote consciousnesses in appreciation for natural ecosy=
stems better than a recording with anthropogenic sounds included. I also be=
lieve that a nature recording without anthropogenic noise has a higher valu=
e to a nature sound consumer audience.
> > >
> > > John Hartog
> > > rockscallop.org
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
|