Matju, I see your point and I won't try to convince you that this work is something you don't believe it to be.
However, I believe our disagreement born from a very different viewpoint on the nature of an """"artistic"""" intervention. Your technical analysis is excellent, but it seems to me it goes over the real scope of the work. A reliable, efficient, accurate and consistent sonification system for IP addresses was not what I aimed for. The project is a simple critical observation. That's my personal view of it and that's what I aimed for in first instance. I agree with you, it's hard to imagine not obvious ways for censorship to enter music, and that's one of the reasons why I'm happy experimenting with it. M On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 8:02 PM, Mathieu Bouchard <[email protected]>wrote: > On Mon, 20 Dec 2010, Marco Donnarumma wrote: > > If one can't reasonably hear the censorship in it, is it appropriate to >>> advertise the work using such a title ? >>> >> How would you define a 'reasonable listening of censorship'? >> > > Well, perhaps there isn't one that can be done with IP addresses. IP > addresses don't mean much to people, even less than phone numbers do, > because the DNS and WHOIS systems do their best to hide those numbers away > from people. There are hardly any well-known IP addresses apart from > 127.0.0.1 and 192.168.0.1, which are reserved for things outside of the > internet anyway. > > Then there is the problem of putting numbers in any way that the numbers > could be recovered (or recovered enough) from the data. In the case of IP > addresses, anything one bit away is a totally distinct address, so, if such > distinctions are hard to hear, you aren't really playing the IP address, but > rather, a fragment of it. The way you play it, even if someone could make > sense of MIDI notes as high as 255 (when even just 140 is above Nyquist...), > there are 24 combinations that would sound the same (for most IP addresses), > because in an IP address, the order of the bytes is important, which is not > rendered as such (you'd be either preserving the order or doing anything > else that amounts to doing the same). Thus there are many combinations of > non-banned addresses that sound exactly the same as the banned ones. > > Both things led me to think that in this work, the IP addresses are > secondary, the fact that they are banned addresses is secondary, and the > concept of censorship is secondary. > > That said, I don't know how censorship could enter a music piece as music. > > However, there are obvious ways to make it enter as lyrics : you write a > song against censorship, and then it will get censored in China, and now > it's doubly relevant to the topic of censorship. > > > Sure, but in this case soundfile is only for online documentation, the >> work is exhibited as multichannel audio installation, the audience can >> interact with the software and read relevant information about the >> how/what/why. >> > > Ah, that's very nice. Will you put some of it online one day ? > > > _______________________________________________________________________ > | Mathieu Bouchard ---- tél: +1.514.383.3801 ---- Villeray, Montréal, QC > -- Marco Donnarumma aka TheSAD Independent New Media Arts Professional, Performer, Teacher Ongoing MSc by Research, University of Edinburgh, UK PORTFOLIO: http://marcodonnarumma.com LAB: http://www.thesaddj.com | http://cntrl.sourceforge.net | http://www.flxer.net EVENT: http://www.liveperformersmeeting.net
_______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
