A LIBERATED SONIC SUBLIME: Perspectives On The Aesthetics & Phenomenology Of Sound Synthesis Anders Bach Pedersen IT University, Copenhagen, Den- mark [email protected] ABSTRACT of music, or we can ultimately try to fathom the sounds in their own existence and in conjunction with one another In this paper I will investigate the aesthetics of electronic to provoke a mood, emotional and/or sensory relation sound synthesis, materiality and the contemporary sub- within the listener. The objectification and paradox in the lime in an analysis and discussion of interrelated phe- effort of materializing sound becomes a personal aes- nomenological, philosophical and cultural considerations thetic judgment of timbre and Kantian aesthetics [4], but I through chosen sound and music examples. I argue that will later in this paper argue that it is in fact an active the aesthetic experience of sonic timbres that seem un- participation in a phenomenological liberation of sound earthly to us resembles that of a transcendental sublime in in continuum of the idea presented by Edgard Varèse [5] the uncanny experience of the synthesis of both known in 1936. I do acknowledge specific types of synthesis – and unknown sounds. Both experimental music and additive, subtractive, FM etc. – with regards to their dif- “switched-on” reinterpretations are addressed through ferent timbral qualities, albeit theory in this area does not explorations of sound in time, space and technology and I serve any major importance for the points made in this discuss if we as listeners are able to differentiate materi- discussion as it is mainly based on aesthetics. ality from its superficial cognates when challenged by In this paper I will firstly discuss the nature of sound sonic doppelgängers. Concepts of sonorous perception synthesis in connection with Freud’s [6] notion of the are taken into account from a phenomenological point-of- uncanny through a phenomenological and sensory-based reference with the purpose of discussing a Varèsian lib- viewpoint in the relation between perception and the am- eration of sound synthesis, arguing the transcendence of biguous materiality of sound synthesis. I will elaborate on the boundaries in the physical world being possible these concepts in connection with the aesthetic experi- through the aesthetics surrounding an unfathomable tech- ence as presented by Goldman [7] through various theo- nological sublime in the art and infinite sea of possibili- reticians and philosophers, and later with the contempo- ties of synthesizing electricity. rary sublime [8]. All discussions will be exemplified through examples of chosen sound and music that benefit 1. INTRODUCTION the argument of this article in the case of aesthetics and not in depth in relation to music theory, psychoacoustics In the creation of an electronic sound, analog or digital, or mathematics, although I acknowledge the importance the synthesized sound can, roughly speaking, be de- of these factors. Finally I will reflect on the topic by dis- scribed as either resembling a natural sound, e.g. a physi- cussing the significance of a phenomenological revisit to cal model or something from nature itself, or the sound Varèse’s liberation of sound in the experience of both can be non-specific and its liking non-existent in the th st 20 and 21 century electronic sound synthesis and music physical world. It serves this paper to use the descriptions through modern aesthetics and the contemporary sublime. made by Steven R. Holtzman [1] about these types of sound synthesis being either “standard” or “non- standard”, alongside John Chowning’s [2] notion on 2. SONOROUS PERCEPTION, AESTHET- “known” or “unknown” timbre and my own definitions of ICS & SPATIALITY “familiar” and “unfamiliar” sounds. This division in syn- There is a fundamental phenomenological interest present thesis methodology in many ways resembles when we as in the discussion of the synthesis of familiar and unfamil- listeners react and try to put into words the aesthetic ex- iar sounds in terms of sensory perception that needs to be periences of listening to electronic sonic timbres: We can addressed from its origin. In his book, “Phenomenology either relate the sounds to something we know from the of Perception”, Maurice Merleau-Ponty [9] makes a dis- natural world or our traditional ecological knowledge [3] tinction between what he (through the terminology of Copyright: © 2016 Anders Bach Pedersen. This is an open-access article neurologist Kurt Goldstein) calls zeigen and greifen distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License [ibid.,] (p. 116), meaning roughly the movements of 3.0 Unported, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduc- pointing and grasping. He hereby assesses the differences tion in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. in perception in terms of vision and hearing, and argues that: string instrument like, for instance, the cello. In 1941 “[…] sound, of itself, calls forth […] a grasping move- Messiaen re-wrote the piece into a movement for his ment, while visual perception calls forth a designating chamber work “Quatour Pour la Fin du Temps” called gesture.” [ibid.] (p. 116) “Louange à l’Éternité de Jésus” [15]. In this version, the electronic sounds of the Ondes Martenots used for “Orai- The idea is that sound is something we connect to the son” were replaced by acoustic piano and, in fact, a cello. movement of grasp, i.e. tactile cognition – what one The recordings listed in the references of this paper through Merleau-Ponty’s notions of “sonorous stimuli” exemplify the difference in spatiality as an active in the and “auditive sensitivity” [ibid.] might define as a type of aesthetic and sensory experience of sound. These experi- sonorous perception, much alike Juhani Pallasmaa’s [9] ences of recorded sound are anchored in phenomenologi- dividing of vision and hearing into experiences of exteri- cal and cultural heritage. We will begin by asserting the ority and interiority. When we make an aesthetic judg- former: In the recording of “Louange à l’Éternité de ment of music or sound we tend to use these references of Jésus” it is apparent that the listener is positioned in tactility, something interior: A sound can be perceived as church- or concert hall-like acoustics that reverberate the hard or soft, coarse or delicate, cold or warm etc. In the sounds emitted by the instruments in a delicate manner. realm of musical metaphors perceptual signifiers, as Back The piece is, more or less, written for these particular [11] argues, are some of the only culturally based de- performance spaces and not initially for recording. In the scriptive means in terms of moving towards an abstract case of “Oraison”, although it is the exact same piece language in music, as “The step from abstraction to ab- compositionally, the listener has no point-of-reference in stract representation has not yet fully occurred […]” the beginning of the piece as to which space we as listen- [ibid.] (p. 164). Of course, in the experience one also re- ers are situated in or even what instrument is in fact being lates music, as with any art form, to a certain feeling or played, and therefore whether or not the piece is even mood, but, as Alexander Baumgarten [7] would argue, performed by a human being. The same perceptual con- the aesthetic is first and foremost “[…] cognition by siderations might have been evident at the premiere of the means of senses, sensuous knowledge.” (p. 255, my ital- piece as it was played back from tape at the Seine in 1937 ics). This conclusion corresponds through its almost em- [13] – here both the medium, tape, and the instrument, piristically epistemological sense with Merleau-Ponty’s the Ondes Martenot, become transmitters of an unearthly concepts of sonorous perception in terms of the experi- sound. ence of sound in oneself, in the spatiality of one’s own The perception of a recording of the Ondes Martenot body and one’s psychoacoustics: as a musical instrument, and its sonic relatability to e.g. the cello, also stems from its embedding in the listeners “Sound always directs us towards its content, its signifi- traditional ecological knowledge (hereafter TEK) [3]. cation for us; in visual presentation, to the contrary, we Berkes et al. define TEK as the “[…] cumulative body of can much more easily ‘abstract’ from the content and we knowledge, practice, and belief […]”, “[…] an attribute are much more oriented toward the location in space of societies with historical continuity in resource use where the object is situated.” (from Goldstein’s (1931) practice.” (p. 1252) Despite the main focus on local eco- “Über Zeigen und Greifen”, cited in [9] p. 116) logical/environmental knowledge and corresponding re- source use activities, the anthropological notion of TEK In the realm of space and time in terms of sound ap- serves the cultural and historical argument of this paper. pearing in the world, one could argue that sound we know The distinction between known and unknown sounds is from and sensory perceive in the natural world, as op- rooted in the TEK of Western music tradition. The Ondes posed to a synthetic sound, appears in an acoustic envi- Martenot has no instant recognizable timbre because of ronment in time and therefore exists. The spatiality of its limited time and use in the continuity of Western mu- one’s own body and the spatiality of the physical world sic tradition and cultural heritage. The “hollow” or “nasil- are perceptually inseparable, but the distinction between lard” [13] timbre, whether in the context of classical mu- the two corresponds in certain ways with when we, in the sic like “Oraison” or contemporary pop like Daft Punk’s experience of sound, relate what we hear to what we “Touch”, remains sonically abstract to this date.