An article I wrote about my ‘New Maps of Time’ workshop was just published in the most recent issue of ‘handheld’ media arts magazine in Canada. A .pdf version can be downloaded from the emmedia website.

New Maps of Time, A workshop about sound, site and social signification

http://emmedia.ca/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/HH_SUMMER2010_website.pdf

EAR ROOM | re-sounding dialogues across the globe

# 4 Online now :: John Grzinich

~~~~

Ear Room, an ONLINE publication for developing critical DISCOURSE and debate
on the creative, and EXPLORATIVE use of SOUND in artistic PRACTICE.

~~~

WHERE… http://earroom.wordpress.com/

EAR ROOM | re-sounding dialogues across the globe

First edition online now :: Jez Riley French.
~~~~
Ear Room, an ONLINE publication for developing critical DISCOURSE and debate
on the creative, and EXPLORATIVE use of SOUND in artistic PRACTICE.
~~~
WHEN… on the FIRST of every month (August launch is a special double
edition on the 1st and 15th).
~~
WHERE… http://earroom.wordpress.com/ear

via… mark peter wright

This is a question I’ve been asking myself ever since I realized that “field recording” was something of a viable genre for many working with sound. Before hearing the term “field recording” (and I’ll throw in Phonography), I never thought much in making a distinction between working in or out in the field. I recorded what I wanted and where I wanted (and still do).

While some view it as a recording technique for any place other than the studio, others seem dedicated to the cause and strive to reach new levels of purity. The spectrum of approaches is wide from scientific ‘nature recording’, and commercial ‘relaxation environments’ (some may know the interesting ‘environments’ series from the 70s) to weekend hobbyists who simply like to get our and record sounds they like.

Like any term, the definition is open to interpretation. The artist Jez Riley French has opened up the discussion with his ‘four questions’ series regarding sound artists/musicians and their use of “field recording” in their work. Below is the current list of artists Jez has included in his survey which I feel is more than worthy to help promote. I’m sure more are on the way, but this should be more than enough to start with:

• Andreas Bick
• Cedric Peyronnet / toy.bizarre
• Eric Cordier
• Goh Lee Kwang
• Jean Francois Cavro
• Jez riley French
• Jez riley French interviewed by John Grzinich
• John Grzinich
• Kiyoshi Mizutani
• Lawrence English
• Maksims Shentelevs
• Marc Namblard
• Matt Davis
• noid (Arnold Haberl)
• Patrick Farmer
• Rob Curgenven
• Simon Whetham
• Thomas Tilly
• Zoe Irvine

Yannick Dauby makes and important point  in his description of “Field recording and phonography” as to why we who record sounds in the field are shaping the sound as much as we are simply capturing it:

“The couple microphone/headphone acts as a filter and an enhancer for perception. The use of these tools is absolutely not neutral : the choices of the place and the moment, the gestures, the technical limitations and the zoom/macro effects of the microphone affect the result of the recording. The recordist makes a series of decisions in his practice, and these decisions are related to his own subjectivity.”

Numerous other in depth perspectives on the practice have emerged in recent years, I suspect due to the availability and ease of use of digital technology. People like Aaron Ximm (Quiet American) and Patrick McGinley (murmer/framework) have been long term proponents of creative uses of filed recordings and seem to have inspied many through their output. As the “field recording” bug spreads I suspect we may see ever more variations and mutations on what this is about. As for listening to field recordings it’s a fertile matter for another post.

Jez riley French runs a good series of interviews with sound artists on his blog. He has posted his ‘four questions’ with me. I’ve always felt it is difficult to write about my experiences in working with sound but what I liked about this process is that somehow when someone else asks questions it helps trigger memories, thoughts and ideas.

Resonance Ensemble is an exercise in physical interaction with material objects, challenging human perception of acoustic phenomenon and guiding peoples intuition of group dynamics. This type of sound action? is carried out in a workshop context with a group of 10-20 people. The participants of the ensemble take everyday common objects such as rocks, jars, bowls, leaves, bells, etc. and transform them into acoustic sound-making devices. When a set of uniform objects is “played”? by larger group of individuals the sound is multiplied and takes on new and unique qualities. The objects are shaken, moved or rubbed in a repetitive, sometimes rhythmic fashion, to bring out the acoustic properties of the objects. From the resulting sound, overtones, voices and patterns often form out of the “chaos”?. The overall sound fills the space and takes on the character of the group. The focus is not on the individual participant, but on the function of the group as a whole. Outside observers are discouraged. In this manner, the participants in the group are also the audience. In many cases a “sacred”? environment is created as the participants redirect their listening attention to the whole sound in the space instead of their individual actions. Several attempts of 10-20 minute sound actions for each particular object is usually necessary for people to focus their perception on listening and to achieve the “ego-less”? state of the group. The result is often an enriching and enjoyable experience for the participants. The only requirements are the spontaneity and open attention of the ensemble participants.

Resonance Ensemble installation. Stazione Topolo, Italy (7/99)
locally found objects like these ceramic roof tiles were used.

Resonance Ensemble has been held in Austin, Texas and at the Stazione Topolo’/ Postaja Topolove festival ’99 in Topolo’ Italy. Recordings of each action are archived and used in the studio for sound compositions.

A description of the Resonance Ensemble recording sessions this spring in Austin, getting to the mood of each gathering… by Seth Nehil (6.8.99)

Like a young child whose impressions are still forming, these sounds grasp at a sense of tactitlity and recognition, simultaneously eluding it. The crystalline iris-circles are open to deep emotional impressions, seeking out a new contact. These sounds carry their own weight – without the imposition of an internal progression. The processes proceed with their own momentum, moving us forward in time. Softening the skin of the inner ear, opening to the inner dynamics of wave-forms.

(2.21.99 evening)

We gathered in the empty lecture-hall of an uninhabited school building, the crisp echo of the room muted slightly by the presence of our bodies. The rows of empty chairs staggered upwards at a sharp angle – an implied audience. We passed out the plastic reeds and affixed large paper cones to them. We placed the four microphones in a rectangular fashion and distributed ourselves at varying distances. The wavering tones of the reeds pierced through the space like bleating animals or unquiet birds. Playing with vague rhythms, we overlapped and intersected the lines of wavering tones.

We are moving from an interest in specific materials and manipulations towards an interest in organization and acousticality. Organization is a self-producing, evolutionary structure, not an imposed hierarchy. Fields of intelligence and communication between people or sounds occur on a moment-to-moment basis. Influence builds, reaching a catastrophe point and giving way to a new trend which was implied by the one proceeding. Representations of natural processes are also the processes themselves in operation.

Each finding a container of various material – metal, plastic, cardboard, glass – we filled them with handfuls of bean. Tipping the containers created a wave of hushing pink noise. Dropping the beans from a height created pointillistic interspersions. We each travelled throughout the space, moving in relation to the microphones, in and out of proximity.

(3.14.99 evening)

We gathered at the house because of its quietude. The approximately square, unfurnished living-room led into a dining area with a low table, and a kitchen where food simmered. Closing the windows, we gathered in a circle, the microphones among and above us. Humming with closed lips, we started slowly and spontaneously reached a tone that resonated within the dry acoustics of the sparse room. Rumbling through the chest cavity and down through the limbs, up into the nasal cavity and vibrating the head, closed into the body by tight lips, yet resonating within the space of the room, passing through the air to interact with it. Cycles of silence and activity, inhalation and exhalation.

The concepts of consonance or dissonance have been abandoned, yet adjustment of pitch becomes an important element in the final stages of mixing – a fine tuning of the interactions of layers. Pitch has an active role in the defining the quality of moods, interlocking sound bodies into an embrace. Drops of dew in the sweetness of a kiss, as sound bodies merge into a revolving whole, take on mass and weight, begin to breathe…

see also the Sound Cellar Project

32 page feature on “Sound Art” + audio CD

for kunst.ee magazine – Estonian Quarterly of Art and Visual Culture  (6/06)

Editing and design: John Grzinich
Estonian translations: Evelyn Müürsepp

Articles by / Artiklid:
John Grzinich
Fred Jüssi
Erkki Luuk

Interviews with / Intervjuu:
Estonian artist – Ki wa
Carsten Seiffarth (Singuhr Hörgalerie, Berlin)

+ History of Sound art and experimental music events at MoKS

+ Comments from visiting sound artists to MoKS: Derek Holzer, mnortham, Paulo Raposo, Antonio Della Marina

-> Download the English PDF version (2.6mb)

Audio CD: sound works from the MoKS archive

compiled and edited by John Grzinich

TRACKS

01. art sounds of the estonian wilderness, talv 06
02. copperless in saaropera – jgrzinich with mnortham and Hitoshi Kojo
03. Forage – by mnortham with Tero Nauha and Lars Larson
04. end of an age – sound action by jgrzinich
05. Kiwa – Live at Heli+Visioon
06. Ici-Même – City Sounds Concert, Live performance in Tartu
07. Ctrl Alt Dlt – Live at Heli+Visioon
08. Maxims Shentelevs – Ant hill life
09. Noortele Heliworkshop installatsioon
10. jgrzinich – manual fracture: mp3 file
11. .murmer. – Field recording in Mooste
12. suviFLUX – sound performance, Sõmerpalu Mõis

…site and sound

since the early 90s I’ve been working with various media with a focus on sound. much of this happened through collaborations with fellow explorers in Austin, TX, Seth Nehil, Michael Northam, Olivia Block, Josh Ronsen, Rick Reed and others. But my interest in the fringes of music extened back to the vibrant days college radio programming and friends with keen musical interests during high school.

my output over the years has never found a stadard format and ranges from recording and composing, to making performances, workshops, installations, events etc… I seek personal integration into the work whether it is only myself or with others, which means being fully present from inception to presentation of any form of creative activity. The “art” is then the vehicle for exploring life, learning and the creation of meaningful ‘culture’, the means by which we commune with others. this approach opens the territory for temporary or long-term, site-specific or contextual work, broadening the scope from mere product into the the wider social and cultural realm.

…from Balkania to Balticum

in 1999 I moved to Ljubljana, Slovenia and worked on various projects there for a year and a half, mainly Ministry of Experiment and hEXPO. since that time I have furthered my strategies of self-production, presentation and documentation with numerous trips around Europe, stretching from the Balkans to the Baltics. I give workshops on digital video versatility, construct site-specific media interventions, and keep up collaborations with various sound and video artists. my current regional concentration is in Estonia where I work with MoKS, an artist-run non-profit art space.

…on economy and creativity

although my interests and areas of work are many the motivation is often the same; creativity and artistic output fuel the being that I am. Accepting this fully means to explore the implications of creativity beyond theory and concept and into the social and cultural spheres of everyday life. This may come as a given where involvement with the ‘art world’ is concerned, but the logic runs deeper. In a time where specialization and market mentalities commonly rule out over the diversification and dissemination of ideas, I often find myself choosing the latter even in the wake of unpopular sentiment. The reasons for this, though not always clear, stem primarily from the view that human evolution is characterized by differentiation and diversification of biological communication and interaction. How does this relate to personal creativity? Without looking too deeply, one can see that in the developed world, commodity values and market ideals have infiltrated and control nearly every aspect of society and life. I say nearly because the desire and personal act of creation itself cannot be easily quantified and hence commodified in a market* reality (although the dominant belief is quite the contrary). Creativity is based on individual and cultural necessities that extend far beyond the deterministic nature of “free” markets and consumer ethics which, more often than not, serve those who serve it most. My concern is with the over specialization of a market* dominated reality as the predominant form of human cultural activity and its threat to the very idea of diversification and dissemination of human culture. In other words, culture, seen as an evolutionary biological phenomenon, relies on differing and diverse forms of communication and interaction beyond the speculative “progress” of commodities and market driven ideologies. The options lie in the open ended qualities of living through the refined social practice of observation, reflection, creativity and communication with yourself and those around you. These principles serve to challenge me in my personal exploration of ideas and the sharing of my work with others. Many points here are debatable and deserve further explanation. Rather than doing so in detail here, I will let the content of the site and my work open the territory.
- John Grzinich

“Reflection is the process of knowing how we know… every reflection brings forth a world” -Maturana and Varela from ‘The Tree of Knowledge’

* Deifinition according to Websters Seventh New Collegiate Dictionary: 2. archaic : the act or an instance of buying and selling 3. the rate or price offered for a commodity or security 4a. a geographical area of demand for commodities b. the course of commercial activity by which the exchange of commodities is affected.

Much effort has gone into studying forms and patterns common in the natural world. From the early formation of the Golden Ratio, to the contemporary complex algorithms of genetics and the fractals of the Mandelbrot Set, similar patterns have been achieved through mathematical abstraction. However, there are still questions that remain beyond the mathematical analysis and simulation of naturally occurring patterns. What is the significance of these patterns and how do they relate to the organization, function and continuation of life? The simple act of asking such questions sets up a recursive pattern in itself. Used as the recursive process in thought/action, the continual asking of a sequence of questions with an enactive response of articulate answers, would lead to a greater probability for the emergence of new patterns from the stream of one’s habits of thought and behavior. The open-ended possibilities are applicable to all domains of human culture and pertain particularly to creativity in artistic action. This is embodied in the concept of the aesthetical imperative where it is simply stated, “if you desire to see, learn how to act”(von Foerster). This method of seeing then becomes a matter of observation. In the modern sense, observation connotes a removed objectivity, with a distinct separation between the observer and the observed. But indeed observation is an act of perception within multiple systems of biological and social domains in dynamic, evolutionary movement, where the object and observer interact in continual dialogue. As an artist working in this creative “mode” the result of such a dialogue is made evident by the phenomenon of sound. When used as a medium, sound is the carrier of meaning, signifying a relationship between the material forms of nature and what is perceived in the act of listening. In this way, sound animates the world through ones perceptual abilities and interactions, or dialogs with chosen sources such as, acoustic objects, original ‘instrument’ devices or modified electronics. In the process of creative action, the artist, as sound instigator and manipulator, relies on the contingent factors of continual discovery, forming the seeds of new ideas to actualize in compositional, installation and performance constructions. In an audio environment, I encourage the listener as creative observer to become immersed in the unfolding process of sound, seeking solace in new realms of sensory articulation.
jgrzinich: spring 1999

(what is) Noise induced order?

Bringing order out of chaos can require a little disorder. Adding variability and disorder to certain complex systems can help tame their chaotic behavior.

This unexpected conclusion could require artists and engineers to take a new look at the operation and interaction of both natural and artificial nonlinear systems. It could ultimately lead to methods for improving the performance of BIOTOPE sound systems by exploiting variations in their components, and to new techniques for controlling disease processes such as consumption, comodification and pop culture by restoring proper amounts of disorder.

“We found that nature utilizes disorder to create organization, and that there are situations where the lack of disorder will create disorganization,” said John Grzinich, sound theorist at the Ministry of Experiment and Institute of Gaussian Technology. “We think many patterns we see in nature are aided by randomness and disorder. This will lead us to think about systems in dramatically different ways.” To see what would happen if they increased the disorder and variability of chaotic sound systems, the researchers made stochastic resonator models programmed by computer oscillators that respond in a slightly different way each time they are used.

“We expected that we would get even more disorder and even more turbulent behavior, but what we got was organized behavior patterns coming out of the systems,” explained Borut Savski who is the director of MZX’s Applied Chaos Laboratory. “The diversity or disorder provided a mechanism by which the systems could organize themselves.”

The result is an organized system of individual elements that repeats its behavior in a complex but regular way.

But not just any amount of disorder will do. The researchers found that a 30 percent variation in the oscillation generators or position of the listeners produced the most regular behavior patterns. Small amounts of disorder could not prompt changes in the system, while more disorder simply “overwhelmed” it.

“The BIOTOPE demonstrates the importance of considering how natural and artificial systems interact with other systems in real-world conditions that include noise and variability”, said Grzinich.

“Real systems are never completely homogeneous and you can never work in an environment without noise,” says Savski. “It is important to move beyond the study of completely homogeneous systems”.

…interviewed by Paulo Raposo

PR: How did you start working with field-recordings? And how did you first
start to integrate field-recordings in your music?

JG: Last month I had some childhood memories come to me that I would say are related to this question. I used to play with tape recorders as far back as I even knew how to operate one. These were playful exercises in recording made-up “songs” or secretly capturing parents conversations. The ability to record sound has always intrigued me in the way it seems to capture “something else”, more than just sound. When I was 12 or so I got a “boom box”, the kind with the built-in microphones. Sometimes strong storms would come through and I used to go out in the garage with the door open to record the heavy rain and thunder sounds. There was a certain thrill in capturing those moments of natural beauty.

Then, sometime around 1993 I began to work with Michael Northam and Seth Nehil, doing different sound experiments using what was available to us. I cant remember exactly what was our first use of “field recordings”. I don’t remember making a distinction between different types of recordings we made. For me it was simply recording sounds that interested me. There was a natural progression that came with our use of devices, objects, home-made instruments and tape recorders in improvised settings that grew from a “studio” setup into site-specific locations. We were interested not only in the sounds we were making but how they could be integrated into our surroundings. The early actions are not too well documented but Michael got a portable DAT recorder at some point, which was a significant boost in quality and we started recording everything. Recordings we made in different situations, settings or locations became integrated in our compositional works. Some of those could be defined as “field recordings”, yet they were often transformed through the composing process. For myself this slow evolutionary approach has been an integral aspect of my work. I see few defined borders in artistic techniques that approach the irony of the sound medium, in the way that you can “capture” sound while understanding the difficulty in “containing” it, while releasing it into space.

PR: Have you come to develop a grammar or vocabulary from the captured audio in your compositional techniques?

JG: I like the term “captured audio” (I think this came out of one of our discussions). It denotes a “living” quality of sound that you somehow capture this essence, process it, then set it free. The use of language with sound has always been a difficult one for me. Making experimental music and working with sound is essentially a non-linguistic form of communication. But rather than leave it at that I still try to develop an appropriate language to describe what I do in order to push the conceptual, philosophical and practical aspects of my work. Some people simply “understand” through listening, others don’t and like to have additional stories or descriptions related to the music.

PR: You studied architecture in Texas. How did it affect your compositional work and your awareness of space? I also know you are very interested in systems, behavioral systems that come from the realm biology. Could you tell me a little bit about this and how you integrate these in your music?

JG: I studied architecture in Kansas for about 3 1/2 years. That education showed me what I didn’t want to do with my life, but afterward there was still the question of what I was going to do. The actual study of architecture didn’t affect my personal approach to composition other than introducing elements of architectural vocabulary, how to shape, define space and so on. My understanding of sound and space came earlier, through intuitive listening exercises I did as a teenager. I used to do “deep listening” type exercises with certain music in order to visualize space. It was my way of “dreaming architecture” to get ideas. This type of active listening became a tool for creativity as it is inherently connected to visualization of the imaginary. I realized early on that when you limit the “input” of the visual sense (you close your eyes) the auditory sense becomes greatly enhanced. Therefor listening becomes a key for visualization. These kind of exercises I found out much later were practiced by Pauline Oliveros and others as forms of musical meditation. So “my” architecture, the personal notion of visualizing structures within space, was of course not the architecture they teach in Universities. So how then could I express this notion of space? It was eventually through my sound “research” in making experimental music that I was able to explore these understandings of how space is related to human perception. This then opens up a large discussion of what sound induced spatial relations mean. For me this is still a matter of curious speculation, but calls for continued work.

In the mid-90s while working on sound experiments with mnortham and Seth Nehil, we also often found ourselves in discussions about how to articulate verbally what we were doing sonicly. The aesthetic debates about whether the music was “post-industrial”, “electro-acoustic” or even genre related at all seemed pointless (and essentially is for reductive journalistic purposes). For this we looked to other sources for answers and and came to interesting topics in philosophy of science. At some point Michael came across the work of Maturana and Varela, the Chilean biologists, and their theory of Autopoietic systems. This at once had an appeal because it explains the role of “the observer” within the context of larger living systems. Here the observer is never a passive individual but always an active component of that which he/she is engaged with. As sound makers and composers our work has a function or purpose beyond the aesthetic judgments often perceived of as a linear progression of a defined historical lineage (that experimental activity being “ahead” or “advanced” leads to proven “results”). Sound is much more an aspect of something we can’t immediately understand, because it induces phenomenon such as visions (as I stated before) and physical matter (known as Cymatics). As the quantum physicist David Bohm has stated there is an inextricable relationship between thought and matter, that both are aspects of an unbroken process. So from these principles I began to consider my sound work more as a signification medium, a generator of meaning, and particular form of communication if you will. Like language, sound can also send messages, express structures and make statements but on a more abstract level. Systems theory helps describe this far more than than terms and concepts used in the disciplines of art and music. Again this has to do with language used to describe what I do, but this looks different in practice which is not very scientific at all.

PR: Someone, I think Barry Truax, said that in soundscape composition it is precisely the environmental context that is preserved, enhanced and exploited by the composer. What is your position regarding this subject? What is, if Lamy says so, the moral status of the captured audio inside your work?

JG: It depends how you define “soundscape composition”. These terms are relative. I don’t think you can preserve, enhance or exploit an environmental context any more than you can an FM signal from a synthesizer. There isn’t anything moral about this view other than I prefer to use self-induced or naturally occurring acoustic sounds in my work over electronically generated sounds. Acoustic sounds being what they are, are inextricable connected to a context, but of course once captured will be released somewhere else in another context (something like a zoo for sounds?). To put it more simply, for composing, I use the sounds I want to. I’m usually not trying to preserve or enhance the context as much as I am the experience of being in that context. Its much more ephemeral and subjective. In this way I enjoy transforming and obscuring my source material, to shift between an original context and an imaginary one. This is why environmental sounds are more interesting because of the richness and “complexity” of their original nature. Of course if you want to “preserve” a soundcape then it’s a scientific matter and not an artistic one. One needs to decide the “best” devices to record, store and reproduce those sounds and figure out how to get the resources to support your work.

this interview was originally conducted for the Binaural Media website.

website of Paulo Raposo.

As many know I have collaborated for more than a decade with Seth Nehil and what follows is a collection of impressions upon listening to his most recent release for Alluvial Records.

I’ve been big on text the last few years… There are no liner notes on this release, no accompanying images (an original drawing on the cover?), no profile of the artist, not even any technical credits. The only extraneous info we find apart from the artist name, album title and label is “composed 2004-2006″ and a short and direct instruction at the end of the circular inscription on the disc, “play loud”. Now normally I don’t encourage instructional use of a listening object, but in this case if it were the only piece of information relating to a CD release it can be something of an essential link to the work itself. But it’s not the only piece of information. We are also given a time frame and I’m actually wondering why. While this work may have technically been “composed” (not more?) from 2004-2006, it certainly contains a conceptual and emotional depth accumulated over a much greater period of time. Lets say Amnemonic Site is a work that has matured (fermented?) from an array of elaborate exercises in sound experimentation.

I had the pleasure to hear earlier versions of some of the tracks on this CD as well as other compositions in progress by Seth over the last few years. My consistent comments were along the lines of “slow down… its too much… the density is extreme… are you trying to prove something?”. These comments were not meant to introduce conservative measures in the musical sense. These comments were to raise more difficult issues concerning what, in this case, was the composer trying to express to the listener? Even as a colleague of 10 or more years I still felt left out and wondering at some essential message beneath the barrage of sounds. I was hearing a variety of repeated gestures and impacts, not only of various materials sounding out within a plethora of internal and external spaces, but of an author who wished to reveal the very idea of what the sounding object means to those who open their ears to listen. I was hearing layer upon layer of dense intertwined tonalities weaving endlessly in layers that age with the feeling of life and death of organic membranes. I was hearing hearing hidden voices buried under echos of distant urban spectacles as well as instruments that exist only in the sphere of electronically manipulated signals. I was hearing layered treatments of these elements drifting in and out of cognition, then recognition. I was brought beyond a threshold that seemingly was insisted upon.

At the same time there was the outside world of the potential viewer. There is my space and your space mingling with the emerging web of local, national and international identities and the formless sticky glue seemingly holding this together, electronic media. One issue that guides all perspectives in this brave new world is that of saturation, where ones personal threshold is targeted relentlessly by the weapon with the strongest signal. Too add density, even in the artistic sense, to a potentially over-saturated mind  is a risky thing. My concern with the composer was over a struggle all too personal to make a “statement” beyond the work itself in the ensuing world. In the sound world one never knows exactly how to make a statement unless its an accent to something else or an added piece built upon an already existing genre, style or class of music. While this is always an accessible potential for some it my be a threat, to face the pressure of having to make a statement when none may be inherent in the work, even if its for the sake of a mere sense of recognition.

My hope is that this work will get “recognized”, not by status or qualification but by those who seek to “listen”. May these listeners not get lost within the sea of sounds that pervade our senses in the most contemporary way (in the most formless way). I also will give one lone instruction like that of the one found on this disk, “listen”, however loud or soft you want. Without listening you will not hear. If you do not hear, you cannot act. You will be unable to react to any phenomenon beyond the limitations of the ordered world, where objects are dead and music has little meaning (other than a label to attach to a fragmented lifestyle sold to you as mold of what you endlessly desire to be). You will not know what it means to visit the Amnemonic Site of Seth Nehil, a place wholly apart from the world of reason and reference, and a place entirely immersed in sensual feeling and tactile expressions of Sound in the widest sense. However personal this “site” is, it is a place to be shared as openly as the energy of sound itself, unrestricted from borders of immediate space. Its presence  comes from lived experience, collected objects, material actions and a dialogue with the immediacy of space. The path to this site reveals a structure that is connected as an embodied being of living tissue as much as the discarded remains of the past…