Post on 01-Mar-2018
transcript
7/26/2019 Audio Culture, cap I, secs. 1-2.pdf
1/8
7/26/2019 Audio Culture, cap I, secs. 1-2.pdf
2/8
I
.{.
ii:
il
$l
:il.
ri
i
.\
\\
\'i
tl
N
$.
s*
s\
$
$
i
il
i
i,
'.4.
$
s^
7/26/2019 Audio Culture, cap I, secs. 1-2.pdf
3/8
l: Music
and
lts
Others:
Noise,
Sound, Silence
,t m
R
r*"*
'si
I,rx $**
g
s" w\
What is
music?
A century ago,
the
question
was
fairly
easy
to answer.
But,
ove
the
course of
the
twentieth century,
it
became increasingly difficult
to
distinguish
music from its others: noise, silence, and non-musical sound.
The
reasons for
this
are many. Already at
the
turn of
the nineteenth
century
the
music
of
Debussy,
Schoenberg, and Stravinsky challenged
tonality on
a
num
ber of
fronts. Not
long after, Cowell,
Vardse,
and Cage
began
to
explore
non
pitched
sounds. Ethnomusicological
research into
the
nature
of
music outside
o
Europe began to suggest
a
need to expand the concept of music beyond the
nar
row
and specialized domain
it
demarcated
in the West.
The tape
recorder
played
a
crucial
role
in
blurring
the
lines of distinction
between
music and
its
others.
Tape
composition allowed
the composer to bypass
musical
notation, instruments,
and
perlormers
in
one
step.
Further,
it
gave
com
posers
access to what
John
Cage called
"the
entire field
of
sound,"
making con
ventional
distinctions
between
"musical"
and
"non-musical" sounds increasingly
irrelevant.l
ln 1948, Pierre
Schaeffer
broadcast
over
French radio
a
"Concert
o
Noises," a set of
pieces
composed entirely from recordings of train
whistles,
spin
ning tops,
pots
and
pans,
canal boats,
percussion
instruments, and the occasiona
piano.
Schaeffer called his
new
music "musique concrdte," in contrast
with tradi
lional
"musique
abstraite,"
which
passed
through
the
detours
of
notation, instru
mentation, and
performance.
Trained as
a
radio-engineer rather than
a
musician
Schaeffer's method of composition bore a closer resemblance
to
cinematic
mon
tage
than
it did to traditional musical composition. The major
European
avant-
garde
composers
(Stockhausen,
Boulez, etc.) flocked
to
his Paris studio; but, ulti-
mately, the impact
of
Schaeffer's work
was
felt
most
strongly outside
classical
music,
for
example,
in
the early tape experiments of
Les Paul, the
studio
manipula-
tions of Beatles
producer
George Martin, the concrdte
pranks
of
Frank
Zappa, the
live
tape-loop systems of Terry Riley and the sampling and turntablism
of
HipHop
DJs
from Grandmaster Flash to Q-Bert.
ln
his
1913
manifesto,
Russolo
wrote that the traditional
orchestra
was
no
longer capable
of
capturing
the
imagination
of
a culture
immersed
in
noise, and
that the
age
of noise
demanded new
musical instruments he called
"noise
instru-
ments"
(intonarumori).
Composer
Edgard Vardse dismissed the conventional dis-
tinction between
"music"
and
"noise,"
preferring
to
define music
as
"organized
sound."
ln his writings
of the
1930s, he described his own music as the
"collision
of sound-masses," blocks
of
sound
"moving
at different speeds and at different
angles."
Vardse's use of sirens in the
groundbreaking
percussion piece
lonisation
(1929-31)
gestured
back to
Russolo
and forward to
the
development of
electronic
instruments that could
provide
the
"parabolic
and hyperbolic trajectories of sound"
introduction
o
5
7/26/2019 Audio Culture, cap I, secs. 1-2.pdf
4/8
of whlch
he
dreaml.
Two decades
laler,
in
the early
1950s,
the
European
avant-
garde
became
captivated
by
the
extraordinary
powers
of
these
electronic
instru-
nrents,
which
extended the
domain of
music
far
beyond that
of
traditional
instru-
rnental sonorities.
ln
the decades
that followed,
commercial
synthesizers
tamed these
unruly
powers
and
made tidy electronic
instruments
available to the
general public.
By
the
1970s, such
instruments
had
become
the norm
in rock and dance
music.
Aim-
ing
to
revive and celebrate
the
powers
of noise,
British
and
European
"industrial"
bands
merged
punk
rock
attitudes,
performance
art sensibilities,
and
a
Russolian
fascination with
mechanical
noise
to forge
a
retro-futurist
music made
with
found
objects:
chains,
tire irons, oil
drums, and
other industrial
debris.
"lndustrial music"
and the
"noise
bands"
that
followed
highlighted certain
cultural and
political
fea-
tures of noise:
noise as
disturbance,
distraction,
and threat.
Noise
has also
functioned
as a vehicle
for ecstasy
and transcendence,
shap-
ing
tlre
musical
aesthetic of
drone-based
minimalists
La
Monte Young and
Tony
Conrad
as well as
the
free
jazz
players from
Albert
Ayler and
John
Coltrane
through
David
S.
Ware
and Sabir
Mateen. And
punk, HipHop,
and
Heavy
Metal
have
revalued
the
notion of
noise,
transforming
it into
a
marker
of
power,
resis-
tance, and
pleasure.
The
rise
of
interest in
"noise"
in contemporary
music has
gone
hand in
hand
with
a
new interest
in its
conceptual
opposite: silence.
With
his
Zen
embrace
of
contradiciion, John
Cage
attempted to
erase the
distinction
between silence
and
music,
while simultaneously
noting
that
perfect
silence is
never more
than a con-
ceptual
ideal,
an
aural
vanishing
point.
ln
the
face
o{
rising noise
levels in urban
and
rural environments,
composer
and acoustic ecologist
R.
Murray
Schafer
called
for
"the
recovery
of
positive
silence"
and a
subtle attention
to the
endan-
gered
non-musical
sounds
of
our environment.
Microphones
and
headphones
brought the
vanishing
point
of silence
within aural
reach, forever
transforming the
relationship
of
silence to sound,
giving
them equal
ontological status.
What is music?
According
to Jacques
Attali, it is
the constant effort
to
codify
and stratify
noise and silence,
which,
for
their
part,
always
threaten it
from without.
From Russolo through
DJ Culture, experimental
musical
practices
have inhabited
that borderland
where
noise and silence
become
music and vice
versa.
i{i'r:liliir
1.
John Cage, "Future of Music:
Credo,"
chap. 6,
below.
During
the
1980s, economic theorist Jacques
Attali
(1943-
)
was Special
Counselor
to French President
Frangois
Mitterand,
He subsequently headed
the European
Bank for
Reconstruciion
and
Development
and
is
currently
contributing
editor
to
Foreign Policy
magazine.
With the
publication
of Nolse
in
1977,
Attali
quickly
became one
of Europe's leading
philosophers
of
music.
For Attali,
music, like
economics and
politics,
is
fundamentally
a mat-
ter of
organizing dissonance
and
subversion-in a
word, "noise."
Yet
Attali
argues
that, an
all-but-immaterial force, music
moves faster than
economics
and
politics
and, hence,
prefigures
new social relations.
Noise
and
Politics
JACQUES ATTALI
l.
. .l Listening
to
music
is listening to
all
noise, realizing
that its appropriation
and
control is
a
reflection
of
power,
that it is
essentially
political.
More than colors
and
forms,
it
is
sounds and their arrangements
that fashion
societies. With
noise
is
born
disorder
and
its
opposite: the world. With
music is born
power
and its oppo-
site:
subversion.
ln
noise
can
be read the
codes of life,
the
relations among
men.
Clamor, Melody, Dissonance,
Harmony;
when it is fashioned
by man with
specific
tools, when it
invades
man's
time, when it
becomes
sound,
noise is
the
source
of
purpose
and
power,
of
the
dream-Music.
lt is at the heart of
the
progressive
rationalization
of
aesthetics, and it
is a refuge for residual irrationality;
it
is
a
means
of power and
a
form of entertainment.
Everywhere
codes analyze, mark, restrain,
train,
repress,
and
channel
the
primitive
sounds
of
language,
of
the
body,
of
tools, of
objects,
of
the
relations to
self and
others.
All
music, any
organization of
sounds
is
then
a
tool for the
creation
or consoli-
dation of a community,
of a totality.
lt
is what links
a
power
center
to
its subjects,
and thus, more
generally,
it
is
an attribute
of
power
in
all of
its forms. Therefore,
any theory
of
power
today
must include
a theory of the localization
of noise
and
its
endowment
with form.
Among birds
a tool for marking territorial
boundaries,
noise
is inscribed from the
start within the
panoply
of
power.
Equivalent
to the articulation
of
a space, it indicates
the
limits
of a territory and the way
to
make
oneself heard
,rS$
' ',,:i;
6
o
introduction
jacques
attali
e
7
7/26/2019 Audio Culture, cap I, secs. 1-2.pdf
5/8
within
it,
how
to
survive
by
drawing
one's
sustenance
from
it.1
And
since
noise
is
the
source
of
power,
power
has
always
listened
to
it
with
fascination'
ln an extraor-
dinary
and
little
known
text,
Leibniz describes
in
minute detail
the ideal
political
organization,
tl-re
"Palace
of
Marvels,"
a
harmonious
machine
within
which
all
of
tlrc
sciences
of time
and
every
iool
of
power
are deployed.
These
buildings
will be
constructed
in
such
a
way
that
the master of
the house
will be
able
to
hear and
see
everything
that is
said and
done
without
himself
being
perceived,
by
means
of mirrors
and
pipes,
which
will be a
most
impor-
tant thing
for
the State,
and
a
kind of
political
confessional'2
Eavesdropping,
censorship,
recording,
and surveillance
are weapons
of
power.
The
technology
of listening
in on, ordering,
transmitting,
and
recording
noise
is at
the
heart
of this
apparatus.
The
symbolism
of
the
Frozen
Words,3
of
the
Tables
of
the
Law, of
recorded
noise and eavesdropping-these
are
the dreams
of
political
scientists
and
the
fantasies
of
men
in
power:
to listen,
to
memorize-this
is
ihe
ability to interpret and control history,
to
manipulate
the culture
of a
people,
to
channel
its
violence
and
hopes.
Who
among
us is
free
of the
feeling
that
this
proc-
ess,
taken
to
an extreme,
is
turning
the
modern state
into a
gigantic, monopolizing
noise
emitter,
and
at
the same
time, a
generalized eavesdropping
device.
Eaves-
dropping
on
what?
ln order
to silence
whom?
The answer,
clear
and
implacable,
is
given
by
the
theorists
of totalitarianism.
They
have all
explained,
indistinctly,
that
it
is necessary
to
ban
subversive
noise
because
it
betokens
demands
for
cultural
autonomy,
support
for
differences
or
marginality:
a concern
for
maintaining
tonalism, the
primacy
of
melody,
a distrust
of new
languages,
codes,
or
instruments,
a
refusal
of
the
abnormal-these
char-
acteristics
are
common
to all
regimes
of
that
nature
[
. .
]
The
economic
and
political dynamics
of the industrialized
societies
living
under
parliamentary democracy
also
lead
power
to
invest art,
and to
invest
tn
art,
without
necessarily
theorizing
its control,
as
is done
under
dictatorship.
Every-
wlrere we
look, the
monopolization
of
the
broadcast
of
messages,
the
control
of
noise,
and
the
institutionalization
of
the
silence
of
others
assure the
durability
of
power.
Here,
this channelizatlon
takes
on
a
new,
less
violent,
and
more
subtle
iorm:
laws
of the
political
economy
take the
place
of
censorship
laws.
Music
and
the musician
essentially
become
either
objects
of consumption
like
everything
else,
recuperators
of subversion,
or
meaningless
noise.
Musical
distribution
techniques
are
today contributing
to the
establishment
of
a system
of
eavesdropping and social surveillance. Muzak, the American corpora-
tion
that
sells
standardized
music,
presents
itself
as
the
"security
system
of
the
1970s"
because
it
permits
use
of
musical
distribution
channels
forthe
circulation
of
orders. The
monologue
of
standardized,
stereotyped
music accompanies
and
lrems
in
a daily
life
in which
in
reality
no
one
has
the right
to
speak
any
more.
Except
those
among
the exploited
who can
still
use
their music
to shout
their
sut
fering,
their dreams
of the
absolute
and
freedom.
What is called
music
today is
all
too often
only
a
disguise
for
the monologue
of
power.
However,
and
this
is
the
supreme
irony
of it
all, never
before
have
musicians
tried
so hard
to communicate
with their
audience,
and
never
before
has
that
communication
been
so deceiving.
Music
now seems
hardly
more
than
a somewhat
clumsy
excuse
for
the self-glori-
fication of musicians and the
growth
of a new industrial sector.
Still,
it is
an activity
that is essential for knowledge
and
social relations.
i,i i*'i'it:;
1.
"Whether
we
inquire into
the
orlgin of
the
arts
or
observe the first criers, we find that
everything
in its
principle
is related to the
means
of
subsistence." Jean-Jacques Rousseau,
Essai
sur I'indgalit6.
2.
Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz,
"Dr6le
de
pens6e
touchant une nouvelle sorte de repr6sen-
tation," ed.
Yves
Belaval,
La
Nouvelle Revue FrancaiseTO
(1
958):
754-68.
Quoted
in
Miche
Serres,
"Don
Juan ou le Palais des
Merveilles," Les
Eludes
PhilosophiquesS
(1966):389.
3.
[A
relerence
to
Rabelais, Gargantua and Pantagruel, b. 4, chap.
54.*trans.]
8
o
audio
culture
jacques
attali
"
9
7/26/2019 Audio Culture, cap I, secs. 1-2.pdf
6/8
Luigi
Russolo
(1S85-1947) was
a
prominent painter
in
the
lialian
Futurist
movement.
Yet he
is
best
known
lor
The Art of
Noises,
among
the
most
important and
influential texts
in 20th century
musical aesthetics.
Wriften in
1913
as
a
letterto
his
friend,
the
Futurist composer
Francesco
Balilla
Pra'
tella,
this
manifesto sketches
Russolo's
radical alternative
to
the
classical
musical
tradition.
Drawing
inspiration
from the
urban and
industrial
sound'
scape,
Russolo
argues
that traditional
orchestral
instruments
and
composi-
tion are
no
longer
capable
of
capturing
the
spirit
of
modern
life,
with
its
energy,
speed,
and
noise.
A
year
after composing
ihis
letter, Russolo
intro-
duced
his intonarumori("noise
instruments")
in
a series
of
concerts held in
London.
None
of
Russolo's
music
remains; and
the
intonarumori
were destroyed
in a
fire
during
World
War
ll. Yet,
since
the
War,
Russolo's
manitesto
has
become
increasingly
important, inspiring
a
host
of
musicians
and compos-
ers, among
them
musique
concrdte
pioneers Pierre
Schaeffer
and
Phrre
Henri, 1980s
dance-pop
outfit The
Art
of
Noise, "industrial"
bands such as
Einstiirzende
Neubauten
and
Test Dept., turntablist
DJ
Spooky, and
sound
artist
Francisco
L6pez.
The
Art
of
Noises.'
Futurist
Manifesto
LUIGI
RUSSOLO
1....1
Ancient
life was
all
silence. ln the
19th Century,
wlth
the
invention
of
machines,
Noise
was born.
Today, Noise
is triumphant
and
reigns sovereign
over
the
sensibility
of
men. Through many
centuries life
unfolded
silently,
or
at
least
quietly.
The loudest
of noises
that interrupted
this silence
was neither
intense, nor
prolonged,
nor varied.
After
all,
if
we
overlook the
exceptional
movements
of
the
earth's
crust,
hurricanes, storms,
avalanches,
and
waterfalls,
nature is silent.
ln
this
scarcity of
noises,
the first
sounds that
men
were able
to
draw
from
a
pierced
reed
or a
taut
string
were
stupefying,
something
new and
wonderful.
Among
primitive peoples,
sound
was attributed
to the
gods.
lt
was
considered
sacred and reserved
for
priests,
who
used
it
to
enrich their rites with
mystery.
Thus
was born
the
idea of sound
as something
in itself, as dlfferent
from and indepen-
dent of life.
And from it resulted
music,
a
fantastic
world superimposed
on
the
real
one,
an
inviolable
and sacred world.
The Greeks
greatly
restricted
the field of
music.
Their
musical
theory, mathematically
systematized
by
Pythagoras,
admit-
ted
only a few
consonant intervals.
Thus, they
knew
nothing
of harmony,
which
was impossible.
The
Middle Ages, with
the developments
and modifications
of the
Greek tetra-
chord system, with
Gregorian
chant and
popular
songs, enriched
the musical art.
But they
continued
to
regard
sound ln its
unfolding
in
time,
a
narrow
concept that
lasted
several
centuries, and which
we find again in
the very
complicated
polyph-
ony of
the
Flemish
contrapuntalists.
The chord
did
not exist. The
development
of
the various
parts
was
not subordinated
to the chord
thai these
parts
produced
in
their
totality. The
conception of these
parts,
finally, was
horizontal not vertical.
The
desire,
the
search,
and
the taste
for
the
simultaneous
union
of
different
sounds,
that is,
for the chord
(the
complete sound)
was manifested
gradually,
moving
from
the
consonant triad to
the consistent
and complicated
dissonances that
character-
ize
contemporary music.
From
the beginning, musical
art sought
out and obtained
purity
and
sweetness
of
sound. Afterwards,
it brought
togeiher
different
sounds,
still
preoccupying
itself with caressing
the ear with
suave
harmonies.
As it
grows
ever
more complicated
today, musical
art seeks out
combinations more
dissonant,
stranger,
and harsher
for the ear. Thus,
it
comes ever closer
to
ihe noise-sound.
This
evolution
of
music
is comparable to
the multiplication
of machines, which
everywhere
collaborate with man.
Not
only
in
the noisy atmosphere
of
the
great
cities, bui even in
the
country,
which until
yesterday
was normally
silent. Today,
the machine
has
creaied such a variety
and contention of noises
that
pure
sound
in
its slightness
and monotony no
longer
provokes
emotion.
ln
order
to excite
and
stir
our
sensibility, music
has been developing
toward
the
most complicated
polyphony
and toward
the
greatest
variety
of
instrumental
timbres
and colors. lt
has
searched
out
the
most complex
successrons
of
disso-
nant
chords, which have
prepared
in
a
vague
way for the creation of MUSICAL
NOISE. The
ear of the
Eighteenth Century
man would not have
been able to with-
stand
the
inharmonious
intensity of
certain chords
produced
by our orchestra
(with
three
times as many
performers
as
that
of the orchestra
of
his
time). But
our ear
takes
pleasure
in it, since
it
is
already educated to modern
life, so
prodigal
in differ-
ent noises.
Nevertheless,
our ear is not satisfied
and calls for
ever
greater
acousti-
cal
emotions.
Musical
sound
is
too limited in
its
variety of timbres. The
most complicated
orchestras can
be reduced to four
or five classes
of
instruments
different
in
timbres
of
sound: bowed instruments, metal
winds, wood winds,
and
percussion.
Thus,
modern music
flounders
within this tiny
circle, vainly striving
to create new varieties
of timbre.
We must break
out
of this
limited
circle of sounds
and conquer the infinite vari-
ety of noise-sounds.
Everyone
will recognize
that each
sound carries with
it
a
tangle
of sensations,
already well-known
and
exhausted,
which
predispose
the
listener to
boredom,
in
spite of the
efforls of all musical
innovators. We
futurists have
all deeply loved and
enjoyed
the harmonies
of the
great
masters. Beethoven
and Wagner have
stirred
10
e
audio culture
luigi russolo
e
1'l
7/26/2019 Audio Culture, cap I, secs. 1-2.pdf
7/8
ow
nerues
and hearts
for many
yeal-s.
Now we have
had enough
of
them'
and
we
detight nuch
more
in combining
in our thoughts the
noises of
trarns, of automobile
engines, of
cariages
and bnwling
crawds,
than in
hearing
again
the
"Eroica" or
the
"Pastorale."
We cannot
see
the
enormous
apparatus
of forces
that
the
modern orchestra
represents
without
feeling
the
most
profound
disillusionment
before
its
paltry
acoustical
results.
Do
you
know
of a more
ridiculous sight
than that of
twenty rnen
striving
to
redouble
the nrewling
of a
violin?
Naturally, that statemeni
will
make
the
nrusicomaniacs
scream-and
perhaps
revive the
sleepy
atmosphere
of the con-
cfi
halls.
Let us
go
together,
like
futurists,
into one of these
hospitals
for
anemic
sounds. Tlrere-tlre
first beat
brings to
your
ear
the weariness
of
something
heard
before, and
makes
you
anticipate
the boredom
of
the
beat
that follows.
So let us
drink
in,
from
beat to
beat,
these
few
qualities
of obvious
tedium,
always
waiting
for
that extraordinary
sensation that
never comes.
Meanwhile,
there is
in
progress
a repugnant
medley
of
monotonous
impressions
and of the
cretinous
religious
ernotion
of the
Buddha-like
listeners,
drunk
with repeating
for the thousandth
time
tfir
more
or less
acquired and snobbish ecstasy.
Away Let us
leave, since
we
cannot for
long
restrain ourselves
from the
desire to
create
finally a
new musical
reality by
generously
handing out
some
resounding slaps
and stamping
with both
@ on
violins,
pianos,
contrabasses,
and organs.
Let us
go
It cannot be objected
that
noise
is
only
loud and
disagreeable
to
the ear.
lt
seems to
me useless
to enumerate
all the subtle
and delicate
noises that
produce
pleasing
sensations.
To be convinced
oJ
the
surprising
variety of
noises, one need
only think of
the
rumbling of
thunder,
the
whistling of the
wind,
the roaring
of
a waterfall, the
gur-
glrng
of a brook the
rustlinE
of leaves,
the trotting
of
a
horse
into the distance,
the
rattling
jolt
of a
cart on
the road, and of
the full, solemn,
and
white breath of a city
at nighl.
Think
of
all
the
noises
made by wild and
dornestic
animals,
and
of
all
those
that a man
can make,
without either
speaking or singing.
Let us cross
a
large modern
capital
with our ears
more sensitive
than
our
eyes.
We
will
delight
in distinguishing
the
eddying of
water,
of
air
or
gas
in metal
pipes,
the muttering
of motors
that breathe
and
pulse
with an indisputable
animal-
ity, the throbbing
of valves,
the bustle
of
pistons,
the shrieks
of
mechanical saws,
the
startinE
of
trams on the
tracks, the cracking
of
whips, the flapping
of awnings
and
flags. We will
amuse ourselves
by orchestrating
together
in our
imagination
the din
of
rolling
shop shutters,
the
varied hubbub of
train stations,
iron
works,
thread rnills,
printing
presses,
electrical
plants,
and
subways
[.
.. .]
We want
to
give
pitches to
these diverse
noises,
regulating them harmonically
and
rhythmicaliy. Giving
pitch
to
noises does
not mean
depriving them
of all irregu-
lar movements
and vibrations
of
time
and intensity but
rather assigning
a degree
or
pitch
to the strongest
and most
prominent
of
these vibrations.
Noise differs
from
sound,
in
fact, only
to the
extent
that
the
vibrations
that
produce
it are
confused
and
inegular. Every
noise
has
a
pitch,
some
even a chord,
which
predominates
arnong the
whole of its inegular
vibrations. Now,
from
this
predominant
character-
istic
pitch
derives
the
practical
possibility
of
assigning
pitches
to
the
noise
as
a
whole.
That is, there
may be imparted to
a
given
noise not only
a single
pitch
but
even
a variety of
pitches
without
sacrificing
its character, by
which
I
mean
the tim-
bre that
distinguishes
it. Thus, some
noises obtained
through
a
rotary motion can
offer
an entire
chromatic
scale
ascending
or descending,
if
the
speed of the
motion
is increased
or decreased.
Every manifestation
of
life is
accompanied
by noise.
Noise
is thus familiar
to
our ear
and has
the
power
of immediately
recalling
life
itself.
Sound,
estranged
from life,
always musical,
something
in itself,
an occasional
not
a
necessary
ele-
ment,
has
become for
our ear what
for
the
eye
is a
too
familiar
sight. Noise instead,
arriving
confused and
irregular
from
the irregular
confusion of
life,
is
never
revealed
to
us entirely
and always holds innumerable
surprises.
We
are certain,
then,
that
by selecting,
coordinating,
and
controlling
all
the
noises,
we will
enrich
mankind
with
a new and
unsuspected
pleasure
of the senses.
Although
the
char-
acteristic
of
noise
is
that
of
reminding
us brutally
of
life,
the
Art
of Noises
shoutd
not limit
itself to
an imitative
reproduction.
lt will
achieve its
greatest
emotional
power
in acoustical
enjoyment itself,
which
the
inspiration
of the artist
will
know
how
to draw
from the
combining
of noises.
Here
are the 6 families
of
noises
of the futurist orchestra
that we
will
soon
realize
mechanically:
1.
Roars,
Thunderings,
Explosions,
Hissing
roars, Bangs,
Booms
2.
Whistling,
Hissing,
Puffing
3. Whispers,
Murmurs,
Mumbling,
Muttering,
Gurgling
4.
Screeching,
Creaking,
Rustling,
Humming,
Crackling,
Rubbing
5. Noises
obtained
by beaiing
on metals, woods,
skins,
stones,
pottery,
etc.
6. Voices
of
animals
and
people,
Shouts,
Screams,
Shrieks, Wails,
Hoots,
Howls,
Death
rattles,
Sobs
ln
this list we
have included
the most
characteristic
of the fundamental
noises.
The
others
are only associations
and combinations
of these.
The rhythmic
motions
of
a
noise
are infinite. There
always
exists, as with
a
pitch,
a
predominant
rhythm,
but around this
there
can
be
heard numerous
other,
secondary
rhythms.
Conclusions
'1
.
Futurist
composers
should
continue
to
enlarge and
enrich the field
of
sound.
This responds
to a need
of
our sensibiliiy.
ln fact, we
notice in the
talented
composers
of
today a tendency
toward
the most
complicaied
dissonances.
Moving
ever farther
from
pure
sound,
they
have almost
attained lhe
noise-sound. This
need and this tendency can
be
satisfied
only with
the
addition and
the
substitution
of noises for
sounds.
2.
Futurist
musicians
should
substitute
for the limited variety
of timbres
that
the
orchestra
possesses
today
the infinite variety
of
timbres
in noises,
reproduced
with
appropriate
mechanisms.
3.
The
sensibility
of musicians,
being freed
from
traditional
and
facile
rhythms,
must find
in
noise
the means
of expanding
and renewing
itself,
given
that
every
noise
offers
a
union
of
the
most
diverse rhythms,
in
addition
to that which
predominates.
4.
Every
noise
having in
its irregular vibrations
a
predominant
generat pitch,
a
sufficiently
extended
variety of
tones, semitones,
and
quartertones
is easily
12
o
audioculture
luigi
russolo
e
13
7/26/2019 Audio Culture, cap I, secs. 1-2.pdf
8/8
attained
in
the constructbn
of tfie
instrurnents that
imitate it. This variety of
pitches
will not deprive
a sinEle noise of
the
characteristics
of its timbre but
will
only
increase
its
tessitura or extension.
5.
TFre
practical
difficul'ties
irwolved
in
the construction
of these
instrurnents
are not
serious. Once the
mechanical
principle
that
produces
a
noise has been
found,
its
pitch
can be
changed through
the application
of
the
same
general
laws
of
acoustics.
lt
can
be
achieved,
for example,
through the decreasing
or
increasing
of speed, if
the
instrument has
a
rotary motion.
li the
instrument does not have
a
rotary molion,
it can be achieved
through differences
of
size or tension in the
sounding
parts.
6. lt
will
not be
through a succession
of noises imitative of
life but through a
fantastic association
of the different
timbres and
rhythms
that the new orchestra
will obtain
the
most
complex and
novel emotions of sound.
Thus, every instrument
will have
to offer the
possibility
of changing
pitches
and
will
need
a
more
or
less
extended
range.
7. The variety of
noises
is
infinite. lf
today, having
perhaps
a
thousand differ-
ent machines,
we are able
to
distinguish
a thousand different
noises, tomorrow,
with the multiplicaiion
of new
machines, we will be able
to distinguish ten,
tvventy,
ot
thirty thousand different
noises, not
simply
by
imitation but
by
combining accord-
ing
to
our
fancy.
8.
Tlrerefore, we
invite talented and audacious
young
musicians to observe
all noises attentively,
to understand
the different rhythms
that
compose
them, their
principal pitch,
and those
which are secondary.
Then,
comparing
the various tim-
bres of
noises to the timbres of sounds,
they will be convinced that
the first
are
much more
numerous than the second.
This will
give
them not only
the under-
standing
of but also the
passion
and
the taste for noises. Our
multiplied sensibility,
having been
conquered
by
futurist eyes, will finally have some
futurist ears. Thus,
the motors
and machines of our
industrial cities can one day
be
given pitches,
so
that every
workshop will become an
intoxicating orchestra of
noises
;.
. . .1
't4
r
audioculture