Auditory Scaffolding

Notes on “Pump Up The Bass: Rhythm, Cars and Auditory Scaffolding” by social theorist and sound person Brandon LaBelle.

LaBelle defines auditory scaffolding as the utilisation of music and sound to extend the self to the environment. In this sense, music from a loudspeaker or phone in public space is a mark of one’s culture and territory. For many marginalised groups sound is a function to reclaim power, to “reclaim the right to the street.” LaBelle 2015. LaBelle focuses on Mexican American culture in Los Angeles, and how the car with it’s sound capabilties became a medium “for the transformation of impoverishment and ostracisation into an emancipatory aesthetics.” Playing hip hop and bass music through the car speakers is a personalisation of the space of marginalised people, and an expression of that personalisation to the public. I feel encouraged by LaBelle’s research of a marginalised and non-western culture as a transformer in sonic behaviours and cultures. It can be a signifier of Sound Arts moving beyond a eurocentric canon. The discussion of noise as power for both the oppressed and the oppressors and beyond is a step past Murray Schaeffer’s yearning towards “quiet” and “natural” sounds in the soundscape. Who are we to request quiet?

Rhythm is a form of auditory latching. How do rhythms or energy patterns in urban space reveal power relations? “The surface of the world takes on significance when aligned with notions of drumming and auditory latching and the forces of cultures on the move, for one may understand the textures, objects, features and architectures of surrounding space as intrinsically meaningful according to how they are appropriated, put to use and utilised not only by their assigned function but also by their elasticity, malleability and resonance; or according to how they come to resist such appropriation: the world is a materiality in which locating the self is defined by a rhythmic potentiality.” LaBelle 2015. Suddenly architecture becomes not only the buildings themselves, but as the life between buildings.

Peronalised listening is a way for the self to manage everyday life. Personal listening devices like headphones are “private structures to latch on to, setting the pace to one’s daily actions, and giving personalised structure to the rhythms imposed by existing architectures and social spaces.”

Speech is also a form of auditory scaffolding. Not only does meaning exist in the words being communicated. Speech can be seen as “vibratory connection”. Speech is fleshy. The body gives itself meaning through vocalisation.

Spatialised?

I am here to explore my relationship to “spatialisation”. I have some questions to explore. How is sound spatialised? How can we observe sound in space? We listen with our bodies, we observe with technology. Reflection, absorbtion, refraction. Movement and being.

How do I design space with digital softwares? I use reverb plugins to create rooms and location; I use panning and amplitude to create movement. Sound design is beyond the object itself, it includes how these objects move and interact with an environment. We are designing environments, we are architects. What is the distinction between an environment and the objects it contains?

I like my melodies to fly about and have life to them. By listening and observing my environment I can learn how things move and sound through the material world. Listening is part of the practice. The world is spatialised. Do I listen to the mechanical sounds around me and recreate them with digital technologies? For what purpose? Can I experience the natural world as an inspiration too?

I am interested in exploring quiet in spatialisation practices. The spaces between. In the sound arts community in London I experience many overwhelming performances. The body is blasted with sound from all directions. Movement that defies physics. What does it mean when we design movement and spaces that don’t exist in the material world? Many of the multichannel compositions I have heard are overwhelming in the movement of sound objects. Artists want to show the limits of these new technologies. It is spectacular. It’s called technological listening. Human’s commitment to the spectacle is now expressed through immersive art pieces. Where will we go from here? Sometimes immersivity with new technologies feels like disembodiement. I am disappointed by the 8 channel spectacular compositions. We accelerate into oblivion. I’m eager to explore technological listening and the ethical debates around it.

I’m scared. I believe we need embodiement to access our empathy and love for eachother, for the environments that sustain us and the non-humans we share life with. Life is such a gift!

I imagine spatialised sound composition as a social experience. Humans gather together and listen to sound. I will share a drawing of an event I was running in the summer with friends. Humans bring different sound devices and participate in the sound system.

Displaying IMG_2476.jpg

I feel urgency. I want my practice to tackle issues such as social alienation and disconnection with our environment. For now I am not interested in working with multi channel equipment as I don’t think it is accessible to most people.

Perhaps I will focus on expanding the radio setup. Maybe we can build a software that makes local broadcasting easy with little equipment.

Perhaps I will learn more about group vocalisation practices. The body is surely the best place to start!

Before making such big statements I have a lot to learn.