sol andersson
log 014

Erase[r]Head 1.0

First some background: In log 001 there’s one of my first sketches of an idea on how to expand David tudors concept of an electroacoustic environment using elements of instrument, installation and feedback to explore an objects being for itself. Instead of reading his work Rainforest IV within the framework of  second-order cybernetics I am interested in the relations between objects from an object oriented perspective. I agree with the idea of a decentralized worldview where mankind is not the center of the universe. This allows further explorations of objecthood and its relations and noise as an entity of its own. In Erase[r]Head feedback and delay are used as a way of working with spacetime and I also think of it as ways for objects to interact and in a way communicate. How this works out depends on the sensual traits of objects. 

Why going analog?
Although it is very useful I am not interested in learning to code properly. Or probably too interested.. I fear I would jump down the rabbithole never to return. I do understand some coders point out that code is material to them but for me it is not tangible enough to stimulate me as a tool of creation. When it comes down to it I think we all just work differently with what turns us on and off. I really like experiencing the world through listening and by touching cause it makes me feel alive. That’s why I choose to materialise sound through objects. It’s that simple.


There is nothing new about working with feedback and delay, it’s more about how you do it. I believe that music is experienced in the act of listening. Lets say during a performance and at some point the ‘magic’ happends. The moment of an experienced transcendence between the instrument, listener and the composer/musician. The realisation of not knowing what is what or that something changed, if only for a second. In a sense, a kind of feedback and delay took place. During the 1930s a german philosopher named Heidegger begins a text by asking the question about the origins of the work of art. Could be an interesting read if you are into that kind of thing.



About Erase[r]Head

Unlike Tudor I have no background or main interest in enginering or electronics and never work from a technical idea, I just have to solve whatever needs to be solved as I move forward. Interestingly enough it turns out we seem to have quite similar thoughts and approach to objects in spite of our backgrounds and reasons of doing stuff.  ‘The basic notion, which is a technical one, was the idea that the loudspeaker should have a voice which was unique and not just an instrument of reproduction, but an instrument unto itself.’ (David Tudor – Teddy Hultberg Interview)























Erase(r)Head 1.0 was up and running a few hours 9 – 13 april during the yearly LjudOljud festival at the Royal College of Music, Stockholm, Sweden. It became my final piece during my MA and I think the concept works well and will move on making new versions of it for people and others to explore in different environments. I see the piece having an open form but unlike the usual interpretation when using open form, that is; the viewer/listener needs to be there for the work to be completed, I believe the work is completed on its own by itself but it becomes sometohing else when other objects starts to interact with it.

testing the idea of an electroacoustic environment using microphones, speakers, a cassette deck turned to a tape delay and a dpa mic on the delay.

Comments are closed.