This article considers ideas of image and space as they apply to acousmatic music and to sound art, establishing overlaps and compatibilities which are perhaps overlooked in the current trend to consider these two genres incompatible. Two issues in particular are considered: compositional (especially mimesis and the construction of image, and what shall be termed ‘ephemeral narrative’) and presentational (in particular multichannel speaker deployment). While exploring several relevant works within this discussion, by way of a case study the article introduces the author’s GRIDs project – a series of four multichannel sound sculptures united in their arrangement in geometric arrays of many (in some cases potentially hundreds of) loudspeakers. These permit, by virtue of being so massively (and geometrically) multichannel, the generation of extremely intricate spatial sound environments – fabricated landscapes – that emerge directly from an acousmatic compositional aesthetic. Owing to their alternative means of presentation and presentation contexts, however, they offer very different experiences from those of acousmatic music encountered in the concert hall. So the latter part of this article explores the various ways in which the listener might engage with constructed image space within these sound sculptures, along with the relationship of the audio content of each with its visual and situational setup – that is, its environment.

Sound art theorists Seth Kim-Cohen and Salomé Voegelin regard the fixed conceptual structures of notation either as an obstacle to pure sensorial engagement with sound (Voegelin 2010), or as the site of arrogant musical exceptionalism (Kim-Cohen 2009). While sound, whether constituted in phenomenological or idealist terms, is evolving and dynamic, notation is characterised by its ossifying imperative (Kim-Cohen 2009; Voegelin 2010). For Voegelin, a music score is regarded as conceptual, not perceptual. It is read as text and, it seems, has no meaningful place within a phenomenological practice of sound art (Voegelin 2010). The criticism that Vogelin’s phenomenalism, in particular, levels at notation invites close examination of notational practice and the semiotic structures that underwrite it. In this article, I seek to challenge the conceptual imperative of fixed notation through the presentation of a case study in the form of an original composition for string quartet and tape. Drawing on research by Rudolf Arnheim and Mark Johnson, a form of notation will be proposed that enables the score to escape singularly semiotic structures so that it may address the dynamic, phenomenological mode of experience that recent theories of sound art imply is beyond the reach of musical notation.

Sound and media installations are rarely considered from a time-based, formal perspective. In order to enable a greater understanding of temporal form in sound installations, I suggest a cross-disciplinary adaptation of musical form to the installation context. Due to the differences between concert and installation presentation practices – including, but not limited to, the increased agency of the mobile visitor – I re-examine form in installation contexts as the particular temporal experience co-produced by the first-person subject as they navigate in, through and out of the work’s frame. By applying this musical perspective to macro-scale formal structures, a set of tools and concepts become available for the analysis of temporal form in existing sound or audiovisual installations. Using practice-based observation and analysis, I describe several compositional strategies through which musical concepts of material and form can be extended in space and time: each of these strategies provides means with which to shape or constrain the visitor’s co-production of experiential form. Finally, I discuss several strategies that can be used for the creation of large-scale form, with particular reference to algorithmic design principles used in my recent audiovisual installation, Room Dynamics.

This article aims to sketch a theory of sound sculpture, one that would explain the variety of forms this artistic practice might take on and define it in relation to other art forms. My hypothesis is that in order to do this we must focus on the traits of sound sculpture connecting it to music rather than on those separating the two. A useful instrument to analyse this connection is Harry Partch’s concept of corporeal music. In contrast to Western classical music, which he viewed as abstract and devoid of life, Partch envisioned a music that would emphasise the physicality of sound-making and engage the listener on a more visceral level. Investigating a number of works from all parts of the sound sculpture spectrum, I argue that all the various practices that comprise the art form present the core traits of Partch’s musical ideal (physicality of music, audience engagement, and unity of the sonic and the visual) to a substantial extent. Analysing sound sculpture in light of its connection to music brings to the fore a number of musical issues for which this new art form provides a new perspective. Among these are the agency of the composer and the listener, the function and nature of a score, as well as the role of technology in music-making. These issues, along with the general idea of corporeality of music, compose a discourse that transcends the boundaries of different subgenres of sound sculpture, allowing for theorisation of the art form as a whole.

The process of creating computer-based music is increasingly being conceived in terms of complex chains of mediations involving composer/performer and computer software interactions that prompt us to reconsider notions of materiality within the context of digital cultures. Recent scholarship has offered particularly useful re-evaluations of computer music software in relation to musical instrumentality. In this article, we contend that given the ubiquitous presence of computer units within contemporary musical practices, it is not simply music software that needs to be reframed as musical instruments, but rather the diverse material strata of machines identified as computers that need to be thought of as instruments within music environments. Specifically, we argue that computers, regardless of their technical specifications, are not only ‘black boxes’ or ‘meta-tools’ that serve to control music software, but are also material objects that are increasingly being used in a wide range of musical and sound art practices according to an ‘analog’ rather than ‘digital’ logic. Through a series of examples implicating both soft and hard dimensions of what constitutes computers, we provide a preliminary survey of practices calling for the need to rethink the conceptual divide between analog and digital forms of creativity and aesthetics.

Many theoretical accounts of sound art tend to treat it as a subcategory of either music or visual art. I argue that this dualism prevents many works of sound art from being fully appreciated. My subsequent attempt of finding a basis for a more comprehensive aesthetic of acoustic art forms is helped along by Trevor Wishart’s concept of ‘sonic art’. I follow Wishart’s insight that the status of music was changed by the invention of sound recording and go on to argue that an even more important ontological consequence of recording was the new possibility of storing and manipulating any acoustic event. This media-historic condition, which I refer to as ‘recordability’, spawned three distinct art forms with different degrees of abstraction – electroacoustic music in the tradition of Pierre Schaeffer, gallery-oriented sound art and radiogenic Ars Acustica. Introducing Ars Acustica, or radio art, as a third term provides some perspective on the music/sound art binarism. A brief look at the history of radio art aims at substantiating my claim that all art forms based on recordable sounds can be fruitfully discussed by appreciating their shared technological basis and the multiplicity of their reference systems rather than by subsuming one into another.

This article focuses on one of the most suggestive proposals within the sound domain of the twentieth century: the concerts for bells and bell towers devised by the Spanish musician Llorenç Barber. His original idea of transforming the city into a monumental instrument provides the starting point for the analysis. In order to access the competing claims of sound art versus music, the text approaches Barber’s creative thinking as if it were a sound grammar devised specifically for the city: materials and performance techniques become a ‘phonetics’, structural elements as a ‘morphology’, the ‘syntax’ of sound-handling strategies, and the formal structure of the score as a ‘narrative’ of the concert. Within each dimension, the text shows how the ‘city instrument’ has extended Barber’s creative horizon by transforming musical problems into unclassifiable strategies of dealing with sound, which are capable of producing a sonic experience deeply rooted in the historical and cultural development of the city. Finally, this research shows how uncertainty, indeterminacy, ambiguity, accident or change (unacceptable concepts for the traditional musical domain) become an essential part of these works. Inevitably, such aspects require from the ‘composer’ a kind of pragmatism that seems to be inherent in the outdoor sound design.

This article proposes that teaching people how to listen is a central and underappreciated facet of post-Cagean experimental music and sound art. Under a new analytical framework that I call ‘sound pedagogy’, I trace a history of linguistic discourses about listening, from John Cage’s talking pieces to Fluxus text scores, Max Neuhaus’s soundwalks, R. Murray Schafer’s ear cleaning exercises and Pauline Oliveros’s Sonic Meditations. I show how all these artists attempt to transform auditory perception in the everyday life of the subject. A central debate here is whether this more ‘open’ listening should be viewed as a new, cultivated practice, or, more problematically, as a primordial condition to which we must return. Framed as a polemical antidote to our harmful auditory enculturation (which privileges Western art music and alienates us from potential auditory aesthesis in the lived space of daily life), these sound pedagogies are, as I will show, ripe for deconstruction and critique. Yet, more hopefully, they may also open up broader and more immediate forms of participation than Western art music has typically allowed.

This article provides a brief survey of composition in which field recordings or other referential sounds are transcribed for acoustic instruments. Through a discussion of how electroacoustic music and scholarship have conceptualised the notion of mimesis, and how various forms of contemporary acoustic music have adopted electroacoustic techniques, it identifies a recent musical practice in which these concerns are brought together. The article proposes the term mimetic instrumental resynthesis as a way of describing the common threads behind works that employ electronic-assisted or computer-assisted techniques towards instrumental imitations of environmental and extra-musical sounds. The article also highlights some of the conceptual and aesthetic questions emerging from such a practice, including the idea of transformation, issues of referentiality, listening, the influence of different technologies and their aesthetic implications, and the tension between abstract and concrete conceptions of the works discussed. Finally, the article raises concerns surrounding the language of discussing what is necessarily an interdisciplinary venture.

Since the 1950s the spatiality of sound has become a key concept in different fields of artistic practice, emerging as one of the most relevant subjects in the contemporary arts. Ideas related to sound and space have been used in different discourses and practices to refer to or to explore perceptually different facets of the spatiality of sound. In the field of fine art they have been associated with the emergence of sound art, while in music, they have been associated with spatial music. In spite of this widespread interest in sound and space, the uses of spatial concepts in relation to sound and music have been inconsistent, with different authors and practitioners referring to different aspects of the complex relationship between the two. In this article I suggest a typology with five categories to describe five meanings of space I identified in the recent literature of music and sound art: metaphor, acoustic space, sound spatialisation, reference and location. With this typology I expect to clarify the contemporary uses of space and spatial concepts in music and sound art.

In this article, we offer an object-oriented ontological perspective to complement the diversity of sounding ontologies, challenging the human perspective as the only valid perspective and call for the necessity of including perspectives of objects such as a speakers, voices and light sensors. Subscribing to this view also confronts music and sound art as consistent autonomous categories and focuses on how the pieces attune to the environment, emphasising meetings, transformations and translations through and with other objects. These meetings generate an ecological awareness of causal aesthetics where objects time and space each other. This contrasts with traditional analysis of music and sound art, which is based on the assumption that time and space are containers in which sound and music unfold. We analyse two contemporary pieces by the authors in an attempt to unfold a dark ecological1 approach to test the implications, limits and potentials for future use and development.

From the early experimentation with specific sounds in musique concrète (Palombini 1999) to the ‘anecdotal’ music of Luc Ferrari (1996) and the ecological sound activism of Hildegard Westerkamp (2002), the collecting, composition and recomposition of sonorous objects has been central to sound practice. Some sound art has privileged a relationship with visual arts and the structuring of objects in curated spaces (Licht 2007), others with the sound worlds beyond the exhibition (Schafer 1994). By examining a specific sound art installation, Sound and Seclusion by Tim Shaw, this article reworks the idea of sonorous objects as artefacts displaying different kinds of representations, knowledges or data. This question of sonorous ‘knowledge-objects’ is particularly important as ‘collected sounds’ become incorporated into compositions away from their, often remote, spatio-temporal origin out there in the landscape. This article raises three areas for discussion. First, what can sonorous objects tell us about the pre-compositional world (Impett 2007)? Second, in what ways can we understand sonorous objects as they are reworked in compositions which re-narrate them? Third, how can we understand sonorous objects as traces and pieces of data as well as aesthetic productions? The article concludes with a case for reworking the very idea of a sonorous object in sound practices as a product of dead logics and dead worlds as it emerges in new ensembles of composition away from its origin.