[LP] Electricity (noisescape/minimal)

[Louigi Verona]

Electricity LP

Tracklist:
1. Electricity...........................7:13
2. Waterfall...........................14:33
3. Hollow Numbers....................6:09
4. Particles.............................9:14
5. Amplifier.............................4:49
6. Old wiring...........................6:55

Description:
This is a noisescape album, emphasizing the feeling of presence in another place, fascination with the complex world of technology and natural phenomena which a man cannot fully control such as fire, water and particle currents. While these can be generally directed, form of flames, ocean waves and exact trajectory of one particle are beyond our control.

All tracks written by Louigi Verona.

[KrazyKatz]

It's definitely a far out album. Its my first listen to the noisescape concept. What I am though is damn interested in how you recorded/manipulated the sounds. It show for some excellent sampling possibilities!

[Louigi Verona]

I used excellent Discovery VST and it's system of multilayering synthesis.

[Sam_Zen]

1. A very promising start. Quite an inspiring view on electricity. Made as a concept.
For the average consumer this would go on maybe too long I guess, but I don't mind.
More later.

[Louigi Verona]

To an average consumer I would advice NOT to buy this album at all )))

[bvanoudtshoorn]

Server not found... Getting 'em from TiS now.

[Harbinger]

Before giving it a listen, let us prepare the potential downloader...

These are nothing but sounds, not music. Great as stickers to apply somewhere else, but most semi-normal ears will find this to be boring and uninteresting. Otherwise the sounds are very well mastered, so if that's all it's meant to be, then well done!! :wink:

[Sam_Zen]

Although a warning is appropriate, I don't mind about some academic distinction between sounds and music.
Any artistic construction of sounds is to me a composition, no matter the content.
Plain reality is that I've heard track two, and it's way too long.

[Harbinger]

Oh, i beg to differ: sound with intent does not make music. Music is human only (as a perceived quality), and requires the aesthetic sense of the perceiver of sound. Sound that EVOKES is music; if it fails to evoke, whether or not there was intent to, the quality of its musicality is in serious question.

This is why i didn't call it noise (which actually can have more musicality than 'sound'). The term 'sound' is neutral and has no appeal to the aethete, only to the physical perceptory. This is what i heard in Electricity -- yes, it is the sound of electricity, but musicality requires in some measure tonal movement, form, or even harmonic exercise before i would call it 'music'.

[Louigi Verona]

I can't agree. The only thing I can agree with is that most listeners would consider this boring or whatnot. The audience for such stuff is limited throughout the world.
However, this is music. It may not evoke you, but it evokes me.
Also, your definition of music is even more questionable then the question of whether soundscape is music. Every definition should be general and your definition rephrased is: music is what I think is music, what evokes ME. That can hardly be definition.

From wikipedia:
Music is an art form in which the medium is sound. Elements of music are pitch (which governs melody and harmony), rhythm (and its associated concepts tempo, meter, and articulation), dynamics, structure, and the sonic qualities of timbre and texture.

I think Electricity LP has all that. It does bring the definition of music to the edge, but nevertheless everything mentioned above is there.

[Louigi Verona]

Oh, i beg to differ: sound with intent does not make music.

Oh, but it does. In arts the interpretation is very important.

[Sam_Zen]

This discussion has been going on from the beginning of electronic instruments, about some compositions being music or not.
I wrote a contemplation about this, which can be found here.
At least since these instruments are tools for composers, a redefinition of 'music' should have been made.

The Wiki definition is well made (and sufficient) with the first sentence.
After that, some explanation is given which does not do right to the definition, because it's based on pre-electronic properties.

2 Louigi
If I review a track as being too long, it doesn't mean that it's boring. It's a comment about the compositional structure.

Track 3 (nice title by the way) is a good example. It may be boring for John Doe who seeks entertainment, so what.
Here, the composition is not the tonal content of the sequence, which is just repeating.
But the chosen moments for different filter-settings, the occasional clicks, and the low noise in the background.
This noise is far too weak btw.

[bvanoudtshoorn]

Well, I liked this album. I listened to the whole thing while I was writing a report for uni. It's interesting enough that you can "dip in to it" every now and then (when you're working), and not be disappointed when you listen intently for a couple of minutes. Good work, Louigi.

[Louigi Verona]

Well, I liked this album. I listened to the whole thing while I was writing a report for uni. It's interesting enough that you can "dip in to it" every now and then (when you're working), and not be disappointed when you listen intently for a couple of minutes. Good work, Louigi.

Yay! Thx! Your words made me happy  

[Sam_Zen]

Track 4 : Very nice and gentle use of resonating sounds..

Track 5 : I first thought, nice sounds, but what's the association with the title? Then I noticed the amplitude modulations.

Track 6 : I agree with BvO. Things like this are very pleasant structures to 'dip in' when you're working.