Talk:IRCAM

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Gauka: Is the fact that Georgina Born did her thesis on IRCAM relevant enough to be put in the body of the IRCAM article? For example, there are plenty of books written about Beethoven, but I wouldn't say "so and so wrote a book about Beethoven"- I would just put that in a bibliography.

One of the reasons I bring this up is that I've read the Born book, and I didn't find it to be particularly rigourous as anthropology, and also not very revealing about the institution as a whole- Personally I thought that it reflected more that Born felt sympathy for certain workers within IRCAM that didn't dig the modern classical music aesthetic. The book also comes apart in the second half, and turns more polemical.

Anyway, my point is that I think it should be a in a bibliography or in an article about Born, and not in the body of the article.

Riceklang 05:17, 8 January 2006 (UTC)riceklang

I have read the book and been at IRCAM. I find it still pretty actual. And in fact, I think some of the points made in the book should be in the article. Though unfortunately the book I have is on another continent, so I can't go through it and make references to it. Guaka 20:07, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

With regard to last edits- PD wasn't developed at IRCAM. Miller Puckette made it later because IRCAM had the rights to Max/MSP. PD is Puckette's personal project.

The tech programs at IRCAM have not been overshadowed by other, smaller insitutions- it's still really the most important source of electroacoustic innovations.

Also, I added some bits about things that have gone on there with tech, and added a paragrapht about the cultural impact of the IRCAM, which is huge. I don't think that anywhere else is as well known everywhere in contemporary classical music.

Riceklang 05:53, 8 January 2006 (UTC)riceklang

The things are put in the article, "for most of the most important concepts for electronic music and audio processing." definitely lacks a sense of neutrality. At least mention some other important institutions in the field.

About the role of IRCAM in the arts: it needs some critical sidenotes. Such as: Between the artistic and scientific teams there is some cooperation, but also a lot of misunderstanding, and lack of communication, things that are described by G. Born (which is old, but in my view, unfortunately, not outdated). Guaka 20:07, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

RE: audio processing. Other institutions have been important in doing things such as developing audio processing tools, as has been the so-called industry, but when it comes to 'concepts of audio processing', such as FM synthesis, FFTs, resynthesis, etc., there have not been other large insitutional players as influential as the IRCAM. I think that it is fairly widely recognized that 'important concepts for electronic music and audio processing' since, say, 1980, probably includes the following: FM Synthesis, Granular Synthesis, FFT related techniques (including computer 'listening' devices, resynthesis, and related techniques, such as so-called cross-synthesis), sound diffusion/spacialization, and algorithmic composition. The IRCAM was quite influential with FM and FFTs, and far from absent in the other areas.

The way that you softened the language in the article already seems entirely appropriate to me. However, I'm not sure how mentioning other insitutions or groups would be relevant to the article. For example, Le Centre de Creation Musicale Iannis Xenakis is associated with granular synthesis, and the IRCAM has not been associated with important work with granular synthesis. Stating this in the body of the article seems like a weird digression to me. Could you clarify what you mean/what you want from the "other insitutions"?

RE: IRCAM in the arts. What institution doesn't have conflict between various groups within it? There is documentation of conflicts between people... I think that if this gets treatment within the article, that it would be better to dig up more sources than just the Born, which also definitely lacked a sense of neutrality, and describe some of the conflicts bewteen people and groups in the insitution. For example, often people discuss how the assistants assigned to work with composers don't receive due recognition for their help, and it is unclear what the extent of their creative contributions are with the final work. However, again, without a wider ranging discussion of the kinds of social conflict and questions of social meaning in relations at IRCAM, it seems weird to me to, 'out of the blue' state that 'there is miscommunication between scientists and artists at IRCAM'.... Again, I wonder if you could say more about what you're suggesting? Riceklang 05:05, 31 July 2006 (UTC)