Interesting, i have the book in my hand right now, the one with the extra chapter with the date mars 1977 at the bottom right of the page 701. So obviously, "le chapitre pénultième" has been added to the book at least 10 years after it's parution in 1966. But still, there is no where i can find the date of a second edition neither Schaeffer's signature! Claire Piché f.maintenant a écrit :
correction concerning Shaeffer's Traité des objets musicaux, the last edition is from 1977 and includes an extra chapter: A LA RECHERCHE DE LA MUSIQUE MEME pp. 663-701, signed by Shaeffer with the date Mars 1977. The rest of the book as stated in that chapter by Shaeffer was published in 1966 ( Dix ans aprés la publication du Traité....). Frédéric Maintenant ----- Original Message ----- From: "Claire Piché" <clairepiche@VIF.COM> To: <AUDITORY@LISTS.MCGILL.CA> Sent: Friday, April 16, 2004 4:00 PM Subject: Re: noise classification problemSusan allen wrote Hello, I would like a definition of 'real world sounds' = does this include piped in or background music in the retail/service environment? Many thanks Susan Allen --- That typical Music in the retail/service environment is called MUSAK wich is also the name of the american firm that defined the concept during the second world war II. Recently Doctor Hildegard Westerkamp from Simon Frazer university (communication dpt) gave a lecture on Musak. Michel Chion also discusses Musak in his book entitled /Musiques, médias et technologies/, 1994, Paris: Flammarion, p.52-63. Also Raymond Murray Schafer. 1977. The Tuning of the World, New York; A. Knopf Inc. 388p./ - Le paysage sonore./ Paris : J.-C. Lattès 1979 pour la traduction française. This book is a "must" for anyone interested in "sound of the environment" Schafer is the "fondateur" of the Canadian Association for Sound Ecology in Canada. Claire Piché Vincent Rioux wrote Back in 77, Pierre Schaeffer wrote very interesting things about sound (including "noise") classification (what he called "typo-morphology") in a book called "Traité des Objets Musicaux", 'Treatise of Musical Objects'. --- A little correction Vincent, Schaeffer'book has been published in 1966 not 1997 Schaeffer, Pierre. 1966. /Traité des objets musicaux : essai interdisciplines. /Paris : Éditions du Seuil, 701p. Claire Piché Vincent Rioux a écrit :Back in 77, Pierre Schaeffer wrote very interesting things about sound (including "noise") classification (what he called "typo-morphology") in a book called "Traité des Objets Musicaux", 'Treatise of Musical Objects'. It is written in French. There might be some translations of this work in English, for e.g. http://www.sun.rhbnc.ac.uk/Music/Archive/Disserts/palombin.html but I am not aware of any official edited translation. Note, that it was thought as a tool for musical composition (mostly electroacoutic music) which might be slightly out of your scope (?) regards, vincent At 22:27 15/04/2004, Valeriy Shafiro wrote:Hi Alberto, I don't believe that there are any "official" categories forclassifyingreal world sounds. In my opinion, Gaver's taxonomy of environmental sounds, while clearly not perfect, is still the best that we have for classifying sounds in general. At least it is a great starting point. As you wrote in your email the problem of classification is very complex, and this is one reason why you have not been able to find much information about it. Real world sounds are produced by a great variety of different sound sources which cannot be unambiguously classified either. People have tried to find some kind of an underlying perceptual structure of environmental sounds (e.g., Ballas, 1993; Marcell et al., Gygi, 2001), but that has not revealed any clearcut categories. Which is not to saythatthere is no category structure, but rather that the categories do not reveal themselves very easily and unambiguously with the analysis methods we are using. My preferred analogy for the perceptual organization of real world sounds would be that of the lexicon where individual items can be classified based on acoustics/phonology, and also based on the ecological significance/semantics/meaning. Of course, this analogy is notperfect,and I offer it just as one way to think about the problem. For one,formost environmental sounds the relationship between their semantics and acoustics is not as arbitrary as it is for words. If I understood you correctly, and your goal is synthesizing musically useful noises (possibly based on some real world sounds) then rather than trying to come up with a general all-encompassing classification ofrealworld sounds you may have more success figuring out specific types of noises/sounds that maybe interesting for your application. Or, you can try to find a way to represent different types of sounds in a smaller subset. Best regards, Valeriy ------------------------------------------------------------- Valeriy Shafiro Communication Disorders and Sciences Rush University Medical Center Chicago, IL office (312) 942 - 3298 lab (312) 942 - 3316 email: valeriy_shafiro@rush.edu Refs: Ballas, J.A. (1993). Common factors in the identification of an assortment of brief everyday sounds. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 19 (2), 250-267. Gygi, B. (2001). Factors in the Identification of Environmental Sounds, Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana. Retrieved 02/20/02 from http://www.indiana.edu/~k300bg/dissall.pdf Marcell, M.M., Borella, D., Greene, M., Kerr, E. & Rogers, S. (2000). Confrontation naming of environmental sounds. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 22(6), 830-864.