Hugh Davies’s Electronic Music Documentation 1961–1968

Abstract

This paper provides an account and interpretation of Hugh Davies s electronic music research and documentation from the period 1961 1968. It is argued that Davies, particularly via his International Electronic Music Catalog (published 1968), characterised electronic music for the first time as a truly international, interdisciplinary praxis, whereas in the preceding literature the full extent of that international, interdisciplinary scope had been represented only partially, and in a way that was heavily biased in favour of the ostensibly main Western European and North American schools. This argument is demonstrated by referring to a range of published sources dating from 1952 1962, which represented the praxis of electronic music as somewhat fragmented and parochial and to a range of Davies s published and unpublished writings, which conveyed a sense of the various international, aesthetic, and disciplinary threads coalescing into an apparently coherent whole. An interpretation of Davies s motivations for representing electronic music in this way is provided, which has to do with his belief in international and interdisciplinary exchange as catalysts for the development of the electronic idiom. Many subsequent publications rely upon the data provided in the Catalog, which continues to be, arguably, the most complete record of international, interdisciplinary electronic music activity up to the end of 1967. Some examples are given that illustrate the influence of the Catalog upon subsequent studies. It is concluded that further work is needed in order to fully understand and evaluate the historiographic consequences of the Catalog s influence upon discourses of electronic music history.

Fostering a Post-Digital Avant-Garde: Research-led teaching of music technology

“…In particular our practices are in live coding and handmade electronic instrument performance. The similarities between our hardware-oriented and software-oriented practices were well described by Mooney’s (2015) characterisations that we presented in the introduction. In the sections that follow, we describe our musical practices so that these points and other aspects of the post-digital may be illustrated.…”

“…Inspired by Mooney (2015), we suggest that post-digital avant-garde music practices have four particular characteristics: live electronic music-making; engage with technical materiality and tool building; celebrate uncertainty through improvisation and algorithmic processes; are openly shared and community oriented. …”

“…Amongst those practices that can be considered post-digital, we include our own live coding and instrument-building activities; we will describe these in more detail below. Interestingly, a connection between these two practices has recently been highlighted by Mooney (2015) who summarised the similarities in four points: They share a common historical trajectory of live (rather than studio-based) electronic music. In them the performer builds, modifies and/or combines the tools of music-making. They are improvised in nature, algorithmic in process and bounded by the constraints of the chosen system. Both are underpinned by a community-engagement ethos. …”

Editorial: Alternative histories of electroacoustic music

“…Issue 18.3 -'Re-wiring Electronic Music' -included a few articles documenting recent creative practice that implicitly adopts a historiographic or media archaeological perspective (Paiuk 2013;Parker 2013;Riis 2013). Finally, issue 20.1, marking '20 Years of Organised Sound', had an explicitly retrospective emphasis, and included a range of personal reflections on electroacoustic music's history, as well as an article on canon formation in its literary history (Mooney 2015). However, these articles represent a comparatively small proportion of Organised Sound's total output, and many of them engage with history only from the perspective of its relevance to, or incorporation within, present-day creative practice.…”

Canonisation and Documentation of Interdisciplinary Electroacoustic Music, Exemplified by Three Cases from the Netherlands: Dick Raaijmakers, Michel Waisvisz and Huba de Graaff

“…(16 October 2013, accessed 6 January 2017), www.eenvandaag.nl/binnenland/ 54590/_dancemuziek_wordt_h_t_exportproduct_van_nederland (15 October 2014, accessed 6 January 2017), www.bumastemra.nl/exportwaarde-nederlandse-populaire-muziek-wederom-gestegen/ (16 January 2016, accessed 6 January 2017). 9 With regard to the early electronic music: a much more inclusive overview of early electronic music compositions in the Netherlands, in which particularly the many compositions of Jan Boerman, Ton Bruynèl and Dick Raaijmakers stand out, was already offered in Davies's catalogue of electronic compositions(Davies 1968); see alsoMooney (2015). So the selection of early Dutch electronic music can not be due to ignorance of the existence of other electronic music in the Netherlands.…”