Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-5959bf8d4d-599mq Total loading time: 0.222 Render date: 2022-12-10T05:25:24.576Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "useRatesEcommerce": false } hasContentIssue true

Beyond DIY in Electronic Music

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 November 2013

John Richards*
Affiliation:
Music, Technology and Innovation Research Centre, De Montfort University, The Gateway, Leicester, LE1 9BH, UK E-mail: jrich@dmu.ac.uk

Abstract

Do-it-yourself (DIY) in electronic music represents a new paradigm that is not just about DIY. Doing-it-together (DIT) and the idea of community and shared experiences are at the root of DIY practice. This article discusses how the workshop and the event have become central to practitioners working in the field of DIY. Collective instrument building, the concept of the living installation, and performance are viewed as a holistic event. Some specific examples of the author's work known as Dirty Electronics are considered, where emphasis is placed upon experience rather than the ‘something to take home’ factor. These include the following works: ICA Solder a Score, Noise Shadow, Still and Cut & Thrust. Composing ‘outside’ electronics is regarded as a method for revealing processes that can be represented in other areas of the work beyond sound-generating circuits. The article also looks at how building circuits and sound devices acts as a way to create a tabula rasa, and how the idea of delegated performance, where instruments are played by ‘non-experts’, serves to establish a naïve approach and authenticity in performance. Through the sharing of information online and in workshops, the DIY community has become knowledgeable, which has resulted in a community ‘full of experts’ and the growth of custom-designed circuits. The rise of discrete hand-held music players, such as the Buddha Machine, and the boutique synthesiser are also discussed, and the physical artefact and sound object are seen as a vehicle for the dissemination of ideas. Finally, the question is asked: ‘In DIY practice, where does the authentic document of the work lie?’

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bausch, P. 2007. Kontakthof with Ladies and Gentlemen Over ‘65’. Paris: L'Arche.Google Scholar
Bishop, C. 2006. Participation. London: Whitechapel.Google Scholar
Bishop, C. 2011. Artificial Hells: Participatory Art and the Politics of Spectatorship. London: Verso.Google Scholar
Boon, M. 2006. FM3. The Wire: Adventures in Modern Music 269: 12.Google Scholar
Bourriaud, N. 2002. Relational Aesthetics. Dijon: Les presses du réel.Google Scholar
Boven, L., Gilovich, T. 2003. To Do or to Have? That Is the Question. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 85(6): 11931202.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bowers, J., Archer, P. 2005. Not Hyper, Not Meta, Not Cyber but Infra-Instruments. Proceedings of the 2005 Conference on New Interfaces for Musical Expression (NIME05), Vancouver, 5–10.Google Scholar
Cage, J. 1981. For the Birds: John Cage in Conversation with Daniel Charles. Boston, MA and London: Boyars.Google Scholar
Collins, N. 2006. Handmade Electronic Music: The Art of Hardware Hacking. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Edwards, P. 2011. Email to the author, 27 August 2011.Google Scholar
Fuller, D. 1983. An Introduction to Automatic Instruments. Early Music 11(2): 164166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Full of Noises. 2013. Full of Noises Festival. http://fonfestival.org Google Scholar
Gieskes, G. 2013b. Email to the author, 18 May 2013.Google Scholar
Hassenzahl, M. 2013. User Experience and Experience Design. In: M. Soegaard and R.F. Dam (eds.) The Encyclopedia of Human-Computer Interaction, 2nd edn. Aarhus: The Interaction Design Foundation. http://www.interaction-design.org/encyclopedia/user_experience_and_experience_design.html Google Scholar
Institute of Contemporary Arts (ICA), London. Live Weekends: Notation and Interpretation 16–20 February 2011. http://www.ica.org.uk Google Scholar
Jo, K., Parkinson, A., Tanaka, A. 2013. Workshopping Participation in Music. Organised Sound 18(3): 282291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lévi-Strauss, C. 1966. The Savage Mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Lippit, T. 2004. Realtime Sampling System for the Turntablist Version 2: 16padjoystickcontroller. Proceedings of the 2004 Conference on New Interfaces for Musical Expression (NIME04), Hamamatsu, 211–12.Google Scholar
Negroponte, N. 1995. Being Digital. New York: Knopf.Google Scholar
Reich, S. 1974. Writings About Music. Halifax: Press of Nova Scotia College of Art and Design.Google Scholar
Richards, J. 2007/8. Unlearn – Re-Wire: Ephemeral Musical Devices. STEIM Project Blog 2007/08. http://www.steim.org/projectblog/?p=254 Google Scholar
Richards, J. 2011. Lead & Schemas. Roland: ICA Magazine 9: 2325.Google Scholar
Richards, J. 2012. Collateral Damage. The Wire: Adventures in Modern Music 338. http://www.thewire.co.uk Google Scholar
Richards, J., Frize, J. 2013. Sonar 20th Anniversary Synth Documentation. http://www.dirtyelectronics.org Google Scholar
Riis, M. 2013. The Media Archaeological Repairman. Organised Sound 18(3): 255265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shaughnessy, A. 2008. Cover Art By: New Music Graphics. London: Laurence King.Google Scholar
Shaughnessy, A., House, J. 2003. Radical Album Cover Art: Sampler 3. London: Laurence King.Google Scholar
Spencer, A. 2005. DIY: The Rise of Lo-Fi Culture. London: Marion Boyars.Google Scholar
Takahashi, T. 2013. Interview with the author, 31 July 2013.Google Scholar
Tilbury, J. 2008. Cornelius Cardew (1936–1981): A Life Unfinished. Essex: Copula.Google Scholar
Toffler, A. 1970. Future Shock. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
Turkle, S. 2007. Evocative Objects: Things We Think With. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Wagstaff, J. 2007. The Anti-iPod: The Buddha Machine Shows that Bells and Whistles Aren't Always Better. The Wall Street Journal 27 April. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB117712103492177617.html (accessed pm 28 August 2013).Google Scholar
7
Cited by

Save article to Kindle

To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Beyond DIY in Electronic Music
Available formats
×

Save article to Dropbox

To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Beyond DIY in Electronic Music
Available formats
×

Save article to Google Drive

To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Beyond DIY in Electronic Music
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *