Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-dvtzq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-11T09:36:09.510Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Using a Sonic Time-Lapse Method as a Compositional Tool

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 August 2020

Felipe Otondo  and
Victor Poblete
Felipe Otondo*
Affiliation:
Institute of Acoustics, Universidad Austral de Chile, Chile
Victor Poblete*
Affiliation:
Institute of Acoustics, Universidad Austral de Chile, Chile
*
Emails: felipe.otondo@uach.cl;
vpoblete@uach.cl
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article describes an innovative compositional method based on the use of a sonic time-lapse algorithm to create soundscape audio montages. The method is based on the superposition of short audio samples of 24-hour continuous field recordings carried out in various kinds of wildlife sonic environments. The optimisation of the algorithm focused on the enhancement of gradual crossfade transitions between recorded samples and the use of variable sample durations as a way of recreating a natural sense of evolution of sonic events in time. Future developments of the project will integrate virtual reality interfaces and environmental education projects as part of the time-lapse algorithm machine-learning techniques and also creative tools suitable for multimedia installations.

Information

Type
Articles
Information
Organised Sound , Volume 25 , Issue 2: Time in Electroacoustic Music , August 2020 , pp. 198 - 204
Check for updates
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press, 2020

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

Barclay, L. 2017. Listening to Communities and Environments. Contemporary Music Review 36(3): 143–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bellisario, K. M. and Pijanowski, B.C. 2019. Contributions of MIR to Soundscape Ecology. Part I: Potential Methodological Synergies. Ecological 51: 96–102.Google Scholar
Bianchi, F. and Manzo, V. J. 2016. Environmental Sound Artists: In Their Own Words. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Blesser, B. and Blesser, R. 2007. Spaces Speak, Are You Listening? Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Boes, M., Filipan, K., De Coensel, B. and Botteldooren, D. 2017. Machine Listening for Park Soundscape Quality Assessment. Acta Acustica united with Acustica 104(1): 121–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carlyle, A. 2007. Autumn Leaves: Sound and the Environment in Artistic Practice. Paris: Double Entendre.Google Scholar
Demers, J. 2010. Listening Through the Noise: The Aesthetics of Experimental Music. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farina, A. 2013. Acoustic Ecology. Dordrecht: Verlag.Google Scholar
Farina, A. and Gage, S. 2017. Ecoacoustics. Oxford: Wiley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hunter, J. D. 2007. Matplotlib: A 2D graphics environment. Computing in Science & Engineering 9(3): 90–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
ISO 12913–1. 2014. Acoustics – Soundscape – Part 1: Definition and Conceptual Framework. Geneve, Switzerland: International Organization for Standarization.Google Scholar
ISO 12913–2. 2017. Acoustics – Soundscape – Part 2: Data Collection and Reporting Requirements. Geneve, Switzerland: International Organization for Standarization.Google Scholar
Jones, E., Oliphant, T. and Peterson, P., 2001. SciPy: Open source scientific tools for Python. www.scipy.org/ (accessed 6 September 2019).Google Scholar
Kendall, G. 2010. Meaning in Electroacoustic Music and the Everyday Mind. Organised Sound 15: 63–74.10.1017/S1355771809990276CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kluyver, T., Ragan-Kelley, B., Pérez, F., Granger, B., Bussonnier, M., Frederic, J., et al. 2016. Jupyter Notebooks – A Publishing Format for Reproducible Computational Workflows. In Loizides, F. and Schmidt, B. (eds.) Positioning and Power in Academic Publishing: Players, Agents and Agendas. Amsterdam: IOS Press, 87–90.Google Scholar
Kolber, D. 2002. Hildegard Westerkamp’s Kits Beach Soundwalk: Shifting Perspectives in Real World Music. Organised Sound 7(1): 41–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krause, B. 2004. Wild Soundscapes: Discovering the Voice of the Natural World. Berkeley: Wilderness Press.Google Scholar
Krause, B. 2015. Voices of the Wild. London: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Lane, C. and Carlyle, A. 2013. In the Field: The Art of Field Recording. Devon: Uniformbooks.Google Scholar
Martin, B. 2018. Soundscape Composition: Enhancing Our Understanding of Changing Soundscapes. Organised Sound 23(1): 20–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McKinney, W. 2010. Data Structures for Statistical Computing in Python. Proceedings of the 9th Python in Science Conference. Austin, Texas, 51–6.Google Scholar
Otondo, F. 2017. Context-based Composition in an Interdisciplinary Collaborative Framework. Organised Sound 22(1): 93–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Otondo, F. 2018a. Listening to Wetland Soundscapes. Leonardo Music Journal 28: 50–2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Otondo, F. 2018b. Valdivia’s Wetland Soundscape. Leonardo Music Journal 28: 99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Otondo, F. 2018c. Paisajes sonoros reales e imaginarios. Resonancias 22(42): 131–41.10.7764/res.2018.42.7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Polli, A. 2016. Sonification of Global Environmental Data. In Bianchi, F. Y. and Manzo, V. J. (eds.) Environmental Sound Artists: In Their Own Words. New York: Oxford University Press, 3–8.Google Scholar
PySoundFile. 2019. https://pypi.org/project/PySoundFile (accessed 6 September 2019).Google Scholar
Python Tkinter. 2019. https://docs.python.org/3/library/tkinter.html. (accessed 6 September 2019).Google Scholar
Roads, C. 1996. The Computer Music Tutorial. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Roads, C. 2001. Microsound. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Toole, F. 2008. Sound Reproduction. Oxford: Focal Press.Google Scholar
Torres, R. and Otondo, F. 2019. Soundlapse Proyect Website. www.soundlapse.net (accessed 6 September 2019).Google Scholar
Truax, B. 2002. Genres and Techniques of Soundscape Composition as Developed at Simon Fraser University. Organised Sound 7(1): 5–14.10.1017/S1355771802001024CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Truax, B. 2012. Sound Listening and Place: The Aesthetic Dilemma. Organised Sound 17(3): 193–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Truax, B. and Barrett, G. 2011. Soundscape in a Context of Acoustic and Landscape Ecology. Landscape Ecology 26(9): 1201–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van der Walt, S., Colbert, S. C. and Varoquaux, G. 2011. The Numpy Array: A Structure for Efficient Numerical Computation. Computing in Science & Engineering 13(2): 22–30.10.1109/MCSE.2011.37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watson, C. 2016. Chris Watson’s website. http://chriswatson.net/2011/10/14/a-journey-south-9th-november-2011/.Google Scholar
Westerkamp, H. 2002. Linking Soundscape Composition and Acoustic Ecology. Organised Sound 7(1): 51–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, G., Aruliah, D. A., Brown, C. T., Chue Hong, N. P., Davis, M., Guy, R. T., et al. 2014. Best Practices for Scientific Computing. PLoS Biol 12(1): e1001745.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

DISCOGRAPHY

Watson, C. 2003. Weather Report. London: Touch Music.Google Scholar

Otondo and Poblete supplementary material

Otondo and Poblete supplementary material 1

Download Otondo and Poblete supplementary material(Audio)
Audio 732.9 KB

Otondo and Poblete supplementary material

Otondo and Poblete supplementary material 2

Download Otondo and Poblete supplementary material(Audio)
Audio 1.4 MB

Otondo and Poblete supplementary material

Otondo and Poblete supplementary material 3

Download Otondo and Poblete supplementary material(Audio)
Audio 2.9 MB

Otondo and Poblete supplementary material

Otondo and Poblete supplementary material 4

Download Otondo and Poblete supplementary material(Audio)
Audio 5.8 MB