Listening through the Noise: The Aesthetics of Experimental Electronic Music

I came into this book fairly informed, so that perspective and baggage colors my impression of the book. It helps to know a bit about general 20th century music history, modern aesthetics, critical theory, and/or electronic music going into it.Demers' book is a great "connect the dots" sort of primer when dealing with this intersection of hi art, low art, philosophy and technology. In the current era, borders between academic, experimental, and popular musical styles are fluid - divisions between genres are often purely aesthetic, rather than a result of classical training or performance venue. Although it leans toward the academy, the thrust of the book is to familiarize the reader with the various rationales underpinning electronic music composition, starting with the early days of sound collages and synthesized tones.My critiques of the book are that it's quite short, and the listening resources are limited and difficult to access. It felt like there was a lot of ground uncovered in regards to the aesthetics of systems-based (algorithmic) composition and human-machine interfacing. There's some discussion on the feedback loop between the technology and the music (i.e. how different synthesizers encourage particular ways of music creation, etc), but the bulk of the discussion was on the larger aesthetic ideas and the musical outcomes, rather than specifics on the craft and processes involved. I wish it had been longer and a bit more extensive. Additionally, this is the kind of study that necessitates a thorough listening guide, and there are often multiple musical references in a single paragraph. I found myself often reading with the internet and a music streaming service open. The included Oxford web music companion is a benefit, but is very limited in regards to the amount of music discussed, and didn't work on my mobile browser. I'd recommend starting or ending each chapter with a recommended listening list - Alex Ross did this with "The Rest is Noise" and it was very helpful.2015 was an awesome year for genre-bending electronic music - Holly Herndon, Arca, Oneohtrix Point Never, and JLin all came out with some incredible work, and that's just what I'm personally familiar with. If you're looking for a deeper dive, or maybe you want some historical context to what you're finding on Fader, Fact or Pitchfork, this is a great place to start.

I had high hopes for this after reading the reviews. It is well written, but in an academic way.The comparison to "My Bloody Valentine" playing extremely loud and 'painful' music which resulted in the audience feeling 'ecstasy', and the slow death by torture of a Chinese assassin was bizarre. A sensational analogy for sure, but no mention of permanently damaged hearing or the questionable judgement of using a 'snuff film' to make a point about the future direction of music.After wading through this, I found something which resonated. A quote by Pierre Schaeffer, lamenting his time wasted with music unrelated to "Do, re, mi." No surprise there.If you take a pass on this (a good idea), I'd recommend "How Music Works" by John Powell. Powell's book focuses on human nature, physics and math in an entertaining and fascinating manner. It's a book for everyone, and great fun. Science and math, i.e. musical 'rules' do have a profound effect on emotions.A great example is the recent Time article on Mickey Hart (drummer for The Grateful Dead), his grandmother and Adam Gazzaley, director of the Neuroscience Imaging Center at the University of California San Francisco. Long story short, Hart's grandmother was suffering from dementia and not speaking. He played for her and a tear came to her eyes and she said "Mickey." The scientist/musician team are studying the positive effects of rhythm on the human brain.I found the reviewed book, however, to contain too many elements of 'glorification of the mundane.' It's a mix of well regarded concepts of truly novel approaches to sound and music, with too many instances of "Dude, turn it up to eleven."

There ought to be a penetrating and comprehensive study of the aesthetics of experimental electronic music, but this one isn't it. It's not bad -- as a rather formal, academically focused analysis and contextualization of some particular examples (I wouldn't even say "schools") of "experimental" electronic music. But any book that takes up this topic without mention of Morton Subotnick, Don Buchla, Pauline Oliveros, Musica Elettronica Viva, Patrick Gleeson's contributions to Herbie Hancock's Mwandishi band, Jimi Hendrix, Emerson Lake & Palmer, Mills College, George E. Lewis or contact mics is overlooking quite a bit of relevant material. Ms. Demers makes a lot of connections to philosophers with of various modernist and post-modern approaches outside the specific spheres of music, which bespeaks her interests, but not mine. Perhaps this is the way people who make experimental electronic music think about what they're doing. . .but if so, this book is clearly devoted to insider-thinking (good, if it made the point of such thinking clear to outsiders. It certainly isn't aimed at a general market, or most of the audiences for experimental or any other kind of electronic music.

I really like this book - it opened a lot of horizons for me. I found myself at the end of the book with more questions than answers. But maybe that's what any great book does? I suspect some people are looking for some sort of affirmation of pop culture tastes - which is not at all a good reason to buy the book. If you're interested in a lucid, quick reading guide to understanding the role of music in society (electronic or otherwise) - buy the book. You won't regret it.

This book was a Birthday present for my son who lives in the states which I had delivered state-side but he tells me that it is a very good read and he would recommend this book, he is in the music business so if he thinks it's good then I would think it must be and he his a music publisher what more can one say.