Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #120764 in Books
• Published on: 2007-11-02
• Original language: English
• Number of items: 1
• Binding: Hardcover
• 304 pages

Customer Reviews

Far from definitive, but great pictures
I can't quite decide what to make of this book. It's a good thing to see a discursive, wide-ranging book on sound art that covers both its practitioners, history, and context. This is a welcome departure from most of the previous books on the subject (Interviews with Sound Artists, Sound by Artists, Site of Sound, Sonic Boom etc) which are essentially compendia of artists' texts or interviews.
Licht tackles his subject under three main headings: What is sound art?; Environment and soundscapes; and Sound and the art world. Much of the book talks around sound art without ever reaching a happy definition, illustrating by example rather than offering a chronology or clear logic. That makes it pleasant enough to read, but very difficult to refer to afterwards. There is a useful section offering potted biographies for 31 sound artists, which is helpful but raises as many questions as it answers: why are several people featured clearly musicians rather than artists, for example? In this respect, it reflects the lack of clarity of the rest of the book.
So while you will read about key sound artists like Christina Kubisch or Max Neuhaus, there's also plenty here about the experimental music fringe, No Wave bands or musique concrete composers. That's all very interesting but seems to detract from the key focus of the book. There are also several omissions (Peter Appleton, Gottfried Willem Raes, Philip Jeck, Disinformation etc) which betray a definite Americocentrism.
One of the best things about the book is the inclusion of numerous well-reproduced photos of installations and sound art events - these are excellent and almost enough on their own to justify the book's publication.
I did enjoy the book - I learnt much that was new and the unwillingness to limit itself to any one approach to sound art allows unpredictable connections to juxtapose and coalesce. But this is not the definitive book on the subject and there's plenty more to be said yet.

sound art book, on sound in art
this book is misleading and confused, it doesn't really define what sound art is but it feels it has the authority to say what it isn't... it feels contrived and confused... most of this book talks of how sound has been an interest for many artists of the visual arts world... fair enough, but everyone knows this.

i haven't really learnt anything new from this book and my views on what sound art is haven't changed from this book.

it's good for interesting quotes and a brief summary of visual artists use of sound but i can't really say much more

this book could have been so much better, maybe if it didn't try and talk about so many different people, maybe using 5 or so examples of 'non-sound art' and 5 or so examples of 'sound art' and discussed where the distinction may lie.

It's a shame about this book, Jim O'Rourke basically says that the term is non-definable which is a fair point and casts a shadow over the rest of the writing

A truly awful non-academic, unintelligible account of sound art practice
This book is utterly bizarre; in that, the author makes absolutely no attempt to formulate any coherent structure for his argument or seemingly adopt any `useful' position on sound art practice what-so-ever. This is epitomised further by his seeming inability to make any attempt to organise this `random' information into any useful and accessible account that others might gain from. As such, it forms nothing more than a vaguely annotated meander through different examples of artists work, and is essentially nothing more than a coffee table book in terms of its academic weight. The author tries to excuse his lack of coherency by saying that sound art is 'non definable'; a very contentious statement considering that LaBelle in `Background Noise' seems to do an exceedingly good job of illustrating both its formation and development. It is fair however to point out that LaBelle does indeed highlight the pervasive quality of sound arts refusal to be simply or neatly categorised, however with LaBelle you are left with a confident idea of its context and development, unlike with this abomination, which simply leaves you wondering how he ever got it published! Another reviewer mentioned that it is `worth it' due to the pictures alone...pictures of `sound' art? This pretty much illustrates the weakness of this contribution. Thus if knowledge is what you seek avoid and look at more valuable insights such as LaBelle: Background Noise', Gibbs: The Fundamentals of Sonic Art & Sound Design or Kahn: Noise, Water, Meat: A History of Sound in the Arts as these are in an entirely different calibre altogether (i.e. they have purpose)!