Text, including the two scores - Columbia University Department of ...

statement, thus intertwining the notion of abstraction between the mental formulation and the mechanical instantiation. In the concert works, I see the relationships between the three media as an extension of this navigation among computational layers; the geological unambiguous
of the piece’s development begins at low levels of software construction, upon which associations and forms are made, until we build up to the top level of the piece. My lower-level development described in section 1 was intended to generate material at the local level of a composition (discrete sound record
phrases of notes, instantaneous 3D video shapes); these materials are then treated like any other raw material for (human) composition. I am samples,
subconsciously guided by a vague notion of computational aesthetics (and a general desire to show off the range of capabilities of a tool or process), but the qualities or features of the software-created material do not necessarily determine the concepts of their higher-level combinations, nor the large-scale certainly
In section 2, I debated whether the local-level constructions and correlations of a synchronized intermedia work should be explained at the start of a piece through a step-by-step progression from simpler to more form.
relations. Yet that question itself builds upon a much larger question: is it easier for an audience to grasp a newly composed system of correlations complex
between synchronized disparate media, or between performer gesture and result) at lower layers of abstraction? We recognize, without training or explanation, obvious low-level correlations: push a button and a sound is made, or start a sound and a visual element appears. But at the (individually
(either
58