Sublime frequencies: The construction of sublime listening experiences in the sonification of scientific data

Social Studies of Science

Volumn 44, Issue 1, 2014, Pages 34-58

  Supper, Alexandra ^a  

^a MAASTRICHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

art science; public understanding of science; sonification; sound; sublime; visual culture

Indexed keywords

EID: 84892889849     PISSN: 03063127     EISSN: 14603659     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0306312713496875     Document Type: Article

References (81)

1. Adams JLThe Place Where You Go to Listen: In Search of an Ecology of Music. Middletown, CT: Wesleyan University Press; 2009:.
2. Aerts C,Christensen-Dalsgaard J,Kurtz DWAsteroseismology. Dordrecht: Springer; 2010:.
3. AsquithL (2010) What Does an Electron Sound Like? Available at: http://lhcsound.wordpress.com/2010/02/19/what-does-an-electron-sound-like/ (accessed 12 October 2010).
4. Barry AThe Politics of Display: Museums, Science, Culture. Macdonald S, ed. London: Routledge; 1998:98-117.
5. Barry A,Born G,Weszkalnys G.Logics of interdisciplinarity.Economy and Society. 2008;37 (1): 20-49.
6. Barry EDSound in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction. Suisman DStrasser S, ed. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press; 2010:115-138.
7. Beaulieu A.Images are not the (only) truth: Brain mapping, visual knowledge, and iconoclasm.Science, Technology, & Human Values. 2002;27 (1): 53-86.
8. Bell C,Lyall JThe Accelerated Sublime: Landscape, Tourism, and Identity. Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers; 2002:.
9. BoogmanW (n.d.) Sternenrest: 'Stars Don't Make Music'. Available at: http://www.sternenrest.nl/files/music_English.htm (accessed 12 October 2010).
10. BoonM (2006) Sublime frequencies' ethnopsychedelic montages. Electronic Book Review. Available at: http://www.electronicbookreview.com/thread/musicsoundnoise/ethnopsyche (accessed 28 September 2012).
11. Born G,Barry A.Art-science: From public understanding to public experiment.Journal of Cultural Economy. 2010;3 (1): 103-119.
12. Bowker G.How to be universal: Some cybernetic strategies, 1943-1970.Social Studies of Science. 1993;23 (1): 107-127.
13. BrantonL (2006) Scientists tell us to tune in to songs of the stars. Innovations Report. Available at: http://www.innovations-report.com/html/reports/physics_astronomy/report-68749.html (accessed 12 October 2010).
14. Bunders J,Whitley RExpository Science: Forms and Functions of Popularisation. Shinn TWhitley R, ed. Dordrecht: D. Reidel; 1985:61-77.
15. Burke EA Philosophical Enquiry into the Origins of our Ideas of the Sublime and Beautiful. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2008 [1757]:.
16. Dunn J,Clark MA.Life music: The sonification of proteins.Leonardo. 1999;32 (1): 25-32.
17. Edford R.The elegance of The Elegant Universe: Unity, beauty, and harmony in Brian Greene's popularization of superstring theory.Public Understanding of Science. 2007;16 (4): 441-454.
18. Felt UBetween Understanding and Trust: The Public, Science and Technology. Dierkes Mvon Grote C, ed. Amsterdam: Harwood Academic Publishers; 2000:7-38.
19. GannK (2006) Fairbanks: A long ride in a slow machine. NewMusicBox. Available at: http://www.newmusicbox.org/article.nmbx?id=4573 (accessed October 12 2010).
20. GentileS (2011) A chilling aural portrait of the deadly earthquake near Japan. Available at: http://www.pbs.org/wnet/need-to-know/the-daily-need/a-chilling-aural-portrait-of-the-deadly-earthquake-near-japan/7906/ (accessed 4 July 2012).
21. GhoshP (2010) God particle signal is simulated as sound. BBC News. Available at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10385675 (accessed 12 October 2010).
22. Griffiths AShivers Down Your Spine: Cinema, Museums, and the Immersive View. New York: Columbia University Press; 2008:.
23. Halpern MK.Across the great divide: Boundaries and boundary objects in art and science.Public Understanding of Science. 2012;21 (8): 922-937.
24. Harenberg M,Weissberg DDas geschulte Ohr: Eine Kulturgeschichte der Sonifikation. Schoon AVolmar A, ed. Bielefeld: transcript; 2012:207-222.
25. The Farthest Place: The Music of John Luther Adams. Herzogenrath B, ed. Boston, MA: Northeastern University Press; 2012:.
26. Hilgartner S.The dominant view of popularization: Conceptual problems, political uses.Social Studies of Science. 1990;20 (3): 519-539.
27. HowardG (2004) Legitimating astronomy. PhD Thesis, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, NSW, Australia.
28. James JThe Music of the Spheres: Music, Science, and the Natural Order of the Universe. New York: Grove Press; 1993:.
29. Joyce K.Appealing images: Magnetic resonance imaging and the production of authoritative knowledge.Social Studies of Science. 2005;35 (3): 437-462.
30. Kant ICritique of Judgement. Oxford: (trans. JC Meredith) Oxford University Press.; 2007 [1790]:.
31. Kinnear T.Voicing nature in John Luther Adams's.The Place Where You Go to Listen. Organised Sound. 2012;17 (3): 230-239.
32. Kirby DA.Science consultants, fictional films, and scientific practice.Social Studies of Science. 2003;33 (2): 231-268.
33. Kolláth ZAstrophysics of Variable Stars. Sterken CAerts C, ed. San Francisco, CA: Astronomical Society of the Pacific; 2006:421-433.
34. Kramer G,Walker B,Bonebright T,Cook P,Flowers J,Miner N, et alSonification report: Status of the field and research agenda. Santa Fe, NM: International Community for Auditory Display; 1997:.
35. Kwa C,van Hemert M,van der Weij LGeospatial Technology and the Role of Location within Science. Scholten HJvan de Velde Rvan Manen N, ed. Dordrecht: Springer; 2009:47-58.
36. Living on Earth (2006) Listening to Alaska. National Public Radio. Available at: http://www.loe.org/shows/segments.htm?programID=06-P13-00016..segmentID=5 (accessed 3 October 2012).
37. Lyotard J-FThe Lyotard Reader. Benjamin A, ed. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers; 1989 [1984]:196-211.
38. Macdonald SThe Politics of Display: Museums, Science, Culture. Macdonald S, ed. London: Routledge; 1998:118-138.
39. McGourtyC (2003) Listening to 'Singing Volcanoes'. BBC News. Available at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/sci_tech/2003/denver_2003/2763657.stm (accessed 12 October 2010).
40. Marx LThe Machine in the Garden: Technology and the Pastoral Idea in America. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1964:.
41. Masco J.Nuclear technoaesthetics: Sensory politics from trinity to the virtual bomb in Los Alamos.American Ethnologist. 2004;31 (3): 349-373.
42. MayneE (2006) Fed up with pop music? Then listen to some real stars ..right here. MailOnline. Available at: http://www.mailonsunday.co.uk/news/article-400289/Fed-pop-music-Then-listen-real-stars-right-here.html (accessed 12 October 2010).
43. Mellor F.Colliding worlds: Asteroid research and the legitimization of war in space.Social Studies of Science. 2007;37 (4): 499-531.
44. Mody CCM.Small, but determined: Technological determinism in nanoscience.HYLE: International Journal for Philosophy of Chemistry. 2004;10 (2): 99-128.
45. Mody CCM.The sounds of science: Listening to laboratory practice.Science, Technology, & Human Values. 2005;30 (2): 175-198.
46. Morgan RPSource Readings in Music History. Strunk OTreitler L, ed. New York: W.W. Norton & Company; 1998:1271-1279.
47. Nye DEAmerican Technological Sublime. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press; 1994:.
48. OverbyeD (2011) Listening to the stars. The New York Times. Available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/31/science/space/31star.html?_r=3..ref=space (accessed 4 July 2012).
49. Paul D.Spreading chaos: The role of popularizations in the diffusion of scientific ideas.Written Communication. 2004;21 (1): 32-68.
50. Pendick D.What's this volcano trying to tell us?.New Scientist. 1999;2174:26-30.
51. PhysOrg (2010) Scientists Listen to the Sun in New Sonification Project. Available at: http://www.physorg.com/news186418364.html (accessed 12 October 2010).
52. Ploeger J.Techno-scientific spectacle: The rhetoric of IMAX in the contemporary science museum.Poroi. 2004;3 (2): 73-93.
53. Polli A.Atmospherics/weather works: A spatialized meteorological data sonification project.Leonardo. 2005;38 (1): 31-36.
54. Polli AGruen 064: Gruenrekorder; 2009:.
55. Rapp RCyborgs & Citadels: Anthropological Interventions in Emerging Sciences and Technologies. Downey GLDumit J, ed. Santa Fe, NM: School of American Research Press; 1997:31-48.
56. Ray G.Reading the Lisbon earthquake: Adorno, Lyotard, and the contemporary sublime.Yale Journal of Criticism. 2004;17 (1): 1-18.
57. Recuber T.Immersion cinema: The rationalization and reenchantment of cinematic space.Space and Culture. 2007;10 (3): 315-330.
58. Regier ARuins of Modernity. Hell JSchönle A, ed. Durham, NC: Duke University Press; 2010:357-374.
59. Rice T.'Beautiful murmurs': Stethoscopic listening and acoustic objectification.The Senses & Society. 2008;3 (3): 293-306.
60. Roosth S.Screaming yeast: Sonocytology, cytoplascmic milieus, and cellular subjectivities.Critical Inquiry. 2009;35 (2): 332-350.
61. Rumori MDas geschulte Ohr: Eine Kulturgeschichte der Sonifikation. Schoon AVolmar A, ed. Bielefeld: transcript; 2012:223-242.
62. Schoon A,Dombois F.Sonification in music. In:. Proceedings of the 15th international conference on auditory display; 2009Copenhagen, Denmark; 2009. 76.
63. Das geschulte Ohr: Eine Kulturgeschichte der Sonifikation. Schoon AVolmar A, ed. Bielefeld: transcript; 2012:.
64. Sterne JThe Audible Past: Cultural Origins of Sound Reproduction. Durham, NC: Duke University Press; 2003:.
65. Sterne J,Akiyama MThe Oxford Handbook of Sound Studies. Pinch TBijsterveld K, ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2012:544-560.
66. Stickler JC.Total immersion: New technology creates new experiences.Museum International. 1995;47 (1): 36-40.
67. Stocker M.Exhibit sound design.Museum International. 1995;47 (1): 25-28.
68. SupperA (2012a) Lobbying for the ear: The public fascination with and academic legitimacy of the sonification of scientific data. PhD Thesis, Maastricht University, The Netherlands.
69. Supper AThe Oxford Handbook of Sound Studies. Pinch TBijsterveld K, ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2012b:249-270.
70. Taruskin RThe Oxford History of Western Music. Volume 5: The Late Twentieth Century. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2005:.
71. TaylorJ(2010) What does the 'God Particle' sound like?The Independent. Available at: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/what-does-the-god-particle-sound-like-2008811.html (accessed 12 October 2010).
72. Turner FFrom Counterculture to Cyberculture: Stewart Brand, the Whole Earth Network, and the Rise of Digital Utopianism. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press; 2006:.
73. Turney J.The abstract sublime: Life as information waiting to be written.Science as Culture. 2004;13 (1): 89-103.
74. Van de Vall RA Companion to Art Theory. Smith PWilde C, ed. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers; 2002:360-369.
75. Verbeek P-P.Obstretric ultrasound and the technological mediation of morality: A postphenomenological analysis.Human Studies. 2008;31 (1): 11-26.
76. Volmar A.Listening to the cold war: The nuclear test ban negotiations, seismology, and psychoacoustics, 1958-1963.Osiris. 2013;28:80-102.
77. Willcock IElectronics in New Music. Mahnkopf C- SCox FSchurig W, ed. Hofheim: Wolke Verlag; 2006:221-235.
78. Williams RNotes on the Underground: An Essay on Technology, Society, and the Imagination. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press; 1990:.
79. Wynne BHandbook of Science and Technology Studies. Jasanoff SMarkle GEPetersen JC, ed. London: SAGE; 1995:361-388.
80. Wynne B.Public engagement as a means of restoring public trust in science: Hitting the notes, but missing the music?.Community Genetics. 2006;9 (3): 211-220.
81. Zimmerman B.Nineteenth-century American astronomy and the sublime.Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society of Canada. 2003;97 (3): 120-123.