Talk:Harsh noise

Merge or split[edit]

Interesting page, fascinating topic. Deserves its own article IMO. See [1] [2] for some interesting previous versions, [3] for the (badly written) French Wikipedia stub on the topic.

Noise music currently links here, and that then currently redirects back to noise music. Previous content has been (validly) cut-and-paste moved/copied to that article and also to noise in music.

Does anyone know where the merge discussion referred to in the first-mentioned of those past versions ended up? Andrewa (talk) 01:08, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Some links[edit]

I won't call these sources but they're interesting jumping-off points.

http://rateyourmusic.com/genre/Harsh+Noise/ Harsh Noise is a term applied to Noise music that seeks to take the genre to its natural limits, resulting in hugely aggressive walls of sound that assault the listener. It has strong links with Japan, with Hijokaidan, Masonna and Merzbow releasing many records key to the development of perhaps this most abrasive style of music, although related underground scenes exist worldwide.
http://rateyourmusic.com/genre/Noise/ Music composed of "noise" and using non-traditional instruments.

Note that:

The second definition is completely different to that used in the current noise music article: Noise music is a term used to describe varieties of avant-garde music and contemporary musical practices that have dispensed with melody, harmony, and at times even rhythm or pulse. That's much closer to the definition above of harsh noise.
Both noise and harsh noise are listed at this site as genres.

Interesting? Andrewa (talk) 01:26, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Almost 400,000 ghits for “harsh noise” music -Wikipedia [4] (your esults may vary) and they look relevant. More evidence that this should be reinstated as a separate article.

But the question then is, how much of the material now at noise music really belongs back here? A lot of the history there seems to relate specifically to this, dare I say it, genre. Andrewa (talk) 01:15, 20 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Here's some Google Book sources. They have my search tags in them, which helps with research but will mess up full urls: [5], [6], [7].--¿3family6 _contribs 02:12, 20 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Chapter summaries of the first are at http://www.experimentalmusicaustralia.net/synopsis.html and track listing of the accompanying CD at http://www.experimentalmusicaustralia.net/cd.html and it does look interesting. Andrewa (talk) 15:58, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The second, interestingly, is also by Australian authors, but both have backgrounds in sociology rather than music.

The All Music Guide to Electronic Music is interesting too, but unsure as to just how citeable it is. Andrewa (talk) 11:16, 29 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What we need[edit]

What we need is just one clearly reliable secondary source that gives a good definition of harsh noise to cite in the article lead. We don't yet have that as far as I can see. Happy to be proven wrong.

There are several artists mentioned as having created harsh noise, notably Xome and Stimbox, who both create live music entirely by manipulating effects pedals with no conventional input. It's not clear to me whether either has any (other?) expertise in musical performance. If so they are careful not to reveal it in the interviews and performances I have seen and/or heard.

That being so, we probably do need an article on harsh noise. If those two are notable enough for articles, then I guess their musical style (genre?) is too. They appear to have no other claim to notability.

Interestingly, they are the co-owners of the Harsh Noise record label. I do hope this is not another Ern Malley.

Does anyone else remember Australian band the Slime Men? I saw them at Macquarie University in February 1971. Today they would be considered noise music pioneers I think. Seriously. Andrewa (talk) 12:39, 29 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Here's something about the Slime Men http://www.milesago.com/artists/tully.htm but not very much. A little more about their front man Terry Wilson at http://www.howlspace.com.au/en2/tully/tully.htm but again not much. When I saw them in 1971 Wilson was narrating (he used a microphone but didn't sing a word) while playing a floor tom with a small coal shovel. Andrewa (talk) 12:53, 29 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

i think we should focus on inserting a subsection entitled harsh noise in the main article, it is described either as sub-genre of japanoise or more generally a noise sub-genre. It seems once "noise music" was identified as a genre proper, it began splintering; analogous perhaps to the way metal did (speed, thrash, death, black, prog, math etc.) or any other music scene outside of the popular domain for that matter. -- Semitransgenic _talk. 22:05, 29 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting...

And it raises questions similar to those regarding noise music. Who describes harsh noise:

1. As (a?) sub-genre of japanoise?

2. As a noise genre?

I'm still puzzled that you say that "noise music" was identified as a genre proper. Elsewhere you have seemed determined not to identify it as a genre. Not consistently, I admit.

Agree that these various other genres all began splintering, and that this is typical of genres in general (and not just musical ones). But this is so obvious and general an observation that I can't see how it helps. Andrewa (talk) 17:42, 1 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The only determination was in avoiding the improper use of the word genre in the context of noise music by sticking to what the RS sources we have at our disposal have to offer; and that is what I have done, consistently. But can I ask that we just drop this genre issue once and for all? It's not constructive unless there are specific sources you wish to discuss. The "harsh" qualifier stems from fan discourse from what I can see. There may be a couple of usable sources, will need to double check. Semitransgenic _talk. 11:33, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please do check. You said it is described either as sub-genre of japanoise or more generally a noise sub-genre; On what do you base this? Andrewa (talk) 12:41, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

personal observations. If you have time best you read this -- Semitransgenic _talk. 16:45, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OK, that's chapter 5 , pp.60-74 of some collection... the actual reference is not obvious to me, do you know what it is?

And it does mention harsh noise, twice in its fifteen pages. What was your point? Andrewa (talk) 19:52, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

But who decides what is improper? That seems a little over the top to me. I'd love to just drop this genre issue once and for all, and to this end I am trying to avoid the term. I even proposed the move away from noise (music genre).

But if you continue to use the term, it makes it a bit difficult. Andrewa (talk) 20:37, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A little recap[edit]

Just to try to focus on the issues here. There are two related but separate questions. Andrewa (talk) 20:37, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Should we have an article[edit]

It seems to me that there is a form or type of music that is clearly notable and is sometimes called harsh noise, and that the current scope of the noise music article is far broader than this and should remain so.

Harsh noise includes:

Russolo's intonarumori.
Recent work by Stimbox and Xome eg http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBUyBfpytow .
Some but not all of Japanoise, which may have its roots in harsh noise (just a guess) but has evolved if so.

It doesn't include:

Any work by Jimi Hendrix of which I am aware.
Music with conventional form and/or tune and/or harmony played with excessive volume or otherwise modified but still recognisable as a version of more conventional music.

These lists are not meant to be complete or even encyclopedic, they're just examples as a first step in scoping the article topic. Andrewa (talk) 01:59, 4 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What should it be called[edit]

I'm open to suggestions, but I haven't seen a better one than harsh noise yet. Pure noise also seems to have some currency but risks ambiguity IMO.

Obviously, if there isn't to be an article, then this question is irrelevant.

On the other hand, if there is to be one but by another name, then harsh noise should redirect to it rather than to the more general article at noise music. Andrewa (talk) 20:37, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]