Content uploaded by Frank Ekeberg
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Frank Ekeberg on Apr 25, 2017
Content may be subject to copyright.
!"#$%#&'#(#'#)*#&$%+&,-./01'2%341(45$5#'6&2789:3&,;</"#41(45$5#'6&<)&="#"$)>?&@A?&B<%0#'?&CA&D&E$'"#F?&GA&2H>%A3&Proceedings+of+the+19th+International+
Symposium+of+Electronic+Art?&IJH-789:?&JF>)#FA&0//5+KK%#%A"<L'$'FA.%F>A#>.A$.K0$)>"#K797:KMNOP&&
!$Q#&).RL#'<)Q&L#Q<)%&$/&9&$/&/0#&%/$'/&1(&/0#&5$5#'A&
MANIPULATING SPACE,
CHANGING REALITIES: SPACE
AS PRIMARY CARRIER OF
MEANING IN SONIC ARTS
Frank Ekeberg, Trondheim, Norway. E-
mail: <mail@frankekeberg.no>;
Web: <http://www.frankekeberg.no>.
Abstract
Space is an essential element of human experience.
In our daily lives we move about in a multi-
dimensional sound field, constantly processing
spatial cues in our encounters with our surround-
ings. Awareness of space as a fundamental compo-
nent of sound is nevertheless limited among artists
and listeners. This paper presents a framework for
recognizing, analyzing and working with sonic
space, based on identifying and categorizing spatial
components from the level of the individual sound,
via the combination of sounds in virtual spaces, to
the experience of the fusion of composed space and
the listening environment.
Keywords: space, sound, spatialization, acous-
matic, sonic art, aesthetic experience, spatio-
structural theory
There is a spatial context to any listen-
ing, with respect to where the sound is
heard, one’s listening position relative to
the sound, whether it is heard indoors or
outdoors, whether recognition of the
source of the sound necessitates action
based on the perception of its relative
movement or placement, and so on.
Further, there are conventions, expecta-
tions and specific use patterns related to
the space in which the sound is presented
– is it a public or private space, gallery
or concert hall, art or non-art space,
urban or natural environment … ? The
space that we hear and perceive is quite
complex, in that it combines many fac-
tors: spatial elements of the individual
sound and any associations it carries,
spatial characteristics of the room that
the sound excites, the spatial relationship
between you, the listener, and the sound
- that is, where is it coming from, and is
it stationary? If you recognize the
source, what images does it trigger? Is it
likely to change position – towards you,
away from you? What does it tell you
about the space you are in – its size and
extent, if it is empty or filled?
In this paper I outline a framework for
recognizing and manipulating sonic
space, developed as a result of my work
as a composer of acousmatic music, a
musical genre in which the work is typi-
cally composed onto a fixed medium, for
listening solely over loudspeakers. Space
has been a focus of practice and thought
in acousmatic music, and integral to
composition and presentation of the
genre, since its very beginning. Spatial
considerations in the composition pro-
cess – the choice and arrangement of
sound material in terms of spatial charac-
teristics and associations – are funda-
mental to the creation of acousmatic
work. The ‘spatio-structural theory’
outlined here seeks to classify the indi-
vidual spatial components of sound. It is
primarily intended as an aid for artists in
developing an increased awareness of
sonic space, and unlocking possibilities
for implementing space with greater
depth and effect in works of sonic art.
Using digital technologies, spatial as-
pects of sound can be manipulated and
controlled to an extent where auditory
space becomes the primary carrier of
meaning in sound-based works, and a
powerful tool for artistic expression and
communication.
Theoretical background
Space is an essential dimension of hu-
man experience. We move about in
relation to objects and other people, and
hear sounds in a multi-dimensional
sound field. Our interpretation of spatial
relations is largely shaped by cultural
knowledge and experience of spatial
communication in everyday life, such as
patterns of interpersonal communication,
experience of rural and urban life, and
the architectural environment in which
we live, as well as the manner in which
space is represented in language. This
knowledge informs our encounters with
each other and with our surroundings,
both visually and aurally. Space com-
municates and establishes types of rela-
tionships between participants in situa-
tions of interpersonal interaction, and
shapes the individual’s relationship with
the surrounding natural and cultural
environments.
Anthropologist Edward T. Hall stud-
ied intercultural variations in the mean-
ing and use of space in communication
[1, 2]. To Hall, culture is defined by
communication itself, in which the uses
of time and of space are fundamental
elements of a ‘silent language’ [3].
Based on his findings of spatial organi-
zation and interaction within and across
cultures, Hall defines interpersonal dis-
tance-setting as a psychological, dynam-
ic space that moves with the person and
varies in size according to situation. This
is characterized by the four spatial dis-
tance zones of ‘intimate space’, ‘person-
al space’, ‘social space’ and ‘public
space’, which are based on interactional
relationships and circumstances.
Lyman and Scott [4] propose a theory
centered on the notion of ‘personal terri-
tories’, which they describe as various
types of marked-off areas within which
intrusion will be responded to, either as
internal, emotional reactions or as exter-
nal, physical actions. In contrast with
Hall’s dynamic spaces, personal territo-
ries are relatively stationary and do not
necessarily follow the individual person.
Lyman and Scott categorize personal
territories into four groups, which can be
seen in parallel with Hall’s four distance
zones: ‘body territory’, ‘interactional
territory’, ‘home territory’ and ‘public
territory’. Body territory is then further
separated into ‘internal space’ and ‘ex-
ternal space’; with the former being an
internal, psychological space, the most
private and intimate of spaces.
Hall points out that many of the com-
municational aspects of space and dis-
tance-setting are so deeply embedded in
the individual’s personality that they
exist outside of awareness, and are rarely
subject to conscious thought. Space is, in
some form, always present, and spatial
processing and decision-making are
constantly carried out, whether or not we
are actually aware of it. Thus, the artist’s
choice and organization of spatial ele-
ments in the creation and presentation of
a work, as well as the audience’s percep-
tion and experience of it, are influenced
and shaped by their own knowledges of
space from everyday life. Recognizing
that these unconscious factors exist, and
developing an understanding of key
aspects of space as a communicative
element, are fundamental to successful
integration of space as a powerful device
in artwork.
In addition to the high-level pro-
cessing of spatial information outlined
above, knowledge of fundamental mech-
anisms of spatial hearing and auditory
perception, as well as a basic under-
standing of acoustics, are helpful for
knowing the limitations of our hearing.
Such knowledge can also assist an artist
to find the most effective ways of pre-
senting a work in a given place, in order
to convey spatial information in the work
as intended.
Spatio-structural theory
The spatial elements of sound are inter-
twined, and cannot be experienced in
isolation. However, they need to be
identified and discussed separately in
order that the different expressive and
communicative aspects of sonic space
can be considered and emphasized.
The framework of spatio-structural
theory is comprised of three basic levels
corresponding to source material, crea-
tive process and listening experience,
respectively: 1) spatial elements of indi-
vidual sounds in terms of ‘intrinsic
space’, ‘extrinsic space’, ‘referential
space’ and ‘spectral space’; 2) the spatial
arrangement of individual sounds and
events into a ‘composed space’ which is
played in, and becomes affected by, the
‘listening space’; and 3) ‘perceived
space’, which constitutes the listening
experience of the combination of com-
posed space and listening space (fig. 1).
An element of the individual sound,
intrinsic space concerns the sound as
space, and comprises components such
as ‘magnitude’, ‘density’ and ‘morphol-
ogy’. These aspects can be discussed
independent of any external acoustic
environment, although the sound’s inter-
action with the surroundings in which it
is heard might still influence the spatial
interpretation of it. Magnitude is a sub-
jective characteristic which refers to the
perceived size of the sound, and is based
on a number of variables related to lis-
tening circumstance, source recognition
and spectral makeup. A sound’s magni-
tude is in particular affected by intensity
and low-frequency energy: magnitude
seems to increase as the frequency goes
down, and as intensity increases. Dura-
tion is another important factor, as a
sound of longer duration is given more
time to interact with, and spread in, its
acoustic environment, and thereby in-
crease its perceived magnitude. Density
refers to the compactness or solidity of
the sound. A sound of high density
seems hard and impenetrable, while a
low-density sound can be experienced as
having a hollow or resonant quality. The
notion of density can also be based on
associations with the perceived source of
the sound, or the gesture behind its exci-
tation. Finally, morphology refers to how
the spectral composition of the sound
varies over the course of its existence,
and can be tied to changes in magnitude
or density.
The element of extrinsic space con-
cerns the sound in space, and refers to
the sound heard in a sound field, where it
can be localized in terms of ‘distance’,
‘direction’ and ‘movement’ relative to a
listening position. The sensory infor-
mation is derived from the interaction
between the sound and its surroundings.
How we perceive direction and distance
is based on a complex combination of
inter-aural time differences (ITD), inter-
aural intensity differences (IID) and
head-related transfer functions (HRTF)
[5], phenomena that can be manipulated
electroacoustically to steer localization.
In addition, we utilize acoustic cues such
as the Doppler effect, reverberation,
diffraction and absorption. Normal spa-
tial hearing is extremely accurate, and
even the slightest deviation can be de-
tected with a spatial resolution that var-
ies somewhat according to the direction,
distance, loudness, duration and spectral
makeup of the sound. There are im-
portant instinctive and associative differ-
ences in the experience of sounds local-
ized in front of, above, or behind the
hearer, or of sounds that are nearby or
far away. Movement adds another aspect
to extrinsic space, by incorporating
changes in distance and direction, as
well as elements of speed, range, accel-
eration, deceleration and perspectival
change.
Referential space is the sound of
space, that is, sound that contains envi-
ronmental cues that point to a valid
spatial setting, whether real or surreal.
Referential space can be a powerful
device in sonic arts, as it is tied to a
recognizable source that carries with it
associations with spaces known from
real-life experience. Such associations
arise in relation to physical, spatial set-
tings, and also in relation to other prop-
erties that are related to such settings, for
example social, psychological or histori-
cal phenomena, by incorporating cues to
specific events, situations, persons or
activities associated with such phenome-
na. Referential space can influence the
experience of intrinsic space and extrin-
sic space, and indicate possible dimen-
sions of a virtual space, as well as the
listener's point of view relative to it. For
instance, outdoor environmental cues
can suggest a much larger virtual spatial
setting than an indoor listening space
implies.
The fourth element of the individual
sound is spectral space. This spans the
lowest to the highest audible frequency,
and is a vertical space where sounds are
localized based on spectral focus, such
as pitch or nodal spectrum [6], spanning
the continuum from ‘note’ to ‘noise’ and
covering a certain ‘spectral range’. It is a
psychologically and psychoacoustically
based sense of elevation and vertical
placement, and as such, physical locali-
zation of the sound is less relevant. It is
primarily a space where sounds are de-
scribed as ‘high’ or ‘low’ in relation to
some frequency reference, whether rela-
tive or instinctive. In pitch-based tonal
music, high and low notes have histori-
cally had important metaphorical func-
tions related to meanings of ascent and
descent. Spectral space is an influential
factor in the spatial experience of sonic
art, and must be considered in any inves-
tigation into sonic space.
Composed space
Composed space is the organization of
the sound material into an artistic context
in which spatial relationships are estab-
lished, and virtual spaces based on the
sounds’ intrinsic, extrinsic, referential
and spectral spaces are set up. It is a
temporal space in which spatial configu-
rations connect and evolve in a structural
manner as the work progresses. Struc-
ture, in the context of composed space,
concerns temporal shaping of spatial
parameters as variations in intensifica-
tion, motion and growth. These are im-
portant aspects of directivity that guide
expectation and anticipation in listening,
and form the basis for evolution and
expression in a work. Spatio-structural
content can be expressed in terms of
spatial references, spatial interrelations
among the sound material, extent and
intensity of spatial movement, bounda-
ries of virtual spaces, clarity and defini-
tion in spatial placement, and vertical
organization in spectral space.
On a high structural level, the spatial
composition tends to be focused toward
one or more of four spatio-structural
categories built on combinations of
Fig. 1. Levels of Spatio-structural theory. (© Frank Ekeberg.)
sounds into larger-scale contexts that I
refer to as ‘schemas’. The notion of
schemas is established on the basis of
spatial characteristics identified on the
level of the individual sound, and ex-
tended into identifying tendencies in
spatial configurations of sounds over
longer time spans: ‘Intrinsic schema’ is
when spatial development is carried by
temporal change in spectral distribution
and spatial shaping inherent in the sound
material. ‘Extrinsic schema’ is when the
focus is on placement and movement of
the sound material, and locational rela-
tionships among sounds. ‘Referential
schema’ is based on referential spaces as
creations or re-creations of known sonic
environments, including cues to dimen-
sions of virtual space and extensions into
real space, as well as the listener’s per-
spective relative to a sound stage. Final-
ly, ‘spectral schema’ is where sounds are
primarily organized in a vertical space
based on pitch relationships or pro-
nounced nodal spaces. Shifts from one
spatio-structural schema to another can
occur in composed space, and a layering
of two or more spatio-structural schemas
can also take place.
Within the schemas, relationships are
established on the basis of the nature of
the individual sounds – their spectro-
morphological qualities as well as asso-
ciative qualities regarding source and
context – and on the basis of the sounds’
spatial behavior relative to each other
and to the space they are in. Spatial
movement, envelopment and distance
are effective structural devices, and
different directions and combinations of
movement can incite different psycho-
logical reactions in the listener, and be of
different communicative significance in
the artistic context. Sequences of spatial
counterpoint, and other combinations of
movements, can effectively underline or
counteract spatial and other types of
expressive elements, such as dynamics
and tempo, and function as intensifying
or de-intensifying devices in the compo-
sitional structure. In addition, speed and
the extent of movement are effective
means for conveying energy levels and
spatial dimensions in the work. Virtual
spaces that are set up are dynamic, can
undergo transformations over the course
of the work, and can be juxtaposed into a
multi-spatial sound field.
A vocabulary for labeling spatial proper-
ties of sounds is helpful in the process of
discovering and identifying those proper-
ties. Based on the notions of intrinsic,
extrinsic, referential and spectral space, a
number of descriptors come to mind that
specifically reference spatial properties
of individual sounds:
• small/large
• dense/transparent
• dispersing/converging
• succinct/diffuse
• stationary/mobile
• directional/non-directional
• distal/proximal
• elevating/falling
• oscillating/circling
• pointed/enveloping
To further describe properties related
to composed space and virtual spaces,
the following descriptors may be added:
• spatial dimensions
• perspective
• sparseness/crowding
• pace/energy
• definition/diffusion
• collaboration/opposition
• references/associations
• envelopment/encirclement
• vastness/smallness
• intrusion/distance
• directions/paths of movement
• range/speed of movement
Listening space
The spatio-structural intelligibility of the
Fig. 2. Schematic overview of Spatio-structural theory. (© Frank Ekeberg.)
work is often dependent upon a success-
ful interaction between the spaces com-
posed into the work, and the space in
which the work is heard. Variations in
the spatial potential of different listening
environments pose different possibilities
with respect to how the work acoustical-
ly reaches the listener, and ultimately
how it is perceived and experienced. The
best sonic result comes from the best
possible combination of sound material,
listening environment and sound system.
The room and the loudspeakers operate
as one acoustic system. I use the term
‘listening space’, therefore, to mean the
combination of listening environment
and loudspeaker configuration.
There are significant differences in
spatial potential between mono, stereo
and surround systems. Mono is limited
in terms of spatial depth, but flexible
with regard to listening position. Stereo
relies on a symmetrical configuration
and a fixed listening position, but can
convey a convincing frontal spatial im-
age. Both techniques provide portability,
although often at the expense of spatial
complexity and precision. 2D and 3D
surround sound techniques add the di-
mension of a real space by providing an
arena for environmental cues that allows
for complex spatial treatment, decorrela-
tion and envelopment of the sound mate-
rial. They also have the potential for
covering a greater listening area with a
higher spatial resolution, but require
multi-loudspeaker systems that are often
large and complex.
Differences in listening circumstance
between private and public space, indoor
and outdoor space, and any combinations
or variations thereof, can significantly
influence the listening experience with
regards to acoustic characteristics, size
and layout, and available listening posi-
tion, but also social context, and expecta-
tions and conventions associated with
space and circumstance.
In a typical concert situation each au-
dience member is oriented differently
toward the position of the loudspeakers,
and thereby receives a different spatial
image. Installing a loudspeaker system in
a public space such as a concert hall or
an art gallery often requires compromise
in order to create a spatial average of the
highest possible quality for as many
listening positions as possible. In con-
trast, for headphone listening room
acoustics are bypassed, and the spatial
image becomes unaffected by listening
position. The mobility of headphones
further implies that any environment can
be a listening environment. The use of
headphones as a listening format has
great potential for spatialization, as real-
istic simulations of 3D space can be
created. However, the influence of sen-
sory information external to the audio
still apply, and must be taken into ac-
count.
Perceived space
The space the listener hears is the com-
bination of composed space and listening
space. The aesthetic experience is based
on this resulting ‘perceived space’, and
depends on how spatial cues in the work
are understood in terms of communica-
tional function in the artistic context.
Perceived space is a multi-sensory space
influenced by a complex web of factors,
such as visual and tactile information,
the circumstance of where and how the
work is presented, cultural and experien-
tial background, social context, inter-
personal space and territory in the listen-
ing situation, and the listener’s mood and
receptivity. Familiarity with the genre
and its expressive devices is often help-
ful in order to connect with and compre-
hend the various structural levels in the
work.
Hall argues that people from different
cultures inhabit different sensory worlds
in which spaces are not only structured
differently, but also experienced differ-
ently [7]. Hence, spatial interpretation
and response are likely to vary among
listeners, and also vary with listening
space and context. Even with all the
variables involved in spatial listening,
space remains a powerful tool for artistic
expression, and an essential element for
aesthetic experience.
Conclusion
Space in sonic arts permeates aspects of
the work at all stages of creation, presen-
tation and appreciation, from choosing
and manipulating the individual sound
through to the overall listening experi-
ence of the work in a private or public
setting. Space as an element of individu-
al sounds and virtual spaces can be rep-
resented by means of spatial localization,
as well as references to real spaces asso-
ciated with the sound source, or with the
composed virtual space, and can be
articulated in terms of placement, envel-
opment, movement, opposition, enclo-
sure, distance and intimacy, all of which
can be treated as structural devices in the
work. Even though spatial elements have
been part of sonic artworks for a long
time, awareness of the potential and
complexities of space remains limited
among art practitioners and audiences
alike. However, because space is such an
omnipresent part of communication in
daily life, as well as in artistic contexts,
it demands the artist’s attention. Identify-
ing spatial elements of sound, their inter-
relations and communicative signifi-
cance is crucial for fully appreciating
space as an artistic tool. I hope my spa-
tio-structural theory is beneficial in that
regard. See fig. 2 for a schematic over-
view of spatio-structural theory.
References and Notes
1. E. T. Hall, ‘Proxemics’, in S. Weitz, ed., Nonver-
bal Communication: Readings with Commentary
(New York: Oxford University Press, 1979).
2. E. T. Hall, The Hidden Dimension (New York:
Anchor Books, 1966, reprint 1990).
3. E. T. Hall, The Silent Language (New York:
Anchor Books, 1959, reprint 1990).
4. S. Lyman and M. Scott, ‘Territoriality: A Ne-
glected Social Dimension’, Social Problems 15, No.
2 (1967).
5. J. Blauert, Spatial Hearing: The Psychophysics of
Human Sound Localization (Cambridge, MA: MIT
Press, 1997).
6. A term originally coined by Pierre Schaeffer
(referenced in Smalley [12]). It refers to sounds
with a strong spectral emphasis, but without a clear
identifiable pitch.
7. Hall [3].
8. A. H. Benade, Fundamentals of Musical Acous-
tics (New York: Dover, 1990).
9. A. Bregman, Auditory Scene Analysis: the
Perceptual Organization of Sound, (Cambridge,
MA: MIT Press, 1994).
10. S. Handel, Listening: An Introduction to the
Perception of Auditory Events (Cambridge: MIT
Press, 1989).
11. F. E. Henriksen, Space in Electroacoustic Music
– composition, performance and perception of
musical space, PhD thesis, (London: City Universi-
ty, 2002).
12. D. Smalley, ‘Spectro-morphology and Structur-
ing Processes’, in S. Emmerson, ed., The Language
of Electroacoustic Music (London: Macmillan,
1986).
13. D. Smalley, ‘Spectromorphology: Explaining
Sound Shapes’, Organised Sound 2, No. 2 (1997).
14. D. Smalley, ‘Space-form and the acousmatic
image’, Organised Sound 12, No. 1 (2007).
15. J. Tenney, ‘Temporal Gestalt Perception in
Music’, Journal of Music Theory 24, No. 2 (1980).
