Here are the scanned pictures of the 2 cassette tape I mentioned last post.
BRYAN LEWIS SAUNDERS / Stream of Unconscious Vol.5 (cassette tape w/ 21page booklet)
Ltd. Ed. C90 Chrome Cassette
Published by: Stand-Up Tragedy Records
Vocals by Bryan Lewis Saunders
Music by Yoshihiro Kikuchi & Christopher Fleeger
Art and Design by Alice Salyer
Edition of 80
Comes with 21 page booklet of text
1 - Yoshihiro Kikuchi "White Surrealist Nihilismus" - 44:45
2 - Christopher Fleeger "Revenge of the Dolphins" - 44:06
YOSHIHIRO KIKUCHI / One Intensely Eats Up Another Economic Principle (cassette tape)
Ltd. Ed. C26 Cassette tape
Published by: FRAGMENT FACTORY
Edition of 66
A1 - Past Age Healing Hair Saloon - 7:38
A2 - Demons Calculation - 5:13
B1 - Underwear Passion - 7:38
B2 - Kids Land Parking Off - 5:04
This tape got a strange review on Vital Weekly 823. The reviewer wrote self-considered observation about the concept I set and how I made, referred my liner note inside the sleeve. It's really strange text that is referring computer science including numerical matters like bit calculations, philosophy, and music criticism's boundary? They the topics are a bit deviated. Again, it's strange, but simply interesting in a viewpoint of like watching concrete poetry. So, we can also decipher it into like "dadaistic" letters construction.
Read/watch the following dadaistic letters:
"Kikuchi’s recordings were made in response to glitches and errors in software on an Apple computer in reading or converting between audio stored in .WAV format and .AIFF format, the two being (almost) the standard audio file format for Microsoft and Apple respectively. Kikuchi doesn’t say which software or precisely the actual details of the files, for both formats can store sound in various sample rates and formats. Details of these are found in the files (header) from which software can detect the number of channels, sample rate and sample size. This is a labyrinthine world of technical and so techie delight, but one with both philosophy, metaphysics, and surreal
humor. For instance a likely source of the error could be Apple’s changing its format from big-endian to little-endian. In simple terms which end of an address (here its data I know) is the most important. So firstname.lastname@example.org is little-end (ian) because you are smaller than hotmail, or wonderfully child’s myname, my street, my town, my country, the world, the solar system , the galaxy the universe. Compare that to the Big endian 1,000,000 – where the 1 is Big, though wiki says that in big endian the first byte, lowest in address is the biggest, and gives Arabic numerals as an example, because I assume 1,000,000 is where we address memory 1,2,3,4,5,6,7, so 1 is in position 1, this is confusing because one might assume the end is position 7 and not 1. The article goes on to explain this has caused bugs!* And just before anyone goes completely insane, the terms little and big endian – wait for it- come from Gulliver’s travels where the two nations (Lilliput and Blefuscu) go to war over which end of the egg goes into the egg cup, the big end or little, or is it which end sticks up… I think I should get back to the review but with Kikuchi’s help I’ve established that the world of so called logic and computer science is far more otiose - ontologically (love it!) than anything those French post-modernists could dream up – well, maybe not, but certainly someone is giving someone a run for their money. *For my part rather than “think” I tend to try each end (when programming!) and listen to the result, see I’m an Englishman and at heart an empiricist, even if I try my hardest I cant go metaphysical for love or money. Perhaps the Japanese share the English sense of empiricism, Gulliver was you see written by an Irishman, as was Finnegan’s wake, though I’m enamored of Deleuze’s transcendental (or is it transcendent- :-) Ha! There’s a BIG difference ….. empiricism…. And so infinite virtualities… but empirically an audio sample (which is a two byte signed integer) say +303 would be stored as 2F 01, or 47 256 (2F is hex 2x16 + 15) or 0101111 00000001 which is 47 + 256 = 303. The 2F is the least significant byte, the 01 the most significant… in binary 1,2,4,8,16,32,64,128 in the first byte 256,512,1024… in the second byte, so 1 x 256 (from the second byte) + 32+8+4+2+1 = 47 (from the first) = 256 + 47 = 303 so empirically we know that if 303 is stored as 2F 01 then the system is using little endian. Obviously we need to know a priori that our number is 303, then the endian format becomes obvious or “visible”, tangible and no more a theoretic object. And this is no more irrelevant than a review of classical music which uses such terms as C sharp, as in “what does C sharp sound like?” – what does this cassette sound like, sounds like a possible endian conversion error in PCM data. And as such a review exceeds any subjective impression in giving an empirical fact, representation of the work, could then be criticized as, and this is true, saying nothing at all, but being a mere doubling, as if I am nothing more than a cassette recorder. Surly (even) any realist can see a mistake here? (jliat)"