[Course Link](https://schoolofsong.org/pages/daniel?mc_cid=9a8d1cda85&mc_eid=486c6d3ffe&utm_campaign=9a8d1cda85-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2024_11_11_08_42_COPY_01&utm_medium=email&utm_source=Workshop%20with%20Daniel%20Lopatin%20%28Oneohtrix%20Point%20Never%29%3A%20Electronic%20Music%2C%20Film%20Scoring%2C%20and%202025-12-17&utm_term=0_2d9013b7ae-dd2b33b00c-646939806) [Zoom link]([schoolofsong.org/go-to-class](https://www.schoolofsong.org/go-to-class)) # Tuning In i wanna hold your hand, brain may still extract essential from a mix, background, blend chaotic environment, desire to make something more honest not just ray of light, the ambience of the cd player, sound of trucks, dishes wanted to express remove from the hermetic album arrangements where things bleed in from background ![[Pasted image 20260201125840.png | 200]] Things meant to go **unheard** become interesting when you bring them to the **foreground** musique concrete use all the parts of the buffalo anti-anesthesia sntennae out practice tuning in [[pauline oliveros]], tune in, be open, questions about judgement huge wizard beard the Tarot (major arcana) [[Hermit]]: takes in the world from a dsistance, considers, lantern to see and be seen. reversed: solipsism and isolation [[Fool]]: open, taking risks ![[Pasted image 20260201131337.png | 200]] practice the hermit and then in the zone become the fool. ## Sounding Outwards Silent Hill: fog hides nothingness until you get there you never have the whole map, just fragments in time the fog is good. it is your friend. [[Mark Isham]] "many chinas" 1983 >> Oval ([[Markus Popp]]): "Do While" *94 Diskont*, 1995 samples scuffs phenomenology materiality nirvana "radio friendly unit shifter" *in utero*, 1993 herbie hancock cover nirvana heavy pop "both things" to the foreground sunset corp *soundsystem pastoral* Dania Shapes, 2006 load exe files into audio editor for noise (cooledit pro) [[fennesz]] arrangement/songwriting approach gyroscopically, start then build it up and play against it "I Bite Through It" *Garden of Delete* Oneohtrix Point Never, 2015 [[Mark Leckey]] "Red Terror" *Hurry Up Tomorrow* The Weeknd, 2025 ![[Pasted image 20260201135424.png]] in person song shares end of the workshop (4th session) a question is a short statement that ends in a questionmark punisher: talks excessively about niche content or until no one cares any more. getting started: 8 of pentacles - incorporating the overwhelm how and when do you set limits? how do you know when its done? - does it do what it is supposed to do? “The signifying regime of the sign is defined by eight aspects or principles: (1) the sign refers to another sign, ad infinitum (the limitlessness of signifiance, which deterritorializes the sign); (2) the sign is brought back by other signs and never ceases to return (the circularity of the deterrito-rialized sign); (3) the sign jumps from circle to circle and constantly displaces the center at the same time as it ties into it (the metaphor or hysteria of signs); (4) the expansion of the circles is assured by interpretations that impart signified and reimpart signifier (the interpretosis of the priest); (5) the infinite set of signs refers to a supreme signifier presenting itself as both lack and excess (the despotic signifier, the limit of the system's deterrito-rialization); (6) the form of the signifier has a substance, or the signifier has a body, namely, the Face (the principle of faciality traits, which constitute a reterritorialization); (7) the system's line of flight is assigned a negative value, condemned as that which exceeds the signifying regime's power of deterritorialization (the principle of the scapegoat); (8) the regime is one of universal deception, in its jumps, in the regulated circles, in the seer's regulation of interpretations, in the publicness of the facialized center, and in the treatment of the line of flight” (Deleuze et al., 1989, p. 138)“ "If we call the signifying semiotic system semiology, then semiology is only one regime of signs among others, and not the most important one. Hence the necessity of a return to pragmatics, in which language never has universality in itself, self-sufficient formalization, a general semiology, or a meta language. Thus it is the study of the signifying regime that first testifies to the inadequacy of linguistic presuppositions, and in the very name of regimes of signs.” (Deleuze et al., 1989, p. 132)