Biodiversity and Creativity in Sonic Art: Underwater and Subterranean Recordings in Environmental Practice

Posted on 6th August 20249th August 2024 by David Vélez (University of Huddersfield)

DOI: 10.5920/DivP.2024.02

Abstract

This audio paper examines sonic artists approaching hydrophones and geophones to advance artworks that enhance creativity and encourage awareness towards biodiversity. These devices present sounds that emerge unfamiliar and unrelatable to our airborne-fixed listening, suggesting unexplored sensibilities and other ways of approaching sound. This research navigates theories in the philosophy of biodiversity by Michael Marder and Luce Irigaray to support the analysis of artworks by Jana Winderen and Jacob Kirkegaard, and to advance autoethnographic research on the investigation of underground and fluvial environments in Northern England. This paper maps the correlation between creativity and biodiversity encouragement in these sonic art pieces.

Keywords

Sonic art, Creativity, Biodiversity, Field recordings

David Vélez, Peronyx Excavatus Worms (2023)

David Vélez, Calder River (2023)

Introduction

Considering the enthusiasm for biodiversity (Callicott, 2019) and creativity (Grant, 2018) in art critique, it is pertinent to think about tools to determine their dimensions in environmental recording-based sonic practice making it accountable for the participation of nonhuman organisms and habitats. The development of these tools is challenging because creativity is often perceived as a human-exclusive and individual virtue (Boden, 2018), neglecting co-authorship and horizontal cooperation, both of which are essential in fieldwork (Viveiros de Castro, 2009).

Sonic Biodiversity and Difference

In this investigation, biodiversity is the possibility of a sonic environment being divergent in sensibilities, materials and mediums. It regards the uniqueness and essentialness of every resonant organism intertwining in a habitat (Irigaray and Marder, 2016), as well as the symbiotic and vibrant processes they advance to sustain collective well-being (Wilson, 1975). Difference concerns the distinctive densities diffusing, absorbing, and reflecting acoustic vibration in an ecosystem (López, 1998), the media in which sound propagates, and their influence on the sensibility of the organisms they help to communicate.

My research centres on hydrophones and geophones, devices helping humans to examine solid and liquid acoustic media and account for the differences we encounter in them. Underwater listening diminishes the receptiveness of humans to mid- and low frequencies while enhancing our sensibility in the high range (Sørensen, Christensen-Dalsgaard and Wahlberg, 2022). Listening through the soil, as in placing an ear on the ground, helps organisms detect distant sounds that vanish in the air, as acoustic vibration travels faster and further through solid media. Hydrophones amplify and record underwater sounds by piezoelectricity, and were created to detect icebergs and submarines in the 1910s, the same decade in which geophones and accelerometers were developed to sense subterranean acoustic vibration using a spring-mounted wire coil and a magnetic mechanism (Richardson, 1912). The rise of these technologies in sound art is contemporary to the development of lower-cost hydrophones, accessible geophones and a surge of online tutorials that indicate how to make DIY models using spare parts.

Creativity

This paper approaches creativity as a trait that human and non-human organisms share according to the theories of philosopher of biology Margaret A. Boden, who defines creativity as the material capability to create new forms whose configuration has not been previously specified (Boden, 2018). In her investigation, this definition encompasses the chemical interaction of everything from atoms that produce new molecules to terrestrial bodies that are formed in the stars (Boden, 2018). Boden investigates biological and geological creativity in terms of the contribution of individual elements to self-organised systems (Boden, 2018). Swarm behaviour is a biodiverse case of creativity, such as when nocturnal amphibian species use unison singing and sonic spatialisation to create a shield of sound that deceives hunting reptiles by and keeps individual locations secret. The dependence of these mechanisms on the participation of all singing individuals makes them strong yet vulnerable, since the smallest de-synchronisation could collapse the system, revealing their positions to a predator (Boden, 2018).

Doubt in Listening and Recording

Underwater, subterranean, and nocturnal wildlife sounds evidence the acousmaticity in which artists encounter biodiversity in the field, a topic addressed in the audio essay La Selva (1998) by sonic artist and trained entomologist Francisco López. The artist developed extensive nocturnal recordings in Costa Rica, investigating the capacity of organisms to camouflage and become visually undetectable (López, 1998). This capacity of organisms to remain undetected translates to the realm of the sonic, as research indicates that toads, owls, bees and moths, among other species, use sound mimicry to camouflagefor subsistence and survival purposes, as it helps them resist identification and localisation by their predators, including human hunters (López, 1998). In this sense, doubt is a critical perceptual consideration for the field recordist investigating bio-acousmatic environments, where sonic and visual stimuli dissociate, and sounds can be the deceiving result of a well-crafted camouflaging strategy. In doubt, artists can learn that their subjectivity is essential yet not central, absolute, or predominant in the studied ecosystem, as it permeates our sensibility by leading to hesitation about what is being heard and about ourselves hearing it (Voegelin, 2010).

Case Studies

How do underwater and underground environmental recordings help sonic art advance biodiversity and creativity? To address this question, I will analyse artworks by Jacob Kirkegaard and Jana Winderen, before presenting an auto-ethnographic account of my own experiments with soil and river sounds.

Jakob Kirkegaard: Eldfjall, 2005

Danish artist Jakob Kirkegaard advances environmental recordings with bioacoustic and geo-acoustic tools. Eldfjall (2005) is a collection of nine pieces featuring accelerometer recordings he made in Iceland:

This CD consists of geothermal recordings of vibrations in the ground around the area of Krisuvik, Geysir and Myvatn in Iceland. The recordings have been carried out using accelerometers inserted into the earth at various places around the geysers, mapping the sonic aspects of volcanic activity at the surface of the earth. (Kirkegaard, 2005)

The interdisciplinary scientific field that investigates the connectedness between the physical Earth and the biosphere is called Geobiology, a study of the agency of processes and interactions between organisms in the co-evolution of life, incorporating methodologies from biology and geology. Geobiology supports an inclusive understanding of acoustic biodiversity towards geological bodies, the sounds of which are featured in Kirkegaard’s work.

In Eldfjall, Kirkegaard used a DeltaTron accelerometer produced by the Danish engineering firm Brüel & Kjær, which he installed on a pointed probe, converting geothermal vibrations into rattling, murmuring and roaring sound as the ground ‘heaves, constricts, bubbles, and spews’, as he describes it (Kirkegaard, 2005). The artist indicates perceiving an interior life in these rocky layers, where he appreciates an aesthetic quality: ‘The earth has an incredibly interesting sound, because there is such a large spectrum in it, with the deep warm tones, high frequencies on top and a movement that gives associations to rhythm and music (…).’ (ibid)

Kirkegaard avoided substantial manipulation of the recordings in order to celebrate their ‘overwhelming natural strength and beauty’ where nature is ‘(…) speaking its own language’ (Kirkegaard, 2005).

The material Kirkegaard presents here is vital and exuberant in rhythms, timbers and densities. The pieces Ala, Al-Lat and Gerd sound heavily filtered in their mid- and high frequencies, a potential consequence of the density of some of the magmatic stones he researched. Aramaiti showcases tiny and subtle sonic materials in the foreground that, underneath, reveal a vast and deep sequence of layers, highlighting the diversity of forces intertwining in this place. In Izanamai, the heavily distorted sounds suggest the harsh conditions sustained during the recordings, as evidenced in some photos that the artist has published on his website (Kirkegaard, no date). The raw, coarse and thick materials of Nerthus, Croaticue, Izanamai, and Kali create a sense of astonishment through the magnitude and complexity of the sounding objects, in which regard the artist accurately suggests that the listeners of this album are entering a universe of darkness where sounds are significantly denser and more compressed (Brüel & Kjaer, 2005). The underground recordings in Eldfjall and the idea of interior life present biodiversity as broad and inclusive, encompassing the vibrant ground acoustic activity occurring in these locations and the contrasting materials and media emerging throughout, which contribute to the appreciation of the planet as a creative sonic force, palpable in the impetuousness and relentlessness of these sounds.

Jana Winderen: The Noisiest Guys on the Planet, 2019

Jana Winderen is a Norway-based sound artist researching subaquatic acoustics, with substantial publications and installations incorporating 8011 DPA and DolphinEAR-PRO hydrophones (Winderen, no date). The title, The Noisiest Guys on the Planet (2009), references the pistol shrimp, Alpheidae, considered one of the loudest animals in the world, with claws snapping at levels superior to 200 decibels. However, this album is not about a particular species. Winderen gestated the two pieces comprising this artwork over years of recording underwater habitats in Norway and Thailand, detecting intriguing sounds that she presumed were organisms from the Decapod order (Winderen, no date). After collecting hours of recordings, she submitted them to a group of researchers from the Institute of Marine Research in Norway, and only one biologist ventured to reply, suggesting they were made by shrimp feeding from decaying matter (Winderen, no date). For Winderen, uncertainty about the origin of these sounds is evidence of the challenges researchers experience when recording underwater and trying to identify sound sources:

Underwater there is very little known about the soundscapes created by living creatures, and few understand the details of variations between the various grunts, knocking sounds and rumbling sounds that cod, haddock, pollock, other fish and crustaceans produce, and how they experience and orientate themselves through the use of sound. (Winderen, no date)

The snapping sounds that caught her attention are textured and immersive, suggesting multiple positions in constant movement. The biologist’s hypothesis is plausible since these Crustaceans do use their claws when eating, which often happens at night, when Winderen created many of her recordings. The intensity and periodicity of the Crustacean claw-clicking sounds evidence the tuning of these species with the circadian rhythm, as they help nearby species keep track of time during their everyday activities, making shrimps the bio-acoustic clocks of the sea (Lillis and Mooney, 2022). Winderen also included audio registers from boat engines and clanking nautical equipment, creating a mysterious droning element that harmonises with the rhythmic shrimp sounds. In her notes, she indicates that the noise made by ferries and motorboats overlapped the sounds of shrimps in the afternoon: ‘When recording on the coast of Norway, for example, this sound is what you are very likely to hear as soon as the ferries and motorboats have parked for the night.’ (Winderen, no date) However, in her mix, Winderen balances human and Crustacean sounds, seeking ecological harmony after the well-known devastating effects of noise pollution on the ecology and biodiversity of underwater organisms (Lillis and Mooney, 2022).

The research in The Noisiest Guys on the Planet evidences how the sensibility and intuition of the environmental artist can connect aesthetic aspects like rhythm, spatial development, timbre, and intensity with the ecosystemic importance of sound. The doubt that Winderen encounters underwater spurs her curiosity and catalyses analysis, reflection, discussion, dialogue, and interdisciplinarity. The doubt she presents prompts the listener’s imagination, anticipating that there is more about the sounds than we currently know. For instance, crustaceans can develop swarm-swimming in groups that can reach areas of thousands of square kilometres, mimicking the shape and movement of larger organisms to intimidate their predators (Neems et al, 1992). We can speculate that the sounds shrimps make when eating could be far from aleatory, as they might be a product of their capacity to use sound and creative cooperation to procure food while avoiding predation.

David Vélez: Soil and River Sounds, 2023

My first attempt to record soil organisms in December 2022 produced a homogeneous and imbalanced sonic material dominated by trucks, cars, and other machinery, overlapping the sounds of insects and annelids. On 2 May 2023, I noticed that Perionyx Excavatus earthworms were emanating from the dirt in the pots where I grow rhubarbs in my house. This annelid species is often cultivated in farms for its ability to feed from decaying roots and leaves, keeping the soil vital and in continuous regeneration while improving the quality of the nutrients. Chewing sounds from insects and worms strengthen the immune system of plants, such as Arabidopsis thaliana and their sensibility toward food-intake sounds made by caterpillars (Appel and Cocroft, 2014). Over millions of years of evolution, the plants have evolved to anticipate the presence of predators by associating the volatile gas emissions of injured conspecifics with the sounds made by their hunters (ibid). To attend to the sounds of these organisms, I placed a LOM geophone and a miniature Aquarian H3 hydrophone inside the soil of the rhubarb after acoustically isolating the pot with cardboard, textiles, foam and bubble wrap. In the recordings, soil emerged as subtle, vibrant, and active, as I finally could register the quiet animal sounds with clarity and intensity. This methodology evidences the benefits of horticulture to help advance ethical bioacoustic investigation, propitiating favourable acoustic conditions without intervening in the ecosystem. Here, I was able to experience sounds in which acoustic energy plays a critical role in the learning and survival of many plant species.

Between July and August of 2023, I made a series of diurnal underwater recordings in the River Calder, the principal source for farms in the Calderdale and Kirklees boroughs. I documented the sounds using an Aquarian H2 in natural areas on Milner Royd Park Reserve and Pugneys Country Park and near Halifax and Huddersfield. In these parks, I noticed fascinating growling and expressive sounds that I could not hear in the urban areas. My initial guess was photosynthesizing plants, but they are usually higher in frequency, or frogs, but most amphibians are nocturnal. In doubt, I approached Michael Prime, an experienced artist investigating plant bioacoustics, who suggested that these sounds might be the product of fish eating algae. While further research is in course, this initial possibility seems likely, as Rutilus roach and chub inhabit this river and eat plants. A critical reflection surfaced when I learned that the Calder is also subjected to substantial sewage leaks, making it England’s second most polluted river (Houghton, 2023). Regardless of their causality, the growling sounds I recorded could help indicate more severe sewage leakage in urban areas, as this might reduce the presence and diversity of organic activity involving the species producing the sounds.

Concluding Reflections

Underwater and underground environmental recordings help artists advance biodiversity and creativity by presenting sounds that change how we think about organic and sonic matter, transforming our understanding of the creative process when incorporating non-human sounds. As ecological philosophy and new materialisms invite us to empathetically engage with nonhuman difference, so hydrophone, geophone, and accelerometer recordings emerge propitious to acknowledge our interdependence with unfamiliar sounding and listening habitats.

References

Appel, H. and Cocroft, R. (2014). Plants Respond to Leaf Vibrations Caused by Insect Herbivore Chewing. Oecologia 175(4): 1257-1266.

Boden, M. (2018). Creativity and Biology. In Gaut, B. and Kieran, M., eds. Creativity and Philosophy. Routledge.

Brüel and Kjaer. (2005). Case Study: Sound Art. https://www.bksv.com/media/doc/ba0764.pdf

Callicott, J. B. (2016). Ecological Sustainability. In Garson, J., Plutynski, A., and Sarkar, S., eds. The Routledge Handbook of Philosophy of Biodiversity. Routledge.

Grant, J. (2018). Creativity as an Artistic Merit. In Gaut, B. and Kieran, M., eds. Creativity and Philosophy. Routledge.

Houghton, A. (2023). Revealed: These are the 20 Most Polluted Rivers in the UK. Time Out. https://www.timeout.com/uk/news/revealed-these-are-the-20-most-polluted-rivers-in-the-uk-022023

Irigaray, L. and Marder, M. (2016). Through Vegetable Being. Columbia University Press.

Kirkegaard, J. (2005). Eldfjall [Album]. Touch.

Kirkegaard, J. (no date). Personal Website. https://fonik.dk/field/iceland04.html

Lillis, A. and Mooney, T. A. (2022). Sounds of a Changing Sea: Temperature Drives Acoustic Output by Dominant Biological Sound-Producers in Shallow Water Habitats. Frontiers in Marine Science 9, 960881.

López, F. (1998). La Selva. V2. https://www.franciscolopez.net/env.html

Neems, R., Lazarus, J. and Mclachlan, A. J. (1992). Swarming Behaviour in Male Chironomid Midges: A Cost-Benefit Analysis. Behavioral Ecology 3(4): 285-290.

Richardson, M. (1912). Apparatus of Warning a Ship at Sea of Its Nearness to Large Objects Wholly or Partly Under Water. Br. Pat. No. 1125.

Sørensen, K., Christensen-Dalsgaard, J. and Wahlberg, M. (2022). Is Human Underwater Hearing Mediated by Bone Conduction? Hearing Research 420, 108484.

Vivieros de Castro, E. (2009). Cannibal Metaphysics. Univocal.

Voegelin, S. (2010). Listening to Noise and Silence: Towards a Philosophy of Sound Art. Bloomsbury.

Wilson, E. O. (1975). Sociobiology. Harvard University Press.

Winderen, J. (2019). The Noisiest Guys on the Planet [Album]. Touch.

Winderen, J. (no date). Personal Website. https://www.soundohm.com/artist/jana-winderen

Winderen, J. (no date). Personal Website. https://www.janawinderen.com/releases/the-noisiest-guys-on-the-planet

About the author

David Vélez is a sonic artist investigating the acoustics of food and horticulture, emphasising the sensibility of edible plants and their ecosystems to sound. His work is interdisciplinary, implementing technologies from bioacoustics, geoacoustics, ethnography and food anthropology to advance politically engaged projects. He centres his work on musical synthesis, electroacoustic transduction and field recording, focusing on underground and subaquatic sounds.