The noise gate, as a dynamic signal-processing element, is used in music production and performance to suppress aesthetically undesirable noise in an audio recording or audio signal. To achieve this, the so-called ‘threshold’ can be set on the noise gate. If the signal falls below this threshold, it is automatically attenuated to such an extent that it is only just audible, or not audible at all. As a result, all remaining signal components appear amplified and stand out more prominently in the soundscape. Such an increase in the signal-to-noise ratio prevents, for example, the background noise from electronic devices in the signal chain from reaching the loudspeaker. The dilemma, however, lies in the fact that this so-called noise also conveys captivating, dynamic and unique moments of musical performances. The sounds of breathing whilst singing, the sliding of fingers across guitar strings, or artefacts from distorted audio signals are, in fact, subject to minute individual variations that run the risk of being suppressed, excluded or excessively adjusted, perfected and smoothed out by the noise gate.

People have always developed tools, devices, technologies and media to regulate their relationships with one another and with their environment. These relationships are also evident in contemporary media cultures. The noise gate therefore serves here as a metaphor and conceptual framework that bridges the gap between music production and socio-cultural practices, technologies and policies.

In the recording studio, at the door to a club, in academia, in teaching methodologies or on algorithm-driven playlists, we stand—symbolically or literally—at the gate and thus face the decision as to what or who constitutes too much noise or causes it and should be excluded, or which voices should be heard. Roland Barthes’ famous thesis on the ‘grain of the voice’ (grain de la voix) as something impure that moves us precisely because of this impurity; Dick Hebdige’s emphasis on subcultural ‘noise’ (‘as opposed to sound’) as both an aesthetic and political disruption, and Jacques Attali’s succinct comment that nothing happens in the absence of noise, all bear witness to the fact that the relationship between sound and noise is often a substantial element in aesthetic, musical, social and, not least, political threshold and decision-making processes. Viewed in this light, power relations are revealed at the noise gate – decisions between inclusion and exclusion, mainstream and niche, or between clamour and silence. In this context, the relationship between non-human and human actors is playing an increasingly significant role in contemporary music production and reception. The ‘adjustment’ (!) of the gate is carried out according to specific criteria determined by individual, societal, technical and social factors. At the centre of all these aspects lies the function of the noise gate as a tool for setting the course and acting as a sluice, but also for regulation and differentiation.

Metaphorically, a noise gate can be interpreted and evaluated in various ways: academia, for example, necessarily functions as a ‘noise gate’. Without the reduction of complexity and the selection and combination of relevant facts, the acquisition of knowledge is not possible. Equally, we are aware of the long history of suppression or marginalisation of certain positions within the academic world. This has concerned the status of research into popular music within the humanities, or the arduous path that gender and postcolonial studies have also had to follow within popular music studies. The academic world itself functions, in this respect, as a filter or gatekeeper in the most direct sense. As a further example, we might refer to the research and representations of the history (or histories) of popular music. Here, too, filtering and selection take place so that history can be told at all – always at the risk of obscuring multi-layeredness and complexity and causing nuances to disappear.

In a figurative sense, the ‘noise gate’ acts as a narrative, social, cultural, educational and political filter. From its significance in production environments to issues of research policy, its ‘tuning’ will be explored and discussed during the conference from various perspectives within Popular Music Studies.

It is planned to publish individual papers as part of the IASPM D-A-CH Vibes series.

All further important information can be found on the Registration and Information page.

Contact persons:
Susanne Binas-Preisendörfer & Sidney König

We look forward to an interesting conference in spring 2026 at the University of Oldenburg.

Susanne Binas-Preisendörfer (Music and Media, University of Oldenburg)
Möritz Höger (Media Music Practice, University of Oldenburg)
Christofer Jost (Centre for Popular Culture and Music, University of Freiburg)
Sidney König (Music and Media, University of Oldenburg) and the
members of the Executive Committee and Advisory Board of IASPM-D-A-CH