Estimation about if the primary paintings have to be visual or sound composition, it is not that easy question. If I am focus on the elements, clearly, from my point of view the composition is perfect, SILK & SKIN_ GOLD & BAMBOO.

Musically, SILK (-) I figure it out as a whisper. SKIN (+) is plenty sonority. GOLD (-) wild be intimate because of its intense hardness. BAMBOO (+) one more time soundly and grateful.

But, about secondary paintings the constant is opposite (musically speaking) GOURD & CLAY_WOOD & STONE. GOURD (+) is rigid but resonant, same as the SKIN. CLAY (-) is the same dense as the SILK. WOOD (+) is sonority par excellence, the same as BAMBOO. STONE (-) the mineral hardness, again, same as the GOLD.

To me all the (+) elements are obviously musical, easygoing and easily sound. But the (-) ones, even also musicals, are introverts, dense and with an intimistic and complex sonority. I think this point doesn't has to affect to the visual composition, but it does in the sound composition. Based on the structure and order established we will get as result: _(-)_(+)(+)_(-)(-)_(+)(+)_(-)_ As you could see, in some way, we already get some type of dynamic…

Man Ferreiro,

musician, sound technician, creator