Relations between histories, sources and preservation problematics are explored by evaluating how Dutch electroacoustic musical life is discussed in international histories of electronic music. Some Dutch cases consisting of different generations of interdisciplinary, live, performance-based electroacoustic work are discussed: the work of Dick Raaijmakers, Michel Waisvisz and Huba de Graaff. These cases point to some important aspects of preservation and the formation of histories. An emphasis in electronic music histories on technology and on technological innovation comes at the expense of information on the musical and artistic aspects. For greater interest in musical aspects, it is crucial to have more access to the music itself. The works and practices of Dick Raaijmakers, Michel Waisvisz and Huba de Graaff seem to resist documentation, ontologically and practically but, on the other hand, there is a desire for its documentation and dissemination. For their work, preservation means: making something new while being faithful to the past. It is therefore that I propose to regard preservation as performance. This music only remains alive when we are not solely interested in linear innovation, but in a profound relation with the past, in reworking the past.

中文翻译：

---

跨学科电声音乐的规范化和文献化，以荷兰的三个案例为例：Dick Raaijmakers、Michel Waisvisz 和 Huba de Graaff

通过评估荷兰电声音乐生活在国际电子音乐史上的讨论方式，探讨了历史、来源和保存问题之间的关系。讨论了一些由不同世代的跨学科、现场、基于表演的电声作品组成的荷兰案例：Dick Raaijmakers、Michel Waisvisz 和 Huba de Graaff 的作品。这些案例指出了保存和历史形成的一些重要方面。电子音乐史对技术和技术创新的重视是以音乐和艺术方面的信息为代价的。为了对音乐方面产生更大的兴趣，更多地接触音乐本身是至关重要的。Dick Raaijmakers、Michel Waisvisz 和 Huba de Graaff 的作品和实践似乎抵制记录，在本体论和实践上，但另一方面，人们希望对其进行记录和传播。对于他们的工作，保存意味着：在忠于过去的同时创造新事物。因此，我建议将保存视为表现。只有当我们不仅对线性创新感兴趣，而且对与过去的深刻关系、对过去的再造感兴趣时，这种音乐才会继续存在。