Can sound penetrate beyond language? Is it a language of its own, a language without barriers or parameters and non-specific or defined by geography? Is it a language that relies purely on resonance? And what is resonance, can it be defined in a way where it does not evoke or suggest?

Redefining the hierarchal structure and elitism found in words, words that can be relevant or irrelevant, one may seek to search for a meaning or let it pass undefined, perhaps let it be filled with uncertain assumption, sound on the other hand, is integral to a bodily function, its visceral reaction is penetrative beyond awareness. It is in fact anti-linguistic in its nature. However it is defined by its visceral connotations.

So what does it mean to be involuntarily exposed to sounds, music for sake of this argument, in a public space, to know that we automatically react to sound in a visceral way? What does it mean to experience this in such a way, in such a space? In such a manner? Does this henceforth involuntarily connect us, to a set locality? To each other? To we form a composition with one another in the architecture of sound? How are we composers in the spatial experience?
 Exploring the corporeal specifics that are unique to the sound heard, as well as the universal aspects of the sound. We almost instinctively recognize a heartbeat; we associate a rate or repetition to what we perceive to be a heartbeat. What we in fact hear is the echo that the sound makes within our ribcage, making each heartbeat not only unique in itself but also relevant to our inwardly space. What does it mean to record such an intimate sound, and play it in a public space? What does it mean to place this intimacy outside, but to also invade the personal space yet again, by playing these sounds back at a specific frequency and in such a manner where one cannot avoid feeling the sound, not just hearing it.