One of the naive fascinations of our times consists in believing that a visual artistic fact and an audible artistic fact syncronize themselves through sophisticated digital connections.
Another construction is that the arts exist separatly, and therefore can be combined.
Finally, languages and codes related to the alleged topic are supposed to define different things with equal words, although it's the other way around.
A good part of these confusions are produced in the transition between the concepts of cult and popular.
Visual language can be referential, symbolic, representative, figurative, intuitive... and so on. and all of these classifications trace the path of what they define after the comparation with the certainties of direct perception.
Audible language lateralizes itself: on one hand, the verbal activity, on the other, the musical. Each are incomparable to reality or are reality, because theyíre ineffable, itís to say, inexplicable and unavoidably abstract. They only make sense combined with other sensorial languages (and they do it with much strength) when theyëre synchronized together.
The unit of syncronicity is the human been.
There may exist an audiovisual, un-synchronized artwork, in condition of the elements that integrate it are produced in a different space-time. Picasso's Gernika and Beethoven's Ninth Symphony are un-sincronized facts only if they are not perceived at the same time.