I think there is difference in using and... well, using. I would assume what Andrew asks, are the bands/artists who use the concrete sounds. Not just something, to be processed via distorting and modulating effects. But that noise itself, has concrete source and natural sound qualities.
Smashing metal, could be taken as one of simples examples, since it is so clear. It is noisy and loud, and the intrinsic quality is just that. When you hear it, you connect immediately to concept of magnitude: size, volume, aggressiveness, etc.
With someone crumbling paper with microphone attached to it (try plastic bags, cellophane bags,...) is some of the standard noise ideas - I would say. But it needs amplification and most often also effects. Sound of paper and many other close-by recorded organic "microsounds" have this quality of not being such a NOISY by loudness, even if perhaps disharmonic and chaotic?
It is the lucky thing in experimental music, that you can of course distort the reality of sounds, and create "space" which is beyond natural balance. Things what are not noisy, can be made such. But if looking for the most painful, most harsh, most disturbing sounds, I tend to experiment with things, what lead there automatically. One can easily find the sources which are harshly noisy, perhaps even unpleasant (relatively) and perhaps even loud enough to consider use of earplugs.
So who exactly is doing NOISE with approach that is nearly electro acoustic? I don't know that many. I do know many who prefer concrete sound as opposed to synthetic.
