Joseph Malloch's Master of Arts Thesis with McGill University on the subject of the creation of the TStick family of instruments
Tuesday, 29 June 2010
A Consort of Gestural Musical Controllers - Joseph Malloch
A Consort of Gestural Musical Controllers - Joseph Malloch (first result)
Thursday, 17 June 2010
Mapping Strategies for Musical Performance
"Mapping Strategies for Musical Performance" - Andy Hunt and Ross Kirk
This is a brilliant study looking at how different kinds of interfaces and mapping complexity effects one's ability to perform musical tasks of varying complexity. The paper goes in depth on a number of principals and presents test results in detailed graphical form, eventually concluding that:
1. Real-time control can be enhanced by the multiparametric interface
2. Mappings that are not one-to-one are more engaging for users
3. Complex tasks may need complex interfaces
4. The "mouse interface" is good for simple tests and for little practice time
5. Some people prefer to think in terms of separate parameters
Importantly the tests carried out in this paper attempting to take into account learning time for a user. Results were taken from practice sessions across different ranges of time from short (3 sessions) to longer term (9 sessions). Interesting to note however that I have not found a study yet that looks at the effects of learning across time periods that are closer to those required to develop even a basic proficiency at a given acoustic instrument (ie perhaps 1-2 years)
Problems and prospects for intimate and satisfying sensor-based control of computer sound
"Problems and prospects for intimate and satisfying sensor-based control of computer sound" - Matthew Wright
" Systems along the lines of Figure 1 naturally invite comparison with traditional acoustic
instruments. Of course the point of the comparison is not to
attempt to decide whether acoustic or electronic instruments
are “better”; each have their strengths and weaknesses. My
point is that the finest acoustic instruments set standards for
nuance, intimate fine control, dynamic range, temporal
responsiveness, and the possibility for a performer to develop
virtuosity, and that electronic instruments have definitely not
surpassed acoustic instruments in all of these areas. The
challenge to meet or come near these standards with our
electronic instruments is a powerful force driving
development, and this development will naturally include
some solutions that can be generalized to non-musical uses of
sensors. "
" Complex real time sensor-based electronic music systems have
a staggering range of possible ways to fail, and it is depressing
how much time the performers of these instruments spend
troubleshooting them. "
This paper presents several challenging areas of DMI design. I quite like this paper because throughout the descriptions of problems are complemented by some of Wright's personal believes and principals when it comes to designing instruments and many of his sentiments I agree with. A lot of his statements also backup what other author's that have inspired me have said.
Wright makes an early point as to why it may be advisable to compare our new DMIs to traditional acoustic instruments and even why we may attempt to emulate aspects of their design:
" Systems along the lines of Figure 1 naturally invite comparison with traditional acoustic
instruments. Of course the point of the comparison is not to
attempt to decide whether acoustic or electronic instruments
are “better”; each have their strengths and weaknesses. My
point is that the finest acoustic instruments set standards for
nuance, intimate fine control, dynamic range, temporal
responsiveness, and the possibility for a performer to develop
virtuosity, and that electronic instruments have definitely not
surpassed acoustic instruments in all of these areas. The
challenge to meet or come near these standards with our
electronic instruments is a powerful force driving
development, and this development will naturally include
some solutions that can be generalized to non-musical uses of
sensors. "
Importantly though, he does not claim that acoustic instrument designs should be the be-all and end-all of DMIs:
" I believe that the emulation of
acoustic instruments is an interesting goal only to the extent
that it increases our general knowledge of sensor-based
instruments or results in hybrid instruments that combine the
strengths of electronic sound production with the features of
acoustic instruments. "
acoustic instruments is an interesting goal only to the extent
that it increases our general knowledge of sensor-based
instruments or results in hybrid instruments that combine the
strengths of electronic sound production with the features of
acoustic instruments. "
Else where in the paper Wright gives some frankly intimidating figures regarding latency and jitter and makes some interesting points about economy of motion and gesture transparency. Finally he concludes by stating:
" Complex real time sensor-based electronic music systems have
a staggering range of possible ways to fail, and it is depressing
how much time the performers of these instruments spend
troubleshooting them. "
It is interesting to see how many authors make points about instrument reliability and how performers should spend as much time playing and as little time repairing as possible, with some DMI creators going to extra lengths to make sure repairing their DMIs is as simple as changing a guitar string and requires no specialist knowledge. This all goes to show the amount of things one must consider if one is trying to design a DMI which could truely be called a musical instrument.
Instrumental Gestural Mapping Strategies as Expressivity Determinants in Computer Music Performance
"Instrumental Gestural Mapping Strategies as Expressivity Determinants in Computer Music Performance" - Joseph Butch Rovan, Marcelo M Wanderley, Shlomo Dubnov and Philippe Depalle
"the mapping layer is a key element in attaining expressive
control of signal model synthesis." (interesting to note their hypothesis is only applied to signal models. I suppose we can mostly write off physical models since the mapping is largely built into the system and any mapping from controller sensor values to model inputs are typically one-to-one)
As well as:
"In an instrumental approach, the conver-
gent mappings demonstrated in this paper have the
potential to provide higher levels of expressivity to
existing MIDI controllers."
Interestingly the authors point out that:
Which is a point that I don't think many other authors have directly made, considering that perhaps we can make existing commercial controllers perform better without building completely new controllers.
This paper sets out to test a hypothesis that convergent (many-to-one) type mapping schemes should give the most intimate control over a synthesis algorithm since it is most like typical instrumental physical phenomena. The example used to test the theory is a Yamaha WX7 wind controller controlling a rather complex additive synthesis system via several different mapping strategies (from one-to-one to a revised many-to-one). Issues are encountered with the synthesis system however and it seems that thorough testing and subject and objective results are never completed (or at least presented) although the author's conclude that:
"the mapping layer is a key element in attaining expressive
control of signal model synthesis." (interesting to note their hypothesis is only applied to signal models. I suppose we can mostly write off physical models since the mapping is largely built into the system and any mapping from controller sensor values to model inputs are typically one-to-one)
As well as:
"In an instrumental approach, the conver-
gent mappings demonstrated in this paper have the
potential to provide higher levels of expressivity to
existing MIDI controllers."
Interestingly the authors point out that:
" Without the need to de-
velop new hardware, off-the-shelf controllers can be
given new life via coupling schemes that attempt to
simulate the behaviors of acoustic instruments"
velop new hardware, off-the-shelf controllers can be
given new life via coupling schemes that attempt to
simulate the behaviors of acoustic instruments"
Which is a point that I don't think many other authors have directly made, considering that perhaps we can make existing commercial controllers perform better without building completely new controllers.
Mark T Marshall E-mail Response
Below is the main advice given by Mark T Marshall:
Regarding your project, I think it is an excellent idea. Be aware however that designing a DMI that is as good as an acoustic instrument is quite difficult. One of the major issues, particularly with a year long project, is that you (or any performers) have a limited time to learn the instrument. This means that it needs to be quite easy to pick up, but it should also be interesting to play. This is a point made by Wessel and Wright in [1]. The other major issue is proving that the instrument is any good. The best way to do this is to have musicians (ideally a number of them) play the instrument. Musicians know what has musical potential and what doesn't. Feedback from them will help guide the design and also can be used to show that the instrument is actually any good. This area (evaluating a DMI) is something I am working on at the moment, and is not an easy thing to do.
There have been lots of projects to build new DMIs. The NIME proceedings are full of them for example. However, very few of them have really been designed to compete with acoustic instruments. One excellent thesis dealing with this is by Newton Armstrong ([2] in the reference list below). I would strongly recommend you read it. It's a bit hard going at times, and I really don't think the final instrument follows the guidelines he sets out, but it is the best discussion of the design process I've seen.
One of the few really successful instruments I've seen when it comes to engaging performers is Joe Malloch's T-Stick. There's a bunch of information about it on http://www.idmil.org in the projects section. I suggest you have a read of some of the papers written about it also.
Finally, you need to put a lot of effort into the mapping. When we worked on the McGill Digital Orchestra instruments, this was the part that we found needed the most work. It helps if this is done along with any performer's who will be playing the instrument (if there will be any other than yourself). Have a look at [3] and [4] for information on how we went about doing this. Also on the subject of mapping, check out the papers in the special issue of Organised Sound on mapping [5].
My main advice for the project itself is to start playing the instrument as soon as possible. While you can use the existing literature to guide you, it's only once you've tried to play the instrument that you can tell if it will work at all.
[1] Wessel and Wright, "Problems and prospects for intimate musical control of computers"
[2] Newton Armstrong, "An enactive approach to digital musical instrument design"
[3] Sean Ferguson and Marcelo M. Wanderley. "The McGill Digital Orchestra: Interdisciplinarity in Digital musical Instrument Design"
[4] Xenia Pestova, Erika Donald, Heather Hindman, Joseph Malloch, Mark T. Marshall, Fernando Rocha, Stephen Sinclair, D. Andrew Stewart, Marcelo M. Wanderley, and Sean Ferguson. "The CIRMMT/McGill Digital Orchestra Project".
[5] Marcelo M. Wanderley (guest editor). Mapping Strategies in Real-time Computer Music. Organised Sound, 7(2), August 2002.
Regarding your project, I think it is an excellent idea. Be aware however that designing a DMI that is as good as an acoustic instrument is quite difficult. One of the major issues, particularly with a year long project, is that you (or any performers) have a limited time to learn the instrument. This means that it needs to be quite easy to pick up, but it should also be interesting to play. This is a point made by Wessel and Wright in [1]. The other major issue is proving that the instrument is any good. The best way to do this is to have musicians (ideally a number of them) play the instrument. Musicians know what has musical potential and what doesn't. Feedback from them will help guide the design and also can be used to show that the instrument is actually any good. This area (evaluating a DMI) is something I am working on at the moment, and is not an easy thing to do.
There have been lots of projects to build new DMIs. The NIME proceedings are full of them for example. However, very few of them have really been designed to compete with acoustic instruments. One excellent thesis dealing with this is by Newton Armstrong ([2] in the reference list below). I would strongly recommend you read it. It's a bit hard going at times, and I really don't think the final instrument follows the guidelines he sets out, but it is the best discussion of the design process I've seen.
One of the few really successful instruments I've seen when it comes to engaging performers is Joe Malloch's T-Stick. There's a bunch of information about it on http://www.idmil.org in the projects section. I suggest you have a read of some of the papers written about it also.
Finally, you need to put a lot of effort into the mapping. When we worked on the McGill Digital Orchestra instruments, this was the part that we found needed the most work. It helps if this is done along with any performer's who will be playing the instrument (if there will be any other than yourself). Have a look at [3] and [4] for information on how we went about doing this. Also on the subject of mapping, check out the papers in the special issue of Organised Sound on mapping [5].
My main advice for the project itself is to start playing the instrument as soon as possible. While you can use the existing literature to guide you, it's only once you've tried to play the instrument that you can tell if it will work at all.
[1] Wessel and Wright, "Problems and prospects for intimate musical control of computers"
[2] Newton Armstrong, "An enactive approach to digital musical instrument design"
[3] Sean Ferguson and Marcelo M. Wanderley. "The McGill Digital Orchestra: Interdisciplinarity in Digital musical Instrument Design"
[4] Xenia Pestova, Erika Donald, Heather Hindman, Joseph Malloch, Mark T. Marshall, Fernando Rocha, Stephen Sinclair, D. Andrew Stewart, Marcelo M. Wanderley, and Sean Ferguson. "The CIRMMT/McGill Digital Orchestra Project".
[5] Marcelo M. Wanderley (guest editor). Mapping Strategies in Real-time Computer Music. Organised Sound, 7(2), August 2002.
Mark T Marshall Suggested Reading
A list of key articles on various subjects within the domain of DMI design suggested by Mark T Marshall:
Marcelo M Wanderley (guest editor) - "Mapping Strategies in Real-time Computer Music." Organized Sound
Wednesday, 16 June 2010
Most Useful Articles in NIME Archives
This post will be an attempt at organizing and categorizing some of the most useful/interesting article entries in the NIME convention archives, presented here. This post will likely be continuously updated for the near future so it may be worth checking it every now and again. I'll attempt to categorize the articles into different subject groups:
INSTRUMENT LIKE/INSPIRED CONTROLLERS
AUGMENTED INSTRUMENTS
- On Making and Playing an Electronically-augmented Saxophone '06
- Using the Augmented Trombone in "I Will Not Kiss Your F.ing Flag" '06
- Augmenting the Cello '06
- The Augmented Violin Project: Research, Composition and Performance '06
- Composing for Hyperbow: A Collaboration Between MIT and the Royal Acadamy of Music '06
- The Augmented Djembe Drum - Sculpting Rhythms '06
NOVEL CONTROLLERS
- The G-Spring Controller '06
- Tenori-On '06
MAPPING
PHYSICAL CONTROL/INTERACTION
GENERALLY INTERESTING/DISCUSSIONS
Monday, 14 June 2010
Exploring the Effect of Mapping Trajectories on Musical Performance
Exploring the Effect of Mapping Trajectories on Musical Performance - Doug Van Nort and Marcelo M Wanderley.
The report considers mapping as a part of the DMI system and presents a discussion on how the mapping strategy employed in a DMI effects the "feel" (in terms of expressivity and ease-of-use) of that DMI.
Gestural Control at IRCAM - M. Wanderley
The article can be found here, first result. The article provides a brief over view of the activities in the area of gestural control of music carried out at IRCAM and by its associates between the years 1996 and 2001.
Friday, 11 June 2010
Sensor Choice for Parameter Modulations in Digital Musical Instruments: Empirical Evidence from Pitch Modulation
Sensor Choice for Parameter Modulations in Digital Musical Instruments: Empirical Evidence from Pitch Modulation - Max T Marshall et al
Article presenting various results of research carried out into appropriate sensor choices for musical applications in DMIs focusing on the task of pitch modulation (vibrato)
The HTML version can be found above along with a link to download the PDF.
Tuesday, 8 June 2010
The McGill Digital Orchestra Project
The McGill Digital Orchestra Project
The McGill Digital Orchestra is a research/creation project supported by the Appui à la recherche-création program of the Fonds de recherche sur la société et la culture (FQRSC) of the Quebec government. Team members include Professors Denys Bouliane and Sean Ferguson of the Composition Area, Professors Marcelo Wanderley, Gary Scavone and Philippe Depalle of the Music Technology Area, and Professor André Roy of the Performance Department. All participants are members of the Centre for Interdisciplinary Research in Music, Media and Technology (CIRMMT). The grant has a duration of three years and will culminate with a performance of new works during the 2008 MusiMarch Festival.
Especially interesting is the projects page which lists the DMIs involved in the orchestra and provides links to more information.
Also see this paper for more detail about the orchestra and the pieces that have been written for it.
Mark T Marshall's Website
Mark T Marshall's website presenting lots of his projects, publications and providing links to other possibly useful sources. Some interesting projects (largely seen before in various papers):
Monday, 7 June 2010
Input Devices and Musical Interaction Lab
IDMIL - Input devices and Musical Interaction Lab directed by Prof. Marcelo M. Wanderley
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
