One of the most vital feedback systems that has been embedded in musicians for centuries is that of physical response. In the same way that auditory information is available and used throughout a performance, a musician will continuously reassess their playing by making use of not only their specialised sensorimotor skills, but also the tangible feedback that is relayed to them through the body of the instrument. This paper discusses approaches to the development of an augmented instrument, namely the hybrid piano, which focuses on the notion of performance as perceptually guided action. While the acoustic component of the sound energy of the augmented instrument is created within the real-world interactions between hammers, resonating strings, and the soundboard, the digital sonic events cannot be located in a similar palpable source. By exploring notions of multimodality and haptic feedback, the ongoing processes of human action and perception within instrumental performance can be maintained for the player, whilst arguably, also enhancing the experience for the listener.
Sean Williams has been awarded funding by the DAAD for three months research in Germany in 2012 on the electronic instruments and sound projection equipment used by the Stockhausen Ensemble from 1964 to 1975.
It was fantastic to spend a full week at the Elektron Music Studion in Södermalm, Stockholm. Mats Lindström is the director. I worked in Studio 4 with the Buchla 200 system. A few more pictures here. This was followed by a live radio broadcast of kontroll on Swedish radio station P2 available here. The show is called Monitor, produced by Erik Mikael Karlsson and Lisa Wall, and plays a great range of new music and sound art. Erik and Mats have both performed at Soundings in Edinburgh years ago. It would be great to see them back in Edinburgh again!
It’s with great pleasure that I share with you this piece.
Over the last month I had an inspiring, in-depth conversation with artist and fellow Pd developer Ben Bogart, and this is the result.
Tags: MAM, creativity, machine imagination, innovation+open source, techno-cultural methodology, awareness+ubiquitous computing, tech distribution,
Thanks Ben, Greg @VT.
[image: Output from Dreaming Machine #1 | Ben Bogart]
I played a similar set-up to the previous session, where I had the laptop mic going through an assemblage of gates, granulators and distortion to give me a (theoretically) responsive percussive interface, and a vanilla synth patch (from Live) with some heavy filtering. No samples at all.
Dave, does something similar, although he has a greater arsenal of effects-racks that he’s put together, and has slimmed his set up from normal so that the trigger-finger is now his main interface (normally he has a knob-box as well).
Sean was doing mysterious things with the modular synths, and getting grief from them.
Lauren had meant to join us, but was under the cosh with a deadline.
We tackled page 3 this time round, and felt pretty please with ourselves that reading the notation was becoming easy. Due to the small room, and weird spatial mechanics, we all found it hard to sit so we could see each other adequately, which served to emphasise the extent to which we rely on visual cues to make this work.
For some reason, a lot of the bits of that page I ended up allotted with involve fairly minimal coordination, that is, a lot of bits where I can start and stop as I please. I found it much more difficult with those bits to stay involved; although it might seem like these bits would provide some relief, its harder not to just end up splurting out without adequete sympathy for the other players (although this was exacerbated by the stupid place I’d sat myself).
(Originally posted by Owen Green)