Live Music-Making: A Rich Open Task Requires a Rich Open Interface

Abstract

In live human-computer music-making, how can interfaces successfully support the openness, reinterpretation and rich signification often important in live (especially improvised) musical performance? We argue that the use of design metaphors can lead to interfaces which constrain interactions and militate against reinterpretation, while consistent, grammatical interfaces empower the user to create and apply their own metaphors in developing their performance. These metaphors can be transitory and disposable, yet do not represent wasted learning since the underlying grammar is retained. We illustrate this move with reflections from live coding practice, from recent visual and two-dimensional programming language interfaces, and from musical voice mapping research. We consider the integration of the symbolic and the continuous in the human-computer interaction. We also describe how our perspective is reflected in approaches to system evaluation.

Making space for material entanglements: A diffractive analysis of woodwork and the practice of making an interactive system

“…Similarly, Nordmoen et al [35] introduced an unfamiliar sensor material that encouraged their participants to explore hands-on experience of making new sensors rather than relying on existing conceptual knowledge. In music, live coding practice treats a symbolic programming language as a rich medium for in-situ exploration [41].…”

Nonlinear dynamical processes in musical interactions: Investigating the role of nonlinear dynamics in supporting surprise and exploration in interactions with digital musical instruments

“…While the ethnographically-informed study provides wider context on engagements with nonlinear dynamics more generally, such processes may be implemented in a limitless number of ways, not all of which may facilitate the kinds of explorative interactions that are investigated here. Further, the design of a musical interface requires many other design decisions, and the design elements under consideration cannot easily be isolated and tested independently of the other elements; oversimplifying a musical device risks rendering it "unmusical" (Stowell and McLean, 2013). The interfaces used in this study therefore represent only one possible implementation of the nonlinear dynamical components, and they are a single factor amongst many in influencing the nature of the interaction.…”

Performing with Patterns of Time

“…In the light of the constraints imposed by hardware, and the software simulating it, there is no wonder that musical and audio programming languages have opened up multiple doors for creative musical exploration and expression (Stowell and McLean 2012). What attracts composers and performers here are the open possibilities of defining their own patterns, synths, and hardware instruments; users can write any pattern generating or manipulating algorithm conceivable without being bound to the musical constraints of software or physical hardware.…”