The Magaloff Project: An Interim Report

Flossmann, Sebastian; Goebl, Werner; Grachten, Maarten; Niedermayer, Bernhard; Widmer, Gerhard

doi:10.1080/09298215.2010.523469

Cited by 30 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Mean rates of pitch accuracy, deﬁned as the proportion of notes in the secondo score to which the matching system could pair a performed note, are shown in Figure 6 . Pitch error rates (i.e., 1—pitch accuracy) reﬂect a combination of omissions (score notes that were not performed) and substitutions (notes performed in place of score notes) ( Drake & Palmer, 2000 ; Flossmann et al, 2010 ; Palmer & Van de Sande, 1995 ; Repp, 1996 ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

When they listen and when they watch: Pianists’ use of nonverbal audio and visual cues during duet performance

Bishop

Goebl

2015

Musicae Scientiae

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nonverbal auditory and visual communication helps ensemble musicians predict each other’s intentions and coordinate their actions. When structural characteristics of the music make predicting co-performers’ intentions diﬃcult (e.g., following long pauses or during ritardandi), reliance on incoming auditory and visual signals may change. This study tested whether attention to visual cues during piano–piano and piano–violin duet performance increases in such situations. Pianists performed the secondo part to three duets, synchronizing with recordings of violinists or pianists playing the primo parts. Secondos’ access to incoming audio and visual signals and to their own auditory feedback was manipulated. Synchronization was most successful when primo audio was available, deteriorating when primo audio was removed and only cues from primo visual signals were available. Visual cues were used eﬀectively following long pauses in the music, however, even in the absence of primo audio. Synchronization was unaﬀected by the removal of secondos’ own auditory feedback. Diﬀerences were observed in how successfully piano–piano and piano–violin duos synchronized, but these eﬀects of instrument pairing were not consistent across pieces. Pianists’ success at synchronizing with violinists and other pianists is likely moderated by piece characteristics and individual diﬀerences in the clarity of cueing gestures used.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

When they listen and when they watch: Pianists’ use of nonverbal audio and visual cues during duet performance

Bishop

Goebl

2015

Musicae Scientiae

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…MIDI data from the Clavinovas were aligned with the corresponding notation using the performance-score matching system developed by Flossmann, Goebl, Grachten, Niedermayer and Widmer ( 2010 ), which pairs MIDI pitches with score notes according to pitch sequence information. Only pitch sequence is considered, so rhythm errors are not penalized.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Communication for coordination: gesture kinematics and conventionality affect synchronization success in piano duos

Bishop

Goebl

2017

Psychological Research

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ensemble musicians often exchange visual cues in the form of body gestures (e.g., rhythmic head nods) to help coordinate piece entrances. These cues must communicate beats clearly, especially if the piece requires interperformer synchronization of the first chord. This study aimed to (1) replicate prior findings suggesting that points of peak acceleration in head gestures communicate beat position and (2) identify the kinematic features of head gestures that encourage successful synchronization. It was expected that increased precision of the alignment between leaders’ head gestures and first note onsets, increased gesture smoothness, magnitude, and prototypicality, and increased leader ensemble/conducting experience would improve gesture synchronizability. Audio/MIDI and motion capture recordings were made of piano duos performing short musical passages under assigned leader/follower conditions. The leader of each trial listened to a particular tempo over headphones, then cued their partner in at the given tempo, without speaking. A subset of motion capture recordings were then presented as point-light videos with corresponding audio to a sample of musicians who tapped in synchrony with the beat. Musicians were found to align their first taps with the period of deceleration following acceleration peaks in leaders’ head gestures, suggesting that acceleration patterns communicate beat position. Musicians’ synchronization with leaders’ first onsets improved as cueing gesture smoothness and magnitude increased and prototypicality decreased. Synchronization was also more successful with more experienced leaders’ gestures. These results might be applied to interactive systems using gesture recognition or reproduction for music-making tasks (e.g., intelligent accompaniment systems).

show abstract

“…To test the LBM approach, two experiments were performed; the first examined how accurately expressive dynamics can be represented and predicted using as dataset the Magaloff corpus [13], recordings of Chopin's pieces performed on a Bösendorfer recording piano. The results showed that, for both representation and prediction, the correlation ranges from weak to medium for various combinations of basis functions, as well as for weights computed globally (same in all pieces) or locally (different for each piece).…”

Section: Related Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dynamics and relativity: Practical implications of dynamic markings in the score

Kosta

Bandtlow

Chew

2018

Journal of New Music Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article focuses on the meaning and practical manifestations of expressive markings in the music score, specifically those markings that correspond to loudness levels-such as p (piano), mf (mezzo forte), and ff (fortissimo). We present results showing how the absolute meanings of dynamic markings change, depending on the intended (score defined) and projected (actually performed) dynamic levels of the surrounding musical context. The analysis of recorded performances shows different realisations of the same dynamic markings throughout a recording of a piece of music. Reasons for this phenomenon include the score location of the markings, such as the beginning of a piece, and the marking's location in relation to that of previous ones. Observations show that more often than not, the transition between the two markings is more consistent when pianists move from a louder to a softer marking, or move between markings that both represent a high intensity, or when the markings show high levels of contrast. For markings that appear in the score more than twice, there tends to be significant difference in the ways they are interpreted in a recording. Finally we present evidence that pianists with high numbers of outlier recordings, i.e. showing uniqueness in the ways they transition between dynamic markings, tend to co-occur in outlier clusters for a significant number of Mazurkas, meaning they diverge from common practice in similar ways. Applications of these results include expression synthesis and music transcription.

show abstract

The Magaloff Project: An Interim Report

Cited by 30 publications

References 32 publications

When they listen and when they watch: Pianists’ use of nonverbal audio and visual cues during duet performance

When they listen and when they watch: Pianists’ use of nonverbal audio and visual cues during duet performance

Communication for coordination: gesture kinematics and conventionality affect synchronization success in piano duos

Dynamics and relativity: Practical implications of dynamic markings in the score

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About