Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-06T02:27:17.319Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Advancements in Actuated Musical Instruments

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 June 2011

Dan Overholt ,
Edgar Berdahl  and
Robert Hamilton
Dan Overholt
Affiliation:
Aalborg University, Department of Architecture, Design and Media Technology, Niels Jernes Vej 14, DK-9220 Aalborg, Denmark E-mail: [email protected]
Edgar Berdahl*
Affiliation:
Stanford University, Department of Music, Center for Computer Research in Music and Acoustics, Stanford, California 94305, USA
Robert Hamilton*
Affiliation:
Stanford University, Department of Music, Center for Computer Research in Music and Acoustics, Stanford, California 94305, USA
*
E-mail: †[email protected]; ‡[email protected]
E-mail: †[email protected]; ‡[email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article presents recent developments in actuated musical instruments created by the authors, who also describe an ecosystemic model of actuated performance activities that blur traditional boundaries between the physical and virtual elements of musical interfaces. Actuated musical instruments are physical instruments that have been endowed with virtual qualities controlled by a computer in real-time but which are nevertheless tangible. These instruments provide intuitive and engaging new forms of interaction. They are different from traditional (acoustic) and fully automated (robotic) instruments in that they produce sound via vibrating element(s) that are co-manipulated by humans and electromechanical systems. We examine the possibilities that arise when such instruments are played in different performative environments and music-making scenarios, and we postulate that such designs may give rise to new methods of musical performance. The Haptic Drum, the Feedback Resonance Guitar, the Electromagnetically Prepared Piano, the Overtone Fiddle and Teleoperation with Robothands are described, along with musical examples and reflections on the emergent properties of the performance ecologies that these instruments enable. We look at some of the conceptual and perceptual issues introduced by actuated musical instruments, and finally we propose some directions in which such research may be headed in the future.

Type
Articles
Information
Organised Sound , Volume 16 , Issue 2: Performance Ecosystems , August 2011 , pp. 154 - 165
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Anderson, C. 2005. Dynamic Networks of Sonic Interactions: An Interview with Agostino Di Scipio. Computer Music Journal 29(3) (Fall): 11–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berdahl, E. 2009. Applications of Feedback Control to Musical Instrument Design, PhD thesis, Stanford University. Available online: http://ccrma.stanford.edu/~eberdahl/berdahl-thesis.pdf (accessed on 28 October 2010).Google Scholar
Berdahl, E., Smith, J., III. 2006. Some Physical Audio Effects. 9th International Conference on Digital Audio Effects (DAFx), Montreal, Canada, 16–20 September, pp. 165–8.Google Scholar
Berdahl, E., Backer, S., Smith, J., III. 2005. If I Had A Hammer: Design and Theory of an Electromagnetically Prepared Piano. Proceedings of the International Computer Music Conference, Barcelona, Spain, 5–9 September.Google Scholar
Berdahl, E., Kontogeorgakopoulos, A., Overholt, D. 2010. HSP v2: Haptic Signal Processing with Extensions for Physical Modeling. Proceedings of the Haptic Audio Interaction Design Conference, Copenhagen, Denmark, 16–17 September, pp. 61–2.Google Scholar
Berdahl, E., Smith, J. III, Niemeyer, G. 2010. Mechanical Sound Synthesis: And the New Application of Force-Feedback Teleoperation of Acoustic Musical Instruments. Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Digital Audio Effects (DAFx–10), Graz, Austria, 6–10 September.Google Scholar
Besnainou, C. 1999. Transforming the Voice of Musical Instruments by Active Control of the Sound Radiation. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Active Noise and Vibration Control, Fort Lauderdale, USA.Google Scholar
Bloland, P. 2007. The Electromagnetically Prepared Piano and its Compositional Implications. Proceedings of the International Computer Music Conference (ICMC), Copenhagen, Denmark, pp. 125–8.Google Scholar
Boutin, H., Besnainou, C. 2008. Physical Parameters of an Oscillator Changed by Active Control: Application to a Xylophone Bar. Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Digital Audio Effects, Espoo, Finland, 1–4 September.Google Scholar
Bryan, N.J., Herrera, J., Oh, J., Wang, G. 2010. MoMu: A Mobile Music Toolkit. Proceedings of the International Conference on New Interfaces for Musical Expression. Sydney, Australia.Google Scholar
Cáceres, J.-P., Chafe, C. 2009. JackTrip: Under the Hood of an Engine for Network Audio. Proceedings of International Computer Music Conference, Montreal, Canada.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cadoz, C., Luciani, A., Florens, J.-L. 1981. Synthèse musicale par simulation des mécanismes instrumentaux. Revue d'acoustique 59: 279–292.Google Scholar
Cadoz, C., Luciani, A., Florens, J.-L. 1993. CORDIS-ANIMA: A Modeling and Simulation System for Sound and Image Synthesis – The General Formalism. Computer Music Journal 17(1) (Spring): 19–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Celi, P., Doidic, M., Fruehling, D., Ryle, M. 2004. Stringed Instrument with Embedded DSP Modeling. US Patent No. 6,787,690.Google Scholar
Collins, N. 2004. Pea Soup. New York: Apestaartje, CD.Google Scholar
Di Scipio, A. 2003. ‘Sound is the Interface’: From Interactive to Ecosystemic Signal Processing. Organised Sound 8(3): 269–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Emerick, G., Massey, H. 2007. Here, There and Everywhere: My Life Recording the Music of the Beatles. New York: Gotham Books.Google Scholar
Gùerard, J., Boutillon, X. 1997. Real Time Acoustic Wave Separation in a Tube. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Musical Acoustics, Edinburgh, UK, 19–22 August, pp. 451–6.Google Scholar
Hajian, A., Sanchez, D., Howe, R. 1997. Drum Roll: Increasing Band-width through Passive Impedance Modulation. Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Albuquerque, USA, 20–25 April, pp. 2294–9.Google Scholar
Hamilton, R. 2008. q3osc: or How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Game. Proceedings of the International Computer Music Association Conference, Belfast, UK.Google Scholar
Hamilton, R. 2010. UDKOSC Development Wiki. http://ccrma.stanford.edu/wiki/UDKOSC (accessed in October 2010).Google Scholar
Heet, G. 1978. String Instrument Vibration Initiator and Sustainer. US Patent 4,075,921.Google Scholar
Hoover, A. 2000. Controls for Musical Instrument Sustainers. US Patent 6,034,316.Google Scholar
McCartney, J. 2002. Rethinking the Computer Music Language: SuperCollider. Computer Music Journal 26(4): 61–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McPherson, A., Kim, Y. 2010. Augmenting the Acoustic Piano with Electromagnetic String Actuation and Continuous Key Position Sensing. Proceedings of the 2010 International Conference on New Interfaces for Musical Expression (NIME 2010), Sydney, Australia.Google Scholar
Overholt, D. 2005. The Overtone Violin: A New Computer Music Instrument. Proceedings of the International Computer Music Conference (ICMC 2005), Barcelona, Spain, 5–9 September.Google Scholar
Reich, S. 1974. Writings About Music. Nova Scotia: Press of the Nova Scotia College of Art and Design.Google Scholar
Sayer, T. 2007. Using Technology to Ride the Reflex/Volitional Continuum in Improvised Musical Performance. Proceedings of the 2007 International Computer Music Conference. San Francisco: International Computer Music Association.Google Scholar
van Driem, G. 2004. Language as Organism: A Brief Introduction to the Leiden Theory of Language Evolution. In Ying-chin Lin, Fang-min Hsu, Chun-chih Lee, Jackson T.-S. Sun, Hsiu-fang Yang and Dah-ah Ho (eds.), Studies on Sino-Tibetan Languages: Papers in Honor of Professor Hwang-cherng Gong on his Seventieth Birthday (Language and Linguistics Monograph Series W–4). Taipei: Institute of Linguistics, Academia Sinica, pp. 1–9.Google Scholar
Verplank, B. 2003. Interaction Design Sketchbook. Class lecture for Music 250A, Stanford University, available online: http://ccrma.stanford.edu/courses/250a/lectures/IDSketchbook.pdf (accessed on 28 October 2010).Google Scholar
Waters, S. 2007. Performance Ecosystems: Ecological Approaches to Musical Interaction. Proceedings of the Electroacoustic Music Studies Network. Leicester: De Montfort, pp. 1–20.Google Scholar
Weinreich, G., Caussé, R. 1986. Digital and Analogue Bows: Hybrid Mechanical-Electrical Systems. Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing, vol. 11, pp. 1297–9.Google Scholar
Zoran, A., Maes, P. 2008. Considering Virtual and Physical Aspects in Acoustic Guitar Design. Proceedings of New Instruments for Musical Expression (NIME) Conference, Genova, Italy, 5–7 June.Google Scholar

Overholt supplementary material

Movie example.mp4

Download Overholt supplementary material(Video)
Video 116.1 MB

Overholt supplementary material

Sound example 1.aac

Download Overholt supplementary material(Audio)
Audio 12.5 MB

Overholt supplementary material

Sound example 2.aac

Download Overholt supplementary material(Audio)
Audio 10 MB

Overholt supplementary material

Sound example 3.aac

Download Overholt supplementary material(Audio)
Audio 7.2 MB