Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T21:23:43.506Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Visual Design of Real-Time Screen Scores

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 November 2014

David Kim-Boyle
David Kim-Boyle*
Affiliation:
Sydney Conservatorium of Music. University of Sydney, Macquarie St, Sydney, NSW 2000, Australia
*
Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The author examines visual design considerations in the development of real-time screen scores. Such scores are shown to lend themselves particularly well to the representation of non-linear musical processes and the articulation of non-linear musical forms. The author argues that the foregrounding of such scores, through their projection for an audience and meticulous design, draws especial attention to the manner in which such non-linear processes are represented and in turn decoded by performers. While the transparency of the decoding process is shown to vary across a wide spectrum, the central role of the notational schema in works such as these is shown to align them in many ways with a broader interface aesthetics, promoting rich fields of creative and artistic enquiry.

Type
Articles
Information
Organised Sound , Volume 19 , Special Issue 3: Mediation: Notation and Communication in Electroacoustic Music Performance , December 2014 , pp. 286 - 294
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press 2014 

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

REFERENCES

Cage, J. and Knowles, A. 1969. Notations. New York: Something Else Press.Google Scholar
Eco, U. 1989. The Open Work. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Freeman, J. 2008. Extreme Sight-Reading, Mediated Expression, and Audience Participation: Real-Time Music Notation in Live Performance. Computer Music Journal 32(3): 25–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Galloway, A. R. 2012. The Interface Effect. New York: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Haubenstock-Ramati, R. 1965. Notation: Material and Form. Perspectives of New Music 4: 39–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hope, C. and Vickery, L. 2011. Visualising the Score: Screening Scores in Real-Time Performance. Diegetic Life Forms II Conference Proceedings. Melbourne. Accessed July 2012, http://wwwmcc.murdoch.edu.au/nass/issue7/pdf/im7-proceedings-article-05-hope-vickery.pdf Google Scholar
Kim-Boyle, D. 2010. Real-Time Score Generation for Extensible Open Forms. Contemporary Music Review 29(1): 3–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McClelland, C. and Alcorn, M. 2008. Exploring New Composer/Performer Interactions Using Real-Time Notation. Proceedings of the International Computer Music Conference. Belfast: ICMA.Google Scholar
Pold, S. 2005. Interface Realisms: The Interface as Aesthetic Form. Postmodern Culture 15(2). Accessed December 2012, http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/postmodern_culture/v015/15.2pold.html Google Scholar
Rebelo, P. 2010. Notating the Unpredictable. Contemporary Music Review 29(1): 17–28.Google Scholar
Rebelo, P. 2013. Personal Communication.Google Scholar
Rees, A. L. 2011. A History of Experimental Film and Video. 2nd edition. London: British Film Institute.Google Scholar
Reyes-García, E. 2013. Motion Structures: Aesthetics of Spatial and Temporal Transformations. Conference Proceedings of Re-new 2013 Digital Arts Forum. Copenhagen.Google Scholar
Salen, K. and Zimmerman, E. 2003. Rules of Play: Game Design Fundamentals. Boston, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Sauer, T. 2009. Notations 21. New York: Mark Batty Publisher.Google Scholar
Smith, R. R. 2013a. Animated Notation website. Accessed December 2013, www.animatednotation.com.Google Scholar
Smith, R. R. 2013b. Personal communication.Google Scholar
Smith, R. R. 2014. Personal communication.Google Scholar
Vickery, L. 2014. The Limitations of Presenting Mobile Notation on Screen. Organised Sound 19: 3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vickery, L., Hope, C. and James, S. 2012. Digital Adaptions of the Score for Cage Variations I, II and III. Proceedings of the International Computer Music Conference. Ljubljana: ICMA.Google Scholar
Wolff, C. 1987. Open to Whom and to What. Interface 16(3): 133–141.Google Scholar