Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T02:39:35.688Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

GNMISS: A scoring system for Internet2 electroacoustic music

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 November 2014

Ian Whalley
Ian Whalley*
Affiliation:
The University of Waikato, Private Bag 3105, Hamilton, New Zealand
*
Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The ‘comprovisation’ (Dudas 2010) of electroacoustic music in an affective manner through Internet2, using a directed dramaturgy approach, poses unique scoring problems. Building on prior work (Whalley 2009, 2012c), GNMISS (Graphic Networked Music Interactive Scoring System) was developed to address this. The system has four visual layers that illustrate the structure of works, represented on a circle with parts for each player. One layer maps emotions to colours based on associated words as a primary basis for gesture and timbre representation. A second layer gives musical motives and frequency information for participants to follow. A third allows for more detailed indications of gesture and sound archetypes through representative symbols. Finally, an inside layer represents macro key centres. For timing, the circle score turns in clock time with the current playing position always at noon, and a central metronome shows speed independent of clock time. Technically, client programs sit on distributed machines across the Internet, with data being coordinated by an OSC Server. Distributed scores can be built by a composer or by a team, and all content can be altered simultaneously across client machines. Two works are discussed as initial examples of its implementation: Sensai na Chikai and SymbolAct.

Type
Articles
Information
Organised Sound , Volume 19 , Special Issue 3: Mediation: Notation and Communication in Electroacoustic Music Performance , December 2014 , pp. 244 - 259
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

Alves, B. 2012. Consonance and Dissonance in Visual Music. Organised Sound 17(2): 114–119.Google Scholar
Blackburn, M. 2011. The Visual Sound-Shapes of Spectromorphology: An Illustrative Guide to Composition. Organised Sound 16(1): 5–13.Google Scholar
Bown, O., Eldridge, A. and McCormack, J. 2009. Understanding Interaction in Contemporary Digital Music: From Instruments to Behaviour Objects. Organised Sound 14(2): 188–196.Google Scholar
Braasch, J. 2009. The Telematic Music System: Affordances for a New Instrument to Shape the Music of Tomorrow. Contemporary Music Review 28: 421–432.Google Scholar
Bryan-Kinns, N. and Fencott, R. 2010. Hey Man, You’re Invading my Personal Space! Privacy and Awareness in Collaborative Music. Proceedings of New Interfaces for Musical Expression (NIME 2010), Sydney, Australia: 198–204.Google Scholar
Cambria, E., Hussain, A. and Livingstone, A. 2012. The Hourglass of Emotions. In A. Esposito et al. (eds), Cognitive Behavioural. Systems 2011, LNCS 7403. Berlin and Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
Carôt, A., Rebelo, P. and Renaud, A.. 2007. Networked Music Performance: State of the Art. Proceedings of the AES 30th International Conference, Saariselkä, Finland, 13–15 March.Google Scholar
Couprie, P. 2004. Graphical Representation: An Analytical and Publication Tool for Electroacoustic Music. Organised Sound 9(1): 109–113.Google Scholar
Dudas, R. 2010. ‘Comprovisation’: The Various Facets of Composed Improvisation within Interactive Performance Systems. Leonardo Music Journal 20: 29–31.Google Scholar
Fields, K. and Whalley, I. 2012. Editorial. Organised Sound 17(1): 1–3.Google Scholar
Follmer, G. 2005. Electronic, Aesthetic and Social Factors in Net Music. Organised Sound 10(3): 185–192.Google Scholar
Joosten, E., van Lankveld, G. and Spronck, P. 2010. Colors and Emotions in Video Games. Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Intelligent Games and Simulation GAME-ON, Leicester.Google Scholar
Juslin, P. and Sloboda, J. (eds) 2001. Music and Emotion: Theory and Research. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Landy, L. 2009. Sound-Based Music 4 All. In Roger T. Dean (ed.) The Oxford Handbook of Computer Music. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 518–535.Google Scholar
Mehrabian, A. 1995. Framework for a Comprehensive Description and Measurement of Emotional States. Genetic, Social, and General Psychology Monographs 121(3): 339–361.Google Scholar
Paine, G. 2002. Interactivity: Where to From Here? Organised Sound 7(3): 295–304.Google Scholar
Patton, K. 2007. Morphological Notation for Interactive Electroacoustic Music. Organised Sound 12(2): 123–128.Google Scholar
Plutchik, R. 2001. The Nature of Emotions. American Scientist 89(4): 344–350.Google Scholar
Poast, M. 2000. Color Music: Visual Color Notation for Musical Expression. Leonardo Music Journal 53(5): 215–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rebelo, P. 2009. Dramaturgy in the Network. Contemporary Music Review 28: 387–393.Google Scholar
Russell, J. 1980. A Circumplex Model of Affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 39: 1161–1178.Google Scholar
Smalley, D. 1997. Spectromorphology: Explaining Sound-Shapes. Organised Sound 2(2): 107–126.Google Scholar
Sudarshun, B. and Wyse, L. 2011. Computer Mediated Visual Communication in Live Musical Performance: What’s the Score? Proceedings of the Second International ICST Conference on Arts and Technology. Esbjerg, Denmark.Google Scholar
Thoresen, L. and Hedman, A. 2007. Spectromorphological Analysis of Sound Objects: An Adaption of Pierre Schaeffer’s Typomorphology. Organised Sound 12(2): 129–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thoresen, L. 2010. Form-Building Patterns and Metaphorical Meaning. Organised Sound 15(2): 82–95.Google Scholar
Vickery, L. 2012. The Evolution Of Notational Innovations from the Mobile Score to the Screen Score. Organised Sound 17(2): 128–136.Google Scholar
Walker, S. and Whalley, I. 2012. Sensai na Chikai (Fragile Vows). Performance. The International Space Time Concerto Competition: Around the World in 80 Milliseconds. 30 November, Newcastle University, Australia.Google Scholar
Weinberg, G. 2005. Interconnected Musical Networks: Toward a Theoretical Framework. Computer Music Journal 29(2): 23–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whalley, I. 2009. Software Agents in Music and Sound Art Research/Creative Work: Current State and a Possible Direction. Organised Sound 14(2): 156–167.Google Scholar
Whalley, I. 2010. Mittsu no Yugo MUSICACOUSTICA 2010, Central Conservatory of Music, Beijing, 22–28 October.Google Scholar
Whalley, I. 2011. KishiKaisei. MUSICACOUSTIC 2011, Central Conservatory of Music, Beijing, China, 24–30 October.Google Scholar
Whalley, I. 2012a. Sensai na Chikai (Fragile Vows) (12′00″). MUSICACOUSTICA 2012, 22–28 October, Central Conservatorium of Music, Beijing, China.Google Scholar
Whalley, I. 2012b. SymbolAct (10′08″). 121212 6th Annual UpStage Festival of Cyberformance. Christchurch, New Zealand; Wellington, New Zealand; Buenos Aires, Argentina; Oslo, Norway; Munich, Germany; Pancevo, Serbia; Montpellier, France; Eindhoven, Netherlands; Nantes, France; Holstebro, Denmark; Linz, Austria; Exeter, UK. 5 –12 December.Google Scholar
Whalley, 1. 2012c. Internet2 and Global Electroacoustic Music: Navigating a Decision Space of Production, Relationships and Languages. Organised Sound 17(1): 4–15.Google Scholar
Yang, J. 2010. Webworks 1, www.youtube.com/watch?v=O2F7M1Wh8n4 accessed 18 December 2012.Google Scholar

Whalley sound file

Sound file

Download Whalley sound file(Audio)
Audio 20.6 MB