New Musical Instruments and Instrument interface design.

The constitution of and problems associated with DMIs.

Name:S.Scutt.
ID:10011159.
Module:MU2040C.
Tutor: Dr.A.Seago.
Date: 04/2012.

Introduction.
Acoustic and digital methods.
The use of electronics and computers in the creation of sound and music although having been around since
the turn of the 20th century is still in a relatively infant state when compared with the centuries old acoustic
methods and traditions. Acoustic instruments generally consist of two main elements these being:
A) An excitation source i.e. a string, reed, membrane or column of air set to oscillate in different ways under the control
of a performer.
B) A resonating system i.e. the body of the instrument and/or the body of the performer transmitting the excitation
source to the air.
These two elements, in almost all acoustic instruments are inseparable. The concept of the DMI differs greatly
in that the sound source and interface have become two or three separate components:
A)
The sound generator (Sound generated by a computer synthesis algorithm or by other electronic means and
controlled by...)
B)
The interface (Using sensor technologies to convert movements and/or gestures into data to control A.)
C)
A mapping system. This is responsible for connecting the sensory data collected by the interface to the sound
generating system.

A simple block diagram of DMI processes is shown in figure 1.

D Sensory

Ff Mapping

Computer

N Controller

of sense

Synthesis

F Interface.

data.

Algorithm.

Audio
Output.

Figure 1. Block diagram of DMI components.

This contained system of acoustic sound production and control can be said to virtually non-existant in the
electronic/digital realm with the relationship between sound generator, instrument interface and performer being
completely free and open to experimentation and constant modification. Something demonstrated quite early in the
dawning of the electronic music era with Leon Termins Theremin which, although the original design uses the principal
of capacitive sensing of human proximity, has since been redesigned using different types of sensors such as Light
dependant resistors and ultrasonic distance sensors (Collins, 2009.) Indeed, computers and the current expansion of
microcontroller programming puts the possibilities of designing and building new or custom musical instrument
interfaces within easy reach of anyone who wants to learn. The Arduino microcontroller platform is a good example,

New Musical Instruments and Instrument interface design.

The constitution of and problems associated with DMIs.
having its own free and open source programming environment with its own application specific programming language
being a subset of C (Igoe, 2007.) It has MIDI and Open Sound Control communicability and plenty of information on the
web from a worldwide group of supporters. Design of alternative musical controllers is something that for a long time
was only within reach of people with either lots of money or in academia or both. However, building an instrument
capable of playing music is harder than simply creating something that can produce a noise. In an interview with one of
the pioneers of computer music, Max Matthews, he states that interesting sounds may be produced but designing DMIs
to be used as expressive musical instruments is difficult simply because it takes so long to learn to play a musical
instrument, and that new controllers unpredictability is a quality that is hard to overcome (Matthews, 2011.CMJ 33 pt V,
Alternative controllers.)
Classical acoustic musical instruments may also contain intricacies in their shape and structure. Looking
carefully at a violin one sees that in the shape of the body, namely on both sides, space is given for the accessibility of
the bow to create long bowing strokes and that the bridge isnt straight like that of a guitar but curved to allow for bowing
of singular strings therefore giving more degrees of freedom to the performers gestural repertoire in relation to the
instrument. These and other aspects of its design give allowances and range to the instrument and are important
aspects of acoustic instrument design. For a DMI to be considered for serious musical use, the designer must address
issues of the instruments playability, range, scope and potential for technical advancement and mastery on behalf of the
learner/player. .

Musical Instruments and playability.

What constitutes a good musical instrument and what makes it playable? Many aspects are involved, obvious
ones being:
Its aesthetic qualities. (How it looks and feels.)
Its musicality. (The type of sound it makes )
Its playability/functionality. (Its accessibility and communicability as a musical instrument.)
Its developmental possibilities (The instruments capacity for advancement of learning and mastering as in
virtuosity.)
Response (Its reaction to manipulation and the feedback response between player and instrument.)
Musicians and, in fact, all people that can play or are learning to play one of the many acoustic types of
instruments go through a rigorous learning experience to become proficient in their playing. The learning
process itself can be a very personal and complex experience of interaction and feedback between persons and
objects involved which can sometimes be missed within the context of DMIs( Marshall, 2008.) Marcelo
Wanderley identifies two types of feedback associated with DMI design: (Wanderley, 2006.)

Primary Feedback: Being the feedback created by the sensor itself i.e. Haptic, Visual, Tactical or auditory.
Secondary Feedback: Feedback from the sound source itself.
A person playing the violin, for instance, knows the exact pressure to put on the bow, or where exactly along the
string relative to the bridge they can play to affect the desired tonal response. It can take a lifetime to attain
a degree of mastery on an acoustic instrument. A common example of the re-unification of haptic feedback
in an electronic instrument is the electronic keyboard where the keys have been weighted to passively copy
piano keys. A more exotic example of a DMI containing the unification of haptic feedback and sound
generator/ controller as a whole unit can be found in the Bossa, or Bowed Sensor Speaker Array
(Trueman & Cook, 1998). Consisting of bowed sponges to emulate the strings, a bow with force and
acceleration sensors and a violin fingerboard mounted with force and tilt sensors. All being mounted on a
body containing loudspeakers arranged spherically (see figure 2.)

New Musical Instruments and Instrument interface design.

The constitution of and problems associated with DMIs.

Figure 2. The BOSSA An Example of a DMI as an inseperable whole.

The Bossa is an interesting example of a DMI constructed in such a way that the sound emanates from the
instrument itself. Research went into the tonal radiation of the violin and using spherical speaker arrays ( Trueman &
Cook, 1999.)
Although the interface and the sound generation are contained, the mapping and synthesis algorithms take place in a
computer using MAX/MSP. Although with todays technology being at a more advanced stage than when the Bossa was
designed and built, the performer sensing and sound generation algorithm elements will always be two linked but
separate processes in DMI design.

The very fact that the DMI may have a disconnection between sound generator and interface gives it the
advantage of being able to produce any sound as directed by the designer/performer. This is especially true of computer
music. When Max Matthews wrote the MUSIC I language, he had in mind the idea that, by being able to program a
computer to play music, one didnt have to spend years learning the instrument to play it and, that also at the end of
composing a piece, it didnt necessarily have to sound like a violin but could be any instrument or sound one so desired.
(.....)
In designing musical instruments, one doesnt necessarily have to have spent a lifetime mastering an instrument of their
choice and can develop their design according to their needs & abilities. The current trend in computer related
performance however, has for a number of years now, taken the computer and its mouse and keyboard at face value
with the performance element consisting sparsely of the performer sat behind a screen which, for some ( and especially
in the context of a mainstream audience, there may not be enough of a context and visual feedback element for it to be
deemed a successful musical performance. The concept of a visual element with the uses
Digital Musical Instrument types.
The types of digital musical instruments have been classified according to M.Wanderley and B.Bongers and
range from the instrument like (based on existing acoustic designs.) Instrument inspired, augmented instruments
(acoustic but with sensors added to them) to alternative controller types having no relationship to known instrument
designs but may be modelled on already existing objects ranging from the mundane to the fantastical.
Again even these classifications can be broken down into further sub classifications of types of controller whether reliant
on touch, near field interaction or immersion into a sensor field which can also involve the performer wearing the
controller on his/her body.

Controller Types:

Touch (interface requires touch)

Expanded range (interface requires limited contact)
Immersive. (Performer is always in the sensor field; may require wearing of controller or symbolic gestures to
activate.)

New Musical Instruments and Instrument interface design.

The constitution of and problems associated with DMIs.
Figure 2. http://silvertone.princeton.edu/~dan/BoSSA/critterTall.gif