Advertisement

Experimental Investigations and Future Possibilities in Network-Mediated Folk Music Performance

  • Chrisoula AlexandrakiEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Current Research in Systematic Musicology book series (CRSM, volume 5)

Abstract

This chapter is intended to acquaint music ethnologists with the paradigm of Networked Music Performance (NMP). NMP facilitates computer networks to allow musicians from distant geographic locations to synchronously collaborate during performance, improvisation or more generally music-making. The chapter comprises two parts. The first part is devoted to providing an overview of research approaches in NMP and elaborates on the technical and perceptual impediments restricting the wide availability of this type of technology. The second part presents an experiment involving three musicians performing folk music over the network. The experiment serves to reveal not only technical and perceptual difficulties in the communication of performers, but more importantly their attitude towards engaging in this novel practice. The chapter concludes by discussing future perspectives on the use of NMP technology in the context of ethnic and folk music.

Notes

Acknowledgements

I would like to especially thank Alexandros Aggelakis, Eustratios Gounakis and Minas Sfakianakis for volunteering to participate in the folk music experiment. Part of this research has been co-financed by the European Union (European Social Fund—ESF) and Greek national funds through the Operational Program “Education and Lifelong Learning” of the National Strategic Reference Framework (NSRF)—Research Funding Program: THALIS–MusiNet.

References

  1. 1.
    Barbosa Á (2003) Displaced soundscapes: a survey of network systems for music and sonic art creation. Leonardo Music J 13:53–59.  https://doi.org/10.1162/096112104322750791CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Follmer G (2005) Electronic, aesthetic and social factors in Net music. Organis Sound 10:185–192.  https://doi.org/10.1017/S1355771805000920CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kapur A, Wang G, Cook PR, Davidson P (2005) Interactive network performance: a dream worth dreaming? Organis Sound 10:209–219.  https://doi.org/10.1017/S1355771805000956CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Goto M, Neyama R, Muraoka Y (1997) RMCP: remote music control protocol—design and interactive network performance applications. In: Proceedings of the 1997 international computer music conference, Thessaloniki, Hellas, ICMA, pp 446–449Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Wright M, Freed A (1997) Open sound control: a new protocol for communicating with sound synthesizers. Proc ICMC 1997:101–104Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Xu A, Woszczyk W, Settel Z, Pennycook B, Rowe R, Galanter P, Bary J, Martin G, Corey J, Cooperstock J (2000) Real time streaming of multi-channel audio data through the internet. J Audio Eng Soc 48(7/8):627–641Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cooperstock JR, Spackman SP (2001) The recording studio that spanned a continent. In: Proceedings of 1st international conference on WEB delivering of music, WEDELMUSIC 2001. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc., pp 161–167.  https://doi.org/10.1109/wdm.2001.990172
  8. 8.
    Gabrielli L, Squartini S (2015) Wireless networked music performance, wireless networked music performance.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-0335-6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Rottondi C, Chafe C, Allocchio C, Sarti A (2016) An overview on networked music performance technologies. IEEE Access 4:8823–8843.  https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2016.2628440CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Goebl W, Palmer C (2009) Synchronization of timing and motion among performing musicians. Music Percept 26(5):427–438CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Keller P (2007) Musical ensemble synchronisation. In: Proceedings of the international conference on music communication science, pp 80–83Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rasch RA (1988) Timing and synchronization in ensemble performance. In: Sloboda JA (ed) Generative processes in music: the psychology of performance, improvisation and composition. Clarendon Press, Oxford, pp 70–90Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Wu X, Dhara KK, Krishnaswamy V (2007) Enhancing application-layer multicast for P2P conferencing. In: Proceedings of the 4th IEEE consumer communications and networking conference, pp 986–990Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Schuett N (2002) The effects of latency on ensemble performance. Honors ThesisGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Chafe C, Gurevich M, Leslie G, Tyan S (2004) Effect of time delay on ensemble accuracy. In: Proceedings of the international symposium on musical acoustics, pp 3–6Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Driessen PF, Darcie TE, Pillay B (2011) The effects of network delay on tempo in musical performance. Comput Music J 35:76–89.  https://doi.org/10.1162/COMJ_a_00041CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Farner S, Solvang A, Asbjørn S, Svensson UP (2009) Ensemble hand-clapping experiments under the influence of delay and various acoustic environments. AES J Audio Eng Soc 57:1028–1041Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Bartlette C, Bocko M (2006) Effect of network latency on interactive musical performance. Music Percep 24:49–62.  https://doi.org/10.1525/mp.2006.24.1.49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Chew E, Sawchuk A, Tanoue C, Zimmermann R (2005) Segmental tempo analysis of performances in user-centered experiments in the distributed immersive performance project. In: SMC conference, p 28Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Rottondi C, Buccoli M, Zanoni M, Garao D, Verticale G, Sarti A (2015) Feature-based analysis of the effects of packet delay on networked musical interactions. AES J Audio Eng Soc 63:864–875.  https://doi.org/10.17743/jaes.2015.0074CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Carôt A, Werner C, Fischinger T (2009) Towards a comprehensive cognitive analysis of delay-influenced rhythmical interaction. In: Proceedings of international computer music conference. http://hdl.handle.net/2027/spo.bbp2372.2009.107
  22. 22.
    Barbosa Á, Cordeiro J (2011) The influence of perceptual attack times in networked music performance. In: Proceedings of 44th international conference: audio networking, 2011, p 10. http://www.aes.org/e-lib/browse.cfm?elib = 16133
  23. 23.
    Mäki-Patola T (2005) Musical effects of latency. Swomen Musiikintutkijoiden 9:82–85Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Valin, J.-M., Maxwell, G., Terriberry, T.B., Vos, K., 2013. High-Quality, Low-Delay Music Coding in the Opus Codec. 135th AES Convention 73–82Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kraemer U, Hirschfeld J, Schuller G, Wabnik S, Carôt A, Werner C (2007) Network music performance with ultra-low-delay audio coding under unreliable network conditions. In: Proceedings of the 123rd audio engineering society convention. New York, Curran Associates, pp 338–348Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Kurtisi Z, Wolf L (2008) Using WavPack for real-time audio coding in interactive applications, in: 2008 IEEE International Conference on Multimedia and Expo, ICME 2008 - Proceedings. pp. 1381–1384.  https://doi.org/10.1109/icme.2008.4607701
  27. 27.
    Tatlas N-A, Floros A, Zarouchas T, Mourjopoulos J (2007) Perceptually-optimized error concealment for audio over WLANs. Mediterranean J Electron Commun 3:77–86Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Xiao J, Tammam T, Chunyu L, Zhao Y (2011) Real-time forward error correction for video transmission. In: 2011 visual communications and image processing (VCIP). IEEEGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Alexandraki C, Kalantzis I (2007) Requirements and application scenarios in the context of network based music collaboration. In: Proceedings of the AXMEDIS 2007 conference. Florence: Firenze University Press, pp 39–46Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Alexandraki C, Akoumianakis D (2010) Exploring new perspectives in network music performance: the DIAMOUSES framework. Comput Music J 34:66–83.  https://doi.org/10.1162/comj.2010.34.2.66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Sawchuk AA, Chew E, Zimmermann R, Papadopoulos C, Kyriakakis C (2003) From remote media immersion to distributed immersive performance. In: Proceedings of the ACM SIGMM 2003 on workshop on experiential telepresence. New York, ACM Press, pp 110–120Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Akoumianakis D, Alexandraki C, Alexiou V, Anagnostopoulou C, Eleftheriadis A, Lalioti V, Mastorakis Y, Modas A, Mouchtaris A, Pavlidi D, Polyzos GC, Tsakalides P, Xylomenos G, Zervas P (2016) The MusiNet project: addressing the challenges in networked music performance systems, In: IISA 2015—6th international conference on information, intelligence, systems and applications. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc.  https://doi.org/10.1109/iisa.2015.7388002
  33. 33.
    Chafe C (2003) Distributed internet reverberation for audio collaboration. In: Proceedings of the 24th AES international conference, pp 13–19Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Akoumianakis D, Alexandraki C, Alexiou V, Anagnostopoulou C, Eleftheriadis A, Lalioti V, Mouchtaris A, Pavlidi D, Polyzos GC, Tsakalides P, Xylomenos G, Zervas P (2014) The MusiNet project: towards unraveling the full potential of networked music performance systems. In: IISA 2014—5th international conference on information, intelligence, systems and applications. IEEE Computer Society.  https://doi.org/10.1109/iisa.2014.6878779
  35. 35.
    Ng K, Nesi P (2008) I-Maestro framework and interactive multimedia tools for technology-enhanced learning and teaching for music. In: Proceeding—fourth international conference on automated solutions for cross media content and multi-channel distribution, Axmedis 2008. Florence: Firenze University Press, pp 266–269Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Hajdu G (2005) Quintet.net: an environment for composing and performing music on the internet. Leonardo Music J 38(1):23–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Hajdu G (2006) Automatic composition and notation in network music environments. In: Proceedings of the 2006 sound and music computing conference. Marseille: Centre National de Creation Musicale, pp 109–114Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Greenberg DM (2016) Musical genres are out of date—but this new system explains why you might like both jazz and hip hop. Economies. http://www.econotimes.com/Musical-genres-are-out-of-date-%E2%80%93-but-this-new-system-explains-why-you-might-like-both-jazz-and-hip-hop-244941
  39. 39.
    Wong J (2011) Visualising music: the problems with genre classification. Masters of MediaGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Ezzaidi H, Bahoura M, Rouat J (2010) Taxonomy of musical genres. In: Proceedings of 5th international conference on signal image technology and internet based systems, SITIS 2009, pp. 228–231.  https://doi.org/10.1109/sitis.2009.45
  41. 41.
    Cáceres JP, Renaud A (2008) Playing the network: the use of time delays as musical devices. Proceedings of International Computer Music Conference 244–250Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Byrne D (1999) Crossing music’s borders: ‘I hate world music’. The New York Times. https://archive.nytimes.com/query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage-9901EED8163EF930A35753C1A96F958260.html
  43. 43.
    Alexandraki C (2014) Real-time machine listening and segmental re-synthesis for networked music performance. PhD dissertation, University of Hamburg. http://ediss.sub.uni-hamburg.de/volltexte/2014/7100/
  44. 44.
    Dannenberg R (1984) An online algorithm for real-time accompaniment. In: Proceedings of the 1984 international computer music conference. Computer Music Association, pp 193–198Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Vercoe BL (1984) The synthetic performer in the context of live performance. In: Proceedings of the 1984 international computer music conference, Paris, pp 199–200Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Sarkar M, Vercoe B (200) Recognition and prediction in a network music performance system for Indian percussion. In: Proceedings of the 7th international conference on New interfaces for musical expression NIME 07, pp 317–320Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Alexandraki C, Bader R (2016) Anticipatory networked communications for live musical interactions of acoustic instruments. J New Music Res 45:68–85.  https://doi.org/10.1080/09298215.2015.1131990CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Music Technology and Acoustics Engineering, School of Applied SciencesTechnological Educational Institute of CreteHeraklionGreece

Personalised recommendations