Advertisement

Musical Instruments for Novices: Comparing NIME, HCI and Crowdfunding Approaches

  • Andrew McPhersonEmail author
  • Fabio Morreale
  • Jacob Harrison
Chapter
Part of the Springer Series on Cultural Computing book series (SSCC)

Abstract

Designing musical instruments to make performance accessible to novice musicians is a goal which long predates digital technology. However, just in the space of the past 6 years, dozens of instrument designs have been introduced in various academic venues and in commercial crowdfunding campaigns. In this paper, we draw comparisons in design, evaluation and marketing across four domains: crowdfunding campaigns on Kickstarter and Indiegogo; the New Interfaces for Musical Expression (NIME) conference; conferences in human-computer interaction (HCI); and researchers creating accessible instruments for children and adults with disabilities. We observe striking differences in approach between commercial and academic projects, with less pronounced differences between each of the academic communities. The paper concludes with general reflections on the identity and purpose of instruments for novice musicians, with suggestions for future exploration.

References

  1. Arellano DG, McPherson A (2014) Radear: a tangible spinning music sequencer. In: Proceedings of the international conference on new interfaces for musical expression, London, United Kingdom. Goldsmiths, University of London, pp 84–85Google Scholar
  2. Barbosa J, Malloch J, Wanderley M, Huot S (2015) What does ‘evaluation’ mean for the NIME community? In: Berdahl E, Allison J (eds) Proceedings of the international conference on new interfaces for musical expression, Baton Rouge, Louisiana, USA, May 2015. Louisiana State University, pp 156–161Google Scholar
  3. Barraclough TJ, Murphy J, Kapur A (2014) New open-source interfaces for group based participatory performance of live electronic music. In: Proceedings of the international conference on new interfaces for musical expression, London, United Kingdom. Goldsmiths, University of London, pp 155–158Google Scholar
  4. Becking D, Steinmeier C, Kroos P (2016) Drum-dance-music-machine: construction of a technical toolset for low-threshold access to collaborative musical performance. In: Proceedings of the international conference on new interfaces for musical expression, Brisbane, Australia. Queensland Conservatorium Griffith University, pp 112–117Google Scholar
  5. Bengler B, Bryan-Kinns N (2013) Designing collaborative musical experiences for broad audiences. In: Proceedings of the 9th ACM conference on creativity and cognition. ACM, pp 234–242Google Scholar
  6. Benjamin E, Altosaar J (2015) MusicMapper: interactive 2D representations of music samples for in-browser remixing and exploration. In: Berdahl E, Allison J (eds) Proceedings of the international conference on new interfaces for musical expression, Baton Rouge, Louisiana, USA, May 2015, pp 325–326Google Scholar
  7. Bhat S (2010) Touchtone: an electronic musical instrument for children with hemiplegic cerebral palsy. In: Proceedings of the fourth international conference on tangible, embedded, and embodied interaction, TEI ’10, New York, NY, USA. ACM, pp 305–306.  https://doi.org/10.1145/1709886.1709955. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1709886.1709955. ISBN 978-1-60558-841-4
  8. Bhumber K, Lee N, Topp B (2016) Pendula: an interactive swing installation and performance environment. In: Proceedings of the international conference on new interfaces for musical expression, Brisbane, Australia, pp 277–285Google Scholar
  9. Blaine T, Fels S (2003) Collaborative musical experiences for novices. J New Music Res 32(4):411–428CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Buschert J (2012) Musician maker: play expressive music without practice. In: NIMEGoogle Scholar
  11. Cappelen B, Andersson A (2014) Designing four generations of ‘Musicking Tangibles’. Music Health Technol Des 8:1–19Google Scholar
  12. Chew E, McPherson A (2017) Performing music: humans, computers and electronics. In: Ashley R, Timmers R (eds) The Routledge companion to music cognition. Taylor and Francis, NYGoogle Scholar
  13. Chuang G, Wang S, Burns S, Shaer O (2015) EmotiSphere: from emotion to music. In: Proceedings of the ninth international conference on tangible, embedded, and embodied interaction. ACM, pp 599–602Google Scholar
  14. Dahl L, Robaszkiewicz S (2012) For novices playing music together, adding structural constraints leads to better music and may improve user experience. In: Adjunct proceedings of the 25th annual ACM symposium on User interface software and technology. ACM, pp 85–86Google Scholar
  15. Diao H, Zhou Y, Harte CA, Bryan-Kinns N (2014) Sketch-based musical composition and performance. In: Proceedings of the international conference on new interfaces for musical expression, London, United Kingdom. Goldsmiths, University of London, pp 569–572Google Scholar
  16. Favilla S, Pedell S (2014) Touch screen collaborative music: designing NIME for older people with dementia. In: Proceedings of the international conference on new interfaces for musical expression, pp 35–39.  https://doi.org/10.1145/2541016.2541088
  17. Ferguson S, Wanderley MM (2010) The McGill digital orchestra: an interdisciplinary project on digital musical instruments. J Interdiscip Music Stud 4(2):17–35Google Scholar
  18. Fiebrink R (2010) Real-time interaction with supervised learning. In: Proceedings of CHI extended abstracts on human factors in computing systems, pp 2935–2938Google Scholar
  19. Frisson C, Dupont S, Leroy J, Moinet A, Ravet T, Siebert X, Dutoit T (2012) LoopJam: turning the dance floor into a collaborative instrumental map. In: 2012 Proceedings of the international conference on new interfaces for musical expression (NIME)Google Scholar
  20. Glickman S, Lee B, Hsiao FY, Das S (2017) Music everywhere—augmented reality piano improvisation learning system. In: Proceedings of the international conference on new interfaces for musical expression, Copenhagen, Denmark. Aalborg University Copenhagen, pp 511–512Google Scholar
  21. Graham-Knight K, Tzanetakis G (2015) Adaptive music technology—history and future perspectives. In: International computer music conference proceedings, pp 416–419.  https://doi.org/10.1145/2769493.2769583
  22. Grierson M, Kiefer C (2013a) NoiseBear: a wireless malleable multiparametric controller for use in assistive technology contexts. In: CHI ’13 extended abstracts on human factors in computing systems, pp 2923–2926.  https://doi.org/10.1145/2468356.2479575
  23. Grierson M, Kiefer C (2013b) NoiseBear: a malleable wireless controller designed in participation with disabled children. In: Proceedings of the international conference on new interfaces for musical expression, pp 413–416Google Scholar
  24. Griffin G, Jacob R (2013) Priming creativity through improvisation on an adaptive musical instrument. In: Proceedings of the 9th ACM conference on creativity and cognition. ACM, pp 146–155Google Scholar
  25. Gurevich M, Treviño J (2007) Expression and its discontents: toward an ecology of musical creation. In: Proceedings of the 7th international conference on new interfaces for musical expression, pp 106–111Google Scholar
  26. Hansen A-MS, Andersen HJ, Raudaskoski P (2012) Two shared rapid turn taking sound interfaces for novices. In: 2012 Proceedings of the international conference on new interfaces for musical expression (NIME)Google Scholar
  27. Harriman J (2015) Start ’em young: digital music instrument for education. In: Berdahl E, Allison J (eds) Proceedings of the international conference on new interfaces for musical expression, Baton Rouge, Louisiana, USA, May 2015. Louisiana State University, pp 70–73Google Scholar
  28. Heller F, Ruiz IMC, Borchers J (2017) An augmented flute for beginners. In: Proceedings of the international conference on new interfaces for musical expression, Copenhagen, Denmark. Aalborg University Copenhagen, pp 34–37Google Scholar
  29. Holland S, Fiebrink R (2019) Machine learning, music and creativity: an interview with Rebecca Fiebrink. In: Holland S, Mudd T, Wilkie-McKenna K, McPherson A, Wanderley M (eds) New directions in music and human-computer interaction. Springer, LondonGoogle Scholar
  30. Hunt A, Kirk R, Neighbour M (2004) Interfaces for music therapy. IEEE Multimed 11(3):50–58Google Scholar
  31. Jackie C, Chui YT, Marafa M, Samson Y, Young KF (2013) SoloTouch: a capacitive touch controller with lick-based note selector. In: Proceedings of the international conference on new interfaces for musical expression, Daejeon, Republic of Korea, May 2013. Graduate School of Culture Technology, KAIST, pp 389–393Google Scholar
  32. Jakobsen KB, Petersen MG, Rasmussen MK, Groenbaek JE, Winge J, Stougaard J (2016) Hitmachine: collective musical expressivity for novices. In: Proceedings of the international conference on new interfaces for musical expression, Brisbane, Australia, pp 241–246Google Scholar
  33. Jense A, Leeuw H (2015) WamBam: a case study in design for an electronic musical instrument for severely intellectually disabled users. In: Proceedings of the international conference on new interfaces for musical expression, pp 74–77Google Scholar
  34. Jensenius AR, Voldsund A (2012) The music ball project: concept, design, development, performanceGoogle Scholar
  35. Jordà S (2004) Instruments and players: some thoughts on digital lutherie. J New Music Res 33(3):321–341CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Kaneko S (2013) A function-oriented interface for music education and musical expressions: “the sound wheel”. In: Proceedings of the international conference on new interfaces for musical expression, Daejeon, Republic of Korea, May 2013. Graduate School of Culture Technology, KAIST, pp 202–205Google Scholar
  37. Katan S, Grierson M, Fiebrink R (2015) Using interactive machine learning to support interface development through workshops with disabled people. In: CHI 2015Google Scholar
  38. Kiefer C, Collins N, Fitzpatrick G (2008) HCI methodology for evaluating musical controllers: a case study. In: Proceedings of NIME, pp 87–90Google Scholar
  39. Kitahara T, Giraldo S, Ramrez R (2017) JamSketch: a drawing-based real-time evolutionary improvisation support system. In: Proceedings of the international conference on new interfaces for musical expression, Copenhagen, Denmark. Aalborg University Copenhagen, pp 505–506Google Scholar
  40. Klipfel K (2017) MIDI motion: interactive music composition gloves. In: Proceedings of the tenth international conference on tangible, embedded, and embodied interaction. ACM, pp 757–760Google Scholar
  41. Knichel B, Reckter H, Kiefer P (2015) Resonate—a social musical installation which integrates tangible multiuser interaction. In: Berdahl E, Allison J (eds) Proceedings of the international conference on new interfaces for musical expression, Baton Rouge, Louisiana, USA, May 2015. Louisiana State University, pp 111–115Google Scholar
  42. Kountouras S, Zannos I (2017) Gestus: teaching soundscape composition and performance with a tangible interface. In: Proceedings of the international conference on new interfaces for musical expression, Copenhagen, Denmark. Aalborg University Copenhagen, pp 336–341Google Scholar
  43. Larsen JV, Overholt D, Moeslund TB (2014) The actuated guitar: implementation and user test on children with hemiplegia. In: NIME ’14 Proceedings of the 2014 conference on new interfaces for musical expression, pp 60–65Google Scholar
  44. Larsen JV, Overholt D, Moeslund TB (2016) The prospects of musical instruments for people with physical disabilities. In: NIME ’16 Proceedings of the 2016 conference on new interfaces for musical expression, pp 327–331Google Scholar
  45. Luhtala M, Kymäläinen T, Plomp J (2011) Designing a music performance space for persons with intellectual learning disabilities. In: Proceedings of the international conference on new interfaces for musical expression, June, pp 429–432. ISSN 2220-4806Google Scholar
  46. Lui S (2015) Generate expressive music from picture with a handmade multi-touch music table. In: Berdahl E, Allison J (eds) Proceedings of the international conference on new interfaces for musical expression, Baton Rouge, Louisiana, USA, May 2015. Louisiana State University, pp 374–377Google Scholar
  47. Lyu F, Tian F, Feng W, Cao X, Zhang XL, Dai G, Wang H (2017) EnseWing: creating an instrumental ensemble playing experience for children with limited music training. In: Proceedings of the 2017 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems. ACM, pp 4326–4330Google Scholar
  48. Magnusson T (2009) Of epistemic tools: musical instruments as cognitive extensions. Organ Sound 14(02):168–176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Malloch J, Wanderley M (2017) Embodied cognition and digital musical instruments: design and performance. In: Lesaffre M, Maes P-J, Leman M (eds) The Routledge companion to embodied music interaction. Routledge, pp 440–449Google Scholar
  50. Mathews MV (1991) The radio baton and conductor program, or: pitch, the most important and least expressive part of music. Comput Music J 15(4):37–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Meckin D, Bryan-kinns N (2013) moosikMasheens: music, motion and narrative with young people who have complex needs. In: IDT 2013, pp 66–73. ISSN 9781450319188.  https://doi.org/10.1145/2485760.2485776
  52. Miletto EM, Pimenta MS, Bouchet F, Sansonnet J-P, Keller D (2011) Principles for music creation by novices in networked music environments. J New Music Res 40(3):205–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Miller K (2009) Schizophonic performance: guitar hero, rock band, and virtual virtuosity. J Soc Am Music 3(4):395–429CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Morreale F, De Angeli A (2015) Evaluating visitor experiences with interactive art. In: Proceedings of the 11th biannual conference on Italian SIGCHI chapter. ACM, pp 50–57Google Scholar
  55. Morreale F, McPherson A (2017) Design for longevity: ongoing use of instruments from NIME 2010-14. In: Proceedings of the international conference on new interfaces for musical expression, Copenhagen, Denmark. Aalborg University Copenhagen, pp 192–197Google Scholar
  56. Morreale F, Masu R, De Angeli A, Rota P (2013) The music room. In: CHI’13 extended abstracts on human factors in computing systems, pp 3099–3102Google Scholar
  57. Mudd T (2019) Material-oriented musical interactions. In: Holland S, Mudd T, Wilkie-McKenna K, McPherson A, Wanderley M (eds) New directions in music and human-computer interaction. Springer, LondonGoogle Scholar
  58. Murray-Browne T, Mainstone D, Bryan-Kinns N, Plumbley MD (2011) The medium is the message: composing instruments and performing mappings. In: Proceedings of the international conference on new interfaces for musical expression, pp 56–59Google Scholar
  59. Nakanishi Y, Matsumura S, Arakawa C (2014) B.O.M.B.—Beat Of Magic Box: stand-alone synthesizer using wireless synchronization system for musical session and performance. In: Proceedings of the international conference on new interfaces for musical expression, London, United Kingdom. Goldsmiths, University of London, pp 80–81Google Scholar
  60. Nam S (2013) Musical poi (mPoi). In: Proceedings of the international conference on new interfaces for musical expression, Daejeon, Republic of Korea, May 2013. Graduate School of Culture Technology, KAIST, pp 148–151Google Scholar
  61. Nath A, Young S (2015) VESBALL: a ball-shaped instrument for music therapy. In: New interfaces for musical expression, pp 387–391Google Scholar
  62. Paradiso JA (1999) The brain opera technology: new instruments and gestural sensors for musical interaction and performance. J New Music Res 28(2):130–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Poepel C, Feitsch J, Strobel M, Geiger C (2014) Design and evaluation of a gesture controlled singing voice installation. In: Proceedings of the international conference on new interfaces for musical expression, London, United Kingdom. Goldsmiths, University of London, pp 359–362Google Scholar
  64. qi Deng J, Lau FCM, Ng H-C, Kwok Y-K, Chen H-K, Liu Y (2014) WIJAM: a mobile collaborative improvisation platform under master-players paradigm. In: Proceedings of the international conference on new interfaces for musical expression, London, United Kingdom. Goldsmiths, University of London, pp 407–410Google Scholar
  65. Robson D (2001) Play!: sound toys for the non musical. In: Proceedings of the 2001 conference on new interfaces for musical expressionGoogle Scholar
  66. Schnell N, Battier M (2002) Introducing composed instruments, technical and musicological implications. In: Proceedings of the 2002 conference on new interfaces for musical expression, pp 1–5Google Scholar
  67. Schnell N, Robaszkiewicz S, Bevilacqua F, Schwarz D (2015) Collective sound checks: exploring intertwined sonic and social affordances of mobile web applications, pp 685–690Google Scholar
  68. Shahar E (2012) Soundstrand: composing with a tangible interface. In: NIMEGoogle Scholar
  69. Shapiro RB, Fiebrink R, Ahrens M, Kelly A (2016) BlockyTalky: a physical and distributed computer music toolkit for kids. In: Proceedings of the international conference on new interfaces for musical expression, vol. 16, 2220-4806, Brisbane, Australia. Queensland Conservatorium Griffith University, pp 427–432. ISBN 978-1-925455-13-7Google Scholar
  70. Tam C, Schwellnus H, Eaton C, Hamdani Y, Lamont A, Chau T (2007) Movement-to-music computer technology: a developmental play experience for children with severe physical disabilities. Occup Therapy Int 14(2):99–112. ISSN 09667903.  https://doi.org/10.1002/oti.227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Tanaka A, Caramiaux B, Schnell N (2013) MubuFunkScatShare: gestural energy and shared interactive music. In: CHI’13 extended abstracts on human factors in computing systems, pp 2999–3002Google Scholar
  72. Trappe C (2012) Making sound synthesis accessible for children. In: NIMEGoogle Scholar
  73. Trento S, Serafin S (2013) Flag beat: a novel interface for rhythmic musical expression for kids. In: Proceedings of the international conference on new interfaces for musical expression, Daejeon, Republic of Korea, May 2013. Graduate School of Culture Technology, KAIST, pp 456–459Google Scholar
  74. Tresch J, Dolan EI (2013) Toward a new organology: instruments of music and science. OSIRIS 28:278–298CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. van Troyer A (2017) MM-RT: a tabletop musical instrument for musical wonderers. In: Proceedings of the international conference on new interfaces for musical expression, Copenhagen, Denmark. Aalborg University Copenhagen, pp 186–191Google Scholar
  76. Wanderley MM, Depalle P (2004) Gestural control of sound synthesis. Proc IEEE 92(4):632–644CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Wanderley MM, Orio N (2002) Evaluation of input devices for musical expression: borrowing tools from HCI. Comput Music J 26(3):62–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Wang G (2016) Game design for expressive mobile music. In: Proceedings of the international conference on new interfaces for musical expression, vol. 16, 2220-4806, Brisbane, Australia. Queensland Conservatorium Griffith University, pp 182–187. ISBN 978-1-925455-13-7Google Scholar
  79. Ward A, Woodbury L, Davis T (2017) Design considerations for instruments for users with complex needs in SEN settings. In: NIME ’17, pp 216–221Google Scholar
  80. Wessel D, Wright M (2002) Problems and prospects for intimate musical control of computers. Comput Music J 26(3):11–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Zamorano F (2012) Simpletones: a system of collaborative physical controllers for novices. In: NIMEGoogle Scholar
  82. Zamorano F (2013) SimpleTones: a collaborative sound controller system for non-musicians. In: CHI’13 extended abstracts on human factors in computing systems. ACM, pp 3155–3158Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Andrew McPherson
    • 1
    Email author
  • Fabio Morreale
    • 2
  • Jacob Harrison
    • 3
  1. 1.Centre for Digital MusicQueen Mary University of LondonLondonUK
  2. 2.Centre for Digital MusicQueen Mary University of LondonLondonUK
  3. 3.Centre for Digital MusicQueen Mary University of LondonLondonUK

Personalised recommendations