Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Music and Human-Computer Interaction pp 29–47Cite as

Should Music Interaction Be Easy?

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: Springer Series on Cultural Computing ((SSCC))

Abstract

A fundamental assumption in the fields of human-computer interaction and usability studies is that interfaces should be designed for ease of use, with a few exceptions such as the trade-off with long-term power. In this chapter it is argued that in music interaction the situation is far more complex, with social, technical, artistic, and psychological reasons why difficulty is in some cases a good thing, and in other cases a necessary evil. Different aspects of static and time-varying difficulty in music interaction are categorised. Some specific areas in which difficulty seems to be inextricably linked to positive aspects of music interaction are described. This is followed by discussion of some areas in which difficulty is undesirable and, perhaps, avoidable. Examples are drawn from music interaction research in general and from other chapters of this book in particular.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  • Apple. (2011). GarageBand. http://www.apple.com/ilife/garageband. Accessed 12 Sept 2011.

  • Armstrong, N. (2006). An enactive approach to digital musical instrument design. PhD thesis, Princeton University, Princeton.

    Google Scholar 

  • AxCent Tuning Systems. (2013). http://www.axcenttuning.com. Accessed 21 Jan 2013.

  • Bills, A. G. (1934). The curve of learning. New York: Longmans, Green and Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boese, C. (2006). Usability of accordions. Interaction design association web forum. http://www.ixda.org/node/18728. Accessed 11 Sept 2011.

  • Bouwer, A., Holland, S., & Dalgleish, M. (2013a). The Haptic Bracelets: Learning multi-limb rhythm skills from haptic stimuli while reading. In S. Holland, K. Wilkie, P. Mulholland, & A. Seago (Eds.), Music and human-computer interaction (pp. 101–122). London: Springer. ISBN 978-1-4471-2989-9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bouwer, A., Holland, S., & Dalgleish, M. (2013b). Song walker harmony space: Embodied interaction design for complex musical skills. In S. Holland, K. Wilkie, P. Mulholland, & A. Seago (Eds.), Music and human-computer interaction (pp. 207–221). London: Springer. ISBN 978-1-4471-2989-9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bozkurt, B. (2011). Otomata. http://www.earslap.com/projectslab/otomata. Accessed 20 Nov 2011.

  • Brandao, M., Wiggins, G., & Pain, H. (1999). Computers in music education. In Proceedings of the AISB’99 symposium on musical creativity (pp. 82–88).

    Google Scholar 

  • Collins, N. (2003). Generative music and laptop performance. Contemporary Music Review, 22(4), 67–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cook, J. (1998). Mentoring, metacognition and music: Interaction analyses and implications for intelligent learning environments. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 9, 45–87.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1991). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York: Harper Collins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Delzell, J. K., & Leppla, D. A. (1992). Gender association of musical instruments and preferences of fourth-grade students for selected instruments. Journal of Research in Music Education, 40(2), 93–103. doi:10.2307/3345559.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eno, B., & Chilvers, P. (2009). Bloom. http://www.generativemusic.com/bloom.html. Accessed 20 Nov 2011.

  • Gentner, D., & Nielsen, J. (1996). The Anti-Mac interface. Communications of the ACM, 39(8), 70–82. http://www.useit.com/papers/anti-mac.html. Accessed 9 Sept 2011.

  • Gifford, T. (2013). Appropriate and complementary rhythmic improvisation in an interactive music system. In S. Holland, K. Wilkie, P. Mulholland, & A. Seago (Eds.), Music and human-computer interaction (pp. 271–286). London: Springer. ISBN 978-1-4471-2989-9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gillespie, R., & O’Modrain, S. (2011). Embodied cognition as a motivating perspective for haptic interaction design: A position paper. In World haptics conference. Istanbul: IEEE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gruson, L. M. (1988). Rehearsal skill and musical competence: Does practice make perfect? In J. A. Sloboda (Ed.), Generative processes in music: The psychology of performance, improvisation, and composition (pp. 91–112). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harmonix Music Systems. (2005). Guitar Hero. Sunnyvale: Red Octane.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harmonix Music Systems. (2007). Rock Band. Redwood City: Electronic Arts.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hedegaard, M. (2005). The zone of proximal development as basis for instruction. In H. Daniels (Ed.), An introduction to Vygotsky (pp. 227–252). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hofstadter, D. R. (1979). Gödel, Escher, Bach: An eternal golden braid. New York: Penguin Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holland, S. (2000). Artificial intelligence in music education: A critical review. In E. Miranda (Ed.), Readings in music and artificial intelligence, contemporary music studies (Vol. 20, pp. 239–274). Amsterdam: Harwood Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hornecker, E. (2011). The role of physicality in tangible and embodied interactions. Interactions, 18(2), 19–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hughes, C., Wermelinger, M., & Holland, S. (2011). Sound spheres: The heuristic design and evaluation of a non-contact finger-tracking virtual musical instrument. In Proceedings of the 8th sound and music computing conference, Padova, Italy. http://oro.open.ac.uk/28709/. Accessed 8 Mar 2012.

  • Hunt, A., & Hermann, T. (2011). Interactive sonification. In T. Hermann, A. Hunt, & J. G. Neuhoff (Eds.), The sonification handbook. Berlin: Logos Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, R., Van der Linden, J., & Rogers. Y. (2011). Prototyping for the wild: Reflections on the design of MuSense, a lightweight wearable practice aid for the violin. BCS HCI workshop “When words fail: What can music interaction tell us about HCI?” 4 July 2011. Northumbria University, Newcastle upon Tyne. http://mcl.open.ac.uk/Workshop. Accessed 8 Mar 2012.

  • Jones, M. K. (1989). Human-computer interaction: A design guide. Englewood Cliffs: Educational Technology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jordà, S., Geiger, G., Alonso, M., & Kaltenbrunner, M. (2007). The reacTable: Exploring the synergy between live music performance and tabletop tangible interfaces. In Proceedings of the international conference Tangible and Embedded Interaction (TEI07).

    Google Scholar 

  • Karlstrom, P. (2007). Existential phenomenology and design—Why “ready-to-hand” is not enough. Unpublished, available: http://petter.blogs.dsv.su.se/files/2011/02/Existential_phenomenolgy-and-HCI.pdf. Accessed 9 Sept 2011.

  • Kock, S.V., & Bouwer, A. (2011). Towards wearable support for nomadic musicians. Paper presented at workshop “When words fail: What can music interaction tell us about HCI?” at the British conference on human-computer interaction, 4 July 2011, Newcastle, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krefeld, V., & Waisvisz, M. (1990). The hand in the web: An interview with Michel Waisvisz. Computer Music Journal, 14(2), 28–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leman, M. (2008). Embodied music cognition and mediation technology. Cambridge: The MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levitin, D. (2006). This is your brain on music: The science of a human obsession. East Rutherford: Penguin Putnam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Massey, A. (2003). Music and the arts: usability in fact and as metaphor. http://www.usabilityprofessionals.org/usability_resources/conference/2003/massey_music_arts.html. Accessed 12Sept 2011.

  • McDermott, J., Griffith, N. J. L., & O’Neill, M. (2007). Evolutionary GUIs for sound synthesis. In Applications of evolutionary computing. Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, K. (2009). Schizophonic performance: Guitar Hero, Rock Band, and Virtual Virtuosity. Journal of the Society for American Music, 3(4), 395–429. doi:10.1017/S1752196309990666.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nakamura, J., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2002). The concept of flow. In C. R. Snyder (Ed.), Handbook of positive psychology (pp. 89–105). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Council for Curriculum and Assessment (Ireland). (2011). Arts education: Music. http://www.curriculumonline.ie/en/Primary_School_Curriculum/Arts_Education/Music/Arts_Education_Music_arts.html. Accessed 12 Sept 2011.

  • Nielsen, J. (2003). Usability 101: Introduction to usability. http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20030825.html. Accessed 9 Sept 2011.

  • Nielsen, J. (2006). Progressive disclosure. http://www.useit.com/alertbox/progressive-disclosure.html. Accessed 9 Sept 2011.

  • Pachet, F. (2003). The continuator: Musical interaction with style. Journal of New Music Research, 32(3), 333–341.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paine, G. (2009). Gesture and morphology in laptop music performance. In R. Dean (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of computer music (pp. 214–232). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ritter, F. E., & Schooler, L. J. (2002). The learning curve. In: International encyclopedia of the social and behavioral sciences (pp. 8602–8605). Amsterdam: Pergamon. http://www.iesbs.com/

  • Rowe, R. (2001). Machine musicianship. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruso, B., Renninger, L. A., & Atzwanger, K. (2003). Human habitat preferences: A generative territory for evolutionary aesthetics research. In E. Voland & K. Grammer (Eds.), Evolutionary aesthetics (pp. 279–294). Heidelberg/Berlin/NewYork: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seago, A. (2013). A new interaction strategy for musical timbre design. In S. Holland, K. Wilkie, P. Mulholland, & A. Seago (Eds.), Music and human-computer interaction (pp. 153–170). London: Springer. ISBN 978-1-4471-2989-9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, M., Burke, C., Draper, S., & Potter, C. (2008). The energy cost of rock drumming: a case study. European College of Sport Science (ECSS) 13th annual Congress, July 2008, Estoril, Portugal.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smule. (2008). iPhone Ocarina. http://ocarina.smule.com/. Accessed 20 Nov 2011.

  • Stowell, D., & McLean, A. (2013). Live music-making: A rich open task requires a rich open interface. In S. Holland, K. Wilkie, P. Mulholland, & A. Seago (Eds.), Music and human-computer interaction (pp. 139–152). London: Springer. ISBN 978-1-4471-2989-9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stuart, C. (2003). The object of performance: Aural performativity in contemporary laptop music. Contemporary Music Review, 22(4), 59–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suthers, D. D. (2001). Towards a systematic study of representational guidance for collaborative learning discourse. Journal of Universal Computer Science, 7(3).

    Google Scholar 

  • Swift, B. (2013). Chasing a feeling: Experience in computer supported jamming. In S. Holland, K. Wilkie, P. Mulholland, & A. Seago (Eds.), Music and human-computer interaction (pp. 85–100). London: Springer. ISBN 978-1-4471-2989-9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tammelin, O, (1999). Jeskola Buzz. http://jeskola.net/buzz. Accessed 12 Sept 2011.

  • Tanaka, A. (2000). Musical performance practice on sensor-based instruments. In Trends in gestural control of music. Centre Pompidou: IRCAM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thornhill, R. (2003). Darwinian aesthetics informs traditional aesthetics. In E. Voland & K. Grammer (Eds.), Evolutionary aesthetics (pp. 9–35). Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • TOPLAP. (2011). http://www.toplap.org/index.php/ManifestoDraft. Accessed 12 Sept 2011.

  • Van Nimwegen, C., van Oostendorp, H., & Schijf, H. J. M. (2004). Externalization vs. Internalization: The influence on problem solving performance. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT’04). Piscataway: IEEE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wagner, R. (1830). The virtuoso and the artist (trans. Ellis, W.). http://users.belgacom.net/wagnerlibrary/prose/wagvirtu.htm. Accessed 9 Sept 2011.

  • Wallis, I., Ingalls, T., Campana, E., & Vuong, C. (2013). Amateur musicians, long-term engagement, and HCI. In S. Holland, K. Wilkie, P. Mulholland, & A. Seago (Eds.), Music and human-computer interaction (pp. 49–66). London: Springer. ISBN 978-1-4471-2989-9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, W. (2002). Six views of embodied cognition. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 9(4), 625–636.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Thanks are due to the organisers of the 2011 British Computer Society HCI conference workshop “When Words Fail: What can Music Interaction tell us about HCI?”, and to all participants in the workshop break-out group on the topic of difficulty in music interaction: Rose Johnson, Isaac Wallis, Alex McLean, Peter Quinn, Andrew McPherson, Mat Dalgleish, JMcD, and AB. JMcD is funded by an IRCSET/Marie Curie Inspire Fellowship.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Evolutionary Design and Optimization Group, Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, 02139, USA

    James McDermott

  2. Queensland Conservatorium of Music, Griffith University, Brisbane, Australia

    Toby Gifford

  3. Intelligent Systems Lab Amsterdam (ISLA), Informatics Institute, Faculty of Science, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Anders Bouwer

  4. Department of Computer Science and Engineering, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, 55455, USA

    Mark Wagy

Authors
  1. James McDermott
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Toby Gifford
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Anders Bouwer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Mark Wagy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to James McDermott .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Centre For Research In Computing, The Open University, Walton Hall JLB2, Milton Keynes, MK7 6AA, Buckinghamshire, United Kingdom

    Simon Holland

  2. Centre For Research In Computing, The Open University, Walton Hall JLB2, Milton Keynes, MK7 6AA, Buckinghamshire, United Kingdom

    Katie Wilkie

  3. Centre For Research In Computing, The Open University, Walton Hall JLB2, Milton Keynes, MK7 6AA, Buckinghamshire, United Kingdom

    Paul Mulholland

  4. Sir John Cass Fac. of Art, Arch & Design, London Metropolitan University, Commercial Road 41, London, E1 1LA, United Kingdom

    Allan Seago

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer-Verlag London

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

McDermott, J., Gifford, T., Bouwer, A., Wagy, M. (2013). Should Music Interaction Be Easy?. In: Holland, S., Wilkie, K., Mulholland, P., Seago, A. (eds) Music and Human-Computer Interaction. Springer Series on Cultural Computing. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-2990-5_2

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-2990-5_2

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, London

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4471-2989-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4471-2990-5

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation