LOGIN TO YOUR ACCOUNT

Username
Password
Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Or use your Academic/Social account:

Congratulations!

You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.

Important!

Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Name:
Username:
Password:
Verify Password:
E-mail:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Magnusson, Thor (2010)
Publisher: MIT Press
Languages: English
Types: Article
Subjects: Music, Music Technology, M1, Human Computer Interaction, New Interfaces for Musical Expression
This paper investigates two central terms in Human Computer Interaction (HCI) – affordances and constraints – and studies their relevance to the design and understanding of digital musical systems. It argues that in the analysis of complex systems, such as new interfaces for musical expression (NIME), constraints are a more productive analytical tool than the common HCI usage of affordances. Constraints are seen as limitations enabling the musician to encapsulate a specific search space of both physical and compositional gestures, proscribing complexity in favor of a relatively simple set of rules that engender creativity. By exploring the design of three different digital musical systems, the paper defines constraints as a core attribute of mapping, whether in instruments or compositional systems. The paper describes the aspiration for designing constraints as twofold: to save time, as musical performance is typically a real-time process, and to minimize the performer's cognitive load. Finally, it discusses skill and virtuosity in the realm of new musical interfaces for musical expression with regard to constraints.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • Akrich, M. 1992. “The De-Scription of Technical Objects.” In W. Bijker and J. Law, eds. Shaping Technology/Building Society. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, pp. 205-224.
    • Anders, T., and E. T. Miranda. 2008. “Higher-Order Constraint Applicators for Music Constraint Programming.” Proceedings of the 2008 International Computer Music Conference. San Francisco, California: International Computer Music Association. Available on-line at http://quod.lib.umich.edu/i/icmc/.
    • Boden, M. A. 1990. The Creative Mind: Myths and Mechanisms. London: Wiedenfield and Nicholson.
    • Bongers, B. 2000. “Physical Interfaces in the Electronic Arts. Interaction Theory and Interfacing Techniques for Real-Time Performance.” In M. Wanderley and M. Battier, eds. Trends in Gestural Control of Music. Paris: IRCAM, pp. 41-70.
    • Bourdieu, P. 1990. The Logic of Practice. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
    • Bown, O., A. Eldridge, and J. McCormack. 2009. “Understanding Interaction in Contemporary Digital Music: From Instruments to Behavioural Objects.” Organised Sound 14(2):188-196.
    • Chadabe, J. 1997. Electric Sound: The Past and Promise of Electronic Music. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
    • Clark, A. 2008. Supersizing the Mind: Embodiment, Action, and Cognitive Extension. New York: Oxford University Press.
    • Clarke, E. F. 2003. “Music and Psychology.” In M. Clayton, T. Herbert, and R. Middleton, eds. The Cultural Study of Music: A Critical Introduction. London: Routledge, pp. 113-123.
    • Costall, A. 1995. “Socializing Affordances.” Theory and Psychology 5(4):467-481.
    • Costall, A. 1997. “The Meaning of Things.” Social Analysis 41(1):76-86.
    • Courtot, F. 1992. “Logical Representation and Induction for Computer Assisted Composition.” In M. Bablan, K. Ebciog` lu, and O. Laske, eds. Understanding Music with AI. Cambridge, Massachusetts, and Menlo Park, California: MIT Press and AAAI Press, pp. 156-181.
    • Cristianini, N., and J. Shawe-Taylor. 2000. An Intro- Latour, B. 1994. “On Technical Mediation: Philosophy, duction to Support Vector Machines: And Other Sociology, Genealogy.” Common Knowledge 3(2):29- Kernel-Based Learning Methods. Cambridge, UK: 64.
    • Kiefer, C., N. Collins, and G. Fitzpatrick. 2009. “Phalanger: Pe´ rez, M. A., B. Knapp, and M. Alcorn. 2007. “Diamair: Controlling Music Software With Hand Movement Composing for Choir and Integral Music Controller.” Using a Computer Vision and Machine Learning Proceedings of the 2007 International Conference on Approach.” Proceedings of the 2009 International New Interfaces for Musical Expression. New York: Conference on New Interfaces for Musical Expression. Association for Computing Machinery, pp. 27-28. New York: Association for Computing Machinery, Polanyi, M. 1966. The Tacit Dimension. Garden City, pp. 246-250. New York: Doubleday.
    • Sorensen, A., and A. Brown. 2007. “aa-cell in Practice: An Approach to Musical Live Coding.” Proceedings of the 2007 International Computer Music Conference. San Francisco, California: International Computer Music Association, pp. 292-299.
    • Varela, F., E. Thompson, and E. Rosch. 1991. The Embodied Mind. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.
    • Vera, A. H., and H. A. Simon. 1993. “Situated Action: A Symbolic Interpretation.” Cognitive Science 17:7-48.
    • Waisvisz, M. 1999. “Gestural Round Table.” Available on-line at www.steim.org/steim/texts.php?id=4. Accessed September 2009.
    • Wanderley, M. M. 2000. “Gestural Control of Music.” Available on-line at recherche.ircam.fr/equipes/ analyse-synthese/wanderle/Gestes/Externe/kassel.pdf. Accessed September 2009.
    • Waters, S. 2007. “Performance Ecosystems: Ecological Approaches to Musical Interaction.” EMS: Electroacoustic Music Studies Network. Available on-line at www.ems-network.org/spip.php?article278. Accessed June 2010.
    • Wessel, D., and M. Wright. 2001. “Problems and Prospects for Intimate Musical Control of Computers.” Computer Music Journal 26(3):11-22.
    • Winkler, T. 1995. “Making Motion Musical: Gestural Mapping Strategies for Interactive Computer Music.” Proceedings of the 1995 International Computer Music Conference. San Francisco, California: International Computer Music Association, pp. 261-264.
    • Winograd, T., and F. Flores. 1986. Understanding Computers and Cognition. Norwood, New Jersey: Ablex.
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article