Sonic Art & Sound Design- P21 pdf

However, the proportion of sound work that depends upon the interaction between the artist and the system used is so substantial that interactivity has become almost a default mode for m

Trang 1

QC Preflight Point

p100

Job no : 76098 Title : The Fundamentals Of Sonic Art Client : AVA

Scn : #150 Size : 200(w)230(h)mm Co : M3 C0 (All To Spot)(Coagl)

1st

p100

1st

p100

PROCESS AND PRACTICE

Introduction

Interactivity is a feature common to

many works of sound art Interactive

works are not uncommon in other art

forms and much of what follows might

be equally applicable to, for example,

visual media However, the proportion

of sound work that depends upon the

interaction between the artist and the

system used is so substantial that

interactivity has become almost a

default mode for much of sonic art

practice This is not least due to the

nature of the software often used to

generate and transform sounds.

Much of this has the potential for high

degrees of ‘customisation’ and is

therefore useful in the pursuit of

innovative sounds and ideas In turn,

this implies the greater possibility of

more fully interactive operation – the

temptation is almost irresistible!

Types of interactive works

Interactivity may exist at a wide range of levels, from the more-or-less unnoticeable

to a full-on format in which the input of the user or participant is central to the unfolding of the work Most commonly, interactivity involves the use of computers and software that is custom-written but, once again, this is by no means inevitably so: sophisticated interactions are quite possible without the intervention of complex, software-dependent technologies

The images opposite show two very different installations, taken from an undergraduate degree show They are both interactive to some extent – one using very simple audio technology and the other employing advanced and highly sophisticated custom software

The first image of Nathaniel Mann’s piece,Foley Works – The Sound of Snow Underfoot (2006), shows an installation

work based upon the film soundtrack

process known as ‘Foley’ This involves the creation of background sounds (such as, amongst many other things, footsteps in snow) In Mann’s work, buried

microphones pick up the sounds made by the user and simply relay them back via headphones The user hears these sounds and modifies their actions accordingly

Although essentially technically unsophisticated, the user is enabled to engage with the work on several levels and we see that what at first appears to

be quite a simple work, invites users to involve themselves in thoughts and actions covering a wide scope

The second example (by Dani Joss) uses a video camera to detect the movements of the user This information is then used to control the generation and playback of sound into the exhibition space By implication, the user then responds to what he/she hears and, as in the first example, modifies his/her actions

1st

p100

Interactivity

Trang 2

QC Preflight Point

p101 Job no : 76098 Title : The Fundamentals Of Sonic Art Client : AVA

1st

p101

1st

p101

101 100

INTERACTIVITY

1st

p101

Left: ‘Foley Works – The Sound of Snow Underfoot’

An interactive sound installation by Nathaniel Mann in which visitors are invited to recreate the sound of footsteps in snow using the techniques adopted by Foley artists when making film soundtracks At a deeper level, the work recalls the occasion during the First World War when British and German soldiers left their trenches to celebrate Christmas together in the snow.

Image courtesy of Maria Militsi.

Left: ‘Stasis/Kinesis’ by Dani Joss

Joss describes this work thus:

‘An installation that can track and analyse the motion of a viewer standing on a clearly marked “sweet spot”, and use this information to influence and modulate musical composition It features a custom sound diffusion system and video projection As its name suggests, the central theme of this work is the stillness/motion dualism This has been contrasted with repetition/variation and excitation/equilibrium, all abstract concepts in their own right The installation is an attempt to move away from the culture of objects and symbolism and to revisit the aesthetic principles of abstract expressionism and the musical thought of the likes of

M Feldman through computer technology and a viewpoint inspired from the early experimentalists.’

Image courtesy of Dani Joss.

Trang 3

QC Preflight Point

p102

3rd

p102

3rd

Concepts and definitions

So what do we actually mean by Minteractivity? Chris Crawford has an excellent definition:

Interaction: An iterative process of listening, thinking and speaking between two or more actors 13

Clearly, Crawford uses the term ‘actors’ in

a far broader sense than normal since, by implication, he includes non-human (indeed non-biological) systems in his definition He breaks the process down into three components: ‘input’ (listening),

‘output’ (speaking) and ‘processing’

(thinking) Arguably, we may wish to add another component to this list – feedback – although, in a sense, this is already implicit in his definition

Critically, however, he points out that the process is iterative If we move the mouse attached to our computer, we see the cursor move on the screen We note its position and move the mouse in accordance with what we see, observe again and continue this process until the cursor comes to rest over the word that

we seek That’s a very simple level of interaction involving an iterative process and a dialogue between our computer and

us Importantly, it relies very heavily upon the points of contact between us: the mouse and the on-screen display This is the interface, one of the most significant parts of any interactive system

p102

3rd

‘THE PERCEPTION OF SOUND

DOES NOT JUST INVOLVE THE

ACT OF HEARING, BUT IS IN FACT

THE PROCESS OF LISTENING THE

LISTENING SYSTEM INCLUDES

TWO EARS TOGETHER WITH THE

MUSCLES FOR ORIENTING THEM

TO A SOURCE OF SOUND.’

JANEK SCHAEFER, ‘AUDIO & IMAGE’

Interactive systems respond to those who encounter

them The forms of interactions may be many and varied

but, most typically, the system will respond in some way

to the presence or gesture (in the broadest sense of the

word) of the onlooker The viewer becomes a participant

and to a certain extent influences the outcome of the

work Some theoreticians argue that all art is

interactive to some degree but, in the sense that we use

the term here, interaction takes place to a far greater

extent than could possibly be the case if the work were

to be, for example, a painting or a static sculpture.

Interactive systems are often (but not inevitably)

technically sophisticated and may use complicated

technologies such as motion tracking – using video

cameras and advanced software – or custom

programmes, often created using systems such as

MAX/MSP.

Trang 4

QC Preflight Point

p103 Job no : 76098 Title : The Fundamentals Of Sonic Art Client : AVA

1st

p103

1st

p103

103 102

Interactive systems in practice

The interface represents and shapes our

knowledge of the whole system and is

arguably the single most important aspect

of interactivity It has to take information

from the user, convey it to the system and

return the system’s response back to the

user Clearly, the success of these

processes is key to the success of the

whole work In order to ensure that

success, one of the most important

considerations is how one set of

information is mapped to another

Mapping, however, is by no means the

whole picture Allied to it is the need to

consider carefully what we can and

cannot constructively use to provide

input to our system One fairly obvious

idea is to use the electrical activity of the

brain to control our system and this has

been used in biofeedback trainers that

detect certain brain rhythms associated

with relaxation and emit a sound to

reinforce them Similarly, systems exist for

people with special needs that allow them

to ‘think’ an on-screen cursor to a

particular position but these rely on one

single piece of information – the presence

or absence of a particular waveform in

the brain We cannot then modulate our

own brain waves to, say, increase the

volume or lower the pitch of a sound

Nonetheless, in 1965, Alvin Lucier’s work

Music for Solo Performer used his brain

waves as a basic sound source, which,

when amplified, caused percussion

instruments placed nearby to resonate

Arguably, Lucier would have heard this and his brain activity would have been influenced as a result The interactivity of this ‘system’ is, however, quite limited – it was not as if Lucier could mentally opt to

‘play’ one or other instrument – and so we should make a distinction between works that are truly ‘interactive’ as opposed to those that are really simply ‘reactive’

How can we establish what will work and what will not? A primary requirement is a source of good, clear information If we use a video camera to track movement, we need a good, well-lit image of an object, possibly of a distinctive colour, with clearly defined edges that contrast well with the background With this quality of data, our system has an excellent chance

of identifying the object, following it and being able to apply controls to the system

in response to movements before the camera The same principles apply to any control input: the information must be as clear as possible So, good examples might

be sound/silence, dark/light, moving/static and so on More difficult examples might

be volume of sound, intensity of light and speed of movement In other words, a binary input (off/on) is simpler and more reliable than one that varies but, clearly, it has less potential for subtlety of

interaction

INTERACTIVITY

13 Quoted in O’Sullivan, D & Igoe, T.

(2004) Physical Computing Boston MA: Thomson Course Technology PTR.

1st

p103

Trang 5

QC Preflight Point

p104

3rd

p104

3rd

p104

Interfaces and physical computing14

Once we have an idea of what form our input may take, we can consider what physical interfaces are required

Experience suggests that the design of any interface has a substantial influence on what form the dialogue with the system will take For example, a musical keyboard will allow the user to interact with the system However, it comes with significant cultural baggage Using such a keyboard immediately references the Western European musical scale and so tends to impel the user’s interactions in a particular direction that relates to the intervals between notes, the structure of chords, key signatures and the like In actuality, the keyboard is merely a collection of switches (so the note middle

C could be mapped, not to a musical note but to ‘blue’ or ‘up’ or ‘loud’ – anything in fact) but the physical presentation pushes

us into a quite specific mindset that we may or may not want

We need to carefully consider what form

of input we want to offer the user Take, for example, the idea of gesture as a controlling input We could use the mouse for this or perhaps we could be a little less traditional and use a graphics tablet

or a games controller These all have the advantage that they plug into a USB port

3rd

Above: EyeCon

This system uses inexpensive webcams

to provide video input The software can then track the movement of objects by their edges, colours or other criteria defined by the user This information can then be used as a controlling input to other systems.

Left: Stamp microcontroller

Essentially a small computer on a single chip, the Stamp and others like

it can accept inputs from almost any source(s) and translate them into data that can be accepted by computers.

Alternatively, once programmed, they are able to control some systems entirely by themselves.

Image courtesy of Parallax Inc.,

<www.parallax.com>.

Định dạng
Số trang	5
Dung lượng	1,58 MB