Figure 3.6: Gestures and their resulting effect
3.4.2 Observations
Although visitors would need an initial bit of training they would then quickly be able to collabo- ratively design musical textures. For example, one person could lay down a predictable repeating bass line by keeping themselves to the periodicity/repetition side of the room, while a companion can generate a freer melodic line by being nearer the ’noise’ part of the space. By not having one user be able to control the whole narrative, the participants would communicate verbally and di- rect each other in the goals of learning to use the system and finding interesting musical textures. This collaboration added an element of playfulness and enjoyment that was clearly apparent.
This installation is an exploratory prototype and occupies an ambiguous role in terms of purpose; it is in a nebulous middle ground between instrument, art installation and technical demonstration. It is clear however, that as a vehicle for communicating ideas related to the expectation, pattern and predictability in music to the public, it proved very effective10.
It was hoped that the installation could be used to identify what areas of the triangle were most popular. However it was clear from observing how people behaved in the installation that this would yield very noisy data unlikely to be of much use; the situation was too playful and chaotic. In order to better get a sense of preferences with regards to the information models, the desktop version of the Melody Triangle was developed. This is described in the next section.
3.5. The Desktop Application 106
Figure 3.7: Screenshot of the Melody Triangle UI. On the right current transition matrices being played are displayed.
3.5 The Desktop Application
In the screen based interface, a number of tokens, each representing a sonification stream or ‘voice’, can be dragged in and around the triangle with the mouse. As in the installation, a se- quence of symbols is sampled using the corresponding transition matrix, which are then mapped to notes of a scale or percussive sounds. Keyboard commands give control over other musical parameters such as the pitch register, volume, scale, inter-onset interval and instrument for each voice. The system is capable of generating quite intricate musical textures when multiple to- kens are in the triangle. The overlapping and interweaving of melodies of varying periodicites and predictability is well suited for making content that could stylistically be characterised as ‘minimalism’, not so unlike the work of Steve Reich or Philip Glass.
This interface is quite unlike other computer aided composition tools or programming en- vironments, as here the composer exercises control at the abstract level of information-dynamic properties.
10This installation was presented at Digital Shoreditch, the Bradford Science Festival, as well as the
3.5. The Desktop Application 107
3.5.1 User trials with the Melody Triangle
A pilot study with six participants was carried. The participants were asked to use a simplified form of the user interface (a single controllable token, and no rhythmic, registral or timbral controls) were carried out under two conditions: one where a single sequence was sonified under user control, and another where an additional sequence was sonified in a different register, as if generated by a fixed invisible token in one of four regions of the triangle. In addition, subjects were asked to press a key if they ‘liked’ what they were hearing.
The hypothesis was that users would linger longer in areas of the triangle that would produce more aesthetically desirable sequences, and these would tend to be the in the areas of the triangle that are of high predictive information rate, that is, areas along the middle and lower edge of the triangle.
The subjects’ behaviour were recorded, as well as points which they marked with a key press.
3.5.2 Results
Some results for four of the subjects are shown in fig. 3.8. It was no possible to detect any systematic across-subject preference for any particular region of the triangle.
Comments collected from the subjects suggest that characteristics of the patterns were read- ily apparent to most: several noticed the main organisation of the triangle, with repetitive notes at the top, cyclic patterns along one edge, and unpredictable notes towards the opposite corner. Some described their systematic exploration of the space. Two felt that the right side was ‘more controllable’ than the left (a consequence of their ability to return to a particular distinctive pat- tern and recognise it as one heard previously). Two reported that they became bored towards the end, but another felt there wasn’t enough time to ‘hear out’ the patterns properly. One subject did not ‘enjoy’ the patterns in the lower region, but another said the lower central regions were more ‘melodic’ and ‘interesting’.
3.5.3 Discussion
The initial hypothesis, that subjects would linger longer in regions of the triangle that produced aesthetically preferable sequences, and that this would tend to be towards the centre line of the triangle for all subjects, was not confirmed. However the subjects did seem to exhibit distinct kinds of exploratory behaviour. It is possible that the design of the experiment encouraged an initial exploration of the space (sometimes very systematic, as for subject (c)) aimed at under-
3.5. The Desktop Application 108
Figure 3.8: Dwell times and mark positions from user trials with the on-screen Melody Trian-
gle interface, for four subjects. The left-hand column shows the positions in a 2D information
space (entropy rate vs redundancy in bits) where each spent their time; the area of each circle is proportional to the time spent there. The right-hand column shows point which subjects ‘liked’; the area of the circles here is proportional to the duration spent at that point before the point was marked. The plots for all users can be seen in the appendix.
3.5. The Desktop Application 109
standing how the system works, rather than finding musical patterns. It is also possible that the
system encourages users to create musically interesting output by moving the token, rather than finding a particular spot in the triangle which produces a musically interesting sequence by itself. In light of this it was clear that a different approach was required to be able to determine what kinds of melodies people prefer. One issue was that the restricted interface (one single moveable token with no additional musical controls) made for an experience of limited musical enjoyment. Additionally it was clear from the collected data that users need some time to get beyond the initial exploratory phase before it is possible to get a sense of their aesthetic preferences. This is what motivated the implementation of the mobile app version of the triangle. The app puts no restriction on time for the users to familiarise themselves, has numerous features and controls to increase the variety in musical output, and the users can submit settings when they feel like. The mobile app is discussed in section 3.6.
3.5.4 Qualitative Feedback
In parallel to the pilot study, informal qualitative feedback was elicited from users of the screen interface. Here four participants were interviewed, all practicing musicians that use computers in music production or in performance. This is with a view to establish what features would be desired for any eventual further development of the interface, for instance as a VST instrument for inclusion in a standard audio production environment.
Unlike in the pilot study where participants would not know anything about the interface before hand and were asked to ‘explore’ with as little instructions in possible, here the potential users are first taught how to use the system. Then were given time to play and experiment, and in informal discussion feedback and criticism of the system was sought ought. As part of a broader conversation, they were asked if they could identify the different areas of the triangle, what features of the system they liked and disliked, if they could see themselves using the system as part of their musical practice, and if so how.
Some points collected include -
• The subjects were very quick to get to grips with the properties of the different areas of the
triangle, and found it quite intuitive.
• The subjects reported using the periodic/predictable half of the triangle more than the