• Sound theory 1 (in English)
• Sound analysis (in Norwegian, together with Rolf Inge Godøy)

In both courses I use Pure Data (PD) for demonstrating various interesting phenomena (additive synthesis, beating, critical bands, etc.), and the students also get various assignments to explore such things themselves. There are several PD introduction videos on YouTube in English, but I found that it could be useful to also have something in Norwegian. So far I have made three screencasts going through the basics of PD and sound synthesis:

• How should the division of sounds be?
• Should every track be totally independent of the others, or would there be room for leakage between tracks (e.g. reverberation).
• Is it intended for 2 channel tracks only. How would they handle panning/spatialisation and multichannel tracks?
• …

It would be interesting to read the specification of the format to see how they are going to approach this. Anyway, it is great to see these things approach the mass market! I am quite sure we will see lots of such “active music” approaches in the years to come.

1. Distracted listening
2. Tangential listening
3. Metaphysical listening
4. Signal listening
5. Sing-along listening
6. Lyric listening
7. Programmatic listening
8. Allusive listening
9. Reminiscent listening
10. Identity listening
11. Retentive listening
12. Fault listening
13. Feature listening
14. Innovation listening
15. Memory scan listening
16. Directed listening
17. Distance listening
18. Ecstatic listening
19. Emotional listening
20. Kinesthetic listening
21. Performance listening

and he concludes: “This list is not intended to be exhaustive.”

Here a picture from an experimental setup where we are looking at the synchronisation between the musicians in a string trio.

We really need to create a set of music recordings including motion capture and video, but this first requires that we develop some common format that can be used for synchronisation and sharing. GDIF, do I need to say anything more…

Esteban played an example of a synthesised version of Pachelbel’s Canon, and it was amazing how much more lively it sounded when the performance actions were also synthesised and used to control the sound. However, as Antonio Camurri noted in the discussion, the performance sounded a bit rushed and without breathing. This is probably because the model is, so far, only based on the recording and synthesising of the instrumental actions (excitation and modification), and does not take into account various types of ancillary movements (e.g. support and phrasing) which typically would create the larger scale shapes.

• Musical actions: actions involved in music making, e.g. performing an instrument (i.e. sound-producing actions).
• Music-related actions: actions that are the result of, or influenced by, music, e.g. dancing, walking in pace, etc.

While I believe the two are strongly connected, I think it makes sense to also make a clear distinction between them.

Music Performance Research is an international peer-reviewed journal that disseminates theoretical and empirical research on the performance of music. Its purpose is to disseminate research on the nature of music performance from both theoretical and empirical perspectives. The journal publishes contributions from all disciplines that are relevant to music performance, including archaeology, cultural studies, composition, computer science, education, ethnomusicology, history, medicine, music theory and analysis, musicology, philosophy, physics, psychology, neuroscience and sociology. [...]

Sounds like a place where I should consider submitting a manuscript.