Transcript ISEA_final

Gestural Control of Sound Synthesis
Marcelo M. Wanderley
Ircam - Centre Pompidou
[email protected]
http://www.ircam.fr/gesture
http://www.notam.uio.no/icma/interactivesystems/wg.html
Interactive Systems
Topics:
Introduction/Terminology
Analysis of different systems from two points of
view:
Engineering
Human-Computer Interaction
Analysis of Instrumental interaction in music
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
2
Interactive Systems
Interactive systems (installations, music and
dance) becoming increasingly popular:
Computers provide high computational power
 real-time processing
Transducer technologies easily available
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
3
Interactive Systems
Design of Interactive systems:
Requires multiple competencies:
Artists, craftsmen, engineers, programmers,
designers, performers, composers, choreographers,
dancers…
Huge amount of possibilities
Lack of a set of consolidated results
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
4
Interactive Systems
Multiple roles:
Communication problems may arise (Camurri):
Approaches, goals and languages from different
domains.
Difficulties:
Evaluation of system performances
Reusability of results
System models/Taxonomy of interactive system
design
ISEA
2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
5
Interactive Systems
How to evaluate an interactive system without
taking into account aesthetics?
How to commonly define gesture and interaction
across fields?
What is part of the composition and what is part of
the technology?
How to test the usability of the system? (available
results usually done by expert and motivated
performer)
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
6
Terminology
Generically:
Interaction: mutual or reciprocal action or influence.
v. Interact: act upon one another.
Interactive System:
A system that allows mutual action or influence
between a user and a computer.
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
7
Terminology - HCI
Human-Computer Interaction: (Dix)
Interaction: Process of communication or
information transfer between the user and the
computer.
Interactivity: defining feature of an interactive
system.
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
8
Terminology - Music applications
Music - some examples:
Interactive Musical Systems (Rowe): Interactive
computer music systems are those whose behavior
changes in response to musical input.
Interactive vs. Reactive systems (Bongers)
Level of interaction
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
9
Human-Machine Interaction Loop
Bongers (adapted)
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
10
Interaction Contexts in Music (Bongers)
In three levels:
Performer-System interaction
performer playing an instrument
System-Audience interaction
Interactive sound installations
Performer-System-Audience interaction
Both the artist and the audience are active parts of the
interactive loop.
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
11
Sound Generating Interactive Systems
Different possibilities:
New Instruments/Input Devices:
 real-time control of sound synthesis;
 “score-level” control;
 compositional tool or post production.
Multimedia Installations
Dance-Music Interfaces
...
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
12
Sound Generation in Interactive Systems
Three non-exclusive roles sound can play in
interactive systems (Pressing):
Artistic/expressive - all music and song;
Informational - speech, alarms, sonified data;
Environmental - animal calls, wind sounds,
noise.
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
13
Different Sound Generating Interactive Systems
How to design interactive systems?
Various points of view:
 Artistic
 Engineering
 Human-Computer Interaction
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
14
A Technological Analysis of Interaction in
Sound Generating Systems
Basic features from a technological point of view:
Types of sensors - existing ones or new designs;
 Sensor characteristics
 Analysis/Conversion techniques for sensors outputs;
 Input Device Design
Mapping strategies between control variables and
sound generation;
Sound synthesis methods.
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
15
A Technological Analysis of Interaction in
Sound Generating Systems
Sensors and transducers:
 transducer (principle); sensor (device)
Sensor characteristics:
 sensitivity, stability and repeatability
Descriptive parameters: (Garrett)
 Accuracy, error, precision, resolution, span,
range
Refs: Paradiso97, Bongers00, Infusion Systems, DIST Eyesweb, VScope
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
16
A Technological Analysis of Interaction in
Sound Generating Systems
Analysis techniques for sensor outputs
Analog-digital conversion (usually MIDI, but
not necessarily)
 Various analog-to-MIDI interfaces:
SensorLab (STEIM), i-Cube (Infusion), AtoMIC (IRCAM),
MIDICreator (York Music Tech. Centre), etc.
 Features: input resolution, number of inputs,
outputs, speed, portability/size, price, etc.
http://www.ircam.fr/gesture
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
17
A Technological Analysis of Interaction in
Sound Generating Systems
Mapping of gesture parameters to sound
parameters (Winkler, Hunt/Wanderley/Kirk...)
What is mapping? - Context dependent
Mathematics: to assign to every element (of a set) an
element of the same set or another set.
Mapping Strategies?
 Simple (one-to-one) mappings? Neural networks?
Complex strategies?
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
18
A Technological Analysis of Interaction in
Sound Generating Systems
Sound Synthesis:
 Signal models
 Physical models
Classification of synthesis methods (Choi)
 Autonomy (degree of automation with respect to
stored data)
 Indexicality (according to the variety of temporal
feature production)
 Indirection (inverse of direct control)
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
19
A Semantical Analysis of Interaction in
Sound Generating Systems
Basic features - communicational point of view:
Final goal of the interaction - role of the system:
 A tool for expression/communication;
 A means to explore an environment.
 Required user expertise level.
Context of the Interaction - physical, social, etc.
Physical approach:
 movements, gestures (gesticulation, signs), postures or
manipulation.
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
20
A Semantical Analysis of Interaction in
Sound Generating Systems
Other features (see also Pressing):
Primary communication channel:
 visual, aural, tactual
Role of Sound Output:
 expressive, informational, environmental (others ?)
Body parts involved:
 finger/hand, other limbs, whole body
movements/postures.
Degrees of freedom involved in each action;
ISEA 2000 Available
Feedback;Marcelo M. Wanderley
Dec/08/00
21
Semantical Analysis
Movement Sensing Installations (Winkler)
Analysis of participation and response in
movement sensing installations. Factors in
audience experience:
 Digital factor
 Physical factor
 Social factor
 Personal factor
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
22
Semantical Analysis
Example of Feature: Movements and gestures
Movements: Actions/gestures/postures (?)
Concept of gesture in instrumental music?
 Musical gesture  movement of thought
 Performance gesture  playing technique
 Gesture (computer music)  related to specific
physical variables  gestural primitives (Choi)
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
23
Semantical Analysis
Example of Feature: Expertise level in music
performance (Lehmann)
Three levels of music performance expertise
according to training and practice:
 Basic level: informal non musicians
 Sub-expert level: varying degrees 
amateurs
 Expert level: extensive (at least ten years !)
ISEA 2000  professional musicians
Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
24
Semantical Analysis
A distinction based
on two features:
User expertise
level and physical
approach
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
25
Semantical Analysis
Distinction based on
two features:
 Extension to
other domains
 Design
implications!
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
26
Instrumental Interaction in Music
Focus on computer-based musical instruments
Based or not on traditional instruments
Expert interaction
Manipulation (mostly) - tactile/force feedback
Expressive intent
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
27
Instrumental Model
A computer-based musical instrument model
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
28
Instrumental Model
Basic topics:
Performer gestures/feedback
Input device (controller) design
Mapping
(Synthesis)
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
29
Gestures in HCI (Kurtenbach/Hulteen90)
Continuum  gesture as computer input:
 Gestures that augment an information
received by another channel  redundant.
 Gestures conveying non-redundant, essential
information  no single channel is sufficient.
 Gestures as main input to the machine.
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
30
Gesture Primitives (Choi)
Three types:
Force-based primitives
Trajectory-based primitives
Pattern-based primitives
Different gestures:
Gesture intensive (functional role)
Gesture extensive (expressive content)
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
31
Example - I. Choi
Machine Child
Gestural Control :
tracker magnétique,
cyberboots (FSRs)
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
QuickTime™ et un décompresseur
Cinepak sont requis pour visualiser
cette image.
Marcelo M. Wanderley
32
Instrumental Model
Feedback
Primary/passive feedback
Visual, auditory and tactile-kinesthetic
(tactual)
Secondary/active feedback
Auditory/force feedback
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
33
Performer Gestures
F. Delalande : Analysis of the Instrumental gesture in
three levels (G. Gould):
Effective gesture - necessary to produce the sound
Accompanist gesture - associated body
movements
Figurative gesture - without direct
correspondence to a physical movement
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
34
Performer Gestures
The actual way of playing an instrument:
Instrumental gestures (C. Cadoz) or Effective
Gestures (F. Delalande)
Gestures not directly linked to the
production of the sound
 Non-obvious, accompanist or ancillary
gestures
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
35
Modeling Performer gestures
Instrumental gestures (C. Cadoz)
Excitation
Modification
Selection
+ Biasing
Ancillary gestures
part of top performer ’s technique.
convey information!
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
36
Instrumental Gestures (C. Cadoz)
Specific to the gestural channel
 means of action on the physical world as well as
communication means in a double sense.
Instrumental Gesture Definition:
Applied to a material object
 where physical interaction takes place
 this interaction conveys some form of
information
 mastered by the subject
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
37
Instrumental Gestures (C. Cadoz)
Functions associated with the gestural
channel (e.g. hand)
Ergotic: material action and modification of
the environment;
Epistemic: perception of the environment;
Semiotic: communication of information
towards the environment.
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
38
Instrumental Gestures
Three-tier layer:
Excitation  provide the energy to be found in the
produced sound
Modulation:
Parametric  continuous modulation
Structural  change the structure of the
instrument
Selection
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
39
Biasing Gestures
Suggestion of a fourth gesture type:
Biasing gesture
 Complementary to the previous types in some
instruments.
 Permanently required in order to put the system
in an initial state
 May modify other gestures operation
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
40
Non-obvious Gestures
Ancillary or accompanist gestures:
Not captured by traditional controllers (no
sound produced)
Not usually implemented as variables in
interactive systems.
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
41
Non-obvious gestures (Wanderley)
Study of performer gestures
(clarinet)
Ancillary gestures (instrument
movement)  GW99
Relation to other gestures
(non-verbal) ?
Possible inter-performer
gestural patterns ?
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
42
Origin
Consciously
Composer’s explicit demand (e.g. Stockhausen)
Visual effect, synchronization between players
(e.g. chamber music)
Not completely
Mental representation of the piece (Delalande)
Communication of extra (redundant?)
information
Playing technique (?), breathing?
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
43
Instrumental Model
Basic topics:
Performer gestures/feedback
Input device (controller) design
Mapping
(Synthesis)
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
44
Gestural Acquisition
In instrumental music:
Direct acquisition: one captures the actual
physical gesture or movement through the use of
sensors (Bongers, Mulder, etc.)
Indirect acquisition: information obtained from
the analysis of the instrument’s sound
(Puckette and Lippe, Bailey, Egozy, Orio)
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
45
Interfaces Analogique - MIDI
 Different models (Sensorlab, iCube, AtoMIC Pro, etc.)
(démos Emmanuel)
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
46
Interfaces A/M - Comparison
Gesture Research in Music (home - page)
http://www.ircam.fr/gesture
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
47
Gestural Controllers
Instrument-like controllers: profit from highly
developed (expert) gestures.
Instrument-inspired controllers - SuperPolm (Goto)
Alternate controllers: design emphasis on
capturing “natural” gestures - opposed to a learned
gestural vocabulary - Hands (Waisvisz)
Hybrid controllers  Intermediate options !
Extended instruments - hyperinstruments
(Machover)
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
48
Controllers
Instrument-like
controller:
Saxophone MIDI YamahaWX7
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
49
Instrument inspired controller
S. Goto - Superpolm
“Violin-inspired”
controller that intends to
capture part of the
gestural vocabulary of a
violin player in order to
control other sounds
(e.g. granular synthesis)
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
50
Alternate controllers
Example of an
alternate controller:
Graphic drawing
tablet - WACOM
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
51
Contrôleurs
Contrôleur alternatif :
The Hands (M.
Waisvisz - STEIM)
http://www.steim.nl
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
52
Input Device Design
Choice of input device for sound synthesis
control
Design principles:
idiosyncratic (musical !?)
design methodology (engineering !?)
Round table - Trends in Gestural Control of Musical
(Wanderley and Battier)
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
53
Input Device Design
Available methodologies?
Design of gestural controllers:
Pressing, Cariou, Mulder, Chu
Transducers, Feedback and Musical Functions
Vertegaal et al.
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
54
User tests:
Choice of evaluation methodology:
 Multi-parametric simultaneous control (expert)
Possible adaptation of motor control or HCI
test methodologies?
Role of musical context?
Role of training (games)?
Importance of statistical analysis?
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
55
How to evaluate input device technologies?
Some evaluation tasks - HCI: (Buxton)
Target acquisition - pointing task
Constrained motion task - linear, circular ...
Pursuit tracking, tracing and digitizing ...
Application to a musical context:
Navigation in a timbre space - Vertegaal et al. ICMC94
 Evaluation of input devices in a 4D timbre space.
(mouse, joystick and dataglove)
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
56
How to evaluate?
 Common performance evaluation methodologies :
Fitts’ law (Fitts)(MacKenzie)
Meyer’s law (Rosenbaum)
Steering law (Accot and Zhai)

A measurement of movement time and accuracy to
perform a task.
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
57
The musical context?
Questions:
Is it important to evaluate the above methodology by
using a measurement of time or accuracy?
How to preserve a minimum musical context?
how to select a musical task?
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
58
Transducers, Feedback and Musical Functions
Musical Functions:
Absolute dynamic functions: absolute selection of a pitch or
amplitude value
Relative dynamic functions: modulation of a given pitch
Static functions: selection of pitch range, duration or
transposition, etc.
Primary Feedback:
Visual
Tactile
Kinesthetic
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
59
Transducers, Feedback and Musical Functions
- Vertegaal,
Ungvary and
Kieslinger
ICMC’96
Towards a
Musician’s Cockpit.
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
60
Experiments - task
Application of modulation to the pitch of a
melody.
No substantial training period.
Warm up session plus 3 tries.
20 subjects - musicians and non-musicians
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
61
Evaluation Experiment
Design
 Choice of an alternate controller with different
transducer technologies
Evaluation
 Definition of a musical task:
No long-term training
 Possible application to other domains
Evaluation possibilities
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
62
Input Device used
Available transducer types:
Position (linear or rotary) - stylus;
Isometric force (linear) - FSR’s and stylus;
Input Devices
Stylus
X, Y
X-tilt or Y-tilt
buttons
pressure
Puck
X, Y
buttons
Extra Sensor pressure
Extra Sensor position
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Transducer Type
position
rotary position
position
isometric force
position
position
isometric force
position
Marcelo M. Wanderley
63
Relation MF - Instr. Gesture
 Fundamental frequency
 Modulation of freq.
 General Amplitude
Musical Function
absolute dynamic
relative dynamic
absolute dynamic
Instrumental Gesture Type
selection / parametric modification
parametric modification
excitation
 Application:
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
64
Application
Musical Function
 Absolute dynamic
Best Transducer
position
Second option
isometric force
Third option
isometric force
(rotary)
 Relative dynamic
 Static
isometric force
isotonic force
(rotary or not)
(rotary or not)
or velocity
position
isotonic force
(rotary or not)
position
-
(rotary)
Thus, for the instrumented tablet:
X position of the stylus
Pressure sensor
Pressure of the stylus
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
 Fundamental frequency
 Modulation
 General amplitude
Marcelo M. Wanderley
65
Transducers, Feedback and Musical
Functions
Example position transducer
(linear and rotary)
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
66
Input Device used
Wacom tablet
 Instrumented with extra
sensors (MIDI):
Two round FSR’s (pressure)
One linear FSR (position &
pressure)
Synthesis software:
CHANT (Max/MSP)
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
67
Experiments
Preliminary experiment:
• Melody performed by
moving the stylus in
clockwise direction.
• Modulation on
each second note.
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
68
Experiments
Movement from one
position to another
(pointing task):
• Modulation applied on the
right rectangle.
• Analysis of the influence of the
movement direction on the
subjects’ evaluation.
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
69
Results (Wanderley)
Subject’s evaluation:
 Qualitative evaluation after
each try (7 levels).
 Results for the third (and last)
try.
Results for both directions:
pressure sensor ranked best.
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
70
Results (Wanderley)
Results / direction:
 Pressure sensor always
ranks best.
 Linear position sensor
ranks second.
 Rotary position sensor
ranks better for the
horizontal direction
compared to the diagonal
one  integrality.
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
71
Conclusion
Design of input devices for sound synthesis control:
The match of transducer technologies and musical
functions - The technology predicted was confirmed by
user tests (in this case!).
Questions:
Role of musical context and the task definition.
Evaluation procedures.
Application to other domains:
Non-musical instrument manipulation
Semi-expert interaction
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
72
Application example
The Cockpit - T. Hungvary/M. Kieslinger
QuickTime™ and a
Video decompressor
are needed to see this picture.
QuickTime™ and a
Video decompressor
are needed to see this picture.
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
73
Instrumental Model
Basic topics:
Performer gestures/feedback
Input device (controller) design
Mapping
(Synthesis)
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
74
Mapping
Different points of view:
Mapping is part of a composition
- idiosyncratic
Mapping is part of the instrument
- affects instrument effectiveness
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
75
Mapping
Electronic musical instruments:
Input device is independent from the sound synthesis
device.
No implicit mapping of one to the other.
Too often: one single control device corresponding to
a single synthesis parameter.
 one-to-one mapping.
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
76
What do we mean by mapping ?
An electronic musical instrument model:
Mapping is the liaison or correspondence between
control parameters (derived from performer actions)
and synthesis parameters.
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
77
Mapping
Mapping between controller outputs and
synthesis inputs (RWDD)(HK)
One-to-one;
Convergent (many-to-one);
Divergent (one-to-many);
 Any mixture of the above (many acoustic
instruments)
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
78
Review of previous works
General works (topology):
Bowler et al. - ICMC90
Mapping of N articulation parameters to M synthesizer
parameters.
Choi et al. - ICMC95
Manifold interface - mapping of a point in a control space to a
point in a phase space.
Simulation of instrumental performance:
Favilla - ICMC96, RWDD - Kansei97, MFM - Kansei97,
HUNT99
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
79
Mapping
Acoustic instruments:
Sound generation device is
inseparable from the
human-control device.
Yielding complex control
relationships between
human performers and their
instruments
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
80
Simulation of traditional instrument
performance
Rovan et al. 1997
Clarinet performance using
a MIDI controller - Yamaha
WX7 and additive
synthesis.
Clarinet
 Reed behavior (Benade90)
 Gestures are not independent
 Embouchure is always
needed
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
81
Simulation of traditional instrument
performance
WX7:
independent outputs
- fingering
- breath pressure
- lip pressure
 Clarinet reed behavior
modeled in FTS to
simulate the
interdependence of
controller parameters.
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
82
Simulation of traditional instrument
performance (RWDD)
Simple and complex mappings - pedagogy
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
83
Complex Mappings (Hunt00)
 Computer mouse controls on-screen
sliders
 One parameter at a time
 Most like common computer interfaces
 4 physical sliders
 Similar in concept to the mouse interface
 Independent control of each parameter
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
 Uses same hardware
 Multiparametric: Complex mapping
 Requires energy (volume related to
speed of mouse movement)
Marcelo M. Wanderley
84
Example of Complex Mapping (Hunt00)
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
85
Towards a model of Instrumental Mapping
Separation of mapping into two independent
mapping layers
Intermediate parameter layer:
- Perceptive parameters - timbre space (Wessel)
- Geometrical shapes - (Mulder et al.)
- User defined parameters
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
86
Towards a model of Instrumental
Mapping (WRS98)
Two independent
layers - user definition of
abstract manipulation
parameters (WSR)
First layer - controller
dependent
Second layer - synthesis
dependent
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
87
Conclusion
Need of a better understanding of the role of
parameter mapping in different interaction
contexts (instrumental).
Different mapping strategies affect the perceived
operation of the electronic musical instrument.
Use of complex mappings:
 in the simulation of existing instruments;
 may improve expert performance on general HCI!
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
88
General Conclusions
Different aspects of interactive systems
depending of the analysis point of view
Influence on the design
Input from other fields - HCI, ergonomics,
experimental psychology, etc.
Need of a general corpus of knowledge:
Trends in Gestural Control of Music !
ICMA/EMF working group/Gesture Research
in Music Homepage
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
89
Reference
 Electronic
publication
 Ircam
(March/00)
M. Wanderley
& M. Battier
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
90
Working Group - www.kcng.org/wg/
ISEA 2000 Dec/08/00
Marcelo M. Wanderley
91
Web addresses
 Gesture Research in Music homepage:
http://www.ircam.fr/gesture
 Working Group ICMA/EMF
www.kcng.org/wg/