The Augmented Piano
-
Upload
dimitra-billia -
Category
Documents
-
view
220 -
download
0
Transcript of The Augmented Piano
-
7/27/2019 The Augmented Piano
1/37
The Augmented PianoA Critical Analysis
Jessica Aslans0976626
Supervisor: Michael EdwardsMSc Digital Composition and Performance
School of Arts Culture and EnvironmentUniversity of Edinburgh
Edinburgh
August 19, 2010
mailto:[email protected] -
7/27/2019 The Augmented Piano
2/37
Abstract
The Augmented Piano is a work for solo piano and live electronics. By exploring the implicit
feedback of electroacoustic instruments and extended piano technique during composition, theauthor approached different forms of interaction between acoustic and digital media. Of im-
port to the work is the practice of electroacoustic performance and its current concerns, which
required a brief interrogation of audience expectations and the aesthetics of laptop performance.
Also, being largely improvisational, The Augmented Piano necessitates a critical engagement with
the nature of spontaneous music, particularly in digital music, in order to successfully advise
it. Whilst offering a detailed analysis into the form and materials ofThe Augmented Piano this
paper addresses each of these concerns in context of the work.
-
7/27/2019 The Augmented Piano
3/37
Contents
1 Description 2
2 Introduction 3
3 Extending the Piano 43.1 A brief history of Piano Extension . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4 The Musical Spectacle 7
5 Composition/Improvisation 95.1 Fixed Composition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
6 Instrument Design 146.1 Models of Interaction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146.2 Hardware . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 176.3 Realtime Processing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 186.4 Non-Realtime Processing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
7 The Augmented PianoA formal Examination 217.1 Movement One . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 227.2 Movement Two . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 237.3 Movement Three . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
8 Conclusion 27
A First Appendix 29A.1 List of abstractions and subpatchers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
A.1.1 Abstractions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
A.1.2 Subpatchers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
1
-
7/27/2019 The Augmented Piano
4/37
Chapter 1
Description
This submission includes
A cd containing:
1. A folder entitledMax Patch containing my main performance patch, entitledja_ theagu-mentedpianomain.maxpat abstractions, subpatchers, sound files and text files
2. A recorded version of my work, entitledja_theaugmentedpiano.wav
A DVD containing a pro tools folder containing my mix, entitledja_theaugmentedpianomix
An accompanying folio, containing performance instructions, software and hardware re-quirements and a notated score entitled The Augmented Piano for solo piano and electronics
A critical examination of the work.
2
-
7/27/2019 The Augmented Piano
5/37
Chapter 2
Introduction
The relationship between electroacoustic resources and live instrumental perfor-mance has been a difficult one...the instrumentalist has never been far away eitheras a source for the composers sound-world or as claiming a continuing position asresource and media of expression. (Emmerson, 1998)
The Augmented Piano is a work for piano extended with live electronics. It is a tripartite work,
with each movement highlighting different aspects of the piano by using different forms of in-teraction with the electronics. The purpose of this paper is to present the technical and aesthetic
decisions employed to create the work, whilst examining the underlying materials and formal
development. The reader will initially be introduced to some contemporary piano techniques,
and existing works that feature piano and electronics, and I will establish the relevance of my
work to certain performance practices. Featuring some improvisational material The Augmented
Piano and its creation poses questions about the role of improvisation in composition, and some
ideas of relevance to this will be presented. I will then offer a detailed examination of the de-
sign of the live electronics, with particular reference to Xenia Pestovas Models of Interaction
(Pestova, 2008). There follows a sectional analysis of the work that highlights the processes,
materials and form intrinsic to each discrete movement. Finally, I will critically reflect on the
inherent strengths and weaknesses of the work , and speculate on future directions that it could
take.
3
-
7/27/2019 The Augmented Piano
6/37
Chapter 3
Extending the Piano
3.1 A brief history of Piano Extension
In the early 20th century a cluster of composers created works for piano exploring new perfor-
mance techniques. These included actions inside and outside the piano to yield new timbres,
gestures and harmonics. The new extensions evolved performance practice, and exhibited dis-
tinct musical gestures that often characterised the composers output by determining the form
and material of the works employing the new techniques. There is marked evidence of a mutual
relationship between technology and musical innovation. Revolutionary timbres and textures
offered by new technology contribute to the evolution of musical works, and conversely the
pursuit of new musical material advances technology.
Acoustic extension
From 1912 Henry Cowell directed performers towards a different approach to the mechanical
action of the piano, with instructions to play passages with fists and forearms. Techniques were
also developed for striking and scraping the strings inside the piano, distinguishing Cowells
work with polyphonic textures of sonically distinct layers of sound. The form of the compo-
sitions was shaped by this sonic identity, the density of the works often building up in a rich
4
-
7/27/2019 The Augmented Piano
7/37
3.1. A BRIEF HISTORY OF PIANO EXTENSION CHAPTER 3. EXTENDING THE PIANO
textural blanket, punctuated by clearer gestures in the foreground. These techniques also al-
lowed a certain level of irony in Cowells work, the The Aeolian Harp, for piano strings, HC 370
(Miller, 1995), for example, distorts modal material with a textural style alien to the harmonies.
George Crumb further interrogated the internal soundworld of the piano focusing on latent mi-
crotonal harmonics that could be achieved by placing a finger on certain parts of the string whilst
playing. This is a technique that is well established amongst other instruments.
In the 1940s John Cage popularised the introduction of objects into the piano. By placing metal
and rubber between the strings Cage exaggerated the percussive nature of the instrument. The
Prepared Piano sculpted Cages material, prompting composition in rhythmic patterns that
naturally emphasised latent harmonies created by the preparation. This style of composition
accentuates the percussive character of the prepared keys, again supporting the suggestion of
dialogue between instrument design and the form and material of the work.
The research that I undertook into extended acoustic piano technique gave me a broader under-
standing of the sonic properties and capabilities of the piano. This informed the design of the
electronics within my work, specifically with the incorporation of percussive prepared piano
samples and exploration into the microtonal harmonics that can be found in the resonances of
the notes. The context and implementation of my designs will be discussed later on.
Electronic extension
The advent and subsequent commercial manufacture of recording equipment and oscillators
lead to the electronic extension of instruments, so called Electroacoustic instruments. Hugh
Davies asserts a definition of these:
[Electroacoustic instruments] contain resonant objects whose vibrations are notonly converted by a transducer into audible sound but can also be heard acousti-cally (Braun, 2002)
Stockhausen used an early example of an Electroacoustic instrument in his piano-sourcedMantra
(Rosalind Bevan, 1990), combining a live amplified piano with an oscillator in ring modulation.
This work exhibits pre-prepared interaction between the electronics and what is being played,
-
7/27/2019 The Augmented Piano
8/37
3.1. A BRIEF HISTORY OF PIANO EXTENSION CHAPTER 3. EXTENDING THE PIANO
with different pitch ranges determining the quality of the resulting ring modulation.
Analogue processes such as those used in Mantra are now facilitated by digital media, such as
Max MSP software for Digital Signal Processing. As a result the electronic extension of acoustic
instruments has become more prolific and now incorporates a high level of dynamic interaction
and sonic extension. Electroacoustic instruments have been developed by composers and per-
formers creating soundworlds as distinct as those of Cage and Cowell, often spawning works
that are idiosyncratic to each extended instrument.
The predilection of composers to create unique electroacoustic instruments has lead to a wide
range of contemporary works exhibiting a multitude of styles. The combination of acoustic and
oscillators remains firmly in contemporary works, such as Peter Adriaanszs Waves for ampli-
fied piano, Ebow and Sinewaves (Adriaansz, 2007), or Johannes Kreidlers Klavierstuck 3 (Kreidler,
2004). Additionally, the ease with which pre-recorded sounds are incorporated allows the com-
poser to layer, loop and create virtuosic musical patterns using the acoustic instrument as source
material. Michael Edwards For Magda Cordell for Piano and Computer (Nicholls, 2007), uses 4
part note loops to provide textural and rhythmic interest whilst allowing the performance of
the impossibly virtuosic.
Highly processed electroacoustic palettes with timbrally detailed electronic parts that the pi-
ano plays alongside are favoured among certain composers. Thomas Ciufos Three Meditations
(Ciufo, 2010) layers recordings of identifiable piano sounds such as scraping of the low keys
to create a dense textural blanket and, more subtly, the use of granulation. Alternatively the
composer can import sounds previously alien to the piano in order to sculpt their electroacous-
tic instrument, such as the incorporation of the voice in Katharine Normans Trying to Translate
(Norman, 2010).
The aural analyses of these works gave me a comprehension of stylistic techniques, and lead me
to experiment with sonic ideas rooted in existing works. These include a reference towards Adri-
aanszs blending of sinewaves within the the work, and recordings of prepared piano samples
similar to Ciufos work.
-
7/27/2019 The Augmented Piano
9/37
Chapter 4
The Musical Spectacle
Composers of electronic music often face performance problems, particularly inconcert situations. Many such composers avoid performer for example. However,performer gymnastics, potential mistakes and particularly (it is hoped) their sensi-tive performances can add the intensity of live performance otherwise missing fromthe staleness of tape playbacks. Cope cited in (Pestova, 2008)
Ciufo cites Simon Emmersons definition of live as The presence of a live performer who
takes decisions and/or actions during a performance that change the real sounding nature of
the music (Ciufo, 2007), however static these may appear. Though this may be the case, many
performers still incorporate additional theatrical or visual elements to performance to supple-
ment the absence of physical gesture, even if the mechanism of the performance is intrinsically
based on live decisions. Incorporating a tangibly live element to the performance sidesteps the
plethora of aesthetic issues associated with performances of little or no visual stimulus. Using a
combination of an acoustic instrument and electronics allows one to incorporate human gesture
into an electroacoustic sound-world, without the need for complex programming of a reactive
electronic interface for performance.
Designing an electroacoustic instrument around an acoustic one is perhaps paradoxical given
our current relationship to digital media as performing musicians. Jody Berland posits that the
advent of the laptop musician, particularly the laptop as musician, has rendered live human
7
-
7/27/2019 The Augmented Piano
10/37
CHAPTER 4. THE MUSICAL SPECTACLE
performers obsolete (Berland, 2000). Therefore, the inclusion of an acoustic instrument could
be perceived to be willfully ignoring the inevitable demise of human performers predicted by
some, and not contributing to the evolution of performance practice. This hypothesis, though
extreme, does highlight the strengthening presence of laptop performance and Berland nods
towards the current progression of audience expectation.
Michael Edwards, commenting on his approach to computer music with traditional instruments
remarks on the importance of bridging technologies to forge a successful shift between me-
dia (Edwards, 2006). This is exemplified by the discontent with which many audiences have
accepted the laptop aesthetic. Arguably, the need for transition stems more from the need to
evolve aesthetic norms over our ability to gain familiarity and flexibility with a new instru-
ment.
Caleb Stuart aligns this audience unease with a potential distrust of the relationship between
computer and performer due to a lack of apparent causal relationship. He goes on to cite Western
bias towards the visual as the root of audiences need for performative gesture (Stuart, 2003).
This being the case, shifting audience expectations is akin to challenging hundreds of years of
embedded culture and could perhaps remain an ideal preserve for the few.
-
7/27/2019 The Augmented Piano
11/37
Chapter 5
Composition/Improvisation
Any activity in the live performance of electronic music ought to compel thepractitioner to think about the role of improvisation, as a result of the nature of themedium itself. (Barrett, 2005).
The Augmented Piano relies greatly on the performer as an improvisor in two of the three move-
ments, partly because as performer I favour structured improvisation over a fixed notated ap-
proach, and partly, I argue, due to the ontology of Electroacoustic instruments. In order to
engage critically with the composition process I found it useful to improvise and experiment
with the instrument throughout its design in order to understand its functionality. The work
was formed through a process of primary research; programming an intended sonic idea, then
testing and calibrating it directly with an improvised part to examine the musical outcome. The
most striking impact of this method is the amount of technical accidents that result in a more
interesting outcome than the intended idea. An emphasis towards the need for spontaneous im-
provisation in order to create even the most fixed section of a work arose in my compositional
process. These experiments inevitably lead to the shaping of the work, its form and material.
Rather than dichotomising the composition and improvisation it illustrates a mutual depen-
dence between them. (Kane, 2006).
Implicit in the use of electronic software and hardware in realisation of an idea is the practical
9
-
7/27/2019 The Augmented Piano
12/37
CHAPTER 5. COMPOSITION/IMPROVISATION
impact that technology has on a composition. As with an instrument made of wood or silver,
the choice of technology influences not only the shape, sound and texture of the instrument, but
also the way in which it is played, and the type of performance that it encourages. Increasingly,
studies into visual culture compared to oral culture highlight the impact that visual bias has had
on our music making, particularly the separation of the fixed visual score compared to sponta-
neous improvisation as an historical constitution (Miranda, 2009). Cardews observation of
an instruments inherent baggage with regards to the music that is created for them is relevant
to the context of my composition, and supports the argument of the semi-improvisational form
arising from the instrument (Cardew, 1971).
It is appropriate to draw a parallel between literate culture with the notated score and impro-
visation with oral culture. Notation is a result of our visually biased literate society; the score,
like written words is a residue, and our culture demands recall of information. There lies a cor-
respondence between improvisation and oral culture, both being focussed around the present
without the need for concrete historical residue. However, Walter Ong argues that orality was
always destined to produce writing in order for human consciousness to achieve its full poten-
tial, with the written word freeing up the mind from conservative tasks (Ong, 2002). If this is
the case the argument suggests that by freeing up the players mind from individual notes and
gestures, musical notation actually allows the player more musicality within them.
Perhaps more striking is the correspondence between secondary orality and improvisation with
an Electroacoustic instrument. Ong defines secondary orality as:
New orality sustained by electronic communications, secondary because theydepend for their existence and functioning on writing and print (Ong, 2002).
This new form of orality encourages more instant communication with the voice in particular,
these correspondences reducing the necessity for the written document. In other words a re-
turn to some form of communication without residue. Whilst technological communications
are inducing secondary orality to flourish, Electroacoustic instruments lend themselves well
to improvisation, partly due to the inadequacy of fixed notation for the medium, but perhaps
more importantly because the composer can build intended expressions and musical results
-
7/27/2019 The Augmented Piano
13/37
5.1. FIXED COMPOSITION CHAPTER 5. COMPOSITION/IMPROVISATION
into the medium for more immediate access. To contextualise this, Electroacoustic instruments,
like telecommunications, are utterly dependent on their written code, hence improvisation still
arises from a concrete historical residue. This code is the new form of notation necessary for im-
provisation. It is also conceivable to align Electroacoustic improvisation with Ongs statement
that literate cultures can never truly revisit primary orality. Perhaps we are not returning to im-
provisation as one would experience in an oral culture, but a secondary form of improvisation,
one that necessitates a form of fixity, reliant on the foundation of written code to further lib-
erate musicianship. Nevertheless, a return to the present (spontaneity) in music is an apposite
reflection of contemporary cultural values.
As previously discussed, The Augmented Piano was borne out of Structured Improvisation
(Pestova, 2008). Ongoing experimentation and improvisations solidified the shape and detail of
the composition, with mutual influence between the electronics and the acoustic. In this work
there is some initial difficulty in distinguishing what is acoustic and what is electronic. This led
to the discovery of musical ideas through crafting the instrument and then improvising with it
to explore it. Thus spontaneous improvisation is shaping the work (Kane, 2006).
5.1 Fixed Composition
Combining the acoustic and electronic means that there are two choices of fixity that the com-
poser is offered: an electronic tape part and mediation either to another performer or to their
future selves, through a notated score. The form ofThe Augmented Piano, including the impro-
visation sections, is governed by a pre-composed structure within the electronic part. This is
similar to using a loose set of timed instructions in a group improvisation and helps support a
fluid musical narrative. It is necessary for the performer to have rehearsed with the electron-
ics, to become familiar with the different sections and to anticipate the forthcoming musical
sound-worlds. This dialogue between the acoustic and electronics encourages a depth of inter-
nal logic into the work and the musical support that it provides can actually liberate the per-
former from the judgment of the form whilst playing, arguably allowing them to be more in the
moment.
-
7/27/2019 The Augmented Piano
14/37
5.1. FIXED COMPOSITION CHAPTER 5. COMPOSITION/IMPROVISATION
Fixed tape parts offer a security and clarity of presentation that can not be guaranteed with re-
altime processing. Using a fixed tape part allows one to arrange all controllable aspects of the
sound prior to performance, giving the ability to portray exact textures, gestures and musical
ideas. To incorporate an extreme level of detail into an instrumental interface or automated
realtime computer part often uses greater processing power than arranging the sounds before-
hand, and the level of sonic perfection cannot be guaranteed. Conversely, a fixed tape part faces
accusations of the mechanised and anachronistic (Pestova, 2008). The use of a fixed tape part
was rooted in necessity through a lack of accessible realtime processing power. For a composer
in 2010, given the advantage of reduced synchronisation issues and a flexibility of tempo , it is
necessary to question the benefit of a fixed tape part, or more loosely a fixed structure in which
realtime processes occur, to which the performer is synchronised (Pestova, 2008).
Departing from the idea of a fixed tape section I chose a slightly more flexible way of fixing the
electronic part by predetermining the overall structure of the work, and particularly detailing
the fixed level of the first section around which realtime processes and improvisation can be
anchored. This acts as a structural guide for both the electronic part and spontaneous impro-
visation, allowing the performer to play in the present and alleviating the burden of one of the
most challenging aspects of improvisation: spontaneously creating detailed internal relation-
ships and formal structure.
Though still predominant, particularly in Western musical pedagogy (Edwards, 2010), the no-
tated score is suffering increasing numbers of assaults on its hegemony from contemporary mu-
sic practitioners. An attribute distinct from this is the fixing particular notes or whole sections of
a work by memory (for a composer/performer), a practice that I found extremely valuable. In
terms of performance practice, fixing of some sections of the score can make for a more coherent
performance, particularly in terms of structure and harmonic content. The question of whether
this should be notated at a later date arises when the opportunity comes for another to perform
the work, at which time a score is an effective way to mediate ideas. Third party communication
of the more improvisatory sections is difficult to reconcile; there are choices that range from a full
transcription of a single performance (in the way that many improvised cadenzas are now fixed)
to the looser direction towards discrete shapes, patterns and phrases for an improvisation to be
-
7/27/2019 The Augmented Piano
15/37
5.1. FIXED COMPOSITION CHAPTER 5. COMPOSITION/IMPROVISATION
framed around (as well as direction towards favoured playing style with the electronic part).
I think that the form of communication of the work to another then relies on each performers
strengths and favoured mode of playing be they improvisatory, score based or aural.
-
7/27/2019 The Augmented Piano
16/37
Chapter 6
Instrument Design
Interaction has two aspects. Either the performers actions affect the computersoutput, or the computers actions affect the performers output. (Garnett, 2001)
Using electronics to augment the sounds of any acoustic instrument presents a chance to explore
mutual interaction and an extended sonic palette. The composer is afforded a great deal of
choice with respect to how interactive or restrained the Electroacoustic instrument becomes,and in turn the responsiveness of the instrument can largely determine the form and gesture
of the final composition. I approached the computer as an active and creative partner in the
actual compositional process (Kane, 2006). For me this led to a process of experimentation
with software and practical improvisation leading to further experimentation whilst using code
to solidify some of the central aspects of the work.
6.1 Models of Interaction
Here I will explain the models of interaction that I used, which will be placed in context of the
work later on. The Max/MSP patches were programmed to provide the electronics with a high
level of interactivity with the live performer. Each movement ofThe Augmented Piano demands
14
-
7/27/2019 The Augmented Piano
17/37
6.1. MODELS OF INTERACTION CHAPTER 6. INSTRUMENT DESIGN
slightly different tools so the electronics adapt to certain compositional choices. I created tech-
nological preparations appropriate to my style of playing, but also adapted certain performative
gestures to bring out interesting musical detail in the electronics. It was also evident that adding
a layer of realtime choice for the computer heightened sonic interest provided by the electronics
and the way in which I played, and forged a perceptible cohesiveness to the composition within
the improvisatory parts.
Machine Listening and Reading
Machine listening involves the computer listening and reacting to what is being played. Con-
versely, machine reading refers to the computer reacting to the sounds that it is producing itself.
All machine listening and reading parameters are subject to fluctuations in accuracy, particularly
in different performance spaces with different microphone and speaker arrangements.When
performing a preliminary work in the Reid Concert Hall in Edinburgh, the acoustic of the room
and different placement and sensitivity of the microphones meant that fundamentals were lost
and my pitch detectors could not calculate the frequency being played. At this stage the it be-
came apparent that it was necessary to program in an easy method of software calibration to
adapt to differences in acoustic.
Listening
Pitch tracking
The clear fundamental note of the piano keys allows pitch tracking to a degree of accuracy not
attainable for other instruments, such as the violin (Pestova, 2008). Though not rhythmically
accurate this pitch tracker can be used to adjust a great deal of parameters within realtime pro-
cesses, as well as triggering samples of a particular frequency.
Amplitude tracking
As with pitch tracking this is not a perfect method for accurate synchronisation of a work, though
it also works well for realtime parameter adjustment and particularly for the triggering of events.
-
7/27/2019 The Augmented Piano
18/37
6.1. MODELS OF INTERACTION CHAPTER 6. INSTRUMENT DESIGN
Amplitude tracking is particularly effective when controlling the amplitude of an electronic mu-
sical line, when designed in the right way the computers sonic response to what it has heard
can sound convincingly human.
Attack detection, Play speed detection and Density detection
These reading methods are less precise than the previous two and so can be used for more arbi-
trary triggering of events or more random parameters.
Reading
Amplitude attenuation
At points it its necessary for the amplitude of the piano to be boosted so that it is not overcome
by the electronics. To do this the computer measures the amplitude of its output and changes
the output gain of the untreated piano signal accordingly.
Synchronisation
The Augmented Piano is entirely automated. Though I was aware that having an assistant to
follow me with the electronics could alleviate the burden of synchronicity I decided that re-
hearsal time for a collaborative duo was not feasible. Sections of my work range from the very
fixed to the more fluid, and each requires different efforts towards synchronisation from the live
performer. In parts of my composition the electronics and acoustic performer are necessarily en-
tirely in sync, this being intended to contrast with the improvisation movement in exploration of
a different model of synchronicity. For this I used a click track to provide me with a fixed point
of reference. Other parts of synchronisation are due to machine listening, with the responsive
element of the electronics to the improvised section providing the cohesiveness between the two
entities. Through practise, however, the performer learns styles of playing that encourage thiscohesiveness, and is therefore not devoid of responsibility.
Synchronisation can arguably also stem from the choice of materials and placement of speak-
ers, specifically with regards to the blend of the electronics with the piano. Machine listening
plays a role in triggering the correct samples with the corresponding pitch, and again the per-
-
7/27/2019 The Augmented Piano
19/37
6.2. HARDWARE CHAPTER 6. INSTRUMENT DESIGN
formers sensitivity to the resonance section is desired for successful performance. However, if
the piano and the electronics arent synchronised in amplitude the work will not be convincingly
cohesive.
6.2 Hardware
Speakers
Emmerson states, In live works the instrument is the anchor and we can never for long leave
the realm of its influence (Emmerson, 1998). Relative to this The Augmented Piano incorporates
a set of speakers local to the piano. This is because I chose to extend the instrument rather than
creating a discrete electronic collaborator, and anchoring all the sound to a local area allowed
me to enhance sections where the piano and electronics exhibit sonic ambiguity for example in
the third movement.
Spatialisation within the localised speakers was a way in which I could augment the sonic space
of the piano according to the textural and gestural characteristics. For example a wider pan
could be triggered in the electronic part when I am playing louder, giving the impression of the
piano stretching to accommodate larger sonic content.
Achieving the correct blend between the acoustic and electroacoustic is a difficult task, particu-
larly due to the large dynamic range of the piano and the fact that calibration is necessary from
space to space. Some sections of the electronics are quite imposing, but it is important that there
remains a correct balance between this and the piano line. As such the piano is largely unam-
plified, but in sections where the electronics are in danger of overpowering the acoustic part
the piano is slightly boosted to give the effect of a swell in the composition rather than a battle
for foreground between acoustic and digital. As the louder sections of the electronics are not
necessarily fixed this is done by machine reading of its own amplitude and triggering of gain
rather than being automated. It is also useful to send out separate lines of amplification, so a
sound engineer can blend the sounds more accurately in a different space.
Microphones
-
7/27/2019 The Augmented Piano
20/37
6.3. REALTIME PROCESSING CHAPTER 6. INSTRUMENT DESIGN
This work requires four microphones, two for control of interactivity and two for slight am-
plification and as a source for realtime recording and processing. For control I use two DPA
miniature omnidirectional microphones that can be placed into the piano. With these used only
for control I can risk audio distortion by turning them up as this provides a more accurate source
of data, particularly frequency data. I then use two figure of eight microphones to record mate-
rial for later use, which allow the recording of the high and low parts of the key range, and pro-
vide some additional spatial representation of the piano (low through left channel, high through
right).
Monitoring
In order for collaborative engagement it is important to allow the human performer to hear
how the electronics is responding/directing their playing. To maintain cohesiveness monitor
speakers are placed on either side of the performer.
6.3 Realtime Processing
Realtime processes that I have used throughout The Augmented Piano include a Phase Vocoder,
Ring Modulation, Granulation of a buffer, Delay and Sample Playback. These techniques in
themselves are well established, and if used in a straightforward way can easily sound hack-
neyed. I therefore found it important whilst using these processes to try to push them beyond
their original designs.
Phase Vocoder
I used the Phase Vocoder to record specific parts of my work. Rather than recording each section
through, however, I exploited the Phase Vocoders ability to freeze at a particular point in time,
and recorded this frozen material into 5000 ms buffers. This created a dense and quite strange
texture, still anchored to the sound of the piano but of distorted nature. I then ring modulated
this rather than the amplified piano, which added to the tension of the texture. This created the
majority of the digital material for section one. The frequency of the sine wave is controlled by
the frequency being picked up by the pitch reader, so each instance of a particular phase vocoder
-
7/27/2019 The Augmented Piano
21/37
6.3. REALTIME PROCESSING CHAPTER 6. INSTRUMENT DESIGN
is always slightly altered.
Granulation
I used the MSP object Mdegranular http://ddm.caad.ed.ac.uk/staff/michael/software/mdegranular/
to contribute a different textural and spectral range to part of the work. The detailed parameters
of the granulator are controlled by time rather than by machine listening, and these parameters
are cycled through at a fixed rate.
Delay
Whilst using a realtime delay I discovered that changing the speed of playback of a delay changes
the quality of the sound so much that it becomes a unique musical line, which behaves as a coun-terpoint to the acoustic material. This relates naturally to what is being played because it is what
is being played, but just at a changing speed, and also because the parameter changes are dic-
tated by the frequency of what is picked up by the microphones. To stop the delay line simply
delaying the live signal by remaining at a static playback speed (a tired technique at best) I fed
it a constantly moving phasor signal, the flow of which was only disrupted by the parameter
change triggered by frequency movement.
Sample Playback
Sample playback provided me with the most flexible source of sound worlds, and also afforded
the highest quality processing. The advantages of this are the ability to use very similar (and
often simple) patches to trigger diverse and spectrally rich samples, that can be used to identify
entirely different sections of the work. Machine listening to trigger and change playback param-
eters (particularly pointers towards parts of a buffer are to be played back) can ensure that the
material still sounds cohesive and live, and that the electronics were still responsive to what
is being played.
http://ddm.caad.ed.ac.uk/staff/michael/software/mdegranular/ -
7/27/2019 The Augmented Piano
22/37
6.4. NON-REALTIME PROCESSING CHAPTER 6. INSTRUMENT DESIGN
6.4 Non-Realtime Processing
The sonic palette available to a composer is greatly increased, particularly in quality, by the in-
corporation of non-realtime preparations of recorded material. My approach to non realtime
processing was quite simple, and rather than creating dense new and unique textures using
these processes I preserved the natural gesture of the recordings that I had made, and rather
used subtle processes to emphasise what was already there. Additionally I processed large
sample rate conversions to increase the number of quality samples that could be used within
the performance. The advantage of non-realtime conversion is the time available to calculate
conversions with many more interpolation points than processes found in realtime. The pre-
pared piano samples are taken from a baby grand piano, edited and lightly EQd and then fed
into my patch for realtime manipulation later on. The resonant soundfiles used to facilitate the
end of the piece are real resonances taken from a concert Steinway, with only high pass filtering
required.
-
7/27/2019 The Augmented Piano
23/37
Chapter 7
The Augmented Piano
A formal Examination
I created my electroacoustic instrument before forming my work. During one of my preliminary
concerts, institutional protectiveness over the wellbeing of a Steinway excluded any extended
techniques inside the piano (in the manner of either Cowell or Cage), and I used this as a formal
restraint to adopt for the entirety of the project. By limiting my use of extended techniques I
ensured thorough exploration and complete cohesiveness between the piano and electronics. I
also limited myself to creating textures using realtime recording and recordings sourced entirely
from pianos. This includes a piano that I prepared using screws bolts and rubber and then
sampled. The digital importation of the prepared piano was intended to expose the musical
potential of the computer as instrument even in the advent of physical restriction.
The different electronic extensions fell into three discrete sound-worlds each encouraging differ-
ent acoustic material, and this lead to the tripartite form of my work. The first movement is fixed
and rhythmic with the electronics creating textural swells to interplay with the pre-composed
acoustic material. The second is improvisational, and features a responsive interactive electronic
line. The third explores the resonant nature of the piano, with the electronics blending to become
a unified extension of the piano.
21
-
7/27/2019 The Augmented Piano
24/37
7.1. MOVEMENT ONECHAPTER 7. THE AUGMENTED PIANO
A FORMAL EXAMINATION
Performing the work myself has its advantages but poses challenges.The inherently physical
nature of performance through an acoustic instrument necessitates at least a modicum of tech-
nical facility for success (despite the underlying support of the electronics). Though my piano
playing is modest and the work would benefit from a player with greater instrumental dexterity
I decided that my practice and familiarity with the instruments outweighed this. Additionally,
the electronic instrument has been designed with my playing as the source for triggering and
programming, and will have certain characteristics embedded in the way in which I articulate
a musical line.
7.1 Movement One
Form
The Augmented Piano begins with a fixed acoustic part (provided in the score) alongside a struc-
turally pre-composed realtime electronic part. The pianist plays exposes repetitive single lined
motifs, arranged into five distinct subsections in the configuration A - B - C - B - A (Please refer
to page one of the score). The pulse is fixed at 140 beats per minute, and the performer synchro-
nises with the piano part through the use of a discrete in ear click track. The time signature is
rapidly changing, and each motif is aligned to a particular sequence of time signatures, which
its melodic shape is intended to accent. The electronic part is also anchored to this meter. The
computer records material at specific temporal points that is to be processed and replayed, also
at particular points emphasising the 23 beat cycle present in all three of the motifs.
Machine Listening
This section uses data from the frequency listening tool to determine parameters for the elec-
tronic part explained below. It also reads its own amplitude to boost the unprocessed piano
signal alongside a swell of loud electronics.
Realtime Processing
-
7/27/2019 The Augmented Piano
25/37
7.2. MOVEMENT TWOCHAPTER 7. THE AUGMENTED PIANO
A FORMAL EXAMINATION
A moment of each 23 beat motif, frozen by a Phase Vocoder, is recorded in realtime as it is ex-
posed. These recordings are triggered at fixed time points recurrently throughout the work,
played back through a slow curving envelope and ring modulated with a sinewave determined
by the current frequency of the piano part. The variety and density of their playback increases
as the section progresses, contrasting the latent harmonies within each motif in the overall
form.
In some instances, in order to add to the spectrally mid to low sound of the ring modulated
Phase vocoder, I triggered a granulator simultaneously, granulating selected samples from my
prepared piano. This also contributes a crunchiness to the otherwise quite smooth swells of
noise. The granulated material changes in parameter at a fixed pace.
Non-Realtime Processing Apart from the small selection recorded prepared piano sam-
ples there is no non-realtime processing within this section.
7.2 Movement Two
Form
The acoustic and electronics in the second section are lead by improvisation. To electronically
parallel the piano improvisation in the second movement I utilise machine reading, live param-
eter mapping and triggering. The work as I perform it is spontaneous in this section, though
the way that I play and rehearse alongside the electronics determine a certain character of per-
formance, and learned palette of musical ideas that are potentially fruitful (including thread-
ing harmonic shadows of the three motifs played in the first section). In terms of the impro-
visatory material played by the performer the style of I intended the improvisation to be quite
free (though by musically referencing itself free improvisation is surely a paradox). Bursts of
sound and reactive electronic part in the delay counterpoint were gesturally appropriate to my
improvised section, signalling unpredictability and spontaneity.
-
7/27/2019 The Augmented Piano
26/37
7.2. MOVEMENT TWOCHAPTER 7. THE AUGMENTED PIANO
A FORMAL EXAMINATION
Dividing the improvisation through a fixed structure in the electronics of movement two gives
the advantage of the pre-composed with the spontaneity of music in the presence. Using the
electronics as a structural score is akin to a structured improvisation and features predetermined,
though not perfectly fixed, musical gestures. Though this does not reflect the perfect ideal of a
completely notated score (Kane, 2006) it goes some way to ensure that the performer need not
be a virtuosic improviser for the music to remain alive; it is an example of spontaneous music
supported by code based recall.
The electronics are temporally fixed into subsections, with two distinct sonic characteristics that
interplay with each other during transition. The first is entirely determined by the instrumental
playing at the time, the second calling on prerecorded sound sources for realtime triggering.
Through a loose score (please see movement two, page two of the score) players are offered
guidance towards musical ideas that enhance interplay between themselves and the computer,
alongside instructions to refer in some way back to the first section and a score of where things
happen temporally in the electronics part.
Machine Listening
This section again uses data from the frequency listening tool for various parameters of the
electronics detailed below. It also uses attack detection and amplitude readings for arbitrary
triggering of playback.
Realtime Processing
The first of the two discrete electronic parts delays the signal using the constantly fluctuating
playback speed as described earlier. The musical quality of this is timbrally very crisp, providing
a distinct contrapuntal line.
The second uses triggering to play back two types of recorded material. The initial appearance
of this is bold, and plays back short clusters of five second buffers of the pre-recorded prepared
piano. These have been played randomly into the buffers, and create a chaotic though sculpted
gesture. The length of playback of these buffers is structurally determined; as the piece pro-
gresses different parts of the buffer can be heard. When decayed, these bold triggered gestures
themselves trigger another type of played back sound heard as a shadow or aftermath. This
-
7/27/2019 The Augmented Piano
27/37
7.3. MOVEMENT THREECHAPTER 7. THE AUGMENTED PIANO
A FORMAL EXAMINATION
material comes from a recording of each motif exposed in movement one, played back through
a Phase Vocoder at double speed. Varying numbers (from 1 - 5) of these are played back and
ring modulated. The frequency of this is related to the frequency being played on the piano at
the time. The section of the sample that is played back progresses at a fixed rate as with the
prepared piano playback.
Non-Realtime Processing
I increased the number of prepared piano samples used for playback using high quality sam-
ple rate conversion in Common Lisp Music. These were then divided into high and low, and
triggered in parallel. Non-Realtime transposition is advantageous due to the larger number of
interpolation points available, and greater mathematical accuracy. This way I could achieve the
crispness of a high quality conversion with the live effect of responsive playback.
7.3 Movement Three
Form
Movement three evolved through study of John Cages work The Dream (1949), a work that I
adapted for performance by electronically extending the piano to call further attention to the
piano as a resonating body. Though not fixed it does call for a certain style of playing to empha-
sise the resonant properties of the piano (please refer to Movement three, page five of the score).
The directed style of playing is slower than the other two sections, fairly linear in gesture, and
designed to encourage more detailed listening to the properties of the instrument. A related
direction is to reference to the ongoing harmonic content of the three motifs at points, and more
so as a coda to the work as a whole. Again the player may choose whether they improvise in a
certain score or reference a transcription of my improvisation
Movement three uses two subtly different modes of resonating, the first playing back record-
ings of piano strikes with the attacks removed, the second adding another layer of filtering to
amplify harmonics within the samples. These sections are played successively; their presence is
triggered within the fixed structure of the work. This section particularly highlights the impor-
-
7/27/2019 The Augmented Piano
28/37
7.3. MOVEMENT THREECHAPTER 7. THE AUGMENTED PIANO
A FORMAL EXAMINATION
tance of blend between the speakers and the instrument: when too loud the listener is privy to
process giveaways and does not blend with the piano, when too quiet they risk not being heard
and losing the slightly distorted properties of the augmentation.
Machine Listening
This section only incorporates the frequency reader for triggering and some parameter changes.
Realtime Processing
The augmentation of the piano is facilitated by the playback of resonant soundfiles in a certain
range of the piano, triggered by notes of the same frequency. Infrequent inaccuracies in the
pitch reader provide harmonic tension. There are two types of soundfiles, Strikes and Reso-
nances. Strikes are louder and slightly more aggressive in character, Resonances provide more
of a harmonic bed. Which of these is triggered is determined by probability, with the selection
of each being more likely to follow their own kind. This was to give the electronics part more of
a dynamic shape. The first half of this only features unprocessed samples, whereas the second
half processes these files through a resonant filter. This filter uses mostly fixed in parameters
(such as Q and Gain), but the central frequency of the filters are determined by multiples of the
frequency that is being played on the piano at the time.
Non-Realtime Processing
I did not record the resonance of every note within the playback range, and used high quality
sample rate conversion to provide the full tonal palette.
-
7/27/2019 The Augmented Piano
29/37
Chapter 8
Conclusion
The Augmented Piano explores the complexities of interaction between electronics and the piano.
Creating an electroacoustic instrument leads to engagement with both media and the scope of
musical material that they can offer, and in particular highlights the importance of blend be-
tween them. Creating an electroacoustic instrument to bridge the transition between traditional
instruments and digital music is supported by an arguable unease into the aesthetics in the per-
formance of computer music. The much debated need for the visual in a traditional concert
setting exposes latent issues still to be resolved within performance practice, and the blending
of traditional norms with digital media perhaps fulfils current expectations whilst embracing
new technology. The nature of this practice, however, will remain consistently challenged and
will change with the progression of aesthetic ideals.
Embedding improvisation into The Augmented Piano also lead to an examination of spontaneous
music making, partly facilitated by notation in the form of coding. The fact that electroacoustic
instruments lend themselves well to improvisation is an apposite reflection of Ongs secondary
orality, and spontaneity reliant on written residue is something that I would be interested to
explore more widely.The practical interrogation of the instrument demanded composition by
experiment, intertwining pre-composition with improvisation. Furthermore the work solidified
through experiment, the materials lending themselves to a particular arrangement and hence
27
-
7/27/2019 The Augmented Piano
30/37
CHAPTER 8. CONCLUSION
contributing to the integral form of the work.
I feel that the work flows well and forms a coherent whole, though I would like to develop
certain musical ideas in more detail. A more thorough investigation into extended techniques
is needed for a versatile electroacoustic instrument, particularly with a view to collaboration.
Additionally, the models of interactions used are arguably quite simple, and the computer offers
far more scope for accurate interaction. This is something that has been and will continue to be
widely researched, and The Augmented Piano would benefit from utilising some more complex
contemporary models.
Ultimately, the creation of an electroacoustic instrument fostered a mutual dependence between
acoustic and electronic that led me to engage with current issues regarding computer music that
informed and sculpted the work.
-
7/27/2019 The Augmented Piano
31/37
Appendix A
First Appendix
A.1 List of abstractions and subpatchers
A.1.1 Abstractions
ampreader~Provides float amplitude and integer midi velocity values (default setting every 50 ms).
bonkreader~Sends a bang when an attack is detected (default setting every 50 ms).
brushes~and brusheslow~A coll is loaded with directions to replace one of a set of prepared piano samples into a
buffer. This is then simultaneously triggered and sent through a volume curve. Volumeattenuation lowers the volume of each successive instance of the patcher. It sends a targetof the instance number that is then divided logoithmically.
densityreader~Detects the density of attacks every 10000 ms.
gatesystem~
A system of gates to control the flow of resonances and strikes to the different resonantfilters.
pianoresonants~and pianostrikes~Based precisely on the brushes abstraction though loaded with instructions for renounceand strikes samples with a longer playback amplitude ascent.
playbackprob~Determines probability of strike or resonant playback. Each is more probable to follow itsown kind.
29
-
7/27/2019 The Augmented Piano
32/37
A.1. LIST OF ABSTRACTIONS AND SUBPATCHERS APPENDIX A. FIRST APPENDIX
polypianorecord~Based on the brushes abstraction, though incorporates the ability to record into a specify
buffer rather than play back samples. It can also pan and has a slightly different triggering
mechanism. polypianorecordpv~
A modified version of the polypianorecord~abstraction but with some playback parameterchanges.
pvrecordplaybackTriggers playback and a volume curve on signal recorded into its individual buffer. Thereare two playback mechanisms to allow a single buffer to be played back twice at the sametime. Playback is then ring-modulated by a multiple of the incoming frequency detected
by the machine listener.
realtimepianopanning26052010The length of the buffer produces two random numbers between 0 and 127. These are then
panned between in the given length. resonancefiltertwo~
A resonance filter bank. Each resonance filter has a fixed gain and Q, though has its cen-tral frequency determined by the frequency determined by machine listening added to aspecific fixed number.
speedreader~Detects the average time between notes every 10000 ms.
yinreader~Provides frequency and midi values.
A.1.2 Subpatchers
BrushesThis patcher contains two poly playbacks that hold high and low register samples. Theseare triggered by randomly generated numbers. Incremental record number from pianorecord-timepoints to allow messages through. Samples are then randomly triggered using a seriesof gates and a number generator.
Click trackThis patcher provides the click track that syncs up the performer and electronics in the firstmovement. Each beat is counted, with an emphasis on the first beat of each bar provided
by a more pronounced click.
GranularContains an mdegranular object http://ddm.caad.ed.ac.uk/staff/michael/software/mdegranular/that has parameter changes set at different timepoints. The buffer is loaded with some pre-pared piano samples It is heard when the volume curve is triggered by specific timepoints.
Granular parametersGranular parameters amplitude, density, grain length, ramp length, transposition, startpoint and end point changed at certain timepoints within movement one.
http://ddm.caad.ed.ac.uk/staff/michael/software/mdegranular/ -
7/27/2019 The Augmented Piano
33/37
A.1. LIST OF ABSTRACTIONS AND SUBPATCHERS APPENDIX A. FIRST APPENDIX
ListenersThis Patcher controls the machine listening of the patch, sending different attributes to therest of the patch for parameter control.
MOVEMENT ONEContains the patches for movement one Phase Vocode and Granulation.
MOVEMENT THREEContains the resonance, strike and filter abstractions. Uses a specific timepoint to deter-mine when messages are allowed through.
MOVEMENT TWOContains the patches for movement two delays, sinewaves and prepared piano sampleplayback.
PlaybackpianotranslatorSwitches between which parameters control the trigger of the samples. This switch is trig-gered by the playback count incremental timepoints. A pattr stores information determin-ing which section of the buffer is played back. Randomly triggers numbers for playbackpoint within certain boundaries. Packs the playback points for the poly containing bufferswith newly recorded piano samples from the brushes sub patcher.
Piano up and downTo boost piano amplification when the electronics reaches a certain amplitude.
Polypiano record and playbackEach poly receives and records signal from the brushes abstraction. It is then played backat given parameters.Targeted messages to the polys instruct each one seperately to recordat specific time points. Messages at which point to play are received from playbackpian-otranslator and sent to the next free note in each of the polypianorecord polys.
PolypianorecordtimepointsSends incremental counter values set at different timepoints to record buffers into targetedpolys found in the polypiano record and playback sub patcher. These also trigger the startand stop of the prepared piano playback that is recorded into them. This patcher also sendsincremental counter values set at different timepoints to the playback trigger mechanismnamed playbackpianotranslator. These counter values serve to change the parameters ofthe playback as well as how they are triggered.
ProgressionThis patcher structures the first movement by counting bangs created by timepoints of spe-cific bars. The counter opens one of five gates that allow a toggle message through to fivedifferent patchers (TIME SIGNATURE GATES) each signalling changes in time signaturecorresponding to the five sections of movement one.
PV playback timepointsTimepoints triggering playback of buffers 1 - 5 at specific points within the structure (Pleasesee appendix two).
PV RECORDContains an FFt freezer http://www.cycling74.com/share.htmlJean-francoisCharles1-freeze-frameand timepoints at which to freeze and record incoming signal into 5 different buffers. Thetimepoints correspond to notes within new sections within the movement.
http://www.cycling74.com/share.html%20Jean-francois%20Charles1-freeze-frame -
7/27/2019 The Augmented Piano
34/37
A.1. LIST OF ABSTRACTIONS AND SUBPATCHERS APPENDIX A. FIRST APPENDIX
PvrecordplayFeatures gated openings determined by position of the counter in the progression patcher.This determines which buffer is recorded into.
PV record twoThis patcher records the five different motifs being played into section one into a PhaseVocoder. This is then played back at twice the speed and recorded into five seperate buffersfor later playback.
PV record two timepointsThis subpatcher Counts the bangs of timepoints to target specific instances of a poly to
begin recording.
TransportThis controls the time signature and counts the bars around which the work is structured.It can be reset with the reset button, and when started with the start toggle proceedsthrough the patch.
-
7/27/2019 The Augmented Piano
35/37
Bibliography
Adriaansz, P.
2007. Waves. Available at: http://www.peteradriaansz.com/audio.htm.
Barrett, R.
2005. Improvisation notes august 2005. Contemporary Music Review, 25(5):403 404.
Berland, J.
2000. The musicking machine (online). Available at: http://switch.sjsu.edu/v6n2/articles/
berland.html (Accessed August 2010).
Braun, H.-J.
2002. Music and Technology in the Twentieth Century. Baltimore, MD: John Hopkins University
Press.
Cardew, C.
1971. Treatise Handbook, chapter Towards an ethics of Improvisation. London: Peters.
Ciufo
2010. Three meditations for prepared piano and computer. Available at: http://www.ciufo.
org/research.html.
Ciufo, T.
2007. Computer-Mediated / Interactive Performance: Moving Boundary Problem Case Study. PhD
thesis, (*)Smith College, USA (*)Arizona State University, USA, [email protected].
Edwards, M.
33
http://www.ciufo.org/research.htmlhttp://www.ciufo.org/research.htmlhttp://switch.sjsu.edu/v6n2/articles/berland.htmlhttp://switch.sjsu.edu/v6n2/articles/berland.htmlhttp://www.peteradriaansz.com/audio.htm -
7/27/2019 The Augmented Piano
36/37
BIBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY
2006. http://ddm.caad.ed.ac.uk/staff/michael/approach (online). Available at: http://
ddm.caad.ed.ac.uk/staff/michael/approach.
Edwards, M.
2010. Electric cowboy cacophony: A project for cross- genre free improvisation. The Interna-
tional Journal of the Arts in Society, 4(5):51 60.
Emmerson, S.
1998. Acoustic/electroacoustic: The relationship with instruments. Journal of New Music Re-
search, 27(1):146 164.
Garnett, G. E.
2001. The aesthetics of interactive computer music. Computer Music Journal, 25(1):21 33.
Kane, B.
2006. Improvising tape music. In Spark, Pp. 67 69. Spark.
Kreidler, J.
2004. Klavierstuck iii. Available at: http://www.kreidler-net.de/werke/klavierstueck3.htm.
Miller, R.
1995. Cowell: The Aeolian Harp, for piano strings, HC 370. New World Records.
Miranda, E. R.
2009. Preface: Aesthetic decisions in computer-aided composition. Contemporary Music Re-
view, 28(2):129 132.
Nicholls, S.
2007. Michael Edwards: For Magda Cordell, if shell have it. Sumtone.
Norman, K.
2010. Trying to translate. Available at: http://www.novamara.com/mp3s/Katharine%
20Norman%20-%20Trying%20to%20translate.mp3?Language=en&MediaID=1536.
Ong, W. J.
2002. Orality and Literacy: The Technologising of the Word. Routledge.
http://www.novamara.com/mp3s/Katharine%20Norman%20-%20Trying%20to%20translate.mp3?Language=en&MediaID=1536http://www.novamara.com/mp3s/Katharine%20Norman%20-%20Trying%20to%20translate.mp3?Language=en&MediaID=1536http://www.kreidler-net.de/werke/klavierstueck3.htmhttp://ddm.caad.ed.ac.uk/staff/michael/approachhttp://ddm.caad.ed.ac.uk/staff/michael/approach -
7/27/2019 The Augmented Piano
37/37
BIBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY
Pestova, X.
2008. Models of Interaction in Works for Piano and Live Electronics. PhD thesis, Schulich School
of Music Schulich School of Music, McGill University, McGill University Montreal, Quebec.
Rosalind Bevan, Yvar Mikashoff, O. B. .
1990. Karlheinz Stockhausen: Mantra. New Albion Records NAR 025.
Stuart, C.
2003. The object of performance: Aural performativity in contemporary laptop music. Con-
temporary Music Review, 22(4):5965.