Part 1 Practice

1 Introduction
2 Muscle Machine
3 Technology
4 Concept
5 Conclusions
Part 2 Theory
6A Robo-Sound
Performance
6B Robo-Sound Performance
7 Neural Networks
8 Artificial Intelligence
9A Interactivity
9B Interactivity
10 Mapping
11 Collaborations
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Stan Wijnans

MuDanx
Home
Curriculum Vitae
Projects
Academics
Masters PhD Publications
Contact
Webdesign by
Stan Wijnans
 

9A Interactivity and Improvisation

Interactivity The trivial form is a closed system with a finite data set. The non-trivial form has the open-ended capacity to accommodate new variables (Roy Ascott 1996)

Below we can find a clear description of the meaning of the word interactivity:

The Collins English Dictionary (1992) contains the following definitions :

Interact is a verb, [meaning]      : 1. to act on or in close relation with each other.
Interaction is a noun [meaning] : 1. A mutual or reciprocal action or influence.
2.2. Physics, The transfer of energy between elementary particles, between a particle and a field or between fields. ,
interactive adjective, [meaning]
1.Allowing or relating to continuous two-way transfer of information between a user and the central poin of a communication system, such as a computer or television.
2.(of two or more person, forces etc.) acting upon or in close relation with each other; i.e. interacting.

The definition implies that the two parties act upon each other; that the parties exchange something, they act upon each other in a way that is reciprocal.”
(in Paine 2002:2)

As I will outline below, a ‘reciprocal way of interacting’ could direct interactive artists towards interactive improvisation and this can be reached from different points of view. Robert Rowe looks at the possibilities of strengthening human-machine musicianship using algorithmic computer programming that can eventually even improvise with the data triggered by the performer. In the book ‘Machine Music’ he notes:

There is no general machine improviser yet. Though improvisation systems do not know what will happen in the performance, they generally are programmed to participate in music of a particular style. Ultimately the ongoing research in style analysis / synthesis may make it possible to write a machine improviser that could recognise the stylistic characteristics of the music being played and adapt its contribution accordingly. Style-specific improvisers have already proven their artistic merit, however, and still benefit from an analysis of the musical context even when that context is essentially restricted a priori (Rowe 2001:278).

Before this form of computer improvisation is possible we will have to examine why there is a necessity for a performer to be able to improvise with the computer. Musicians and artists have always applied interactivity amongst themselves and now the aspect of a technology performance improvisation becomes even more important, being able to interact, ‘play’, freely with a technology that can sometimes distribute an unexpected dataflow. Dr Lycouris explains below “how artists involved in cross-disciplinary performances are experimenting with improvised hybrid performance- and digital multimedia work mixing elements of movement, sound and choreography”.  She goes on:

‘Improvisation in live performance is a compositional event defined by clear decisions which take place in the ‘present moment’ and that become part of the technical performance process and are, for this reason, irrevocable .…There are a number of parameters which inform the decision-making process, amongst which one of the most crucial is the performers’ assumptions and experiences in relation to models of composition in hybrid improvised work which incorporates the use of technology, the heterogeneity of the participating elements intensifies the role of the unknown’ (Lycouris 1999:4).