Libertad(es) Controlada(s)

([un]Controlled Freedom[s])

Interactive Music for Computer, Dysklavier and Performer, implementing Sensor Technology.

Alexis Perepelycia Student N 10848045 Sonic Arts Research Centre Queens University Belfast

Abstract
The piece Libertad(es) Controlada(s) ([un]Controlled Freedom[s]) is an algorithmically generated piece for Computer, the Yamaha Dysklavier Piano and a Performer. Unlikely most musical pieces employing sensor technologies as an interface to control the computer, this project proposes the implementation of sensor technology not as a mean to control a virtual or synthetic instrument nor to control computer processes as an end itself. Instead, it proposes as a way of interfacing and touch less playing an acoustic instrument. The Performer wears a pair of gloves with built-in sensors. The sensors track the gestures of the Performer and data is sent to a computer. The computer, then, algorithmically generates a brunch of data, wh ich includes not just musical notes, but musical ideas with proper dynamics, phrases, accents, articulations, etc. This data is sent to the Piano trough a simple MIDI connection. Sound processes are applied both to the direct signal of the Piano and to the sampled sound. Reverberation and Pitch Transposition are the main processes involved. They are used to extend the music possibilities of the instrument either to extend the duration of notes or by transposing them onto an unusual register for the Piano. The piece enhances the Interaction (action and reaction) between the three elements that conform it: the logical one (computer), the acoustical one (piano) and the living one (human, performer), whom is actually the one deciding what is the piece going to be, musically; by interplaying gesturally either with piano, the computer or both.

Introduction With the increment of Live Electronic Music and Electro-acoustic Music including acoustic instruments in live performances, the correlation between gesture and sonic representation became vague. The paradigm of achieving almost any imaginable sound by hitting a key of a Laptop keyboard, clicking a mouse button or by turning knobs and sliders of a MIDI controller seems to have left expressiveness aside form the performers. They seem to spend most time trying to remember which actions they have assigned to their computers and what does each button, knob and fader from their MIDI controller does rather than focusing on the actual performance and music. Therefore, integration between the instrument and the performer became an issue that needs to be solved if we want the computer and electronic devices to enhance gestures being made by performers. A proper translation of the Performers gestures into adequate musical representations would enrich the actual performance by providing the Performer with reliable musical feedback from its arms and hands motion. The implementation of Sensor Technology would give the Performer an answer to the paradigm, by making use of a flexible system that provides them with freedom enough to manipulate the needed amount of parameters to get the best musical result. Hence, touch less action will enhance musical gestures by not being linked to non-musical devices such as faders or knobs-based MIDI controllers, which belong more to studio environments than to the performance stage. The piece Libertad(es) Controlada(s) ([un]Controlled Freedom[s]), proposes the implementation of Sensor Technology into a pair of gloves that will suit the performers hands to provide the computer with information related to the gestures and movements being made by the performer throughout the piece. Furthermore, it intends to establish a link between the Performer and an acoustic instrument to take advantage of the properties of acoustic sound and integrating them into the music.

Development (I)

Overview

1.1) Key points to achieve/combine to get the desired result: Gesture Action/Reaction Feedback Direct/non-direct related Gesture and Sound Interactivity Interdependence Touch less produced acoustic sounds Blend of processed sounds

1.2) The Importance of the Acoustic Instrument Once the key points were set I had to determine which instrument to use. It had to be an acoustic instrument allowing me to achieve my goals in terms of interactivity and yet provide me with an acoustically rich sound covering the harmonic spectrum as much as possible. Therefore, the best possibility was to implement the Yamaha Dysklavier, since a crucial point was the possibility to send data from the computer it. Another possibility would have been to attach a specifically developed actuator (e.g. servos) to different types of instruments like an acoustic guitar or bowed instrument. But the complexity of such a task would have taken me most part of the project and that wasnt the aim of the piece.

Development (II)

Music 2.1) Concept

Since my intention was to make a music piece for a performer (not necessarily an instrumentalist) linked with sensors to an acoustic instrument I had to focus in the interaction between the two elements. I had to decide then, the amount the interaction and the way I was going to treat action/reaction on each side of the system: perfo rmer-instrument. I have decided then to write an algorithmic and rely partially on the computer, since each one is an element and note a whole of the music. That resulted in a piece where the performer could make a certain influence on the behaviours of the instrument by sending different orders (signals) but not being able to control everything in a determined way but rather

in an indeterminate way. To make cover this are I had programmed a generative engine which give a brunch of notes when an order is received. In this situation the performer might give the computer a direction with certain intention but he/she will never be able to determine precisely the ending result, as the computer will finally react to the action produced by the performer and produce the sonic material. To avoid the computer to take unwanted paths and in order to get interesting musical results I decided to provide the performer with control over certain parameters such as: Harmonic structure (modal/atonal). Timbre/Colour (bright/dark). Density (tight/wide spectrum). Sound distance (far/close). Sound source (acoustic instrument/computer). Combinations of the mentioned above.

Harmonic Structure: I had decided not to use tonality since I dont feel it would bring me the tonal characteristics I wanted for this piece. Therefore, I had approached the Harmonic Structure in a way that allowed me to have two very distinctive and very contrasting sonic materials. In order to achieve this I have made use of Modality and Atonality. Each one has unique characteristics that provided me with great tools to achieve sonic contrasts. Timbre/Colour: I have made use of different articulations to achieve different sound properties and get different effects in specific sections on the music. Density: I have included, when programming the patches, the option for the performer either to cover the whole harmonic spectrum of the piano while playing a phrase or to focus on a certain section of the keyboard. Sound distance: By implementing reverberation, as well, the feel of closeness and farness is achievable. Sound source: Despite the Piano being the only instrument involved in generating sound by its own, I had the idea of interacting between the original sound and the hacked (sampled) one, by extending the piano possibilities.

2.2) Modes General: None of the Modes have the same amount of notes. None of the Modes have the same Root note. Every Mode has different tonal (sonic) characteristics. Some of the Modes are more artificial than others, perhaps because of the use of Chromatic intervals (Mode IV), resulting in denser harmonies.

Some Modes have more conventional structures, close to Tonal structures (Mode III) resulting in almost diatonic and less denser harmonies.

Description of each Mode: Mode I E of 6 Mode II C 9 Mode III D 8

D E F G A Bb - C C# Notes 1, 3, 5 and 7 (odds) form D minor with flat 7th = D (b3/b7).

Root Amount Notes Notes

Mode IV A 7
A D# - E F F# - G G#

E F G Bb C D Eb - E C# - D# F F# - G A Bb Characteristics The Notes 1, 3, Notes 1, 2, 7 4 y 5 form a and 9 form C7 = Diminished 7th C (b3, b7) chord. Note 2 is the 9th The other two of the chord notes (3 y 6) while note 8 is are both the 13th. sensible of the root, depending This Mode on the direction could be the mode is ungrouped into played. a minor 3rd (C, D, Eb: diatonically filled) + a Major 3rd (Eb, E, F, F#, G: chromatically filled) + a 4th (G, A, Bb, C: diatonically filled).

The main characteristic of this mode is that its formed by two augmented The main fourths characteristic of (tritones). this mode is that it could be The first of understood as them is an an Aeolian interval while mode the second is transposed to chromatically D, but with the filled. Major 7th added, resulting in a scale with two sevenths, minor and major.

Explanatory graphic on the inter-relations between the four Modes:

Continuous lines show common notes between all the modes. Dotted lines show the structure of the three common notes inside each mode. Dashed lines show common notes between two or three modes.

2.3) Formal Criteria

2.3.1) General Formally the piece has five sections clearly marked by a silence between each. Sections I, II and V have two smaller sections inside whereas sections III and IV have no sections inside. Sections II and I are built on the principle of question and answer. The question is being asked (played) by the piano, while the answer, is given (sounded) by the computer by playing back the sound (question) and processing it. Section III is a solo section. On it, the piano plays a Modal solo throughout the whole section. Since it is supposed to be played in a lonely way, the computer adds slightly variations of reverberation to play with the idea of sound distance. In Section IV and in Section V piano and computer play simultaneously. In Section IV the computer creates a thick density by adding excessive reverberation and in Section V the computer interferes the dialogue of the piano by playing back samples of the previous section and transposing them at quartertones. Although the timing is relative, duration of approximately 20 minutes is recommended for performances. The scored timing is 21 minutes.

If a different duration is chosen for performance, the sections should maintain its proportion between them, as follows: Section I ~ 1/10 Section II ~ 1/5 (~2* Section I) Section III ~ (~ 2* (Section B)-1) Section IV ~ 1/10 (~ Section I) Section V ~ 1/5 (~ Section 2)

2.3.2) Sections

a) Sections Ia and Ib (Intro) The first section of the piece is made of two different sub -sections. Both constitute the opening for the piece. Section Ib starts with a series of clusters in the highest register of the Piano at a forte (loud) dynamic and starts a chromatic glissando downwards, as it speeds up gradually. The idea of the Intro is to get as much of the resonance of the instrument as possible by using the pedal to let all the strings ring and to make the other strings sympathetically vibrate. In addition to this, to enhance even more this effect, the computer adds reverberation once the performer reaches the lower register of the piano and while repeating at fast tempo a few clusters. At this point the signal is feed into a sampler. After the sound is sampled a transition to Section Ib, begins by playing back the sampled sounds from the very end of the previous section. Section Ib discards the idea of resonance but preserves a certain mood of it since it is build from a sample of Section Ia plus transposes it in a non usual way for the piano. It is played back forward and backwards in a loop mode and transposed first surrounding the tonal centre of the sample and later extending the spectrum of the original sample, till the end of the section when the transposition reaches around an octave below the original tone. Section I (a and b) ends with a silence to separate it from Section II. b) Sections IIa and IIb In the beginning of Section IIa the following conditions for the Piano, are set: Play as fast as possible Play as piano (quiet) as possible Play with mechanical articulation (short notes) Start in the middle register and gradually spread the note within the whole register Crescendo poco a poco (increase dynamics gradually) Let the piano resonate again, by pressing the pedal down

The aim of those directions is to try to achieve an effect similar to Granular Synthesis by playing short notes really fast and at distant intervals. This process would not be achievable, normally, by a piano player, so I decided to include it in the piece to show the possibilities of the system. This section, generates a great contrast in terms of chronometric density, with the previous section and provides the sampler with a great steady signal to develop the second half (b) of Section II. During the last half of Section II the idea is to produce a blur transformation of the sampled sound from the first half. Because of that, a great amount of reverberation is applied while sampling the end of the first half of the whole section. While the blurred effect takes shape the Piano starts shading till it disappears completely leaving the blurred samples playing in loop mode till the end of Section IIb. The section finishes with a fade out followed by a dramatic silence of a few seconds to give air to the following section. c) Section III (solo) In a lonely way . That is the way this section is intended to be played. It is then, an airy and open section where there is a lot of time and space for each note. This is the core section of the piece, lasting about half of the total duration of the piece. It is entirely built on the Artificial Modes (described in chapter 2.2 of this paper) in order to generate not just a contrast but also a balance or maybe an unbalance, since till this section the criteria of tonality or modality is avoided (replaced) by the idea of atonality, so the listener is not expecting any specific harmonic structure. Intentionally it happens in the core section, in the solo section, where the piano takes all the attention. As this section is the solo section of the piece, on it, the computer enhances the musical ideas developed by the Piano. Working on favour to the pure acoustic sound by adding small amounts of reverberation just to get the feeling of distance (farness/closeness) to mask the transitions between Modes, which suppose to be almost unnoticeable.

d) Section IV This section works as an interference to the end of the solo section. It produces a sudden shift in the mood built during the solo, contrasting completely with the lonely feeling of Section III. It is based on the same harmonic material than Section I but this section has a linear approach. That is, instead of using vertical structures (clusters, chords) I have used arpeggios (notes played sequentially like a broken chord) to achieve a linear feel. The section has the following conditions set: Start with slightly fasts arpeggios. Start in the high register and then randomly glissandi to the low register. Increase the tempo (accelerate) gradually. Increase dynamics gradually from mezzo forte to fortissimo within the whole section.

Gradually spread arpeggio time (time between notes) [in order to achieve this you should turn the Cluster Transformation Time button on, before the beginning of the section]. Gradually thicken the texture by adding reverberation.

The arpeggios could be spread over the whole range of the Piano, but this is not essential, since it is left to the performers will. The section ends with a moderate silence which doubles as a separator between this section and the following. e) Section V (coda) The final section of the piece is intended as a coda. And thus, it combines elements used in the other four sections to create a new structure. The section starts with an atonal single line being played at a moderate tempo and it quickly introduces changes on register, tempo (accelerates) and loudness (increases). After a moment, samples from the previous section are sounded and transposed within a range of an octave as the loudness increases to the highest degree. Next to the little atonal sub -section, while the sampled sounds reach its loudest peak, cutting through the mass of sound a modal sub -section begins. It implements Mode 3 to evoke a pseudo-melody that will lead to a final atonal section, which will sinks into the sounds from the sampler, by this stage being transposed at quartertones. The last breath of sounds will gradually fades into the silence, finishing the music in loneliness.

Development (III) Building the System

3.1) The Glove Since I wanted to enhance the interaction between Performer and Instrument by using a type of Interface that would allow this I have decided to implement a pair of gloves with sensors built in to convert gesture (motion) from the Performer into data to control the Computer and thus the Piano. To achieve as much control over the computer as possible I had to track as much of the motion as possible. In order to do that I had to include several types of sensors to track different types of movement and different actions the Performer might do to get different sonic results. The original design per glove included: 4 flexometers, 4 micro switches, 1 dual axis inclination sensor and 1 infrared sensor. However, due to budget circumstances the final version has 1 dual-axis inclinometer and 4 switches per hand. Cables were routed to an RJ45 (UTP) connector and linked to a Basic Stamp Board next to the Computer, with a UTP cable (w/ 8 cables inside) to avoid loose cables to interfere with the

Performers

movements.

A RJ45 (UTP) Connector B Ground (for all Switches) C Switch 1 (+5v) D Switch 2 (+5v) E Switch 3 (+5v) F Switch 4 (+5v) G Dual-axis Inclinometer

3.2) The Sensors After receiving the Sensors available for this project I started to experiment with them to have an approximate scope of their behaviour and to check if they would do the tasks I expected them to do. a) Dual-axis Inclinometers The first type of sensor I have tried was the Memsic 2125, Dual-axis Thermal Accelerometer. This type of sensor measures static (gravity) acceleration and dynamic (vibration) acceleration over two axis, X and Y. Because of its capabilities it could be used to measure not just acceleration but also tilt

(inclination) and rotation. Knowing the sensor capabilities I could have programmed two or three different tasks for this type of sensor but instead I decided to have a relatively simple task in order to have to do, when performing, a fair simple action to get a direct result. As a result I set them to work as dualaxis Inclinometers in order to have the possibility of getting two values (X,Y position) to control two different parameters.

Memsic 2125

b) Switches In order to route the incoming signal from the Inclinometers to different parameters inside the Computer I have implemented four switches, one per finger but in the thumb, which is in fact the ground (vss) for the other four fingers, which have a positive pole (vdd)[+5v.] each. Buy touching the tip (where all the switches are placed) of the thumb with the tip of any other finger, the Performer closes a circuit, choosing which parameter the data coming from the Inclinometer will affect and thus, selecting a parameter to perform with.

3.2.1) Tested Sensors (not included in the glove) Despite in the final version of the gloves I have implemented one inclinometer and four switches; during the construction process I have tried several types of sensors. Next I will mention the most representatives: a) Flexiforce On the early stage of development of the gloves I have tried a Force Resistor called Flexiforce. This sensor is basically a plastic strip of about 6 inches with a small circle with three pin connections in one end and a small-circled surface in the other. This circled surface is the area that actually works as a sensor. When you apply a certain pressure in that area, it will send a message to the Basic Stamp Board, which will indicate two values: force applied and time spent applying it. Those values are used then to fill a capacitor (buffer) and when the pressure is release the capacitor starts unloading its data. The main problem experienced with this type of sensor was the unreliability of not knowing how much pressure is being applied and how long has been since one started to apply that pressure. Plus, as it was a plastic strip it was really complicated to attach them properly to the gloves without interfering with the Performers movements, which might have caused a really awkward feeling when performing. Because of those reasons I have decided not to use them in the final version of the gloves.

Flexiforce

b) Polaroid Ultrasonic Sonar Transducer Together with the Flexiforce I have tried a Sonar sensor. I had the idea of implementing it to measure distance (proximity) between both hands in order to assign the reverberation amount to that gesture. Although, the type of sensor I could get was a little bit noisy and when very quiet dynamic levels were needed in the music, one could easily hear the sonars noise. In addition to that, the main piece of the circuit (the sonar it self) was a little bit too big to fit the glove and still have a comfortable feel while performing.

Polaroid Ultrasonic Sonar Transducer

3.2.1) Combining the Sensors The final version of the gloves I have made to perform the piece included, as showed previously, a dual axis inclinometer and four switches per hand, providing the performer with to degrees of freedom (X and Y) times four (one per finger), that is:

X1, Y1 X2, Y2 X3, Y3 X4, Y4

However, this amount of signal routing was not enough to control all the parameters I needed to control to perform the piece, in order to solve this problem I have implemented a foot pedal (keyboard sustain like) to double the amount of routing made to the incoming signal from the Inclinometers. The final amount of signals would be described as follows:

X1, Y1 (A) X1, Y1 (B) X2, Y2 (A) X2, Y2 (B) X3, Y3 (A) X3, Y3 (B) X4, Y4 (A) X4, Y4 (B)

(A) = Pedal Off (B) = Pedal On

3.3) The Basic Stamp Board and Basic Programming In order to get all the sensors working and feeding data into the computer a Basic Stamp Board (BSB) was implemented. In essence a BSB is a device that allows you to build circuits on it by attaching the needed components (for e.g. resistors, capacitors, switches, sensors, etc.). However, its main feature is that it has a built in microcontroller (a type of EEPROM memory) that allows the user to store a small piece of code programmed in Basic language. This is really useful when dealing with sensor technology since one can easily program different tasks to be performed by the received signal coming from the sensors. For instance, one could assign a variable (resizable number) to a certain pin (an input or output connection terminal) and when the signal goes through it will be detected by the programmed code and a predetermined action will be done.

Final Basic Stamp Code:

'{$STAMP BS2sx} '{$PBASIC 2.5} ' 2 Tilt (2125) Sensors + 8 Switches top: ' accelerometers variables x VAR Word y VAR Word x1 VAR Word y1 VAR Word ' switch variables a VAR Byte b VAR Byte c VAR Byte d VAR Byte e VAR Byte f VAR Byte g VAR Byte h VAR Byte 'Loop Section DO ' accelerometer loop PULSIN 14, 1, x PULSIN 15, 1, y PULSIN 12, 1, x1 PULSIN 13, 1, y1 'switch loop IF IN1 = 1 THEN a = 0 ELSE a = 1 IF IN2 = 1 THEN b = 0 ELSE b = 1 IF IN3 = 1 THEN c = 0 ELSE c = 1 IF IN4 = 1 THEN d = 0 ELSE d = 1 IF IN5 = 1 THEN e = 0 ELSE e = 1 IF IN6 = 1 THEN f = 0 ELSE f = 1 IF IN7 = 1 THEN g = 0 ELSE g = 1 IF IN8 = 1 THEN h = 0 ELSE h = 1

'Debugging Section DEBUG "A ",DEC a, CR DEBUG "B ",DEC b, CR DEBUG "C ",DEC c, CR DEBUG "D ",DEC d, CR DEBUG "E ",DEC e, CR DEBUG "F ",DEC f, CR DEBUG "G ",DEC g, CR DEBUG "H ",DEC h, CR DEBUG "I ", DEC x,CR DEBUG "J ", DEC y,CR DEBUG "K ", DEC x1,CR DEBUG "L ", DEC y1,CR PAUSE 1 LOOP

4) Max/MSP Programming Once I had tested the viability of implementing the Dysklavier and the Basic Stamp Board I had to find a piece of software that would allow me to implement the converted signal coming from the Board and use it to trigger the algorithms to generate the music and once it would be done, route it to the Piano. Since I had used Max/MSP in previous projects I knew this program would allow me perform the tasks I needed. 4.1) Link with Basic Stamp The first step was to establish the link between the Basic Stamp Board and Max. Since the Board has USB connection I have used an object that detects signals coming into the Input Ports of the computer. I had the signals from all the sensors together coming to the same port so I separated them and then routed to different sections of the patch. 4.1.1) Filtering and Numbers Conversions Data coming from the Basic Stamp Board was treated in different ways to get the desired result, depending on the parameters to be controlled. Hexadecimal to Decimal conversion was applied to route different signals properly. As well, several types of filtering of the stream were applied in order be able to control the musical parameters with a smooth signal.

4.2) Programming the Musical Tools Once the sensor part worked Ok, I could focus totally on the musical side to achieve what I needed, in order to be able to perform the piece. The final version of the piano patch for Libertad(es) Controlada(s) has four main elements: a Cluster Generator , a Single Note, a Two Notes Generator and a Modes. In addition to this, the patch has a signal processing (MSP) part that includes: a sampler with controls for sampling time, playback (with choice for mirror loop back and forth), half tones transposition (ranging from an octave above to an octave below) and quarter tones transposition with the same two octaves range. Moreover, there is a section of the patch that includes reverberation and it is possible to control the amount of reverberation and the loudness of the reverberated signal.

Final Patch (screenshot):

4.2.1) Piano Elements

a) Single Notes Generator In some sections of the piece I make use of atonalism. Because of this I have created an engine that automatically generates notes with no hierarchy at all, according to same directions the Performer would give: Pitch Range, Relative Tonal Centre, Dynamics and Tempo. b) Two Lines Generator In order to be able to create different densities when using atonality I have built a two lines atonal player, to create some sort of inter-layering between notes, without actually playing a chord an arpeggio or a cluster. Different dynamics could be applied to each line to enhance even more this principle. The following parameters were set for the performer to control: Phrase Length, Relative Tempo, Automatic Tempo (button on/off), Sustain and Dynamics for each of the two players. c) Modes Player The core section of the piece is based on modal structures. It actually combines four different modes (explained on chapter 2.2 of this paper) throughout Section III, which is actually the solo section of the piece. To control the different modes I have implemented a modal player, which controls and combines the four modes. On it, the performer controls the following parameters: Mode Selection (I, II, III, IV), Relative Dynamics, Relative Tempo, Sustain and Phrase Length. d) Clusters Generator It is used in the opening section and it has the following parameters to control: Tempo, Root note, Length and Articulation. The final part of the patch is a Cluster Generator, which creates six notes clusters, covering a perfect fourth. For instance, if the root note for the Cluster is set to C3, the result will be as follows:

In addition to the parameters listed above, there is a button set to turn on and off the cluster Transformation Time. This parameter is used in Section IV to convert clusters into chromatic arpeggios. The transformation time for arpeggios works by delaying the attack of each of the six notes of the cluster with different times. It has a clock that counts the elapsed time and each note has a different multiplication factor to get a spread arpeggio that gradually spreads more and more on time.

d.1) Delays for transforming Clusters into Arpeggios Notes to be delayed = 6 (N1, N2,N6) Delay Time = z (ms.) Note 1 will be delayed with delay time z1 (N1 => z1), and so on till N6 => z6. z1 z2 z3 z4 z5 z6 = z + (z/10) = z + (z/9)*2 = z + (z/8)*2.1 = z + (z/7)*2.1 = z + (z/6)*2.3 = z + (z/5)*2.4

This will result in every note, including the root note, being delayed. Every note except the root will be delayed with a proportional coefficient, being closer to each other (time wise) and slightly distant from the root, resulting in an uneven arpeggio with a rhythmic rest in the root note. For instance: For z = 1000 ms. Z1 = 1100 ms. Z2 = 1222 ms. Z3 = 1262 ms. Z4 = 1312 ms. Z5 = 1318 ms. Z6 = 1480 ms. 4.2.1) Computer E lements a) Sampler The main element of the patch, not intended to control the piano is a sampler. It is used to record small samples of the Piano while it is playing and then apply few sound processes like: Loop playback Reverse playback Mirror playback (back and forth) Half tones Transposition (within an octave above and an octave below) Quarter tones Transposition (within the same spectrum the previous)

As sometimes the sound is too quiet, as soon as the sampler stops recording the signal is automatically normalized to get a constant sound.

b) Reverb The second element in this section is a Reverb based on Christopher Keyes Reverb of his Real-Time Granular Cloud Maker. The Reverb has controls for Signal Level and Wet/Dry level. An interesting feature is an adaptive filter that detects the notes being generated by the computer and selects the root frequency of that note in order to avoid feedback when fully wet reverberation is applied to the Piano signal. Practical Implementation (I)

5) Performing 5.1) The setup for performing the piece should include the following: Yamaha Dysklavier Piano or similar. A computer running Max/MSP version 4.3 or above, with enough CPU power and ram memory to run both the algorithmic part and the sound processing smoothly. Two cardioids microphones (or any two directional microphones). An audio interface with to preamps to connect the microphones to sample the Piano. A MIDI interface to connect the computer to the Piano. A two on/off buttons foot switch or pedal switch. A Basic Stamp Board (BS2sx or above) and a Basic Stamp Editor running Basic Stamp 2.5 (to load the code to the microcontroller). A pair of speakers with its proper amplifier. The proper gloves to perform it.

5.2) Directions A few considerations should be taken in performance situations. The performer should face the audience in order the let them perceive the gestures involved in the sound production. The computer and the Piano should not interfere between the audience and the Performer. Though, visual contact with the computer monitor is recommended. The speakers should be on the same line than the Piano, vertically and horizontally to enhance smooth transitions between reverberated and pure sound. Although the relative position of microphones and speakers should be considered in order to avoid feedback. Long enough cables to link the gloves to the Basic Stamp Board should be implemented in order to provide the Performer with as much freedom of motion as possible. All cables connecting interfaces (Audio, MIDI) and microphones or speakers should be cleared from the Performers area.

5.3) The Performance space:

A Computer Desk B Piano C Speakers position (in case of using two) e1 and e2 Microphone position when Piano lib half closed f1 and f2 Microphones position when Piano lib removed.

Conclusions and Future Work

The key point of this project was to create a system, which allows the Performer to interact gesturaly with an Instrument. And that was achieved in the system developed for the piece Libertad(es) Controlada(s). My experience with the system suggest that sensor technology would be a very powerful tool to control an acoustic instrument remotely, by translating the performers gestures into musical information through a computer. In the piece Libertad(es) Controlda(s) the Performer is provided with a reliable wearable interface which allow him/her to contact less interact with the Piano enhancing the principle of gestural integration between Performer and Instrument. However, the system could be greatly empowered by increasing the amount of sensors implemented in the actual version. This would give increase the amount of accuracy of the system by tracking in a more adequate way every gesture and movement of the Performer. For instance, with the actual Inclinometer the system perceives two degrees of freedom, translated into four. That is, axis X and Y, from 0 to positive and from 0 to negative. But with an infrared distance measurement sensor a third axis (Z) might be included to give even more accuracy to the system. Interesting physical parameters to measure and include in further improvements to the actual system would be motion and pressure of fingers, distance between hands. Another useful improvement would be the implementation of Wireless (Wi-Fi /Bluetooth) protocol to link the gloves to the Basic Stamp Board in order to set the Performer free from any cable that might disturb the performance. Finally, despite the piece and the system are intended for a single player, a future system would include the possibility of multi-players enhancing the interactivity even more and taking advantage not only of the human-computer interaction but also of the human-human interaction as in purely instrumental situations. Acknowledgements

I would like to express my gratitude to Dr. Ricardo Climent for his support, enthusiasm and wise guidance throughout the whole project. Without his advice this project would havent been possible. Thanks Timothy Place for his help on the Tap Tools for the PC version, to Jason Dixon for his help with soldering and circuitry stuff. Special thanks to Chris Corrigan for all the technical assistance and for always being there when needed. Lastly, Id like to dedicate this work to my family and Cecilia Gonzalez for their unconditional support, always and everywhere. To all of them my gratitude.

References/bibliography

Books and Papers: ANDERSON, David P. and KUIVILA, Ron Formula: A Programming Language for Expressive Computer Music in Readings in ComputerGenerated Music, BAGGI, Denis, ed., IEEE Computer Society Press, Unites States of America, Los Alamitos, 1992, pp. 9-23. BIBBY, Neil Tuning and temperament: closing the spiral in Music and Mathematics, FAUVEL, John; FLOOD, Raymond; WILSON, Robin, eds., Oxford University Press Inc., Unites States, New York, 2003, pp. 9-27. BORGERS, Bert Physical Interfaces in the Electronic Arts: Interaction Theory and Interfacing Techniques for Real-Time Performance in Trends in Gestural Control of Music IRCAM (Institut de Reserche et Coordination Acoustique / Musique), France, ISBN 2-84426-039-x., April 2000. CROSS, Jonathan Composing with numbers: sets, rows and magic squares in Music and Mathematics, FAUVEL, John; FLOOD, Raymond; WILSON, Robin, eds., Oxford University Press Inc., Unites States, New York, 2003, pp. 131-146. FOWLER, David Hemholtz: combinational tones and consonance in Music and Mathematics, FAUVEL, John; FLOOD, Raymond; WILSON, Robin, eds., Oxford University Press Inc., Unites Sta tes, New York, 2003, pp. 77-88. GAMER, Carlton and WILSON, Robin Microtones and projective planes in Music and Mathematics, FAUVEL, John; FLOOD, Raymond; WILSON, Robin, eds., Oxford University Press Inc., Unites States, New York, 2003, pp. 149-161. HODGES, Wilfrid The Geometry of Music in Music and Mathematics, FAUVEL, John; FLOOD, Raymond; WILSON, Robin, eds., Oxford University Press Inc., Unites States, New York, 2003, pp. 91-111. JANZEN, Thomas E. AlgoRhythms: Real-Time Algorithmic Composition for a Microcomputer in Readings in Computer-Generated Music, BAGGI, Denis, ed., IEEE Computer Society Press, Unites States of America, Los Alamitos, 1992, pp.199-211. PARADISO, J. et al New Sensor and Music Systems for Large Interactive Surfaces. Proceedings of the ICMC, 2000, pp. 01-04. PARADISO, J., et al Sensor Systems for Interactive Surfaces. IBM Systems Journal, Volume 39, Nos. 3 & 4, October 2000, pp. 892-914. REICHBACH, Jonathan D. and KEMMERER, Richard A. Soundworks: An Object-Oriented Distributed System for Digital Sound in Readings in Computer-Generated Music, BAGGI, Denis, ed., IEEE Computer Society Press, Unites States of America, Los Alamitos, 1992, pp. 161-181. ROADS, Curtis Microsound MIT Press, London: Cambridge, Massachusetts, 2001, 209 p. SHERLAW JOHNSON, Robert Composing with fractals in Music and Mathematics, FAUVEL, John; FLOOD, Raymond; WILSON, Robin, eds., Oxford University Press Inc., Unites States, New York, 2003, pp. 163172.

TAYLOR, Charles The Science of Musical Sound in Music and Mathematics, FAUVEL, John; FLOOD, Raymond; WILSON, Robin, eds., Oxford University Press Inc., Unites States, New York, 2003, pp. 47-59. WINKLER, Todd Composig Interactive Music: techniques and ideas using Max Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, etc, 1998, 350 p. XENAKIS, Iannis Formalized music: thought and mathematics in composition Rev. ed., Harmonologia series; n 6, Pendragon Press, Stuyvesant, New York, 1992, 387 p.

Scores consulted: BERIO, Luciano Sequenza VIIb per sassofono soprano, Universal Edition, ue 30255, Austria, 1995. BERIO, Luciano Sequenza III per voce femminile Universal Edition, London, 1968. BOULEZ, Pierre Structures Ia pour deux Pianos Universal Edition Ltd., London, 1955. LIGETI, Gyorgy Volumina: for Organ Edition Peters No. 5983a, Frankfurt: H. Litolff's Verlag/C. F. Peters, New York, 1973. MAXWELL DAVIES, Peter A Mirror of Whitening Light Boosey & Hawkes Music Publishers Ltd., 1976. MESSIAEN, Olivier Etudes de rhythme. Mode de valeurs et d'intensits: pour piano Durand, Paris, 1950. PENDERECKI, Krzysztof De natura sonoris Edition Moeck; Nr. 5029, H. Moeck Verlag, Celle, 1967. PENDERECKI, Krzysztof Polymorphia: fr 48 Streichinstrumente. (Polymorphia for 48 stringed instruments) Edition Moeck ; Nr. 5008, H. Moeck Verlag, Celle, 1963. STOCKHAUSEN, Karlheinz Expo: Nr. 31 Stockhausen-Verlag, Krten; West Germany, 1975. STOCKHAUSEN, Karlheinz Pole: Nr. 30 Stockhausen-Verlag, Krten; West Germany, 1975. STOCKHAUSEN, Karlheinz Klavierstucke X (Stcke, piano. no.10) Universal Edition; Nr. 13675f LW, London, 1967. STOCKHAUSEN, Karlheinz Klavierstucke XI (Stcke, piano. no. 11) Universal Edition; Nr. 12654 LW, London, 1975. STOCKHAUSEN, Karlheinz Klavierstucke XII fr Klavier 1979/1983, Stockhausen-Verlag, Krten; West Germany. STOCKHAUSEN, Karlheinz Mantra fr zwei pianisten, werk Nr. 32 Stockhausen-Verlag, Krten; West Germany, 1975. XENAKIS, Iannis Metastasis for String Orchestra Boosey and Hawkes, London, 1967.

Music (CD) consulted: BERIO, Luciano Sequenzas Deutsche Grammophon, Ensamble Intercontemporain, Pierre Boulez, 1994. BOULEZ, Pierre Boulez conducts Boulez Deutsche Grammophon, 1995. LIGETI, Gyorgy Gyorgy Ligeti Keyboard Works Sony, 1997. TAKAHASHI, Yuji Xenakis: Evryali and Herma / Messiaen: Quatre Etudes de Rythme Denon, 1976. PENDERECKI, Krzysztof Threnody to the Victims of Hiroshima, Canticum Canticorum Salomonis, De Natura Sonoris Nos. 1&2 Emi, 1994. STOCKHAUSEN, Karlheinz Klavierstucke Vol. II Koch Schwann, 1989. STOCKHAUSEN, Karlheinz Mantra CD 16, Stockhausen, 2003. XENAKIS, Iannis Metastasis, Pithoprakta, Eonta Le Chant du Monde, 2001.

On-Line Resources: CHAMAGNE, Mathieu and NINH, L Quan The Max Objects Database www.maxobjects.com [retrieved date: 06/2005 ~ 09/2005] Parallax, Inc: www.parallax.com [retrieved date: 06/2005 ~08/2005] EME Systems BASIC Stamp Support Index Berkeley CA U.S.A, 19982001, updated 2005 http://www.emesystems.com/BS2index.htm [retrieved date: 06/2005 ~ 09/2005] TRACY, Allen Comparing PBASIC 2.5 control structures to the old PBASIC, 2003, modified 26/03/2004, http://www.emesystems.com/BS2pbasic25.htm [retrieved date: 06/2005 ~ 09/2005] LECLERC, Vincent Basic Stamp 2 Workshop 19/11/2003 http://uttermatter.com/bs2/ [retrieved date: 06/2005 ~ 08/2005] Reynolds Electronics www.rentron.com/BasicStamp ZAMBETTI, Nicholas Using a Memsic 2125 Dual-axis Accelerometer BANZI, Massimo, 2004 http://www.potemkin.org/cms/Resources/HomePage [retrieved date: 06/2005 ~ 07/2005] MAE Design Studio http://maelabs.ucsd.edu/mae_ds/stamp [retrieved date: 06/2005 ~ 08/2005] Basic Stamp Programming, Mac Style http://www.scispot.org/archives/electronics/basic_stamp_programming_ mac_style.html [retrieved date: 07/2005 ~ 08/2005] CHAPMAN, Rob, University of Alberta, http://www.ee.ualberta.ca/~rchapman/Cmpe401/homepage.html [retrieved date: 06/2005 ~ 08/2005] USC Interactive Media, Basic Stamp Archives: http://interactive.usc.edu/members/534/archives/cat_basic_stamp_electr onics.html [retrieved date: 06/2005 ~ 09/2005]

VISCO, Paul Basic Stamp 2 Info http://www.paulvisco.org/bstamp/ [retrieved date: 06/2005 ~ 08/2005] FARWELL, Neal Sensors, interaction& performance - creative uses of technology in live performance 12 February 2001 http://www.nealfarwell.co.uk/sensors_interactive.html [retrieved date: 06/2005 ~ 09/2005] STUART SAPP, Craig http://improv.sapp.org/ [retrieved date: 06/2005 ~ 07/2005] SONAMI, Laetitia, 2000 www.sonami.net [retrieved date: 06/2005 ~ 07/2005]