Imagine a nightmarish, dark-world, alternative-reality version of Wii Music, one that sends Miyomato-san screaming. That’s what you get from tokoloten, in a very un-Nintendo noise performance, as found on comments. The Wii is just one of his tools:

tokoloten uses a variety of objects such as magnet motors, infrared devices, game controllers… in order to hide his lack of conventional technic. Depending on the venue, the show might be ambient-like, experimental or electronica with weird cinematographic references. But it most often combines all of this.
tokoloten is based in Lausanne, Switzerland.

It’s proof that the controller – any controller – is in the hands of the creator, and what it sounds like is entirely undetermined.

Mapping a hardware input to a sound means making an abstract connection between one physical action and another sonic reaction. What that relationship is is entirely up to you. I was honestly a bit surprised by some of the impassioned critical reactions to yesterday’s brief mention of the use of the Wiimote as a studio recording. Of course, that proves the creed of the blogger – post first, ask questions later, and when in doubt, just post. Amidst some of the frustration, there are some good discussions, though I do dream of an Internet on which we criticize content without name-calling.

But the reality remains: controllers are always abstracted from the sound, by definition, and whether they’re satisfying to you depends on how you’ve mapped them. I don’t know what qualifies as innovative, but then, there have been times when I’ve very much enjoyed turning a knob, so “innovation” isn’t always what matters to me. I tend to fall back on Duke Ellington – “if it sounds good, it is good.” For controllers, that means “if it feels good, it is good.” You’re the one with the controller in your hands.

For an alternative example, musician/artist Kassen has an excellent session on improvising with custom software and game controllers. Below, you can catch some of his talk from Amsterdam’s famed STEIM research center, which has a long history of researching the controller-music connection. After all these years asking that question, what we have is …more questions. But that’s a beautiful thing.

Kassen (DJ, performer, ChucK programmer) from STEIM Amsterdam on Vimeo.

Part of the reason I’ve never liked “controllerism” as a term – sorry, Moldover – is that there is no clear technique, no clear sound, no particular discipline. That is, I understand the case for the term and I’m glad there’s a discussion. But it seems to me that part of why controllerism is interesting is that there is no such thing as controllerism. The beauty of digital music is that you do have wide-open, blank-page possibilities. You can create your own system. It is abstract, simulation, ungrounded in physical reality. But while that is at odds with millenia of acoustic instrument-making, it’s also in tune with centuries of compositional and notational tradition, which are abstract. For the first time, the systems of how we conceive music can themselves become physical.

That to me is an exciting thing.

So, here’s a question — let’s take the example of sensors that handle orientation. How would you want to deal with them in music software, if they could be standardized, if any accelerometer or tilt sensor could announce its orientation? How do you decide which is the x, y, and z axis, for instance? How would you want the data normalized?

LaDiDa Demo from khush on Vimeo.

There’s no question iPhone/iPod touch development – really, just clever mobile development – has gotten a bit overhyped lately. But that’s all the more reason to do a round-up of genuinely interesting stories, real innovation happening on the platform. So, I’m clearing out my inbox with some of the more creative tools appearing recently on Apple’s mobile gadgets. There’s no better way to kick off today’s festivities than with this unusual “reverse karaoke” creation.

Sure, people may think they’re tone-deaf. But even the layperson has extraordinary powers of musical perception. So how could you train your iPhone to perceive and respond to music? That’s the question asked by LaDiDa for iPhone, the first of a new line of “intelligent” music applications for mobile devices. A “reverse karaoke” tool, the idea is to listen to singing and fake accompaniment, rather than having you sing along to canned backing tracks. Nothing is pre-programmed; everything is generated on the fly on the device.

It’ll even make up a Bollywood accompaniment to your singing:

LaDiDa Bollywood Duet from khush on Vimeo.

Of course, to me, it’s interesting not only what the iPhone is able to musically, but also what these algorithms are unable to make sound musical. Both reveal a whole lot about how we hear and conceptualize music. I think the team deserves real credit for making this fun, though, and on constrained hardware.

The app’s creator Khush follows in the footsteps of Smule in that it takes hard-core academic music research and uses mobile devices as a vessel for getting that tech in the hands (literally) of the general public. (See my interview with Smule founder and ChucK originator Dr. Ge Wang.)

Parag Chordia, developed at professor at the Georgia Institute of Technology and the gentleman you see in the video, spoke to CDM about what’s happening behind the scenes. He tells us about how this application was developed, and how the intelligent algorithms work (or at least try to work, as music analysis and auto-accompaniment remain at early stages).

First, an explanation of the app.

Khush CEO Prerna Gupta explains how it works:

1. You sing into the phone, and LaDiDa will compose music to match.
2. LaDiDa’s patent-pending technology analyzes the pitch and structure of the melody to compose a unique accompaniment for each recording.
3. To be clear, we do not query a database of pre-recorded songs. That is, LaDiDa has been designed to work with any music.
4. After recording your song, you can hear it with different styles. LaDiDa comes with three styles — E Piano Pop, Rhythm Synth Pop and Dub Tone — each of which has been developed using high-quality instrumentation to work specifically with our algorithm.
5. We will be launching new styles every month that will be made available through in-app purchases.
6. LaDiDa also works on rap! This month we’ll be adding three new rap styles.
7. After choosing your style, you can save the song and share it on Facebook, Twitter and email.
8. LaDiDa also has a Discover page, where you can hear songs recorded by other users from all over the world.
9. Khush was founded by music technology enthusiasts from the Georgia Tech Music Intelligence Lab. You can read about us here and also find out more about the research at our lab here.
10. LaDiDa went live in the iTunes store last week and is currently priced at $0.99.

Prena, the woman you see in the video, has some Web experience to boot, too, including founding a popular Indian dating site. Oh, and she’s a better singer than the music researcher, but, hey, that’s why we all went into computer music, right?

In case you’re wondering how you take a research idea and make it run on the iPhone – or how the algorithm works (and might get smarter in the future) – I turned to Parag for those details:

The initial code was developed in my lab in c++. Since the core algorithms are basically mathematical, that portion was relatively easy to port. However, we spent significant time thinking about how to optimize for the iphone and every aspect of the app, from the interface to sound design, has been built with the iphone in mind. For example, there are significant limits on sampler performance — samples have to be short and effects are more or less out — but we thought it was important for our styles to have a rich sound. So we
put great effort into designing light styles that sound realistic.

Another significant challenge was making the analysis robust to external noise; iphone recordings are lo-fi and corrupted with tons of background noises, which makes robust (and again computationally efficient) pitch detection essential.

Our approach to reverse karaoke is somewhat different than what’s been done before. A significant limitation of previous work was a lack of fine-grained key estimation, a problem that we felt was critical to successful vocal accompaniment (most people are not anywhere near a piano or an instrument with fixed tuning when singing into the app).

We also worked on trying to give some larger structure to the
accompaniment, which can often sound locally reasonable but notably lacking in direction. Again, a difficult problem particularly when people are singing snippets. Still it is sometimes possible to detect phrases, and we have tried to incorporate that information as well.

Auto-accompaniment is an endlessly fascinating and deep problem. As we learn more about human perception and cognition of music, as well as improve our tools for machine listening, our systems will become more musical. While we still have a ways to go, we believe that, with LaDiDa, we’ve created a product that is engaging and allows regular people to express themselves creatively.

If all of this talk about musical perception recalls the questions about how culture and background versus neurology can be used to explain music – as seen at the Notes & Neurons conference – that’s no coincidence. Researcher Parag played sarod with a fascinating ensemble at that same conference. Bobby McFerrin sings a really beautiful solo with the ensemble.

In fact, it’s absolutely worth contrasting the elegance and beauty of these all-human musical responses to the somewhat clumsy (sorry, Khush) iPhone responses. That’s not to say the iPhone creation is any less human – it’s a computation model programmed by humans, and is capable of some impressive feats made possible by their musical instincts and training. As such, we really can hear the gap between what advanced musicians can do intuitively and what we can model computationally, atop the restrictions of the device’s ability to sense the world around it.

World Science Festival 2009: Notes & Neurons, Part 5 of 5 from World Science Festival on Vimeo.

For many, mobile technology and developing for the iPhone and the iPod touch is a fad and a Gold Rush. Good designers, though, take a longer view of how interaction can be expressive. And there are few people with a better sense of the big picture of small devices than Dr. Ge Wang. The co-founder, CTO, and Chief Creative Officer of Smule has a background that goes well beyond the latest Apple platform. Along with Perry Cook at Princeton, Ge Wang is the co-originator of ChucK, a real-time programming language for synthesis so efficient some people use it live onstage. (ChucK, as an open source project, now has a terrific team of people behind it.) ChucK is the sonic engine that powers Smule’s projects. Ge Wang also teaches at Stanford, working with students and fellow researchers to explore new ways of interacting with music technology.

Ge Wang joined me for a lengthy phone conversation recently. He really contextualized why the iPhone is important in the grand scheme of things, but also how the people at Smule and Stanford (and Princeton) can approach technology for musical interaction, focusing on what devices are rather than what they’re not.

(The audio here, believe it or not, is extensively edited – Ge Wang is that easy to talk to. I hope the next time it’s over beers rather than Skype.)

The full interview can be played below, or downloaded directly.

Download MP3 of the interview

Thanks to KORG and the Nano Series for their support of programming on createdigitalmusic.com.

Lastly: a video of the Smule team headquarters and playing around with Leaf Trombone for a Zelda duet!

More information:
The Mule Chronicles [Smule Blog]
http://smule.com/
Center for Computer Research in Music and Acoustics (CCRMA), Stanford University

Previously, for more on Ge Wang and CCRMA:
Make:TV Meets Stanford Musical Inventors, Feedback Piano

Video + Audio Subscriptions, iTunes Podcast

CDM is now launching regular audio content on the artists and inventors we cover as part of our series CDM Sounds. You can subscribe (and review the podcast) via iTunes, where you’ll also find our new video series:

cdm Sounds Podcast [audio]
cdm TV [video]

Or using your software of choice, subscribe directly to RSS. (I like to follow podcasts with Banshee and Winamp this way.)

We’ve fixed some transcoding issues for iPod touch/iPhone on the video podcast. Please do test this and let us know if you have any issues on your software/hardware.

Barry Threw demos the K-Bow at Maker Faire from The Amazing Rolo on Vimeo.

Yann Seznec aka The Amazing Rolo brings CDM his coverage of
music tech at the Maker Faire in three episodes today.

As long as there have been computers, violinists have looked for ways of extending the nuances of their physical performance into the digital realm. (Us keyboardists have it easy – we’re used to pressing an array of levers, and a lot of the gestures we make are, arguably, superfluous.) Many of these concepts return to the idea of the bow.

The K-Bow by Keith McMillen Instruments is a Bluetooth-enabled bow with sensors that read bow angle, length, acceleration, grip pressure, and even hair tension. It’s accompanied by software developed in Max/MSP. The bow itself is one of those “if you have to ask, you can’t afford it situations,” at US$4000-5000 retail, though they claim the bow itself – specially-designed kevlar and carbon graphite, anyone? – can compete with more expensive bows even before you add in the sensors.

http://www.keithmcmillen.com/kbow/index.html

In the video at top, developer Barry Threw of Keith McMillen Instruments demonstrates the K-Bow.

Here’s what you get out of the software screen:

Barry has also written up a visit to the STEIM research center and work with sensor bow pioneer Jon Rose.

Jon Rose with the K-Bow

And yes, you can rock out hard with this thing:

I know what you’re thinking – you could also just hook your violin into a pickup and some distortion pedals. I think it’s really the experience of playing it that changes, though I’m just guessing, since I’m not a string player.

Previous research projects:

Jon Rose’s own Hyperstring project (warning: loud hyperviolin audio auto-plays, and I don’t see any mute button!)

The Augmented Violin project at IRCAM: see Emmanuel Flety’s development blog, IRCAM project page and references

And that’s by no means a complete list, of course.

As an addendum to the last story, Ivica Ico Bukvic sends along an example of the [myu] Max/MSP + Unity game engine combination in action. Here’s the surprise: Unity isn’t generating visuals. Instead, Unity simulates ripples created by movement in the space, and builds physical models that are sonified and spatialized by Max/MSP.

Speaking of work involving art museums and the combination of Max and Unity, VJ Anomolee notes in comments his own work with the pairing. Lightbent Synth is an in-progress piece with alternative controllers and sensors that produces sound with a novel visual representation (sound’s very quiet in this preview — more hopefully once it progresses):

Lightbent Synth from VJ Anomolee on Vimeo.

Ivica explains the top work:

This past fall [myu] had seen its first real-world implementation in an exhibit that was a part of the grand opening of the Taubman Museum of Art in Roanoke, VA (http://www.taubmanmuseum.org/). The exhibit utilized [myu] as part of an interactive aural installation titled "elemental." An online tech
demo video of the installation, including written synopsis is available also via Youtube at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PA-9BOgc1gk. Below is a brief synopsis of the installation:

"elemental" interactive communal soundscape premiered in November 2008 as part of the Revo:oveR collection commissioned for the grand opening of the Taubman Museum of Art in Roanoke, VA. The Youtube video focuses primarily on the technical aspects of the installation. Using Max/MSP/Jitter, a homebrew IR webcam with fish eye lens and a LED-based IR spotlights, entire 24×36-foot exhibit space is converted into an aural sandbox giving visitors an opportunity to generate and shape the
ensuing soundscape. Positional data of up to 20 visitors is forwarded to Unity3d using [myu] Max-Unity interoperability toolkit developed at DISIS (http://disis.music.vt.edu). Unity is used for physical simulation of ensuing ripples and the resulting data is sent back to Max for spatialization across a 12-channel (4×3) ceiling-mounted speaker array. Driven by communal interaction, virtual ripples refract from each other spawning an algorithmically generated aural fireworks. The exhibit ran non-stop for approximately 5 months until March 2009.

Bonus video below: an early prototype that did include visuals. After days of looking at emulated knobs and faders, it certainly does speak to some of the possibilities for musical interface and expression.

Fractals, those wacky self-similar, rough geometries that resemble so many patterns in nature, were once all the rage. Ravers and digital artists embraced them, only to get bored with them, apparently. To billions of years of evolution and natural phenomena, they’re still cool. And to me, there’s still plenty to talk about when it comes to thinking how fractals might be all the rage.

Composer Terran Olson, a musician with a long resume that includes work with the Ives Quartet and Quartet San Francisco, takes on the idea of fractals in a new article. Writing for our friends at Rain Pro – makers of music and visual pro PC laptops – Terran explores how fractal patterns could be applied to sound.

Exploring Audio Fractals

The results are fascinating: they’re a kind of fractal synthesis. Of course, that gets at the heart of the question: just how do you map a visual pattern like a fractal – or anything else visual – to music? The answers aren’t always intuitive. The biggest question is whether to work at the scale of sound (Terran focuses on individual samples and impulses), or to deal with musical patterns. I knew I had read a fractal article in Electronic Musician; sure enough, in 1999 EM did a story on fractals that focused instead on pitch mappings. (Bonus: Bach even comes up.)

Fractals and Music

Composer Gustavo Diaz-Jerez penned that story, and the results tend toward algorithmic music. Many of the tools are now gone, though some survive (Csound) and other tools (Max/MSP, Pd, SuperCollider, Reaktor, ChucK) could certainly fill in.

And, of course, for a truly high-level musical approach to fractals, skip the individual sounds or individual notes and write a whole song, like Jonathan Coulton’s brilliant fractal ode, “Mandelbrot Set.” (It should also help anyone needing to, erm, brush up on their fractal theory.)

Sadly, neither of these articles is especially useful as how-to – great on theory, but not so practical if you haven’t tried these things before. That begs for a new tutorial. Are you working with fractals these days? I’d love to hear what you’re doing.

I want to highlight two sequencers that you play as if they’re games. (Just don’t play a Vulcan – they always win.)

Robots on a Grid

Al-Jazari is named for a 13th-Century scholar and musician who apparently invented an entire band of water-powered hydraulic robotic musicians with more than fifty facial and body movements per song. (Okay, that clearly deserves a separate post later. So, our Western education is so eager to avoid the achievements of Arabs that we skipped over the fact that he basically invented Disneyland in the Middle Ages.)

Al-Jazari in the 21st Century iteration takes the idea of robotic agents and builds a sequencer around them. Creator Dave built a grid on which you can give the robots symbolic instructions (like up, right, down, left), selected from a gamepad. Each grid square represents a note, with pitch modulated by moving bricks up and down. Like Elysium, the music is generated as events are triggered on the grid. And like Microsoft Research’s (non-musical) game Kodu, the gamepad and a set of symbols make what is essentially scripting easy and transparent. (Few would likely call this “programming” because it doesn’t look scary, but that’s what it actually is.)

Al-Jazari is open source, built in the elegant coding language Scheme (a Lisp dialect) atop a game engine called Fluxus. Dave has extensive documentation on its development, and not only the code but even the textures and models. You can use this yourself on Mac and Linux, but it’ll require some messy compiling. (Thanks for this link, MattH – this is layered with things that blow my mind!)

Al Jazari [pawful.org]

reacTogon

Mark Burton’s reacTogon was the influence for Elysium. It’s a “chain reactive performance arpeggiator” – that is, it takes the usual, static, repeating patterns of an arpeggiator and turns them into something altogether different, by allowing events to transform dynamically in two dimensions across a hexagonal grid. The interface is a multi-touch controller with physical objects, so there’s a tangible element, as well.

Looking at reacTogon alongside Al-Jazari really demonstrates some of the advantages of a hexagonal grid versus the more traditional square grid. (And if you think about most musical applications, most of what we have is relatively non-dynamic right-angle grids. There’s movement, but only left to right, with start/stop or loop points. One exception: Follow Actions in Ableton Live.)

Al-Jazari requires movement only to tiles with adjacent edges. reacTogon, since it tiles hexagons, has six adjacent tiles instead of four. It can also map a harmonic table, as other musical hexagonal grids do. Now, that’s not to say reacTogon is better than the other – on the contrary, it demonstrates that just one choice – a grid of squares or a grid of hexagons – can create very different musical possibilities. So even if you’re not musically impressed by these examples just yet, think about the possibilities here. We’re still early in software design and musical interface, so early that something as simple as a simple geometric pattern can become an entire composition.

That’s something to ponder on the eve of the music manufacturers’ trade show.

(If anyone has more documentation on Mark or his creation, let me know.)

Switching tools isn’t a panacea, but it can inspire new ideas, by changing the way you structure your music. Elysium is a powerful new sequencer in development for the Mac the creates generative patterns on a beehive-shaped hexagonal grid. For the hardcore, you can even extend the tool with Ruby and JavaScript.

Elysium is a MIDI sequencer only: it has no sound generation facility of its own. But that makes it an ideal complement to your existing tools and favorite synths; the creator shows it off with Apple Logic Studio (Sculpture physical modeling, anyone?) and Native Instruments Kore.

Elysium [Mac-only public beta, PPC/Intel; 10.5 required]

Most sequencers work like a variation on a score: you compose events in time and it renders those events in precisely the same order each time. Elysium is generative: instead of creating a score, you create a system, and events are determined by the rules of the system. That means the exact deployment of events in time is variable, and things may not sound the same way – or over the same span of time – twice.

To do this, Elysium employs layers, cells, tokens, and callbacks. Huh?

• Layers are roughly equivalent to a track in a traditional sequencer; it’s a single grid of cells, each containing a note, transmitted on one MIDI channel. That means, most likely, you’ll use a different layer for each sound you want to generate in your synth or host.
• Cells are arrayed in a 17×12 honeycomb (a hexagonal grid), each transmitting one MIDI note. They’re organized in a harmonic table – the three adjacent hexagons around a single vertex, for instance, form a triad.
• Tokens are the things that actually do stuff – they’re what make Elysium generative and interactive. Functions currently include Start/Stop, Note (plays an actual note), Rebound (changes direction), Absorb, Split, and Spin (impact movement). Arrange these on the grid, and instead of playing left-to-right as a traditional sequencer would, playback will navigate the spaces on the grid – potentially in unusual and interesting ways. To edit tokens, Elysium uses floating inspector palettes for setting parameters.
• Callbacks give you the power to define your own musical behaviors by scripting them, making your musical world more variable. Elysium uses the same JavaScript interpreter as the Safari/WebKit browser, so you can code in JavaScript. Ruby lovers can even work in MacRuby. These code snippets don’t have to be complex: on the contrary, they’re quite simple and friendly to non-programmers, tantamount to saying “Hey, sequencer, I command you to do THIS!”

Side note: I love the idea of scripting engines. Back in the day, HyperCard’s HyperTalk had simple, scriptable events that even kids could learn. There’s some real potential there, as we’ve seen in Native Instruments’ Kontakt sampler. If you’re afraid of code, don’t be. Even if you do nothing but copy and paste some useful code borrowed from someone else, you can benefit from a scripting engine. Change one variable to suit your purposes – even one number in that code – and you’ve just become a programmer. (Ableton? Ableton Live scripting? Please?)

Anyway, the resulting sequencer navigates through musical materials interactively. Add some layers, and you can create something quite dynamic. If that sounds as though it could become monotonous, consider this: you could use Elysium to trigger a sampler as well as notes on a synth, and you could modulate a synth’s timbres while Elysium drives notes. There’s some serious potential.

Musical Applications

Elysium: Probabilistic Arp from giles goat boy on Vimeo.

Giles Bowkett has a fantastic hands-on feature where he couple Elysium with some hardware sound sources:

Driving Korg Hardware With Elysium [Giles Bowkett Blog]

He also makes note of the similarity to the wonderful-looking reactOgon interface, which took this concept to a tangible table. That means that the actions were actually physical objects placed on the grid that controlled movement – brilliant, though apparently no one knows what happened to the project. (Too bad. I can imagine people playing Warhammer and performing music at the same time.)

There’s a separate hands-on employing Ableton Live, by mmi.

If you want to try this yourself, visit the Elysium project site and be sure to try the:

Introductory screencast

Going Hexagonal

All of this brings us to the question of why hexagonal grids are so cool. It’s been on my mind lately as I just read a fantastic chapter in the book Game Programming Gems 7, a book that could easily be titled “A Collection of Really Cool Ideas from Game Programmers.” Check out the chapter “For Bees and Gamers: How to Handle Hexagonal Tiles.” Basically, the advantages of a hexagonal grid as opposed to our usual square one:

• It’s the most efficient regular tessellation – it has the highest packing density and uses the least perimeter, making for an elegant, organic pattern
• Adjacent tiles can be described as defining a vertex (a point) or a whole edge, and you still get the same number of tiles – six. On a grid of squares, there are only four squares that are adjacent based on side (the ones above, to the right, to the left, an below), but eight squares sharing a vertex (the ones on the diagonal). That makes navigation through the grid somewhat confusing – though it does enable the games of chess and checkers.
• The distance from one tile to an adjacent tile is the same, whichever direction you go.

This comes up in game design because hexagonal grids work well for mapping movements of … well, little dudes fighting in strategy games. The advantage is the inverse of what you get in checkers and chess: you can define one kind of movement from a tile to an adjacent tile.

You can perhaps already see what this means for music. It means hex grids are efficient, they allow unambiguous movement to adjacent tiles, and they form neat little triads and dyads that can make sense harmonically when we’re talking pitch.

At the same time, these seem advantages pose some challenges. The hex grid is so regular, it’s a little hard to look at. There’s a reason pianos use keys of different sizes and colors. It would be possible to use clever coloring schemes to help with this, though the shape would remain regular (and thus a little hard to look at). Elysium does have a color scheme applied, but it certainly requires some adjustment; perhaps the ability to shift on-the-fly to see pitch relationships could help.

I do also wonder if there aren’t ways of using these kinds of grids aside from just putting a note on each tile. Elysium does have more going on, but you can’t see it. It’s all hidden behind the tiles in scripts and slightly hard-to-recognize icons. It’d be great to see more visual representation of movement and interaction. This app is new, so perhaps there’s still time.

That said, I think the capabilities here are already amazing. I was a skeptics of hexagonal grids when I first saw them, feeling as though I’d just been dropped on an alien starship. (Greetings, fellow Cardassians!) But there is something behind the geometries we use. And I have no doubt that a lot of future experimentation with sequencers will involve more than just grids that read, as piano rolls and notation once did, in linear fashion from left to right.

Related

Giles Bowkett also investigates the Erratic probabilistic VST drum machine for Windows, which he says is better suited to drum parts than Elysium is. (Erratic is the plug-in’s name – not that I haven’t occasionally encountered an erratic plug-in.)

Nodal, like Elysium, is Mac only, free, and uses a graphical interface to create interactive rules. Interestingly, it uses square grids to Elysium’s hex grid and provides schematic-like flow diagrams of movement. Each approach, I think, has some advantages and tradeoffs.

Kodu by Microsoft Research uses interactive rules for game design, not music, but I can see the interface working well for musical applications, too. What really makes it work is that you have immediate visual feedback as to what you’ve created, which makes the kid doing the driving very pleased, indeed.

Intermorphic’s own generative suite draws upon a lineage that includes Eno’s landmark Ambient Music I. It’s far less graphical,but can be used to create sophisticated systems, interfaces with mobile devices, and provides deployment options (so other people can hear your generative work and not just a recorded take).

And be sure to check out the generative tag on CDM.

For a hardware device using this scheme (and with a nice solution to the color / mapping challenges), check out the C-THRU Axis.

The AXiS-64 pro MIDI controller [Product Page @ C-THRU MUSIC]

Zillion-Keyed Keyboards, New Musical Layouts, and Microtonal Gadgets [CDM, on NAMM 07]

(thanks, MattH, for the reminder to get this bit in, too!)

Those who fail to learn from history are doomed never to make anything as cool as 17th Century keyboard makers.

New York’s Metropolitan Museum of Art announces (via its Twitter feed, no less) that it has gotten its Musical Instruments collection online. Over 800 inspiring objects of all kinds are available with photos, maker information, and historical notes, making this an extraordinary tool both for serious research and discovering wonderful designs.

The best place to start is the Musical Instruments department page, which includes links to highlights, how to find the gallery in the Museum (believe me, you may need that), publications, and other details. You can also search the database, picking out a keyword like “drum.”

Incredibly, this is only a fraction of what the Met has in their collection. The department has 5,000 pieces from every continent except Antarctica, with pieces dating back to around 300 BC, from Stradivari’s violins to rare African percussion.

Of course, seeing instruments isn’t nearly as meaningful as hearing them. The department offers concerts through the year, including an annual concert on its 1830 Thomas Appleton organ. Sadly, the works database doesn’t include sound samples yet; perhaps that can be the next step. (Anyone feeling generous and want to donate to them?) But this is the one case in which an art museum audio guide is a must-have; you can hear descriptions and brief sound samples when you visit the collection here in Manhattan.

Digital instrument makers and software designers often look only to the future or the recent past for inspiration, which is a pity: there’s plenty to learn from historic instruments. As a keyboardist, of course, my favorites tend to be the collection’s wildly imaginative keyboard instruments. One of my favorites of the museum is the 1598 Claviorganum, pictured above, which built an organ and a virginal into a tabletop chest of drawers. I always thought the idea of being able to pull a virginal out of a piece of furniture was somehow magical. It seems there’s no better time than 2009 to resurrect some of these ideas as people build their own instruments and digital technology allows new flights of fantasy. Bring on the Neo-Baroque Digital Age.

Updated: The museum sends us this video of a Strad performance, in case you want to know what a highly valuable instrument sounds like.

The concert violinist Eric Grossman performs the chaconne from the Partita no. 2 in D Minor by J. S. Bach (1685 – 1750) on a violin made by Antonio Stradivari in 1717. The instrument — one of three by Stradivari in the Metropolitan Museum’s collection — is named “The Antonius” and comes from Stradivari’s so-called golden period (about 1700 to 1720).

Violin, “The Antonius,” 1717
Made by Antonio Stradivari (Italian, 1644 – 1737)
Cremona, Italy
The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, Bequest of Annie Bolton Matthews Bryant, 1933 (34.86.1a)

And the Timeline of Art History has a bit on sixteenth century violin makers, in case you’re not an expert.

In a surprise announcement (well, surprising me, at least), the experimental MySong shown by Microsoft Research earlier this year will be available for sale. US$29.95 will buy you a downloadable auto-accompaniment tool. Windows-only, but it sounds as though a Mac release is in store (seriously). It’s a bit like Band-in-a-Box for singers: sing in a line, and the software will generate accompaniment to your singing with styles of your own choosing. There are thirty styles included, and apparently Microsoft focused on the content end in bringing this product to market: there’s a 1 GB space requirement and partnerships announced with PG Music and sample house Garritan.

I’m guessing PG Music, the makers of aforementioned Band in a Box, have helped smooth out the slightly unmusical arrangements generated by the first version. Now, okay, admittedly I was skeptical of the output I heard of the first version. Maybe I’m scarred because I had a high school jazz teacher who player trumpet, not piano, and therefore insisted on running Band-in-a-Box over top of me while I tried to comp on keys. But there are reasons this is cool:

• Garritan’s sample content sounds great.
• PG Music has made its auto-accompaniment a lot more musical over the years.
• The thing could be a decent sketchpad for people who find this helps them imagine musical ideas – realizing there’s no substitute for the real thing.
• Most importantly, bringing research to market is a great thing.

And let me emphasize that last point. I love that Microsoft has made this available. Too often, R&D achievements get one demo, a patent filing, and then languish in some dark closet, never to be seen again. Sure, some of them probably were never meant for the light of day, but very often people love the demo and want to give the thing a chance – and why not let you decide?

Songsmith at Microsoft Store, via istartedsomething

So a big congrats to the Microsoft R&D team. And here’s to more research seeing that light of day, whether through open source availability or commercial release (or, where appropriate, both).

So Songsmith will accompany your vocals, Apple will get Sting to teach you to play and explain how he wrote Roxanne – okay, as if this week, you really have no excuse not to graduate from Rock Band, ye casual musicians!

Updated: Oh, wait. (*&(*&$#&*. The promo video is … ?

(*&(*&$#&*. Can Microsoft just let Sparrow do all the promotion from now on, please?