Archive for the ‘Performance’ Category
NIME07 – Concert 3
June 11, 2007NIME07 Concert 1
June 8, 2007Frederick Loewe Theater, NYU
Disparate Bodies – Pedro Rebelo, Alain Renaud, Tom Davis
Disparate Bodies is a network performance that explores multi-modal remote presence. The performance happens simultaneously in three sites (Belfast, NY and Stanford, California). The stage performance in NY features a laptop musicians and two Remote.bots. These are robotic entities that host the physical and musical gestures which are performed by the remote participants in the various locations. They consist of reflective elements which move according to the analysis of each audio stream and project glimpses of 3D rendered imagery around the performance space. The performance is based on the notion of performance entities as reflected by telepresence, robotics and sound systems. As such, each performer (local and remote) has a specific sound diffusion set up and a chosen 3D avatar which consists of abstract representations of movement and gesture. The performance is improvised with reference to strategies that intend to explore the relationship between sound and movement. The performance uses high quality audio streaming software developed by CCRMA and gesture, robotic and 3D rendering technologies developed at SARC. Instrumentation: Saxophones (Franziska Schroeder), Moustrap (Mark Applebaum), Piano/Computer (Pedro Rebelo), Remote.bot (Tom Davis) and Frequencyliator (Alain Renaud).
EyeMusic v1.0 – Anthony Hornof, Troy Rogers, Tim Halverson
EyeMusic is a project that explores how eye movements can be sonified to show where a person is looking using sound, and how this sonification can be used in real time to create music. An eye tracking device (the LC Technologies Eyegaze Communication System, http://www.eyegaze.com/) reports where the performer is looking on the computer screen, as well as other parameters pertaining to the status of the eyes. The eye tracker reports these data in real time to a computer program (written using Max/MSP/Jitter). The computer program generates and modifies sounds and images based on these data. While the eye is, in ordinary human usage, an organ of perception, EyeMusic allows for it to be a manipulator as well. EyeMusic creates an unusual feedback loop. The performer may be motivated to look at a physical location either to process it visually (the usual motivation for an eye movement) or to create a sound (a new motivation). These two motivations can work together to achieve perceptual-motor harmony and also to create music along the way. The two motivations can also generate some conflict, though, as when the gaze must move close to an object without looking directly at it, to set up a specific sonic or visual effect. Through it all, EyeMusic explores how the eyes can be used to directly perform a musical composition.
“Let’s Just See What Happens” for Long Tube and gestural interface – Brenda Hutchinson
website
Ménagerie Imaginaire – Zach Settel, Mike Wozniewski, Jeremy Cooperstock
http://www.electrocd.com/bio.e/settel_za.html
http://www.cim.mcgill.ca/~mikewoz/
http://www.cim.mcgill.ca/~jer/
Cyberdidj Australis – Garth Paine, Michael Atherton
For a recently designed telescopic didjeridu, Capybara and Wacom interface. The work explores the shifting fundamentals and overtones of the didjeridu and the possibilities of interactive synthesis. Traditional playing techniques are extended and morphed by and in response to electronic elaboration. The performers explore shifting dronal material, vocalisations, and additive rhythmic patterns to create dramatic shifts in timbre, density and pulse.
“NYZ” by Zanana – Monique Buzzarté, Kristin Norderval
http://www.zanana.org/
KARMA/live – Kurt Hentschlager
http://www.hentschlager.info/
KARMA is a “living” environment, a procedurally changing audiovisual installation. KARMA follows a non-linear progression in which moments of commotion are followed by periods of meditative peace. The installation comes alive via humanoid 3D figures suspended, often seemingly unwell, trembling and oscillating. Their movements emanate a drone-like sound-scape. The 3D characters are presented as puppets on strings, instilling them with a familiar yet ambiguous sense of human life, resulting in an indefinite dance of the almost living dead. Karma is incidentally the name of the physics simulation unit within Unreal Tournament, a multi player computer game. Karma in UT or similar “3D real-time engines” describes the simulation of physical laws like gravity & kinetic forces. In KARMA / cell, the motions and actions of the 3D characters synthesize through an additional sound software, a dynamic sound-track composed on the fly. The characters each are a discrete musical instrument and become, through their “motions and emotions,” part of a symphonic, multilayered body of sound. Both the realtime synthesis of the characters motions and their sounds build, within the scripted frame defined by the artist, an endlessly changing variety of emotional expressions.
Crackle, Noise & Light; Performances @ 3LD
June 7, 2007On Tuesday, June 5th we visited another NYEAF performance evening at 3LD Art Center. This time it was called “Crackle, Noise and Light”, common terms of which crackle and noise almost seem to designate a specific genre of electronic music these days. The evening was being described as “Electronic sound and video with sonic environmentalist Anne Wellmer in collaboration with live video artist and musician Adam Kendal; interactive sound-art and live cinema by NoiseFold (David Stout and Cory Metcalf); Bay Area electronic performer Elise Baldwin; and video artist Leslie Thornton. Supported by the Gaudeamus Foundation.” The evening was again presented by Carol Parkinson, executive director of Harvestworks, and she was remarkably more relaxed and enthusiastic compared to the Sunday before. Maybe because she already knew that the evening was going to be so much better, in fact, the evening was going to host at least two very interesting and remarkably good performances. Here we go,…
First up were Anne Wellmer and Adam Kendall. They presented a collaborative audiovisual performance examining the interaction of sound, light and video. Anne performed with digital granular synthesis and some analog equipment controlling TVs as audio-reactive “lightboxes”. Adam played with software-based live video playing on and expanding the theme of white light. The video work was quite nice and showed dark black and white images of cities and especially bridges, with occasionally some colored accents. The style was quite edgy and it looked a bit like those old projectors that have a concentration of light in the middle and become a bit frayed on the edges. This was a good start to set the mood for the rest of the evening. The sounds and music from Wellmer reminded me in a way of the heartbeat and nervous system opposition. There was always a certain rhythmic pattern going on in the lower frequencies and a more continuous singing slower moving cloud in the higher frequencies. What I liked very much about the piece was the way the video and the audio interacted. For the rest I didn’t get too crazy about the sounds and composition. I kept wondering throughout the piece what Wellmer was trying to express or what kind of experience she was trying to create. The composition didn’t manage to appeal to any emotion and ended up to sound just very sterile. Also she kept breaking the flow by constantly introducing new elements and sounds into the piece. If you’d view certain aspects of the performance in isolation there were some magical moments though, sonically as well as visually.
Next there was a short movie by Leslie Thornton.
After this enjoyable warming-up began the really good stuff. Elise Baldwin used early ’20s circus video footage and new processing techniques together with a fantastic musical composition. One of the great things about this performance was the way she managed to revive these old sounds and images with modern technology. There was a certain dark, sweet, loving melancholy in her performance that started out with sounds that reminded me of an old music box. Slowly the composition developed into a more layered and complex whole that towards the end climaxed in series of sounds that easily managed to equal the emotional richness of the human voice. All throughout the piece she managed to dose the sounds and images so that you were taken away into this other world of days past, completely forgetting about the audience and city around you. The early ’20s video footage was edited in such away that it created these visual loops that took you in and slowly passed you over into the next loop. I don’t know what more to say, it was just beautiful.
After the break we were treated with another brilliant performance. Up were David Stout and Cory Metcalf who together make NoiseFold. Noisefold is “NoiseFold is an interactive visual-music-noise performance that draws equally from mathematics, science and the visual and sonic arts. This networked performance duet explores the use of infrared and electromagnetic sensors to manipulate and fold virtual 3-D objects that emit their own sounds. The work integrates multiple techniques including; real-time 3-D animation, mathematic visualization, recombinant non-linear data-base, A-life simulation, image to sound transcoding, complex data feedback structures and a variety of algorithmic processes used to generate both sonic and visual skins. The result is a theater of emergence and alchemical transformation existing within an intricate cybernetic system. The endlessly folding objects, synthetic life forms, vortices and oblique spirals defy easy anthropomorphic projection – images of crumpled paper, nerve ganglia, dendrites, organic architectures, impossible animals, seed-pods and fungi may come to mind.”
Sensors & Gestures; Performances @ 3LD
June 6, 2007On that rainy Sunday evening June 3 we visited “Sensors and Gestures” at 3LD. This performance evening was part of NYEAF07 and programmed by Harvestworks. We arrived soaking wet but were excited about what this evening had in store for us. 3LD is a fancy place that looks a bit like an igloo, probably heavily sponsored but I guess the high admission fee ($20) also helped to keep the place fashionable. Carol Parkinson, executive director of Harvestworks, introduced the artists and their performances and she did so by reading pre-written texts from paper.
First up was a short film by Henry Threadgill. According to many websites and bio’s Threadgill is a respected composer, multi-instrumentalist and bandleader who has won numerous awards and who’s music has been performed by the most acclaimed ensembles of the past two decades. I personally didn’t understand why the movie was shown there. First of all, though this might not be blamed entirely on Threadgill, it is very strange to watch a film on a screen that is being projected on from the back. The effect of this is that right in the middle of the screen (depending on where you are seated) all you see is a big bright white spot without any contrast. Not to waste too many words: the only thing I enjoyed about this short film was that it was,… indeed,.. short. The soundtrack was a bit annoying and sounded like a first experiment with electronics. When the movie was over Threadgill left immediately.
The next performance was by SSS which stands for Sensors Sonics Sights and is, according to their website, “a trio performing visual music with sensors and gestures. They create a work of sound and sight, a laptop performance that goes beyond with the intensity of bodies in movement. Going beyond media: music that is more than a soundtrack, images going further than video wallpaper. A three-way conversation modulating sonic and luminous pulse and flow.” Cecile Babiole uses ultrasound sensors to control the visuals of the performance. Laurent Dailleau was playing the Theremin and Atau Tanaka was using Biomuse to turn his body into a sound controller. The performance didn’t always come together as musical compositions but mostly remained a collection of (sometimes really nice) sounds. The visuals were fantastic to watch and Babiole did a very good job in a “less is more” kind of way. What I found a bit strange about this performance was that they used all these sensors and controllers without overcoming some of the typical problems of the laptop musician: “During a live performance with laptop, the audience has difficulty connecting the visual input (the physical gestures of the performer) to the auditive output (the sound they hear coming from the speakers), as they are used to do with musicians performing on acoustic instruments. What the audience is seeing does not correspond to what they are hearing. Because of this, the surplus value of attending a live performance is often unclear or unsatisfying. These problems are caused by the overwhelming amount of possibilities that the laptop offers for music making and the diffuseness of its functionality as such. With a laptop as a musical instrument, the relation between input and output is ‘modular’; it is dependent on the used software and other settings, which are normally invisible to the audience. It is possible to visualize this input/output relation. The physical gestures used by the performer to operate a laptop are of a very small nature and mostly take place behind the raised screen; therefore, they are invisible to the audience. This can be overcome by using external controllers that demand larger physical gestures, again making the relation between the visual and the auditive, the input and the output, more clear to the audience.” (Edited from a text by Arthur Wagenaar, Aliona Yurtsevich, Henk van Engelen, Jense Meek and Thomas Bensdorp for HKU, KMT). First of all, in the performance by SSS, although they were using controllers that demand larger physical gestures, the relation between what they were doing on stage and what you heard coming out of the speakers remained mostly unclear. Also I didn’t really feel that the controllers that they used added much musical expression in the sense that there were little subtleties to be heard in the sounds that required the use of lets say EMG biosignals in stead of a panpot or something. Overall the visuals were great and some of the generated sounds as well, especially those coming from the Theremin but the whole performance lacked musical coherence and good compositions.
After a short break Miguel Frasconi was trying to perform “Out of Edges: for gesturally controlled surround sound matrix” with the use of the Buchla Lightning MIDI controller. His setup failed on him so there is little to say about it. Of what I heard and saw I can only say that I didn’t get it anyway.
The final performance of the evening was by FAIR USE (Luke DuBois, Matthew Ostrowski and Zach Layton). They had nice videowork going on for the two pieces they did. They used existing film material (I think from Blade Runner and Metro but I’m not quite sure) and processed this quite heavily. Matthew Ostrowski used a P5 Glove to control his Max/MSP patch.
Overall I had expected more of the evening. It didn’t seem like very cutting-edge as you’d expect from the NYEAF. Maybe the words Heinrich Heine once said about Holland now seem to be true for NY: When the world comes to an end, I’m going back to New York, because everything happens 10 years later there. Okay,.. Heine said 50 years and that would be a bit too much. Actually I’m sure that New York is much more on top of things than what has been shown this evening at 3LD. Hope the rest of the NYEAF and especially the NIME conference proves me right in this.
