Advertisement

In-the-moment and Beyond: Combining Post-hoc and Real-Time Data for the Study of Audience Perception of Electronic Music Performance

  • S. M. Astrid BinEmail author
  • Fabio Morreale
  • Nick Bryan-Kinns
  • Andrew P. McPherson
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10513)

Abstract

This paper presents a methodology for the study of audience perception of live performances, using a combined approach of post-hoc and real-time data. We conducted a study that queried audience enjoyment and their perception of error in digital musical instrument (DMI) performance. We collected quantitative and qualitative data from the participants via paper survey after each performance and at the end of the concert, and during the performances spectators were invited to indicate moments of enjoyment and incidences of error using a two-button mobile app interface. This produced 58 paired post-hoc and real-time data sets for analysis. We demonstrate that real-time indication of error does not translate to reported non-enjoyment and post-hoc and real-time data sets are not necessarily consistent for each participant. In conclusion we make the case for a combined approach to audience studies in live performance contexts.

Keywords

Audience studies Error Performance studies 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We extend our warm thanks to Dianne Verdonk, Tim Exile, and our enthusiastic audience for their gracious participation. This work is funded by the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) through the Media and Arts Technology Programme, a Research Councils UK Centre for Doctoral Training (EP/G03723X/1).

References

  1. 1.
    Agarwal, A., Meyer, A.: Beyond usability: evaluating emotional response as an integral part of the user experience. In: CHI Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (2009)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bin, S.A., Bryan-Kinns, N., McPherson, A.P.: Skip the pre-concert demo: how technical familiarity and musical style affect audience response. In: Proceedings of NIME (2016)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Barbosa, J., Calegario, F., Teichrieb, V., Ramalho, G., McGlynn, P.: Considering audience’s view towards an evaluation methodology for digital musical instruments. In: Proceedings of NIME (2012)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Barkhuus, L., Jørgensen, T.: Engaging the crowd: studies of audience-performer interaction. ACM (2008)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Berthaut, F., Marshall, M., Subramanian, S., Hachet, M.: Rouages: revealing the mechanisms of digital musical instruments to the audience. In: Proceedings of NIME (2013)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bilda, Z.: Evaluating audience experience. Creativity and cognition studios (2006)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bødker, S.: When second wave HCI meets third wave challenges. In: Proceedings of the 4th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (2006)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bongers, B., Mery, A.: Interactive kaleidoscope: audience participation study. In: Proceedings of the 23rd Australian Computer-Human Interaction Conference (2011)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bull, P., Noordhuizen, M.: The mistiming of applause in political speeches. J. Lang. Soc. Psychol. 19(3), 275–294 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dahl, L., Wang, G.: Sound bounce: physical metaphors in designing mobile music performance. In: Proceedings of NIME (2010)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Desmet, P.: Measuring emotion: development and application of an instrument to measure emotional responses to products. In: Blythe, M.A., Overbeeke, K., Monk, A.F., Wright, P.C. (eds.) Funology. Human-Computer Interaction Series, vol. 3, pp. 111–123. Springer, Dordrecht (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Fels, S., Gadd, A., Mulder, A.: Mapping transparency through metaphor: towards more expressive musical instruments. Organ. Sound 7(2), 109–126 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Fyans, A.C., Gurevich, M., Stapleton, P.: Where did it all go wrong? A model of error from the spectator’s perspective. In: Proceedings of NIME (2009)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Fyans, A.C., Gurevich, M., Stapleton, P.: Spectator understanding of error in performance. In: CHI 2009 Extended Abstracts (2009)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Fyans, A.C., Gurevich, M., Stapleton, P.: Examining the spectator experience. In: Proceedings of NIME (2010)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Fyans, A.C., Gurevich, M.: Perceptions of skill in performances with acoustic and electronic instruments. In: Proceedings of NIME (2011)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gaver, W.W., Beaver, J., Benford, S.: Ambiguity as a resource for design. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (2003)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Gluck, M.: Toward a historical definition of modernism: Georg Lukacs and the Avant-Garde. J. Mod. Hist. 58(4), 845–882 (1986)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Gurevich, M., Stapleton, P., Bennett, P.: Designing for style in new musical interactions. In: Proceedings of NIME (2009)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Gurevich, M., Fyans, A.C.: Digital musical interactions: performer-system relationships and their perception by spectators. Organ. Sound 16(2), 166–175 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Höök, K., Sengers, P., Andersson, G.: Sense and sensibility: evaluation and interactive art. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (2003)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kruse-Weber, S., Parncutt, R.: Error management for musicians: an interdisciplinary conceptual framework. Front. Psychol. 5, 777 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Lai, C., Boverman, T.: Audience experience in sound performance. In: Proceedings of NIME (2013)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Latulipe, C., Carroll, E.A., Lottridge, D.: Love, hate, arousal and engagement: exploring audience responses to performing arts. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (2011)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Loftus, E.F., Palmer, J.C.: Reconstruction of automobile destruction: an example of the interaction between language and memory. J. Verbal Learn. Verbal Behav. 13, 585–589 (1974)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Millard, W.J.: A history of handsets for direct measurement of audience response. Int. J. Public Opin. Res. 4, 1–17 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Norman, D.A.: The Design of Everyday Things. MIT Press, Cambridge (2013)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Perrotin, O., d’Alessandro, C.: Visualizing gestures in the control of a digital musical instrument. In: Proceedings of NIME (2014)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Poole, A., Ball, L.J.: Eye tracking in HCI and usability research. Encycl. Hum. Comput. Interact. 1, 211–219 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Reeves, S., Benford, S., O’Malley, C., Fraser, M.: Designing the spectator experience. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (2005)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Russolo, L.: The art of noises: futurist manifesto. In: Audio Culture: Readings in Modern Music. Continuum International New York (2010)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Sengers, P., Gaver, W.W.: Staying open to interpretation: engaging multiple meanings in design and evaluation. In: Proceedings of DIS (2006)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Sheridan, J.G., Bryan-Kinns, N.: Designing for performative tangible interaction. Int. J. Arts Technol. 1, 288–308 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Stevens, C., Glass, R., Schubert, E., Chen, J.: Methods for measuring audience reactions. In: Proceedings of the Inaugural International Conference on Music Communication Science (2007)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Stevens, C.J., Schubert, E., Morris, R.H., Frear, M.: Cognition and the temporal arts: investigating audience response to dance using PDAs that record continuous data during live performance. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud. 67, 800–813 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Verdonk, D.: Visible excitation methods: energy and expressiveness in electronic music performance. In: Proceedings of NIME (2015)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Wen-Chung, C.: Open rather than bounded. Perspect. New Music 5(1), 1–6 (1966)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Wright, P., Blythe, M., McCarthy, J.: User experience and the idea of design in HCI. In: Gilroy, S.W., Harrison, M.D. (eds.) DSV-IS 2005. LNCS, vol. 3941, pp. 1–14. Springer, Heidelberg (2006). doi: 10.1007/11752707_1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • S. M. Astrid Bin
    • 1
    Email author
  • Fabio Morreale
    • 1
  • Nick Bryan-Kinns
    • 1
  • Andrew P. McPherson
    • 1
  1. 1.Centre for Digital MusicQueen Mary University of LondonLondonUK

Personalised recommendations