Advertisement

A NIME Reader pp 373-389 | Cite as

2011: Satellite CCRMA: A Musical Interaction and Sound Synthesis Platform

  • Edgar BerdahlEmail author
  • Wendy Ju
Chapter
Part of the Current Research in Systematic Musicology book series (CRSM, volume 3)

Abstract

This paper describes a new Beagle Board-based platform for teaching and practicing interaction design for musical applications. The migration from desktop and laptop computer-based sound synthesis to a compact and integrated control, computation and sound generation platform has enormous potential to widen the range of computer music instruments and installations that can be designed, and improves the portability, autonomy, extensibility and longevity of designed systems. We describe the technical features of the Satellite CCRMA platform and contrast it with personal computer-based systems used in the past as well as emerging smart phone-based platforms. The advantages and trade-offs of the new platform are considered, and some project work is described.

Keywords

Musical Instrument Audio Effect Pure Data Sound Synthesis Musical Interaction 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgements

In addition to Chris Chafe, Fernando Lopez-Lezcano, Bill Verplank, Max Mathews, Perry Cook, Julius Smith III, Michael Gurevich, Carr Wilkerson, and the open-source community, we would like to thank our students who helped us test the initial release of Satellite CCRMA: Chris Carlson, Locky Casey, Roseann Cima, Björn Erlach, Marc Evans, Francesco Georg, Jiffer Harriman, Ravi Kondapalli, Eli Marschner, Hunter McCurry, Linden Melvin, Michael Repper, Mike Rotondo, Spencer Salazar, Ben-Zhen Sung, and Mike Wilson. This research was made possible by a generous equipment donation from Texas Instruments.

References

  1. Banzi, M. (2009). Getting Started with Arduino. Sebastopol, CA: Make Books, O’Reilly Media.Google Scholar
  2. Barreiro, S. (2013). Roll your own looper cheap: Raspberry Pi + Pd + KORG monotron hands-on. http://createdigitalmusic.com/2013/07/roll-your-own-looper-cheap-raspberry-pi-pd-korg-monotron-hands-on/.
  3. Berdahl, E. (2014). How to make embedded acoustic instruments. In Proceedings of the International Conference on New Interfaces for Musical Expression (pp. 140–143), London, UK.Google Scholar
  4. Berdahl, E., Salazar, S., & Borins, M. (2013). Embedded networking and hardware–accelerated graphics with satellite CCRMA. Proceedings of the International Conference on New Interfaces for Musical Expression (pp. 325–330), Daejeon, Korea.Google Scholar
  5. Bowen, A. (2005). Soundstone: A 3-D wireless music controller. Proceedings of the International Conference on New Interfaces for Musical Expression (pp. 268–269), Vancouver, Canada.Google Scholar
  6. Bryan, N. J., Herrera, J., Oh, J., & Wang, G. (2010). Momu: A mobile music toolkit. In Proceedings of the International Conference on New Interfaces for Musical Expression, Sydney, Australia.Google Scholar
  7. Carlile, J., & Hartmann, B. (2005). OROBORO: A collaborative controller with interpersonal haptic feedback. Proceedings of the International Conference on New Interfaces for Musical Expression (pp. 250–251), Vancouver, Canada.Google Scholar
  8. Dahl, L., Whetsell, N., & Stoecker, J. V. (2007). The WaveSaw: A flexible instrument for direct timbral manipulation. In Proceedings of the 7 \(^{th}\) International Conference on New interfaces for musical expression (pp. 270–272), New York, NY.Google Scholar
  9. Essl, G., & Rohs, M. (2006). Mobile stk for symbian os. In Proceedings of the International Computer Music Conference (pp. 278–281). Citeseer.Google Scholar
  10. Gao, M., & Hanson, C. (2007). Lumi: Live performance paradigms utilizing software integrated touch screen and pressure sensitive button matrix. In Proceedings of the International Conference on New Interfaces for Musical Expression, New York, NY.Google Scholar
  11. Kartadinata, S. (2003). The gluiph: A nucleus for integrated instruments. In Proceedings of the International Conference on New Interfaces for Musical Expression, (p. 180), Montreal, Canada.Google Scholar
  12. Lugo, R., & Jack, D. (2005). Beat boxing: Expressive control for electronic music performance and musical applications. Proceedings of the International Conference on New Interfaces for Musical Expression (pp. 246–247), Vancouver, Canada.Google Scholar
  13. Martelaro, N., Shiloh, M., and Ju, W. (2016). The Interaction Engine: Tools for Prototyping Connected Devices. Proceedings of the TEI ’16: Tenth International Conference on Tangible, Embedded, and Embodied Interaction (pp. 762–765)., TEI ’16 New York, NY, USA: ACM.Google Scholar
  14. McPherson, A., & Zappi, V. (2015). An environment for submillisecond-latency audio and sensor processing on BeagleBone Black. In Proceedings of the AES 138 \(^{th}\) Convention, Warsaw, Poland.Google Scholar
  15. Mellis, D., Banzi, M., Cuartielles, D., & Igoe, T. (2007). Arduino: An open electronic prototyping platform. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI).Google Scholar
  16. Merrill, D., Vigoda, B., & Bouchard, D. (2007). Audiopint: A robust Open-Source hardware platform for musical invention. Pd Convention.Google Scholar
  17. Mulder, A. (1995). The i-cube system: Moving towards sensor technology for artists. In Proceedings of the Sixth Symposium on Electronic Arts (ISEA) 95.Google Scholar
  18. Overholt, D. (2006). Musical interaction design with the CREATE USB interface. In Proceedings of the International Computer Music Conference, New Orleans.Google Scholar
  19. Reas, C., & Fry, B. (2003). Processing: A learning environment for creating interactive web graphics. In ACM SIGGRAPH Web Graphics (p. 1).Google Scholar
  20. Schlessinger, D., & Smith, J. O. (2009). The Kalichord: A physically modeled electro-acoustic plucked string instrument. Proceedings of the International Conference on New Interfaces for Musical Expression (pp. 98–101), Pittsburgh, PA.Google Scholar
  21. Shiraiwa, H., Segnini, R., & Woo, V. (2003). Sound kitchen: Designing a chemically controlled musical performance. Proceedings of the International Conference on New Interfaces for Musical Expression (pp. 82–86), Montreal, Canada.Google Scholar
  22. Steiner, H. C. (2005). Building your own instrument with pd. In Proceedings of the 1\(^{st}\) International Pd Conference, Graz, Austria. Citeseer.Google Scholar
  23. Verplank, B., Sapp, C., & Mathews, M. (2001). A course on controllers. In Proceedings of the International Conference on New Interfaces for Musical Expression, Seattle, WA.Google Scholar
  24. Wilkerson, C., Ng, C., & Serafin, S. (2002). The mutha rubboard controller. In Proceedings of the International Conference on New Interfaces for Musical Expression, Dublin, Ireland.Google Scholar
  25. Wilson, S., Gurevich, M., Verplank, B., & Stang, P. (2003). Microcontrollers in music HCI instruction: Reflections on our switch to the Atmel AVR platform. Proceedings of the International Conference on New Interfaces for Musical Expression (pp. 24–29), Montreal, Canada.Google Scholar
  26. Wright, M., & Freed, A. (1997). Open sound control: A new protocol for communicating with sound synthesizers. In Proceedings of the 1997 International Computer Music Conference (pp. 101–104).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Louisiana State UniversityBaton RougeUSA
  2. 2.Center for Design ResearchStanford UniversityStanfordUSA

Personalised recommendations