EMUSIC-L Digest Volume 48, Issue 04 This issue's topics: Keyboards and visual problems No sight in sounds (fwd) (10 messages) Your EMUSIC-L Digest moderator is Joe McMahon . You may subscribe to EMUSIC-L by sending mail to listserv@american.edu with the line "SUB EMUSIC-L your name" as the text. The EMUSIC-L archive is a service of SunSite (sunsite.unc.edu) at the University of North Carolina. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 10:06:09 -0500 From: "Joseph D. McMahon" Subject: No sight in sounds (fwd) Michael A Squillace (squillac@student.msu.edu) writes: > Hey, all: > > As a handicapper (the preferred term for we "physically challenged" persons in > Michigan), one of my first goals is to promote awareness whenever possible. > Hence, I cannot esist the chance to comment on what it's like to program > today's synths without sight, since this seems to have stirred a few minds out > there. > > In the beginning, things weren't so bad. My ARP AXXE has only about 15 or so > levers and a few switches (and, to my knowledge, only one LED for power up). > Knowing the basi configuration of analogue synths, it was fairly simple to > create sounds. Even my JUNO 106 was fairly straight forward, though it has a > few more LEDs and one display for the patch number. A good memory and the > patience of a reader or two who knew nothing about music in going through the > manual with me is all that was necessary. > > Now, with my D50, things have become a bit complex. Layers of menus and > little graphs on the PG1000 are quite difficult to maneuver without eyes. > I have made extensive braille charts for myself and labels for the major > sections on the programmer but things are still rough. One of these days, > someone will build a synthesizer that includes speech output. Why we persist > in creating sounds based on visions and graphs is beyond me -- no one would > think of creating a painting from sounds (or would they). > > Actually, I'm not so sure that the problems I encounter with the D50 are all > related to my lack of sight. Be honest, y'all, there's just too many darn > parameters! I counted once, and there's about 340 parameters per sound on > that blinkin' keyboard!! That's alot to program even if you have eyes. The > next stage in technology is going to require not only more control but some > other means of control. Endless rows of knobs, levers, buttons, and > joysticks simply won't cut it. I'm hoping that, upon such a change, the > visually-oriented sound creation will suffer a change as well. > > Two questions: > > 1. Does anyone know of such "other means of control" in the making or in > the near future? Are they as visually-oriented as current technology is? > > 2. More generally, am I the only one that sees the need to change? Can > we continue to program as we do? > > ---> Mike S. > > P.S. Would have responded sooner but just got back into town from the holiday > break. > ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 09:45:36 PST From: metlay Subject: Re: No sight in sounds (fwd) > >Michael A Squillace (squillac@student.msu.edu) writes: >Hey, all: > >As a handicapper (the preferred term for we "physically challenged" persons in >Michigan), one of my first goals is to promote awareness whenever possible. >Hence, I cannot esist the chance to comment on what it's like to program >today's synths without sight, since this seems to have stirred a few minds out >there. Thanks for an interesting read, Mike. By the way, how do you follow text like this letter on your computer? Do you have a speech synthesizer? A Braille encoder of some sort? >. One of these days, >someone will build a synthesizer that includes speech output. Why we persist >in creating sounds based on visions and graphs is beyond me -- no one would >think of creating a painting from sounds (or would they). We are visually oriented creatures as much or more than we are aurally oritented. It's how we evolved. We communicate by sound, but we learn primarily by watching. Trying to build machines like synths that can be used by the blind short-circuits our normal modes of education. >Actually, I'm not so sure that the problems I encounter with the D50 are all >related to my lack of sight. Be honest, y'all, there's just too many darn >parameters! I counted once, and there's about 340 parameters per sound on >that blinkin' keyboard!! That's alot to program even if you have eyes. The >next stage in technology is going to require not only more control but some >other means of control. Endless rows of knobs, levers, buttons, and >joysticks simply won't cut it. I'm hoping that, upon such a change, the >visually-oriented sound creation will suffer a change as well. This is the sort of statement that crops up here frequently. There are too many parameters, and not enough controls. I have yet to see anyone make a constructive suggestion on how to solve this dichotomy; the ones who are trying for their own solutions are probably hard at work in basements somewhere and too busy to argue the point here. |-> I certainly don't know of many people who'd willingly oversimplify all their gear to the point where it was in 1970. >Two questions: > > 1. Does anyone know of such "other means of control" in the making or in >the near future? Are they as visually-oriented as current technology is? Not offhand. You ought to talk to Don Buchla about a Braille Thunder. > 2. More generally, am I the only one that sees the need to change? Can >we continue to program as we do? I certainly can. I have only a few instruments, and all of them are in my rig at least partially because I find them easy to program. Or at least tolerable, he amended, thinking of the U-50. |-P -- mike metlay | atomic city | p. o. box 81175 | "'Thppht' spelled backwards is 'thppht'." pittsburgh pa 15217-0675 | metlay@netcom.com | ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 14:48:46 -0500 From: Brian Adamson Subject: Re: No sight in sounds (fwd) > >We are visually oriented creatures as much or more than we are aurally >oritented. It's how we evolved. We communicate by sound, but we learn >primarily by watching. Trying to build machines like synths that can be >used by the blind short-circuits our normal modes of education. > I think we are also somewhat tactile oriented also. Virtual reality system with tactile stimuli as well as visual (or without the visual part for the blind) may offer some help here. >>Actually, I'm not so sure that the problems I encounter with the D50 are all >>related to my lack of sight. Be honest, y'all, there's just too many darn >>parameters! I counted once, and there's about 340 parameters per sound on >>that blinkin' keyboard!! That's alot to program even if you have eyes. The >>next stage in technology is going to require not only more control but some >>other means of control. Endless rows of knobs, levers, buttons, and >>joysticks simply won't cut it. I'm hoping that, upon such a change, the >>visually-oriented sound creation will suffer a change as well. > >This is the sort of statement that crops up here frequently. There are >too many parameters, and not enough controls. I have yet to see anyone make >a constructive suggestion on how to solve this dichotomy; the ones who are >trying for their own solutions are probably hard at work in basements >somewhere and too busy to argue the point here. |-> I certainly don't >know of many people who'd willingly oversimplify all their gear to the point >where it was in 1970. Virtual reality systems (still in a distant perhaps virtual future) may help here. Controls which cannot be practically implemented mechanically could be perhaps used. Examples which come to mind include 1) joysticks which move in 3 dimensions, 2) fluid, flexible, bendable, permeable surface controls, 3) wires bendable and twistable into shapes, 4) controls which can be ganged together with a piece of virtual string, the list goes on.... More complex (even customizable) controls could reduce the endless rows of knobs and buttons we've seen in the past. A virtual reality user interface will hopefully be as cost effective as the standard knob, keypad, and LCD display are today. I had a dream the other night of a wondrous synth engine tied to a virtual reality interface. I walked down the halls of a virtual museum filled with synths from the past. I marvelled at the attention to detail the virtual reality programmer had given as a slider on a virtual Mini Moog stuck a little about 2/3 the way up the dial. The accuracy was amazing! Imagine my horror when walking into a room with a virtual K2000 only to find a virtual knob and LCD :) >mike metlay | >atomic city | >p. o. box 81175 | "'Thppht' spelled backwards is 'thppht'." >pittsburgh pa 15217-0675 | >metlay@netcom.com | _ __ ___ __ --| \---||--| _ |--||-------------- Brian Adamson ----------------- --||\\--||--|| ||--|| ------------- NRL Code 5523 ----------------- --||-\\-||--||//---|| ------------ adamson@itd.nrl.navy.mil ------ --||--\\||--||\\---||___----------- (202) 767-5110 ---------------- --||---\_|--|| \\--|____|------------------------------------------ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 21:31:00 EST From: ROTHBART@ITHACA.BITNET Subject: Re: No sight in sounds (fwd) We've had some success here at Ithaca College in the Electroacoustic Music studios using Voice Navigator hardware and software for one of my students who is blind. It comes with a series of commands for Performer and is voice activated. Since we do virtually (sic) all our work from the Mac screen, this program seems to help my student a lot, although inevitably a sighted person needs to be nearby. If you want, I can put you in touch with Mark so you guys can compare notes. Mak has had great success on our Memorymoogs and especially the Synclavier, which we labelled with Braille. Peter Rothbart , Dir, EMS, Ithaca College, 607-274-3171. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 15:34:17 GMT From: Phil Gardner Subject: Re: No sight in sounds (fwd) Out of interest, I have a blind friend who manages to operate and play: 1) Yamaha TX7 2) Korg DW8000 3) Roland U20 4) Roland MT32 5) Roland MKS20 6) Roland MC500 7) Boss 8-channel mixer 8) Computer with a Braille I/O device. Membrane switches are of no use to her... Also, the so-called 'Alpha-dial' knob is a bit of a problem on the MC500. To use this, she has had a sighted friend stick blobs of 'Blu-Tack' at equidistant positions round the knob. She also needs a sighted friend to plug-in audio and MIDI leads. Generally, I marvel at her ability to remember how many button presses are necessary to select/edit a sound. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 15:46:34 EST From: Michael A Squillace Subject: Re: No sight in sounds (fwd) Ah...good conversation...Gotta love it! First, how do you folks "lift" passages from previous letters in order to guide conversation? Please bare with me in my indirect references to pieces of previously written stuff.. With rgard to the point about our learning be so visually-oriented... The problem with suggesting that keyboards may never be programmed in a nonvisually-oriented fashon is that we are not talking about learning, here, but creating. Creation, as we all know, takes all sorts of forms and, I again urge, that the keyboard, together with its rows of sliders and knobs, is quite limited in both sound creation and musical productions. I am not familiar with virtual reality much, but this seems like a possibility. I am a little hesitant about certain methods of control. For example, one suggestiong (Brian Adamson) was to employ three-dimensional joysticks. This seems to only complicate the problem for the blind person who (at least in my own case) has enough trouble visualizing 2D graphic representations. Too many parameters and not enough controls... This calls for a change in vocabulary. Obviously, if we think of sounds as having parameters, then we immdiately think of a control which corresponds to each parameter (or, perhaps, a set of parameters). Let's talk of sound "characteristics" such as warmth, sharpness, harshness, darkness, depth, fluidity, etc. Voice activiated programming together with commands for comparison (e.g. "brighter than patch nn") might then be used. I realize this is all quite vague but my main point is that our vocabulary changes with technology and, given the drastic changes in technology, we are going to have to literally think differently about sound creation. (A point in favor of nonvisually-oriented learning -- much more depends on the oral than the visual than one might first suspect.) Question: Who is Don Buchka and what's a "Braille Thunder?" Mike S. Squillac@student.msu.edu P.S> These messages are output as speech by my Amiga 1000. The synthesizer is built into this machine...one real good reason for my buying it. .> > > > >Michael A Squillace (squillac@student.msu.edu) writes: > >Hey, all: > > > >As a handicapper (the preferred term for we "physically challenged" persons i n > >Michigan), one of my first goals is to promote awareness whenever possible. > >Hence, I cannot esist the chance to comment on what it's like to program > >today's synths without sight, since this seems to have stirred a few minds ou t > >there. > > Thanks for an interesting read, Mike. By the way, how do you follow text > like this letter on your computer? Do you have a speech synthesizer? A Braille > encoder of some sort? > > >. One of these days, > >someone will build a synthesizer that includes speech output. Why we persist > >in creating sounds based on visions and graphs is beyond me -- no one would > >think of creating a painting from sounds (or would they). > > We are visually oriented creatures as much or more than we are aurally > oritented. It's how we evolved. We communicate by sound, but we learn > primarily by watching. Trying to build machines like synths that can be > used by the blind short-circuits our normal modes of education. > > >Actually, I'm not so sure that the problems I encounter with the D50 are all > >related to my lack of sight. Be honest, y'all, there's just too many darn > >parameters! I counted once, and there's about 340 parameters per sound on > >that blinkin' keyboard!! That's alot to program even if you have eyes. The > >next stage in technology is going to require not only more control but some > >other means of control. Endless rows of knobs, levers, buttons, and > >joysticks simply won't cut it. I'm hoping that, upon such a change, the > >visually-oriented sound creation will suffer a change as well. > > This is the sort of statement that crops up here frequently. There are > too many parameters, and not enough controls. I have yet to see anyone make > a constructive suggestion on how to solve this dichotomy; the ones who are > trying for their own solutions are probably hard at work in basements > somewhere and too busy to argue the point here. |-> I certainly don't > know of many people who'd willingly oversimplify all their gear to the point > where it was in 1970. > > >Two questions: > > > > 1. Does anyone know of such "other means of control" in the making or i n > >the near future? Are they as visually-oriented as current technology is? > > Not offhand. You ought to talk to Don Buchla about a Braille Thunder. > > > 2. More generally, am I the only one that sees the need to change? Can > >we continue to program as we do? > > I certainly can. I have only a few instruments, and all of them are in my > rig at least partially because I find them easy to program. Or at least > tolerable, he amended, thinking of the U-50. |-P > > -- > mike metlay | > atomic city | > p. o. box 81175 | "'Thppht' spelled backwards is 'thppht'." > pittsburgh pa 15217-0675 | > metlay@netcom.com | > ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 16:18:00 EST From: Robert Depin Subject: Don Buchla >Question: Who is Don Buchka and what's a "Braille Thunder?" Mike S., I think you Don Buchla. He's a synthesizer designer who has tried several different controllers other than the traditional keyboard. Touch pads, different key layouts, etc.. I haven't kept up with his latest designs, but they're usually pretty far reaching custom machines for university and experi- mental music studios. Bob DEPIN@TARGET.COM ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 21:55:12 PST From: metlay Subject: Re: No sight in sounds (fwd) >First, how do you folks "lift" passages from previous letters in order to >guide conversation? Please bare with me in my indirect references to pieces >of previously written stuff.. Many mail programs do this as a feature; say you want to reply or forward mail, and it includes the text, usually marked in the margins to differentiate it from what you're adding. >Question: Who is Don Buchka and what's a "Braille Thunder?" That's bee you see aytch ell ay, beeyooklah. (I hope your Amiga handled that okay-- mine seemed to). Don is one of the grand old men of the synth world, he builds strange controllers that use touch pads and pressure sensors rather than conventional keys and controls. The Thunder is his latest beast, a MIDI controller whose touch pads can be configured to send many different kinds of data. He doesn't make one with a Braille display, but building one for you custom would be the sort of thing he might consider a worthy challenge. -- mike metlay | atomic city | "S H * T ! I give up. That's it. I'm p. o. box 81175 | not going to buy any more music gear. pittsburgh pa 15217-0675 | Ever." metlay@netcom.com | (n. rothwell) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 07:50:48 EST From: The Radio Gnome Subject: Re: Don Buchla Hi, Did/does Don Buchla teach emusic/composition? I remember Suzanne Ciani recalling in an interview that Don Buchla told her that women have no place in electronic music. He has several releases out including "How Much Better if Plymouth Rock Had Landed on the Pilgrims" with David Rosenbloom. Andy Wing ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 12:50:53 EST From: Michael A Squillace Subject: Re: Don Buchla Thanks for the info folks...Now, how do I get hold of this fellow? He sounds intriguing and, perhaps, can work with me on some of these matters. Mike > > >Question: Who is Don Buchka and what's a "Braille Thunder?" > > Mike S., > I think you Don Buchla. He's a synthesizer designer who has tried > several different controllers other than the traditional keyboard. Touch pads , > different key layouts, etc.. I haven't kept up with his latest designs, but > they're usually pretty far reaching custom machines for university and experi- > mental music studios. > > Bob > DEPIN@TARGET.COM > ------------------------------ End of the EMUSIC-L Digest ******************************