drum duino icli2014 presentation

Playful Interaction: Designing and Evaluating a Tangible Rhythmic Musical Interface

Cesar Vandevelde Peter Conradie! cesar.vandevelde@ugent.be peter.conradie@ugent.be

Jolien De Ville Jelle Saldien!

jolien.deville@ugent.be jelle.saldien@ugent.be

Tangible Music Interfaces •  Increased accessibility •  Sensory engagement •  Group use and concurrent

use

Advances in DIY hardware •  Laser cutting •  3D printing •  Electronics platforms (e.g.

Arduino)

Sounds Pegs Brennan 2013

FirstAct electronic drumsticks Small & Izen 2011

Block Jam Newton-dunn & Gib 2003

Radio Baton Mathews 1991

Physical artifacts that manipulate

digital sound

Overtone Overholt 2005

Haptic Drum Holland et al. 2010

Augmented Instruments

DrumTop Troyer 2012

DrumDuino

Physical sound generation using everyday objects

push rod

solenoid

actuator

object / surface Drum Duino Actuator!Sound is generated through the physical impact of the push rod against an object. Each actuator is color-coded to correspond to one specific channel.

Select active channel!Stores previous channel’s pattern in memory when changing.

Beat: enabled!

Beat: disabled!

Change speed!

Pattern indicators!Displays stored pattern, blinks to indicate active position.

Control panel Shape mimics the visual language of a Djembe Drum. Allows users to interact with up to three solenoid actuators

Version 1!

Version 3!

Version 2!

Participants •  Co-discovery (constructive

interaction) •  Preadolescents from a

technology hobby club •  5 pairs of 2 children •  Aged between 8 and 11.

Setup •  Short demonstration •  10 minutes of free

exploration •  Recreate familiar sounds

(clock, jackhammer) •  General questions about

their experiences

Method

What happened… •  The actuators were much

more captivating than the control panel.

•  Only after exploring many surfaces and objects did they start to change the rhythm.

•  Children prefer loud objects.

•  All groups agreed: “it would be hard to make music, but with enough practice, it should be possible.”

Results

Group use •  Concurrent use was

facilitated because of the separate actuators.

•  Actuators can be programmed individually, but always stay in sync.

Discussion

Accessibility •  Children had no trouble

playing and generating sounds.

•  Low threshold of use!

Sensory Engagement •  Noise generated can be

considered annoying. •  … but fun to play with!

Future work •  Focus on the actuators.

Playful Interaction: Designing and Evaluating a Tangible Rhythmic Musical Interface

Cesar Vandevelde Peter Conradie! cesar.vandevelde@ugent.be peter.conradie@ugent.be

Jolien De Ville Jelle Saldien!

jolien.deville@ugent.be jelle.saldien@ugent.be

Thank you! Questions?