soundgarten1 18.06.2002 1:50 uhr seite 1 … a tangible interface that enables children to record,...

soundgartenA TANGIBLE INTERFACE THAT ENABLES CHILDREN TO RECORD, MODIFY AND ARRANGE SOUND SAMPLES IN A PLAYFUL WAY

Diploma thesis presented by Michael Wolf

1rst examiner: Prof. Gui Bonsiepe

2nd examiner: Prof. Günter Horntrich

University of Applied Sciences Cologne

Department of Design 2002

SOUNDGARTEN1 18.06.2002 1:50 Uhr Seite 1

2


3

soundgartenA TANGIBLE INTERFACE THAT ENABLES CHILDREN TO RECORD, MODIFY AND ARRANGE SOUND SAMPLES IN A PLAYFUL WAY

Diploma thesis presented by Michael Wolf

1rst examiner: Prof. Gui Bonsiepe

2nd examiner: Prof. Günter Horntrich

University of Applied Sciences Cologne

Department of Design 2002


4

table of contents

// CHAPTER ONE

0 Introduction 71 Project Goals 81.1 To offer tools for early musical

education and trainingof acoustic perception

1.2 To encourage collaborative action1.3 To develop new approaches in

the field of Human Computer Interaction (HCI)

2 Research on „non-traditional“ user interfaces 8

2.1 Augmented Reality 92.2 Tangible interfaces 93 Related projects dealing with

sound and/or children 113.1 Philips Pogo3.2 Toy’s Symphony3.3 Hiroshi Ishii/Music Bottles 4 Conclusion 12

// CHAPTER TWO

1 Early musical education (EME) 122 Playing and learning 133 The use of toys 154 Toys that relate to sound 165 Tools for early musical education 196 Conclusion 19

// CHAPTER THREE

1 General working process 202 Conceptual studies 202.1 To collect and to tinker2.2 Sound kitchen2.4 Sound fish 212.5 Gyroscope 212.6 The garden metaphor 24


5

table of contents

// CHAPTER FOUR

1 Presenting Soundgarten 281.1 The mushroom 281.2 The shuffle-recording tool 281.3 The flower patch 301.4 The sound attributes 302 The predefined sound samples 323 The Icons 324 The technical concept 325 Material 366 Safety 367 Testing with children 368 Applications 388.1 Distinguishing, assorting

and associating 8.2 Auditive perception

and musical memory8.3 Understanding principles

of sound and music8.4 Being aware of the sounds

of the environment9 Extensions 3910 The making of Soundgarten 3911 En passant 4212 Conclusion and future progress 4212 Literature 45


6


// INTRODUCTION

SOUNDGARTEN is an interactive toy, whichallows children, aged from 4 to 6, to record,manipulate and arrange sound samplesthrough play. Taking current concepts ofearly musical education into account,SOUNDGARTEN encourages playing andlearning situations, which allow the explora-tion and creation of sound scenarios. Thisdocumentation presents a model for a hap-tic-tactile interface, which offers childrenaccess to new electronic and digital tools,which eliminate the need to read or to ope-rate a computer as such.The first chapter of this document describesthe principal goals of the SOUNDGARTENproject and is followed by a short summaryof topics and approaches in the field of„non-traditional“ interface research. Theaims of this project are then situated withinthe context of current research on the topic.Reference is thus made to related projectsdealing with sound and/or children.

In the second chapter it is necessary to high-light certain elements concerning the deve-lopment of children of this age group. Lear-ning philosophy and methods of earlymusical education are also discussed. Final-ly, the role of play and toys on cognitivedevelopment in relation to early musicaleducation is studied. By providing examplesof „good“ and „bad“ toys in the area ofsound, and describing what the market hasto offer, the need for the functionalities ofSOUNDGARTEN as a tool for early musicaleducation is explained.

In the third chapter, the design process isdescribed from beginning to end. Generaldevelopment/construction processes aretaken into account as well as the originalideas on the concept itself and the role ofcooperation amongst partners.

The fourth chapter presents the final con-cept and model of SOUNDGARTEN. Thefinal concept idea, with its different func-tions, is explained in detail. In addition toexamples for various applications and theuse of SOUNDGARTEN, technical and formalaesthetic issues are discussed.

Future developments of SOUNDGARTENconclude this documentation.

7


// CHAPTER ONE

1 Project Goals

The aim of the SOUNDGARTEN project is todevelop an experimental interface for chil-dren from 4 to 7 years of age with which theycan construct and navigate sound scenarios.The design enables them to digitalize (col-lect) sounds from their environment and tomanipulate them in various ways. Interactiondoes not necessitate a mouse, a keyboard ora screen. The main goals of SOUNDGARTENare:

1.1 To produce tools for early musical education and training of acoustic percep-tion

In their first few years, children developtheir elementary and most important skills.They learn how to move, to handle objects,to speak and to understand language. Thishappens through their actions and by experi-menting with, observing and imitating theirenvironment. All the senses, especially tacti-le, visual and auditory perception, play amajor role in this period.Early musical education offers a great varie-ty of approaches for stimulating, practisingand teaching sound and music to pre-schoolchildren. SOUNDGARTEN provides tools tosupport the practice of early musical educa-tion based on new electronic and digitaltechnologies.

1.2 To encourage collaborative action

A problem with classical „WIMP“- Interfaces(Windows, Mouse, Pointer) is that they hin-der, rather than enhance, co-located collabo-ration. . When children play or work withmaterials (e.g. building blocks), often seve-ral will work simultaneously with a givenobject. With this in mind, the new interface

aims at encouraging collaborative action.

1.3 To develop new approaches in the field of Human Computer Interaction (HCI)

We, the current generation of adults, havegrown up with a specific way of dealing withcomputers. We adapted to the „ways of themachine“ more than we adapted the interfa-ce to our ways of experiencing the world. Theclassical Graphical User Interface (GUI) isstill an important tool. In terms of usabilityhowever, much could be improved. Manyresearchers and designers have started tolook for new approaches toHCI which inclu-de the other senses and more „human-like“ways of communicating. Developing „toys forchildren“ in the context of interface designgives more room for experimentation thantrying to create an altogether new approachfor an already precisely defined application.In designing toys, digital tools included, theadult is asked to „become a child“ and todiscover the digital world from scratch.

2 Research on „non-traditional“ user interfaces

While the influence of digital technology oneveryday life grows stronger, offering us newtools, spaces and possibilities, interfacedesigners try to accommodate the demandfor digital tools better adapted to „humanbehaviour.“ Moving beyond the classical GUI(Graphical User Interface), designersandresearchers re-discover the experience ofbody and space. When these new conceptsare applied, the user navigates and interactswith the computer by means of gestures andmovement or simply by manipulating physi-cal objects in the same way as he/she didbefore the introduction of digital tools.

8


2.1 Augmented Reality

In 1991, Mark Weiser of Xerox-Parc beganhis article „A Computer for the 21st Centu-ry“ written for „Scientific American“ withthe words: „The most profound technologies are thosethat disappear.“. Here he refers to compu-ters which silently work in the background,become part of our everyday life, and whichextend the functionality of our other tools.According to Weiser, interaction with theseinvisible „workers“ takes place throughactions and behaviours, which are wellknown, to us. He refers to this as the „seam-less integration“ of the computer into thephysical world. Weiser claims: „They weavethemselves into the fabric of everyday lifeuntil they are indistinguishable from it.“ He thus describes the emerging „ubiquitouscomputing“, a concept which has been usedand discussed in many models and applica-tions since the early 1990s. Examples suchas the „intelligent house“ (in which the frid-ge automatically orders new food from thesupermarket via internet) often lead to uncri-tical technique euphoria as well as to undif-ferentiated fear of the „big brother is wat-ching us“ syndrome.

The concept of invisible computers, exten-ding almost every functional aspect of dailylife, lead to the concept of „AugmentedReality.“Instead of developing completely new appli-cations, a group of researchers at the Xerox-Park-Lab, decided to extend the context ofexisting physical products with computertechniques. Gradually, books and otherobjects were equipped with tiny chips (elec-tromagnetic ID-Tags), which relate to advan-ced and dynamic context information. Thisinformation is accessible when the objectcomes close to output media such as prin-ters or screens.

In a project named „Digital Desktop,“ a realphysical desktop was equipped with certainfunctions of a virtual desktop. This made itpossible to manually interact with the com-puter and to use ordinary tools such as apencil and a rubber. (Note 4) This modelmade use of a camera tracking system,which sends information to the softwareabout certain moves on the desktop (seevideo on CD//Video//Wellner.mov). At thesame time, the influenced situation was pro-jected from below onto the desktop (Wellner,Newman, 1992.)

Furthermore, technicians, theatre scientistsand artists experimented with interfaces,which could „read“ or interpret gesture andmimic. In „Murmuring Fields“ (pic 1), thevisitor of an architectural room is able tonavigate through data spaces with full bodymovement and gesture (see video onCD//Video//mars.mov). The vision of thisimmersiveinstallation is a room furnishedwith data (Fleishmann, Strauss, 2000).

2.2 Tangible Interfaces

Ishii und Ullmer from the Tangible MediaGroup at the Massachusetts Institute ofTechnology (MIT) focus on the research ofhaptic-tactile interfaces: „‘Tangible bits’allow users to ‘grasp and manipulate’ bits inthe centre of users’ attention by coupling thebits with everyday physical objects andarchitectural surfaces.“ (Ishii, 1997).

After a walk through a museum, they con-cluded that „the aesthetics and rich affor-dances of these historical scientific instru-ments, most of which disappeared fromschools, laboratories and design studios, andhave been replaced with the most general ofappliances: personal computers.“According to Ishii und Ullmer this representa loss. Their research team at MIT tries to

9


10

pic 1: murmuring fields

pic 3: philips pogo pic 4: musicBottles

pic 2: illuminating clay


(re-)discover the benefits of haptic-tactileexperience.

Already in 1995, Hiroshii et al. determinedthat the use of physical handles combinedwith conventional direct manipulation tech-niques, as opposed to using virtual handles,offers inherently richer possibilities (Ishii,1995). As presented in 1995, their mainobservations concerning what they called agraspable interface „brick“ were that it:

// encourages two-handed interactions; // shifts to more specialized, context

sensitive input devices; // allows the user more parallel input

specification, thereby improving the expressiveness or the communica-tion capacity with the computer;

// takes advantage of our well develo-ped, everyday haptic-tactile abilities for physical object manipulation;

// takes advantage of our keen spatial reasoning skills; and

// enables multi-person, collaborative use.

Many applications recognise the practicalqualities of this research. The latest deve-lopments include a tool for urban planningand landscape design in which:a system, called Illuminating Clay (pic 2),allows users to alter the topography of a claylandscape model. The changing geometry iscaptured in real-time by a ceiling-mountedlaser scanner. A depth image of the modelserves as input for a library of landscapeanalysis functions. The results of this analy-sis are projected back into the workspaceand registered with the surfaces of themodel (Fitzmaurice, Ishii, Buxton, 2002).

3 Related projects dealing with sound and/or children

3.1 Philips Pogo

Pogo (pic 3) gives children a set of toolsincluding story cards, a sound mat, storymumbos, a story table, and a composer.Pogo then encourages the children to create,record and act out their stories. The soundmat contains pockets in which the childrenplace what he calls memory cards. When thechildren step on the mat, the sounds storedon these cards are activated (see video onCD//Vido//pogol-3.mov).

3.2 Toy’s Symphony

The Music Toys developed by Tod Machoverand his team at the MIT Media Lab for ToySymphony are electronic instruments, whichcan be played without being able to readmusic or play an instrument. The Beatbug isa kind of drum computer that varies itsrhythm patterns when someone beats it orbends its two antennas. The Shaper is a softball-like object equipped with touch sensors.Touching and squeezing the object controlsthe synthesizer. And HyperScore is softwarethat turns drawings into musical composi-tions (see video on CD//Video//machover.mov).

3.3 Hiroshi Ishii/ musicBottles

musicBottles (pic 4) introduces a tangibleinterface that deploys bottles as containersand as controls for digital information. Thesystem consists of a specially designed tableand three corked bottles that „contain“ thesounds of the violin, the cello and the pianofrom Edouard Lalo’s Piano Trio in C Minor,Op. 7. Electromagnetic tags embedded inthe bottles enable each one to be wirelesslyidentified. The opening and closing of a

11


bottle is also detected. When a bottle is pla-ced on the stage area of the table and thecork is removed, the corresponding instru-ment becomes audible. A pattern of colouredlight is rear-projected onto the table’s trans-lucent surface to reflect changes in pitchand volume. The interface allows users tostructure the experience of the musical com-position by physically manipulating the dif-ferent sound tracks.

4 Conclusion

Recent developments and new approaches inthe field of interface research reveal aninteresting tendency toward re-discovery ofthe human senses, in particular haptic-tacti-le or spatial censoring abilities, which in HCIhave as yet been only marginally explored. The objectives of SOUNDGARTEN relate tomany of the goals of current interface rese-arch. The SOUNDGARTEN project includesthe following topics:

// Tangible/graspable interfaces// Physical-virtual integration// User interfaces for invisible and

embedded computing/ubiquitous andpervasive computing

// Models of context and context awareness

// Co-located cooperation

// CHAPTER TWO

1 Early Musical Education (EME)

It is generally agreed that musical activityhas beneficial effects on psychology andcognitive efficiency. In addition to resultingin the creation of music, it promotes thepractise of positive social behaviour (Pal-mowski/Probst, 1985). Apart from theinfluence of early musical education on the

child’s general development, the aim musiceducationis to awake and develop the musi-cal capacities of a child, i.e. the ability tolisten and distinguish between sounds; tosing, play an instrument, etc.The curriculum for early musical educationprovided by the Federation of German MusicSchools is divided into four parts emphasi-zing: music practise, music listening, instru-ment studies and music studies (referred toby Zarius, 1985). Under the heading „ele-mentary instrument play“ (music practice) itis explained that instrumental activity hap-pens in a group, a partnership or alone playby imitation, improvisation, reproduction orplanned design. The main goals of the curri-culum are:

// to develop and experience, recogniseand distinguish musical phenomena by means of playful activity with material, objects and instruments

// to acquire basic experiences and abilities in handling instruments

// to experience playing (making music)in a group

// to recognise and show simple principles of order and form in music(e.g. loud-silent, high-low, fast-slow, long-short)

// to develop auditive perception and musical memory

The curriculum section „listening to music“specifies the need :

// to be aware of the sounds of one’s environment (e.g. exploring, disting-uishing, finding, contrasting, combi-ning, sequencing sounds)

// to describe auditive experiences in

12


speech and graphical notation

// to listen to and follow extracts of complex compositions.

Since the SOUNDGARDEN project focuseson an active role for the child in listening toand constructing sound environments, the„instrument studies“ and „music studies“parts of the curriculum, which describe amore passive learning method, are not inclu-ded.The Federation of German Music Schoolscurriculum leaves ample room for the inter-pretation and individual design of EME les-sons. Each school and its teachers adapt thecurriculum a little differently. Some focusmore on movement, others on introducingmusical instruments and singing. Conside-ring the core issues of early musical educa-tion, it can be presumed that the term‘music’ doesn’t necessarily play a major rolein early musical education (despite its title).The focus lies rather on developing sensitivi-ty and awareness towards the audible envi-ronment, introducing knowledge and techni-ques with which to produce sound andpractising and experimenting in groups.Early musical education can offer a space forchildren in which they can make full use oftheir curiosity while exploring music, instru-ments and sounds.

2 Playing and learning

According to the psychologist A. Flammer,human development can be divided intoeight phases (Flammer, 1996): He believesthat children aged from four to five expe-rience the third phase. In this age group,children systematically explore their environ-ment, develop a strong curiosity and therefo-re ask many questions. In search for possibleidentities they act out ideal roles: father,mother, astronaut, princess, etc. At this age,

referred to as „pre-school,“ spontaneous de-signs have a major role in children’s play.They express themselves by drawing picturesor act out their experiences in the form ofplays. They also often hum melodies or makeup the lyrics to entire songs. Their activity isexploratory. During this period of development, adultsand teachers are encouraged to give childrenenough room to explore the world and findanswers to their questions.

According to Jean Piaget, cognitive psycho-logist, children’s cognitive abilities developbest when they play an active role in buil-ding or constructing their understanding ofthings, by interacting with objects and situ-ations in their environment.

Children learn best when they:

// Have fun and are attracted by the experience

// Build, act out and manipulate// Are actively and physically involved// Communicate within a group situation // Are free to explore.

For Jean Jacques Rousseau (1712-1778),playing is a nature-given method by whichchildren train their perceptive abilities andlearn about their capacities as well as aboutthe qualities of their environment and therelation between them. Today, this is refer-red to as „functional play“ and „explorativelearning“ (Hering, 1979).

Jean Piaget was convinced that thinking isstimulated by exploratory play. Following histheory, Hildegard Hetzer and Charlotte Büh-ler relate children’s play to their cognitivedevelopment. „Functional play“ is exercised during thefirst two years. During this period, the childlearns about his sensory-motor abilities as

13


14

pic 5: function play

pic 7: construction play

pic 6: role & fiction play

pic 8: montessori game


well as the qualities of materials in his envi-ronment (pic 5).In the second stage (children aged from 2-and-half to 5 years), „role and fictiongames“ (pic 6) as well as „reception games“dominate. From the age of 5 „constructiongames“ (pic 7) become central.But already from the age of three, childrenstart to develop a capacity to handle materi-al correctly and are able to create objectswith a specific goal in mind. Play remainsthe most important part and not necessarilythe goal itself, e.g. when a three-year oldchild wants to build a tower using buildingblocks the chances are that it turns out to bea house in the end.

3. The use of toys

The importance of pre-defined toys is con-troversial. It appears as though children donot necessarily relate to the design of toys inthe same way adults do. A good example ofthis is the young child on Christmas Eve whohas more fun with the wrapping paper thanwith the perfectly designed toy. A visit to atoyshop suffices to confirm this theory. Mosttoys being designed by adults reflect the fee-lings adults have for their own childhood rat-her than the reality of the child’s play. Forexample, when adults buy enormous teddybears the thing sometimes frightens theirchildren. While for the adult, the very sameobject brings back the notion of dimensionscorresponding to when he or she was a child. For some adults their children are nothingmore than a tiny reproduction of themselves.Toy design often reproduces a miniature ver-sion of the adult world; take a mini workshopcomplete with a miniature drill, a chain saw,etc. Childlike play and toys are dominated byadult interpretations of the world. In his arti-cle „What’s left from playing,“ Franco LaCecla criticises the modern toy industry. Heclaims that through toys adults force child-

hood into pre-defined meanings. Instead ofsupporting the child’s search for his or herown identity, adults confront children withwhat they consider to be ideal entities. As anexample, he quotes the slogan of a „Barbie“advertisement: „Now Barbie is like you, nowyou can even swap clothes!“ La Ceclareflects on long-gone times when childrenwere invited to invent a name for their dollthemselves (La Cecla 1997).

A frequent mistake in toy design is in theproduction of toys that confront childrenwith static or „closed“ concepts; toys thattell only one story and don’t leave room forfree interpretation. Walter Benjamin critici-ses: „Pedantisch über Herstellung von Gegen-ständen, Anschauungsmitteln, Spielzeugoder Büchern, die sich für Kinder eignen sol-len, zu grübeln, ist töricht. Seit der Aufklä-rung ist das eine der muffigsten Spekulatio-nen der Pädagogen. Ihre Vergaffung inPsychologie hindert sie zu erkennen, das dieErde voll von den unvergleichlichstenGegenständen kindlicher Aufmerksamkeitund Übung ist. Von den bestimmtesten. Kin-der nämlich sind auf besondere Weisegeneigt, jedwede Arbeitsstätte aufzusuchen,wo sichtbar die Betätigung an Dingen vorsich geht. Sie fühlen sich unwiederstehlichvom Abfall angezogen...“ (Benjamin 1972).

Nonetheless, adult guidance and thus a cer-tain degree of influence on the child’s deve-lopment cannot altogether be excluded andis certainly necessary. In the first great civi-lisations of human history, dating back some4000 years, adults designed toys for chil-dren. These artefacts typically representedand introduced adult culture to the child andwere also explicitly used for didactic andpedagogical purposes. Toys are and havealways been an initiation to adult culture. From a pedagogical point of view, toys can

15


serve diverse functions regarding a child’sdevelopment. The „Workgroup for QualityToys“ published a book with a functionalcategorisation of toys. It distinguishes: (a) toys to move, (b) toys tolove, (c) toys for role plays, (d) toys todesign, construct and research, and (e) toysfor group play (referred to in Hering 1979).According to this categorisation, there arespecialised toys to enhance motor abilities,communication or creativity.

The Montessori method focuses on materialand objects which deal with mathematical-spatial relations, for example, objects thatfit in holes of a certain size (pic 8). Playingwith building blocks, clay or water, the olderchild learns about the properties of objects,form, size and structure. It is generallyagreed that play activities such as these(found in almost every nursery of the westernworld) have a positive effect on cognitivedevelopment. From the early 1960s on,abstract construction toys such as Lego,Meccano and Fisher Techniques became verypopular. The idea was not to confront chil-dren with „closed concepts“ but rather tooffer them a „repertoire“ in order to createtheir own objects and toys.

For Mike Scaife there is another reason,which makes artefacts important for chil-dren. He believes that the most importantskill for a child to learn is that of understan-ding symbolic systems such as language,numbers, music and art. During the first twoyears of life, children don’t differentiate bet-ween objects and symbol. Scaife thinks thattoys and other objects play an important rolein helping children to understand the natureof symbols. In a role-play, for example, chil-dren can learn to differentiate between astick, which becomes a horse in a game,from a real horse (Scaife, 1997).

4 Toys that relate to sound

According to Walter Benjamin, almost anysound producing object can become a„sound toy“ for children. Metal pots becomea drum set, just as a stick rattled along agarden fence can make a lot of noise. Sim-ply experimenting with the sound that bott-les filled with different amounts of watermake when struck could be an interestingactivity for an EME-class.There are, of course, already a variety ofsound toys available on the toy market,which are worth considering with regard tothe goals of EME presented above.

4.1 Sound memory

Small boxes (film boxes) are filled withmaterials that will produce a different soundeffect when shaken. Each box has a pair.The object of the game is to find the pairs byusing listening skills. The game enhancesauditory perception (pic 9).

4.2 Where does the sound belong?

The sound of different instruments andsounds taken from the environment and fromnature are stored on an audiocassette. Chil-dren are asked to match the sounds to repre-sentations of the sounds on picture cards(pic 10).

4.3 Table drum

Generally speaking, rhythm instruments arevery suitable for children between the age offour to six. They are easy to play (success isobtained much faster with a drum than witha violin, for example) and they require a lotof physical movement as input. The big table drum is attractive in particularbecause its low frequencies cause tactile-perceptible vibrations. Another plus is that a

16


17

pic 9: sound memory pic 10: Where does the sound belong?

pic 11: table drum pic 12: paletto


group of children can stand around the tableand play together. It is therefore appropriatefor group activity (pic 11).

4.4 Keyboard mat

This electronic toy is a big polyurethane matwith a keyboard that the child steps on toproduce musical notes. Like the table drum,sound is again related to movement. Chil-dren can „hop onto“ the piano. Disadvanta-ges of this toy are that the electronic soundis of only mediocre quality, and the soundspectrum is very limited.

4.5 Paletto

A manufacturer of therapeutic toys offers agame consisting of 8 coloured pads and aspeaker mechanism. Different sounds areactivated by touching the pads. Each padcan produce eight distinct sounds which arerelated to specific topics; thus Paletto canmake a total of 64 sounds altogether). Thetopics are musical, environmental and natu-re sounds. Ads for this product claim a varie-ty of benefits; in particular, that Paletto rein-forces the ability to concentrate, toremember, to coordinate and to associate.Further, the manufacturer recommendsusing Paletto to set role-plays and stories tosound. Disadvantage: even 64 differentsounds become boring with time. The func-tions are very limited and the sound banksare not expandable (pic 12).

4.6 Sound blocks

„Sound blocks“ is the only sound toy I foundthat relates the composition of sound andmusic to spatial constructing. The interfaceis very interesting because it assemblessound, colour and form. Five cubes are pla-ced into holes of the same size. Each side ofa cube refers to a different melody or rhythm

line. With the sound blocks a child can com-pose different music tracks by manipulatingphysical objects. Still, like Paletto, the pos-sibilities are limited. It is another closedsystem.

4.7 Karaoke tape recorder

Tape recorders equipped with a microphonehave over the years become very popular innurseries. Children love to hear their ownvoices or to sing along with a microphone intheir hands just like a pop star. They alsohave great fun recording their own voices orother noises and listening to such recordingsagain and again.Compared to these very expensive examplesof pedagogically valuable toys (toys likePaletto cost up to 1600 EUR), which werefound in specialised catalogues for kinder-garten and pre-school equipment, the realityof common toy shops is quite different.

The sound toys found in a „ToysR’Us“ storeusually produce low quality syntheticsounds, which are triggered by pressing abutton. These toys are very limited in termsof use and do not promote creative, develo-ping play. Consider, for example, the largevariety of puppets and dolls which when tou-ched or squeezed can say their names or alimited number of phrases. The „speakingdoll“ could frankly be considered a „fantasykiller.“ These and other toys hinder whatshould be an opportunity for children todevelop their own character and to expressthemselves verbally. The initial attractionfor, or „sensation“ related to, a speaking dollis soon replaced by boredom. More promi-sing, are the latest studies done by Microsofton a interactive toy bear by the name ofBarny. This bear assists the child in handlinga graphical computer Interface, relating todiverse contexts. These „smart“ toys have acapacity of up to 4000 words.

18


Very popular and also more promising soundtoys, although less or even non-functional,are miniature versions of real instruments,for example, a small keyboard which plays awhole melody and not just a single notewhen a key is pressed.

If parents were to listen to advice given bythe „Stiftung Warentest,“ chances are theywould never buy any of these electronicsound toys. This product-testing institutesuggests:“ Before you buy a toy, hold itagainst your ear. If the sound is unpleasantto you, don’t confront your child with it.“

5 Tools for early musical education

According to literature and various observa-tions, the tools used in early musical educa-tion are typically restricted to classical musi-cal instruments, sound-producing objects ofeveryday life and tape recorders or other hi-fi equipment.

The use of a tape recorder makes it possibleto capture environmental or self-producedsounds. This can be advantageous for thelearning sequels „distinguishing or classify-ing sound“. The playback function providesthe possibility of playing a musical elementor of transporting sounds from other environ-ments into the kindergarten or classroom.The big disadvantage of a tape recorderhowever is that it can only play sounds in alinear manner as they were recorded. It isnot possible to modify or arrange the captu-red sounds. For a long time, this capabilitycould only be provided by advanced studiotechnology.

Today, every PC is equipped with sound soft-ware, which enables the user to modify andarrange sound samples at leisure. Neverthe-less, within the context of early musical

education and computers, certain hurdlesremain. A classical WIMP-interface is not suitablefor group activities. No appropriate soundsampling software for children currentlyexists. Furthermore, there is no digital recor-ding tool that can be easily operated by chil-dren. In discussing the topic with two early musi-cal educators, it was apparent that such atool, which could enable a group ofl 4-year-olds to experiment simultaneously withsound (to capture sound samples, manipula-te and arrange them independently of oneanother), would be extremely encouraging.

6 Conclusion

The goals of early musical education are setin relation to agreements on learningmethods and the level of development ofchildren between 4 and 6 years of age. Theymain goals are to teach children to imitate,improvise, reproduce and plan the design ofsound.

According to Piaget and other educators,children of this age group develop their cog-nitive abilities while actively handling andmanipulating objects and freely exploringtheir environment.Toys these days often offer possibilities foruse which are too restricting and often „nar-row-minded“. Children are confronted withperfectly defined artefacts or closed systemsthat are fly in the face of both the theory andthe reality of children’s play.With regard to current EME and sound toys,electronic and digital technology has not yetbeen applied efficiently and thus remainsmuch less useful than expected. The factremains that very few tools available ontoday’s market allow children to capture, tomanipulate and to organise sound throughplay.

19


// CHAPTER THREE

1 The general work process

Before explaining the final concept and themodel of SOUNDGARTEN, it will be helpfulto briefly describe how this project was deve-loped. Several conceptual studies, which ledto the final concept, also need to be descri-bed.

The main goals of SOUNDGARTEN weredecided upon at the beginning of April2002. A framework of three months remai-ned to work on the project itself.

A website (http://wolf.formlos.com/sounkue-che) piloted this project from beginning toend. The website, regularly updated, provi-ded information on new developments andresearch results inviting discussion fromboth professors Gui Bonsiepe and GünterHorntrich, as well as designers and partnersat MARS-lab. The website contained a gene-ral description of the project, a section cal-led „work in progress“, a forum for com-ments and online discussions. The conceptof working through a website represented amajor advantage and helped in structuringthe work process and the different phases ofdevelopment of the project. It meant presen-ting summaries of the state of art from timeto time. However, the forum was replaced bytelephone discussions, emails and face-to-face discussions.

The interest and support shown by MARS-Lab/IMK at Fraunhofer, St.Augustin for thisproject proved to be a determining factor.The opportunity of working with MARS twodays a week, and notably, the invaluableinput of Yinlin Li, an electronics engineer,and Christoph Groenegress, a computerscientist, helped to make SOUNDGARTENtechnically possible. Under a tight schedule,

the duties and responsibilities of the projectwere clearly defined: Li was responsible forthe electronics and Christoph for the soft-ware development. Monika Fleischmann,Directress of MARS, and Wolfgang Strauss, amedia architect, provided information, dis-cussion and feedback. All the conceptual and formal aestheticissues, as well as the project process, remai-ned to be my part.

2 Conceptual studies

2.1 To collect and to tinker

The first working title of the SOUNDGARTENproject was „to collect and to tinker“. Whileobserving children and their way of dealingwith the world, it was clear that to them,these two actions were synonymous. Chil-dren would grab a bucket, a net, an emptyglass and a shuffle collecting things theyfound worthy to carry home. Then they wouldtinker with these objects, combine them andcreate something new to show their interpre-tation of the world. At the beginning stagesof the project therefore, the elements,‘bucket’ and ‘shuffle’ were considered. Theinitial idea of sound being carried in a buk-ket, as if it were a material, was interesting.But how the collected sound would later bemanipulated by children remained a to besolved.

2.2 Sound kitchen

A photograph of two children sitting at a kit-chen table mixing something in a pot inspi-red the „kitchen“ metaphor (pic 13). Thepicture showed the children collaboratingand having fun. The basics of cooking(mixing ingredients together) are easy tounderstand. So why not cooking up sound? The concept for SOUNDKÜCHE was basedon the simple idea of adding and removing

20


„sound ingredients“ (symbolised by physicalobjects) to and from a pot, thus creatingindividual mixes. In placing a certain objectin the pot or bowl, a certain sound would beplayed. The sound objects would representsingle sounds, like a rhythm line or a melo-dy. But these objects could naturally alsorepresent environmental sounds such aswind, rain or animal cries. With this givenrepertoire, children could build their ownsongs or acoustic environments by combi-ning the different „ingredients“.This concept also offers the possibility ofcollecting new sounds using certain „jokerobjects“. With these objects children couldrecord their own voice, and additionally, theycould take the object with them and recordadditional sounds. After capturing a sound,they could then bring it home and play withit, integrating it in their sound scenario. The concept utilized the sound items in thepre-defined sound banks, augmented bysounds that the children gathered from theirenvironment. However this idea was excluded for two rea-sons: first, Philips Pogo had already used asimilar concept which consisted in droppingcards into a pot, which in turn processed eit-her pictures or sounds. Second, the on/offfunction seemed a little too simple: therewas too much resemblance to dropping acoin in a jukebox. Once again, the conceptdid not provide the opportunity of modifyingsound samples.I programmed a virtual model (macromediadirector) with movable graphical symbolscorresponding to the physical objects servedto show the functionality of this concept (seeon CD // interactive model/ soundkueche).

2.3 Sound fish

The next idea was more complex and provedto be too complicated. In looking for a way ofnot only handling single sound objects inde-

pendently from each other but also puttingthem into relation with one another, the ideaof a pot was replaced by that of severalboxes. Each box had the function of a play-er. By placing a sound object in the box, thestored sound would become audible. Drop-ping other items with the sound object intothe same box could control features such asvolume and pitch. The size of the box wouldalso have an effect on the duration of thesound.For more advanced players, the sound boxesincluding the objects could be arranged nextto or behind each other. In this way soundscan be „clustered“ together, played one afterthe other or at the same time (pics 15-16).

2.4 Gyroscope

The concept of a „gyroscope“ came about asthe result of the search for a simpler ideathat would also incorporate movement. Thisbasically amounted to a variation of the bowlmetaphor. It strongly resembled an oldsound-producing toy, which functionsmechanically: by turning the handle on thetop of the object different sounds or melo-dies were produced. The difference was thatwith this new version, sounds and effects(represented by objects) had to be physical-ly placed in the gyroscope. The action of„mixing“ the objects together by turning thehandle made the sounds audible. Accordingto the turning speed, playback speed or volu-me pitch could also be selected (pic 14). The Gyroscope included body movement buthad several drawbacks. Although interactivegames would be possible, each gyroscopecould only be used by one child at a timeand thus excluded co-operation or veritablegroup interaction. The other disadvantage isthat the sound scenario could not be chan-ged dynamically while turning the handle.This meant that each time the sound scena-rios were changed, one had to stop the

21


22

pic 13: children cooking

pic 14: gyroscope


23

pic 15: sound fish

pic 16: box, sound objects and attributes

sound fish


movement so new items could be loaded intothe gyroscope.

2.6 The garden metaphor

Neither a bowl nor boxes provided a veritablycollective interaction space. Rather than abowl, the interaction space needed to resem-ble a stage or a dome. The idea of a lands-cape developed: what if adding and remo-ving sound plants could alter a soundlandscape? In the first stage of the gardenconcept, a variety of plants were assembledto represent different sound sources.

2.5.1 Flower

The „flower“ (pic 19) symbolized a predefi-ned sound. This could be any sound of theenvironment, e.g. wind, a car, animals, voi-ces. „Flowers“ are of different colours,which each represent a certain „soundclass“, i.e. long sounds or short sounds. Agraphic symbol in the centre of the flowerenables the child to distinguish between thedifferent sound objects. By adding the „flo-wer“ to the garden the corresponding soundis activated.

2.5.2 Mushroom

The „mushroom“ (pic 18) is the recordingtool and can be carried away to record soundsamples. Squeezing the lower part of themushroom triggers the recording action. Therecording is stopped by squeezing it asecond time and the sound sample is playedback once in low quality. By adding the„mushroom“ to the garden the recordedsound is played back, this time in good qua-lity.

2.5.3 Singing ivy

„Singing ivy“ (pic 20) is an example of a

musical instrument which can be played wit-hin a sound garden. It produces soundsbased on Lew Theremin’s principle. The„Theremin“ was the first electronic musicalinstrument. It produces electrostatic fields,which are influenced by organic materialsuch as the human body. Movement is trans-formed into the typical „Theremin singing“. 2.5.4 Rhythm root

„Rhythm root“ (pic 22) has some of thefunctions of a simple drum computer. Thedifferent „branches“ can be bent in alldirections. By manipulating the object, dif-ferent rhythm patterns appear and can bemodified dynamically.

2.5.5 Echo cave

„Echo cave“ (pic 21) is an example of asound filter (here: echo effect) which can beapplied to a sound by putting the „echocave“ over a sound object (i.e. mushroom).The shell-like shape has holes, which allowone to see the object that lies below it.The garden metaphor can incorporate manymore sounds and musical elements.

Although these different elements were initi-ally viewed as a valuable aspect of the con-cept, it seemed necessary to restrict thenumber of functions and to focus on the cen-tral idea (i.e. recording, manipulating andarranging sound). The diversity of tools wit-hin one sound interface seemed to distractfrom the principal goal and became merelyan assortment of different instruments, eachwith an individual „behaviour“ and design.Apart from which, the interface doesn’t giveenough visual feedback according to thechanges of the sound situation. In terms ofthe task „context awareness“, it would benecessary for the objects to change theirshape.

24


25

pic 17: first soundgarten concept

pic 18: mushroom pic 19: flower

pic 20: singing ivy

pic 21: echo cave

pic 22: rythm root

garden metaphor


26

pic 23: final concept of SOUNDGARTEN


27

soundgarten


// CHAPTER FOUR

1 Presenting Soundgarten

SOUNDGARTEN enables children to createtheir own sound environment by manipula-ting physical toy objects. They can (a) usepredefined sound samples, (b) record soundsamples of their environment and (c) modifyand arrange the different elements in soundscenarios, choose volume pitch and applysound effects. The target audience is 4 to 6year-olds, the recommended age for begin-ning a child’s musical education.Nevertheless, SOUNDGARTEN is also suita-ble for younger children from the age of 2-and-a-half years old. To reduce the comple-xity and for safety reasons it is necessary toexclude the smaller objects, i.e. the soundattributes. Older children could also benefitfrom the SOUNDGARTEN concept, as it iseasily adaptable to more complex play andlearning situations.

The final concept of SOUNDGARTEN con-sists of mushroom-formed items that repre-sent sound samples. There are small flower-and leave-shaped attributes, which can beplugged onto the mushroom to modify thesound. A radio-wave microphone embeddedin a shuffle-shaped device can record soundsamples when a special recording mushroomis plugged into it. Last but not least, the flo-wer-patch, i.e. the central part of SOUND-GARTEN, allows the sounds to be activatedand arranged. The elements provide the fol-lowing functions in detail:

1.1 The mushroom (pics 24-25)

Within the SOUNDGARDEN system, themushroom is the physical representation ofsound. Each mushroom refers to a soundsample of up to one minute, relating eitherto predefined sound samples or to vacant

space for sound to be captured by the child.The icon on their top can distinguish thepredefined sound mushrooms and the recor-ding mushroom. The same icon as the oneon the recording mushroom can also befound on the „shuffle“-microphone. In addi-tion, a strong colour contrast signalises thedifference between the mushrooms.

The mushroom is 8 cm high with a diameterof 4,5 cm on the upper part. These measu-rements were selected based on the size of achild’s hand. Three to four year old childrencan easily clasp the mushroom with onehand. Due to its shape (similar to that of anold-fashioned round porcelain door handle)it is likely that children would hold themushroom at the head (upper part) ratherthan at the stem, which contains the elec-tronic connection. The base of the stem hasto be plugged into the holes on the flowerpatch in order to activate the mushroom.

1.2 The shuffle-recording tool

The shuffle (pics 26-27) symbolises the col-lecting tool. It mediates the idea that soundis a material that can be handled like anyother material even though it can not beseen or touched. Keeping in mind that chil-dren tend to gather interesting graspableobjects, the shuffle proved inviting to chil-dren of this age group and facilitated theidea of collecting sound samples. The devicecontains a wireless (radio-wave) microphonewith a range of up to one kilometre. Thismakes it possible for children on their soundhunt to stroll around the garden, the houseor nearby streets.

The shuffle records new sounds when it isconnected to the recording-mushroom, i.e.when the mushroom is plugged into theshuffle. The combination of shuffle and

28


29

pic 24: mushrooms and filter attributes

pic 25: dimensions mushrooms

elements


mushroom is necessary to later impart con-trol of the recorded sample on the flowerpatch by manipulating the reference object.The captured sample can be treated like anyother sound object. The principle of how theshuffle functions is easy to understand: oncethe mushroom is plugged (Grafik) into theapparatus the recording action is triggeredand stops when the mushroom is removed.From this moment on, the mushroom repre-sents the captured sound.

1.3 The Flower patch (pic 28)

The „flower patch“ is the central element ofSOUNDGARTEN. It is the interface wheregathered sounds are activated and arranged.It is the stage where the action takes place:the sound objects become the actors and thechildren the directors. The circular wave-shaped form contributes to the garden meta-phor. The landscape offers a set of nineteenholes to plant mushrooms. Different topogra-phical levels in the garden refer to differentplay back volumes (Grafik). On the lowestlevel the sound is silent, on the highest it isloudest, etc. Its size and its round shapeenables at least four children to sit, kneel orlie on or around it and thus interact in theirplay. There is no cable or visible connectionbut rather a wireless local area network(WLAN) connecting flower patch and compu-ter. The flower patch has a soft textile surfa-ce that is inviting. The inside of the flowerpatch is hollow providing storage space thetoy elements when the children have finis-hed playing. It can be opened and closed bymeans of a zipper.

1.4 The sound attributes (Bild)

The sound attributes are little flower- andleaf-shaped items that can be plugged intothe mushrooms. They transform the soundquality of the sample. Each attribute repre-

sents a filter or sound effect. They can indi-vidually be combined (pic 37) and attachedto any mushroom. Currently, SOUNDGAR-TEN offers 8 different filters and effects(Grafik):

// Attribute „backwards“ (pic 29) playsthe sound backwards, a rather amu-sing effect. One’s own voice played backwards sounds very foreign.

// Attribute „echo“ (pic 30): The echo item chan ges the imaginary locationof the sound object, e.g. the dog sud-denly barks on a mountain or insidea cave.

// Attribute „magic“ (pic 31): The magic filter adds a special resonancefield to the sound with the „magic“ filter sounds can be enchanting.

// Attribute „high“ (pic 32): Here the sound pitch is increased.With this effect an adult horse beco-mes a baby horse ; a normal voice sounds like Micky Mouse.

// Attribute „low“ (pic 33): Here the sound pitch is lowered.„Low“ turns the sound of a cat into amonster ; a violin becomes a cello.

// Attribute „slow“ (pic 34): The soundis played back slowly.With this attribute sound can be listened to in slow motion. It’s a very efficient tool to discover tonal and rhythmic structures.

// Attribute „fast“ (pic 35): The sound is played back at a relatively high speed.This effect turns a slow car into a fastcar, brings a slow horse to a gallop

30


31

pic 26: shuffle

pic 27: shuffle dimensions

details shuffle


// Attribute „multi-voice“ (pic 36): Thesound is played back on three tone levels at the same time.In applying this effect, a single flutebecomes an ensemble; one singing bird sounds like three.

By the use of the sound attributes childrencan not only create their individual soundscenario, they can also learn about simpleprinciples of order and form in music (e.g.high-low, fast-slow) as recommended by theGerman Federation of Music Education.

2 The predefined sound samples

The stored sound samples are divided intothree groups: There are technical sounds(e.g. a car, a clock, a train), natural sounds(e.g. animals, wind, water) and musicalinstruments (e.g. a violin, drums, a horn).The various colours of the mushroom headindicate the different sections. The soundsamples are not longer than one minute andare repeated on a sound loop. A pause ofabout 10 seconds between short soundevents has been inserted so that shortsounds and noises like the barking of a dogor a canon shot are not repeated monoto-nously. According to the specific application(see chapter „application“) the sound databanks can easily be selected and exchangedby parents or teachers via a graphical inter-face on the screen of a standard PC.

3 The Icons

Icons on the top of each mushroom mark thedifferent sound samples (pics 38-41). Thesymbols do not necessarily have to be iden-tified on the spot, i.e. they don’t have to„speak for themselves“. Their function isfulfilled if the children relate the markedmushroom to a certain sound after hearingit. Manufactured with the Nyloprint-procedu-

re, also known from stamps the icons offer arubber-like relief-surface that is attractive interms of tactile senses.

4 The technical concept

The SOUNDGARTEN interface works in com-bination with software that runs on any stan-dard personal computer. Since PC’s are avai-lable in most households of the westernworld, SOUNDGARTEN does not provide aprocessor unit (CPU). In this way, the tech-nical requirements of SOUNDGARTEN arereduced to a minimum, which reduces pro-duction costs. All the user has to do is toinstall the software and sound data banks onhis or her computer and connect it to spea-kers. With a WLAN-connection the PC workscompletely detached from the interfaceitself and thus remains invisible to the user.Output-devices (speakers) don’t necessarilyhave to be seen and technical devices not apart of the interface are put aside. Accordingto the concept of invisible and embeddedcomputing, the user’s attention should becentred on the interaction space and not onthe technical details (pic 42).

All technical procedures being activated byuser interaction are primarily low voltageconnections. Each element of the interface(mushrooms, attributes) is equipped with adifferent low voltage resistor. If an elementis plugged onto the flower patch the systemcircuit recognises not only a change but theexact identity of the object and its attribu-tes. This data is sent via WLAN to a serialport of the computer. These commands trig-ger off a software function that plays therequired sound and applies the choseneffect.

The wireless microphone is probably themost expensive part of SOUNDGARTEN. Thisis why the recording device (shuffle) is deta-

32


33

details flower patch

pic 28: flower patch dimensions


34

pic 29: „backwards“

pic 32: „high“

pic 35: „fast“

pic 30: „echo“

pic 33: „low“

pic 36: „multivoice“

pic 37: sound sample „horse“ with attributes„fast“, „echo“ and „backwards“

pic 31: „magic“

pic 34: „slow“

filter attributes


35

pic 38: examples for section „environment“

pic 39: examples for section „musical instruments“

pic 40: examples for section „nature“

pic 41: icon on „recording mushroom“

mushroom icons


ched from the sound-representing object(mushroom). Considering that there shouldbe a minimum of 20 mushrooms to recordindividual sound samples, the idea of provi-ding a microphone for every recording mush-room was quickly rejected. The final solutionis to have only one or two shuffles each con-taining a microphone and 20 or more recor-ding mushrooms.

5 Material

The mushrooms and filters can be mass-pro-duced with common enjection moulding pro-cedures using poly propylene or other ther-moplastics. The surfaces are then varnishedwith a product called Nextel. This two-com-ponent-varnish leaves an attractive hapticalsurface similar to that of an apricot skin.

The flower patch on the contrary should bemade out of sandwich sheet material withpoly urethane foam inside and fabric on theoutside. This material is shape by thermo-compression. There are several rucksacks,suitcases and other products on the marketthat are produced with this method. Theeffect is to have a semi-flexible structurewith a textile surface. The flower patchshould not be too hard either. A semi-flexibleshell would be a lot more resistant to wear-and-tear.

6 Safety

The product does conform to all the relevantsafety regulations concerning productsmanufactured for children. SOUNDGARTENis safe for children from the age of four. Andas mentioned before, is also suitable foryounger children, but care must be taken inremoving the small sound attributes in thiscase. Besides which smaller elements represent,the European Safety Standard for Toys (EN

71) warns about the danger of substancessuch as paint. It was therefore vital to ensu-re that the manufacturer of Nextel guaran-ties a non-toxic spit-resistant product. Theminimal electric currents do not representany danger what so ever.

7 Testing the product with children

Although it is very difficult to test a productwithout having a functional model to presentto the intended user, testing the concept asit was with two small girls (aged three andseven) did help in analysing how childrenmay react to SOUNDGARTEN. At this stageof the project only a first foam model, total-ly dysfunctional, served as a base for plug-ging the mushrooms into the holes on theflower patch but without sound. On the otherhand I brought my laptop with a 2D-Applica-tion providing the function to drag and dropobjects into a bowl and thus activatingsounds.

The situation was precarious because Iasked my girl friend to film and the childrenwere a little bit uncomfortable by that. It washardly possible to create a usual play situa-tion. Still the meeting was very informativeand therefore successful. Both childrenunderstood even without sound that themushrooms are supposed to be plugged ontothe flower patch. After giving a hint wherethe filter attributes could fit in, soon allmushrooms were decorated. Shortly theseven year old mentioned that this game wasa little bit boring. The sound was missing.

The computer game gained more the atten-tion of the older child. I was astonished howeasily a seven year old could already handlea GUI. The principle of the game was quik-kly understood and it was obviously fun forthe older child. The three year old was lessinterested.

36


37

technical concept

pic 42: technical principle


As a result of the testing I had the impres-sion that the combination of the functionsoffered by the computer-application and thetoy objects could be successful. Also I reali-zed that a true conclusion could only bemade with a full function model.

8 Applications

SOUNDGARTEN is a toy than can be usedfor many applications. On one hand childrencan use it autonomously exploring the possi-bilities and creating their sound environ-ments. On the other hand teachers of EMEclasses in school and kindergarten can findmultiple possibilities for well-targeted lear-ning goals. Here are some examples accor-ding to learning goals:

8.1 Distinguishing, assorting and associating

Sound domino

Each child is asked to choose 5 or moremushrooms. One child starts the game byplanting any mushroom onto the flowerpatch. Now the next child is invited to find asound that is somehow related to the soundalready heard. It can try out its mushroomsand choose one. Then it is discussed if thesound really suits to the last sound and why.Then the next child continues.

Setting a story to sound

Each child is given 5 selected mushrooms.The teacher reads or tells a story while thechildren are asked to set the story to sound.Also possible is this game the other wayround: One child chooses some sound sam-ples the others are asked to invent a storyaccording to the sound.

8.2 Auditive perception and musical memory

What did you hear?

The teacher sets a sound scene on the flowerpatch by planting several mushrooms. Thechildren face in another direction so theycan only hear what’s happening. Then theteacher takes the mushrooms away and asksthe children to reproduce what they heard.

8.3 Understanding principles of sound and music

Constructing and deconstructing a complex piece of music

The software of SOUNDGARTEN offers tea-chers or parents the possibility of choosing acertain music piece. Each instrument of thepiece is activated when the related mush-room is plugged. The exercise is to find outwhich instruments can best be used to recre-ate the music. For example, can a saw beused as an instrument? Step-by-step, theinstruments are planted in the garden andeverybody listens carefully what happens.Sooner or later the group might find out thattwo instruments, e.g. a violin and a bass,play the same melody. What else suits thetune? By trial and error and discussions theEME-class finally gets together the wholeband or orchestra.

What is the original sound?

One child steps out of the group and choosesa mushroom and one or more filter attribu-tes. The other children face another direc-tion and are only allowed to listen. The childactivates the modified sound. The others (a)have to guess what the original sound wasand (b) what might have happened to thesound. Is it slower, higher than normal?

38


8.4 Being aware of the sounds of the environment

Sound hunt

Each child of the group is given a recording-mushroom. The shuffle (if there is only one)has to be shared. The teacher introduces asubject and the children are asked to findsounds in the house, garden, street that rela-te to this subject.

Where does the sound come from?

Two children are sent out to collect 5 to 10sound samples. Having returned they plantthe sounds and the others have to guesswhat they recorded.

9 Extensions

SOUNDGARTEN is extendable. Like Lego,Fisher Technique and other constructive toysystems SOUNDGARTEN provides an opensystem, which can be expanded indefinitely.Once equipped with the basic set (flowerpatch and shuffle) new filter attributes,mushrooms and sound data banks can beadded. Depending on marketing strategiesthese extensions will be available piece bypiece or by thematically specified sets. Forexample it can be imagined to offer 20mushrooms and the necessary sound data(CD-ROM) in a pack with the subject „on thefarm“ or „out of space“. (Grafik) Lego provesthat this concept can work. Beside basic setsLego offers complete scenarios (i.e. farm,wild west) or construction kits (i.e. cars, pla-nes). One might assume that specific scena-rios would inhibit a child’s fantasy. But theexperience with Lego shows that very soonthe parts used to construct a racing car aremixed with parts of the farm or space set inthe very same washing powder box. Probablya racing car is more attractive to a child in

modern times than a set of building blocks.But this shouldn’t be a problem: It is finewhen the racing car can change into a houseor anything else.

10 The making of Soundgarten

A big part of the conceptual and formal aes-thetic development of SOUNDGARTEN tookplace during experimentation with form andmaterial. Early 3D-sketches were quicklyshaped with modelling foam. In the begin-ning the sound objects were still very figura-tive, e.g. they looked like flowers and mush-rooms (pics 43-44).

Two or three models later the concept ofaddable filter attributes emerged. I paintedthe model in bright colours. Later I decidednot to use the typical „children colours“,because I couldn’t find any prove to the sta-tement that children prefer the primarycolours red blue or yellow. The non-functio-nal model was tested and discussed withchildren (see chapter „testing“). Besides itwas the base for many discussions in termsof formal aesthetic tasks and technical deve-lopment. Yinlin Li, an electronic engineerworking at MARS-Lab encouraged me tobuild a function model straight away accor-ding to the simple technical solution (seechapter „technical concept“) he found tomake SOUNDGARTEN functional within one-month time. The cheap and easy to makefoam model was a perfect way to discuss thenecessary installations that had to be madeon the final model to implement the electro-nics. Christoph Groenegress, a computerscientist also working at MARS-Lab, wasengaged in many discussions and finallytook responsibilities for the software deve-lopment. Li and Christoph received a detai-led description of the functions of SOUND-GARTEN. At this state the developmentadvanced simultaneously. While I was con-

39


40

the making of...

pic 43+44: early models


41

the making of...

pic 45, 46: milling cutter, models


structing the physical model in the works-hops of the Department of Design in Colog-ne, Li and Christoph worked at MARS-Lab inSt. Augustin.

The final shape of shuffle, mushroom andfilter elements I specified with the 3D-Soft-ware „Form Z“. Only the flower patch I builtonce more in a smaller scale with modellingfoam to be able to judge the proportions bet-ter (pic 46). Though the implementation ofthe electronics didn’t seem to be difficult itturned up to be a lot of work to provide theelectronic contacts on flower patch andmushrooms. I didn’t want to use standardconnectors like chinch or jack plugs. TheSOUNDGARTEN-connectors had to be mucheasier to plug and had to have a less techni-cal appearance. After I figured out all the technical details Iworked on technical drawings of each ele-ment. The mushrooms were quickly made onthe turning lathe using highly compressedmodelling foam. A drilling hole providedenough space to insert the resistor. Morecomplicated was the making of the flowerpatch. It had to be hollow to leave space forelectronics and installation. I built a positi-ve form out of MDF (middle dense woodfibre) using CAD and a computer steeredmilling cutter. Then I applied heated 3mmpoly sterol board onto the form. Later I coa-ted the plastic form with lycra tissue tosimulate the appearance of the textile-poly-urethane sandwich material (see chapter„material“).

11 En passant

During the design process some good ideashad to be abandoned. Following are twointeresting concepts:One aspect shows a lot of potential butcouldn’t fit into this project: network com-munication.

The screen application I designed to showthe functions of SOUNDKÜCHE (see on CD //interactive model/ soundkueche) could befurther developed regarding network interac-tion for children via sound. Possibly a websi-te could offer a sound space where childrenin different locations collectively create theirsound worlds or tell their stories usingsound. Steven Spielberg once initiated aproject for children in hospitals allowingthem to communicate via Internet.

Another promising idea is the SOUNDGAR-TEN mixed reality installation (pic 47). Theconcept simply transfers the garden meta-phor to a bigger scale. A room-sized installa-tion of SOUNDGARTEN could provide flo-wers with the diameter of a plate or larger.Either these sound representing objectscould be projections that can be moved by„real“ physical tools like a shuffle, or theflowers themselves are physical textile orplastic objects that are tracked by camerasensors. These concept ideas claim a morephysical engagement of the user. Probablythe most interesting approach is to combineprojections and real objects. The projectedflowers represent the contribution of usersacting in simultaneous installation at otherplaces. Many users in parallel installationcould participate in an altogether telematicsoundscape.

12 Conclusion

SOUNDGARTEN is an interface that offerschildren access to advanced electronic anddigital technology that can help them toexplore the world of sound. Regarding thelearning goals of early musical education thefunctionality of SOUNDGARTEN provides asound lab where children from the age offour can, independently or guided, record,manipulate and arrange sound samples.

42


43

mixed reality installation

pic 47: mixed reality installation


Compared to common graphical sound soft-ware interfaces, the principle of SOUND-GARTEN has the following advantages:

// It allows multi user activity.// It doesn’t require the ability to read.// It records what it is doing (context

awareness).// It involves haptic-tactile senses and spatial reasoning, taking advantage of basichuman skills.// The recording device is part of the

same „language“ and not a separate application.

Future work on SOUNDGARTEN requiresproduct testing with children operating a fullfunction model. Only then definite state-ments can be made. Letting children playand observing them will be a necessary stepin the design process of SOUNDGARTEN.

To create a more human centred technology,it is necessary to find new approaches inHuman-Computer-Interaction. The graphicaluser interface is not out-ranged yet but it istoo one-sided to serve the multiple and com-plex tasks of today’s computing opportuni-ties. It is urgent to include other senses ininterface development. For more than 10years researchers at MIT, Xerox-Parc andFraunhofer Institute have seen the need toturn from traditional GUI’s and provoke radi-cal changes in HCI.

SOUNDGARTEN is an experiment. One rea-son for the subject „toy“ was because thereis more freedom in designing toys than indesigning other application.

44


12 Literature

Berger, U. ; u.a. // Spiel und Klang // Diemusikalische Früherziehung mit dem Mur-mel // Kassel 1998

Fleischmann, M. ; Strauss, W.:Murmuring Fields oder ein Raum möbliertmit Daten; in: Interaktiv; Zacharias, W.[Hrsg.], 2000

Fitzmaurice, G. W.; Ishii, H.; Buxton, W.:Bricks: Laying the Foundations for GraspableUser Interfaces, CHI 1995

Flammer, A. // Entwicklungstheorien //Psychologische Theorien der menschlichenEntwicklung // Bern 1996

Hering, W.: Spieltheorie und pädagogischePraxis, Düsseldorf 1997

Ishii, H.: Tangible Bits: Towards seamlessinterfaces between people, bits and atoms,CHI 1997

La Cecla, F.: Was vom Spielen übrigblieb; in:Kid size, Möbel und Objekte für Kinder, VitraDesign Museum, S. 69-79, Mailand 1997

Meyer-Denkmann, G. // Klangexperimenteund Klanggestaltungsversuche im Kindesal-ter // Wien 1970

Palmowski, W. /Probst, W.: Möglichkeitenallgemeiner Förderung durch frühen Musik-unterricht; in: Musikalische Früherziehung,Grundfragen und Grundlagen [Herausgeber:Zarius, K-H.]; 1985

Piper, B.; Ratti, C.; Ishii, H.: IlluminatingClay: A 3-D Tangible Interface for LandscapeAnalysis, CHI 2002

Scaife, M.: Kreativität in der Kindheit; in:Kid size, Möbel und Objekte für Kinder, VitraDesign Museum, S. 61-67, Mailand 1997

Weiser, M.: A computer for the 21rst centu-ry, Scientific Americain, 09-91

Wellner, P.; Newman, W.: A desk supportingcomputer-based interaction with paper docu-ments, CHI 1992

45


soundgarten1 18.06.2002 1:50 uhr seite 1 … a tangible interface that enables children to record,...

Documents