Untitled Document

The realisation of this piece required a completely customised piece of software, which was designed and built using Max/MSP

The main components of the software are:

a. main sampler unit
b. input mixer
c. sampler - effects router
d. multi channel delay lines
e. multi channel phase adjuster
f. granular sampler
g. channel meters
h. master volumes
i. panning system
j. ‘black button’
k. low frequency wave generators
l. number of speakers
m. room height

I set the following criteria for the technical design:

1. Link all possible aspects of sound to the space
2. Avoid pre-recorded or synthesised sound
3. Create an engaging spatial environment

Sound

To achieve these goals, the piece had to be interactive in some way. We already interact with a space by walking on the ground and pushing air molecules about through our voices and movements, so these native sounds would be my source material. However footsteps, conversation, doors opening and closing all proved difficult to capture, or prone to feedback.

A close range microphone and a gate switch was the most effective solution, inviting people to intentionally enter a sound into the space, the rich tonal and harmonic content of the voice and our sensitivity to its range aiding the movements well.

This input is recorded into the main sampler [a], and a granular sampler for playback. Granular sampling has the effect of stretching a sound, revealing the vast timbral variations without adjusting the pitch, and vice versa. It’s used here to create the slowly moving textural foundations of the composition [f]. Each of these samplers are actually an interlinked pair, programmed to merge between each other as new sounds are entered.

Processing

You will have read about our sound ‘localisation cues’ at the main information point. I have used these cues as creative effects, based on differences in time [d, e] volume [i, b, h, k], timbre [f], and pitch [a, f]. This supported the concept well, and gave me a palette of effects that included phase manipulation, echo’s, comb filters, phase and pitch shifting. To give the user an extra element of control I added a button to the information point, which randomly changes the ‘dimensions’ of the space [j]. Each press selects a different playback mode for the sampler, and sends it to different effects and panning methods, virtually transporting a person from place to place.

The behaviour of a sound wave in space is unpredictable, but there are certain governing rules and limits to the randomness. This is paralleled in how parameters and effects are chosen in this piece; by randomly fluctuating and changing, but between specified, aesthetically pleasing limits. I wanted to experiment with this under explored faculty of hearing; to draw out that instant for closer inspection, both distorting and enhancing the relationship between the sounds we make, and the spaces they occur in.

Acoustically rich spaces such as caves and cathedrals with an echo several seconds long, have a provocative quality that makes a person want to shout and enjoy the rippling after effects. It is my intention to bring some of that grand sonic experience into this corridor.

Space

The effected signal is then sent to spatialisation tools [i, k], creating all manner of spatial gestures. The movement can be controlled by sine wave LFO’s, sample and hold, the play position of the source sample or a pre-programmed path, selected at random by pressing the black button. This far in the process, we have an abstract spatial environment; quite unlike a normal corridor should sound. The next process, in contrast, is designed to assert a more realistic character of the space. Its uniform shape makes an echo acquire a certain pitch, related to the distance from speaker to floor.

In this corridor that distance is 2808mm, giving us a frequency of 122.15Hz (remarkably this is a pitch somewhere between A and B!). These pitched acoustics informs us of a smaller, geometrically more simple space. A series of very short delay lines with variable feedback rates mimic this effect, with each speaker output having its own channel of delay, creating a spatial ‘chord’. The frequency for each speaker is generated from a list of fractional values, multiplied by our resonant frequency of 122.15Hz. These fractions are generated by of numbers with harmonic and geometric significance. Links between harmony and geometry have been known since pythagorus, but still no explanation exists as to why the connections occur.

Below are a few examples of harmonic/spatial relationships.

Here, we see the octave has a frequency ratio of 1:2. This is represented here by two squares, with the distance from corner to corner being equal to the square root of 5. The sides of a pentagram’s triangle are in the ratio of 2:3, which is a perfect fifth. 2 / 3 = 0.666. Within the interior pentagon we find the ratio of the sides of its triangle to be 3:4, equal to that of a perfect fourth. 3 / 4 = 0.75. I have used lists including these somehow ‘special’ numbers to generate another list of fractional values, by pairing them together at random, and dividing. This fraction is the multiplied by the resonant frequency.

Some examples of the lists used are the fibonacci series up to number eight (0 1 1 2 3 5 8), the first eight prime numbers (1 2 3 5 7 9 11 13), numbers 1 to 16, a list of only 2’s, 3’s and 4’s, and several more. The melodic effect ranges from vaguely serialist tones of the fibonacci list, to a dramatic range of 1-16, and the pleasing harmonics of the list of 2,3 and 4.






	The realisation of this piece required a completely customised piece of software, which was designed and built using Max/MSP The main components of the software are: a. main sampler unit b. input mixer c. sampler - effects router d. multi channel delay lines e. multi channel phase adjuster f. granular sampler g. channel meters h. master volumes i. panning system j. ‘black button’ k. low frequency wave generators l. number of speakers m. room height I set the following criteria for the technical design: 1. Link all possible aspects of sound to the space 2. Avoid pre-recorded or synthesised sound 3. Create an engaging spatial environment Sound To achieve these goals, the piece had to be interactive in some way. We already interact with a space by walking on the ground and pushing air molecules about through our voices and movements, so these native sounds would be my source material. However footsteps, conversation, doors opening and closing all proved difficult to capture, or prone to feedback. A close range microphone and a gate switch was the most effective solution, inviting people to intentionally enter a sound into the space, the rich tonal and harmonic content of the voice and our sensitivity to its range aiding the movements well. This input is recorded into the main sampler [a], and a granular sampler for playback. Granular sampling has the effect of stretching a sound, revealing the vast timbral variations without adjusting the pitch, and vice versa. It’s used here to create the slowly moving textural foundations of the composition [f]. Each of these samplers are actually an interlinked pair, programmed to merge between each other as new sounds are entered. Processing You will have read about our sound ‘localisation cues’ at the main information point. I have used these cues as creative effects, based on differences in time [d, e] volume [i, b, h, k], timbre [f], and pitch [a, f]. This supported the concept well, and gave me a palette of effects that included phase manipulation, echo’s, comb filters, phase and pitch shifting. To give the user an extra element of control I added a button to the information point, which randomly changes the ‘dimensions’ of the space [j]. Each press selects a different playback mode for the sampler, and sends it to different effects and panning methods, virtually transporting a person from place to place. The behaviour of a sound wave in space is unpredictable, but there are certain governing rules and limits to the randomness. This is paralleled in how parameters and effects are chosen in this piece; by randomly fluctuating and changing, but between specified, aesthetically pleasing limits. I wanted to experiment with this under explored faculty of hearing; to draw out that instant for closer inspection, both distorting and enhancing the relationship between the sounds we make, and the spaces they occur in. Acoustically rich spaces such as caves and cathedrals with an echo several seconds long, have a provocative quality that makes a person want to shout and enjoy the rippling after effects. It is my intention to bring some of that grand sonic experience into this corridor. Space The effected signal is then sent to spatialisation tools [i, k], creating all manner of spatial gestures. The movement can be controlled by sine wave LFO’s, sample and hold, the play position of the source sample or a pre-programmed path, selected at random by pressing the black button. This far in the process, we have an abstract spatial environment; quite unlike a normal corridor should sound. The next process, in contrast, is designed to assert a more realistic character of the space. Its uniform shape makes an echo acquire a certain pitch, related to the distance from speaker to floor. In this corridor that distance is 2808mm, giving us a frequency of 122.15Hz (remarkably this is a pitch somewhere between A and B!). These pitched acoustics informs us of a smaller, geometrically more simple space. A series of very short delay lines with variable feedback rates mimic this effect, with each speaker output having its own channel of delay, creating a spatial ‘chord’. The frequency for each speaker is generated from a list of fractional values, multiplied by our resonant frequency of 122.15Hz. These fractions are generated by of numbers with harmonic and geometric significance. Links between harmony and geometry have been known since pythagorus, but still no explanation exists as to why the connections occur. Below are a few examples of harmonic/spatial relationships. Here, we see the octave has a frequency ratio of 1:2. This is represented here by two squares, with the distance from corner to corner being equal to the square root of 5. The sides of a pentagram’s triangle are in the ratio of 2:3, which is a perfect fifth. 2 / 3 = 0.666. Within the interior pentagon we find the ratio of the sides of its triangle to be 3:4, equal to that of a perfect fourth. 3 / 4 = 0.75. I have used lists including these somehow ‘special’ numbers to generate another list of fractional values, by pairing them together at random, and dividing. This fraction is the multiplied by the resonant frequency. Some examples of the lists used are the fibonacci series up to number eight (0 1 1 2 3 5 8), the first eight prime numbers (1 2 3 5 7 9 11 13), numbers 1 to 16, a list of only 2’s, 3’s and 4’s, and several more. The melodic effect ranges from vaguely serialist tones of the fibonacci list, to a dramatic range of 1-16, and the pleasing harmonics of the list of 2,3 and 4.
Info Images Sounds Technical Download Contact