Robert H. Jack
Andrew McPherson
ABSTRACT
When designing digital musical instruments the importance of low and consistent action-to-sound latency is widely accepted. This paper investigates the effects of latency (0-20ms) on instrument quality evaluation and performer interaction. We present findings from an experiment conducted with musicians who performed on an percussive digital musical instrument with variable amounts of latency. Three latency conditions were tested against a zero latency condition, 10ms, 20ms and 10ms ± 3ms jitter. The zero latency condition was significantly rated more positively than the 10ms with jitter and 20ms latency conditions in six quality measures, emphasising the importance of not only low, but stable latency in digital musical instruments. There was no significant difference in rating between the zero latency condition and 10ms condition. A quantitative analysis of timing accuracy in a metronome task under latency conditions showed no significant difference in mean synchronisation error. This suggests that the 20ms and 10ms with jitter latency conditions degrade subjective impressions of an instrument, but without significantly affecting the timing performance of our participants. These findings are discussed in terms of control intimacy and instrument transparency.
- A. Askenfelt and E. V. Jansson. From touch to string vibrations - the initial course of the piano tone. Dept. for Speech Music and Hearing, Quarterly Progress and Status Report, 29(1):31--109, 1988.Google Scholar
- S. Dahl and R. Bresin. Is the player more influenced by the auditory than the tactile feedback from the instrument? In Proc. of the COST-G6 Workshop on Digital Audio effects (DAFx-01), Limerick, pages 194--197. Citeseer, 2001.Google Scholar
- G. Essl and S. O'modhrain. An enactive approach to the design of new tangible musical instruments. Organised Sound, 11(03):285--296, 2006. Google ScholarDigital Library
- S. Fels. Designing for intimacy: Creating new interfaces for musical expression. In Proc. of the IEEE, 92(4):672--685, 2004.Google ScholarCross Ref
- F. Fontana, H. Järveläinen, S. Papetti, F. Avanzini, G. Klauer, L. Malavolta, C. di Musica, and C. Pollini. Rendering and subjective evaluation of real vs. synthetic vibrotactile cues on a digital piano keyboard. In Proc. of the Sound and Music Computing Conference 2015, Maynooth, Ireland, 2015.Google Scholar
- A. Friberg and J. Sundberg. Time discrimination in a monotonic, isochronous sequence. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 98(5):2524--2531, 1995.Google ScholarCross Ref
- S. Fujii, M. Hirashima, K. Kudo, T. Ohtsuki, Y. Nakamura, and S. Oda. Synchronization Error of Drum Kit Playing with a Metronome at Different Tempi by Professional Drummers. Music Perception: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 28(5):491--503, 2011.Google ScholarCross Ref
- T. Kaaresoja, S. Brewster, and V. Lantz. Towards the Temporally Perfect Virtual Button: Touch-Feedback Simultaneity and Perceived Quality in Mobile Touchscreen Press Interactions. ACM Transactions on Applied Perception, 11(2), 2014. Google ScholarDigital Library
- T. Kaaresoja, E. Hoggan, and E. Anttila. Playing with tactile feedback latency in touchscreen interaction: two approaches. In Proc. of the IFIP Conference on Human-Computer Interaction, pages 554--571. Springer, 2011. Google ScholarDigital Library
- N. Lago and F. Kon. The quest for low latency. In Proc. of the International Computer Music Conference, pages 33--36, 2004.Google Scholar
- M. Leman. Embodied music cognition and mediation technology. MIT Press, 2008. Google ScholarDigital Library
- T. Magnusson and E. H. Mendieta. The acoustic, the digital and the body: A survey on musical instruments. In Proc. of the 7th International Conference on New Interfaces for Musical Expression, pages 94--99. ACM, 2007. Google ScholarDigital Library
- T. Mäki-Patola and P. Hämäläinen. Latency tolerance for gesture controlled continuous sound instrument without tactile feedback. In Proc. International Computer Music Conference (ICMC), pages 1--5, 2004.Google Scholar
- A. McPherson, R. H. Jack, and G. Moro. Action-sound latency: Are our tools fast enough? In Proc. of the International Conference on New Interfaces for Musical Expression, 2016.Google Scholar
- A. McPherson and V. Zappi. An environment for submillisecond-latency audio and sensor processing on beaglebone black. In Audio Engineering Society Convention 138. Audio Engineering Society, 2015.Google Scholar
- S. O'modhrain. A framework for the evaluation of digital musical instruments. Computer Music Journal, 35(1):28--42, 2011. Google ScholarDigital Library
- B. H. Repp and Y. H. Su. Sensorimotor synchronization: a review of recent research (2006-2012). Psychonomic bulletin & review, 20(3):403--452, 2013.Google Scholar
- D. Rubine and P. McAvinney. Programmable finger-tracking instrument controllers. Computer Music Journal, 14(1):26--41, 1990.Google ScholarCross Ref
- C. Saitis, B. L. Giordano, C. Fritz, and G. P. Scavone. Perceptual evaluation of violins: A quantitative analysis of preference judgments by experienced players. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 132(6):4002--4012, 2012.Google ScholarCross Ref
- D. Wessel and M. Wright. Problems and Prospects for Intimate Musical Control of Computers. Computer Music Journal, 26(3):11--14, 2002. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Effect of latency on performer interaction and subjective quality assessment of a digital musical instrument
Recommendations
Maintaining and Constraining Performer Touch in the Design of Digital Musical Instruments
TEI '17: Proceedings of the Eleventh International Conference on Tangible, Embedded, and Embodied InteractionExpression in musical practice is inextricably tied to the touch of the performer. In digital musical instruments (DMIs) the relationship of touch to sound is indirect: the nuances and fine detail of performer control can be flattened and limited during ...
Navigation of Pitch Space on a Digital Musical Instrument with Dynamic Tactile Feedback
TEI '16: Proceedings of the TEI '16: Tenth International Conference on Tangible, Embedded, and Embodied InteractionWe present a study investigating the impact of dynamic tactile feedback on performer navigation of a continuous pitch space on a digital musical instrument. Ten musicians performed a series of blind pitch selection and melodic tasks on a self-contained ...
Musical instrument interaction: development of a sensor fingerboard for string instruments
TEI '14: Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Tangible, Embedded and Embodied InteractionIn the past few years, many technologies for motion capturing are used to examine posture and movements of musicians. Several video and sensor based systems are developed and available for these observations. In research and for augmented instruments ...
Comments