Unconventional Inputs: New/Old insturments, design, DIY and Disability

2.50
Hdl Handle:
http://hdl.handle.net/2436/620295
Title:
Unconventional Inputs: New/Old insturments, design, DIY and Disability
Authors:
Dalgleish, Mat ( 0000-0003-3697-8556 )
Abstract:
Musical instruments today exhibit a split between old and new. On one side, there are a modest number of canonical forms that have slowly evolved over millennia; they are now extremely familiar and a few can reasonably be labelled “iconic”. However, rather than idealized or even near-optimal designs, they are necessarily the product of compromise between incompatible acoustical and human factors, and therefore invariably imperfect. For some musicians and composers these limitations are a source of creative stimulation (Eno 1996; Strauss 2004), but many more rarely deeply consider their interaction possibilities — good or bad. In either case there may be little to no demand for changes to be made in the design of an individual instrument, let alone to a family of instruments
Publisher:
Canadian Electroacoustic Community (CEC)
Journal:
eContact! (18.3)
Issue Date:
Dec-2016
URI:
http://hdl.handle.net/2436/620295
Additional Links:
http://econtact.ca/18_3/dalgleish_unconventional.html
Type:
Article
Language:
en
ISSN:
0000-0000
Appears in Collections:
FOA

Full metadata record

DC FieldValue Language
dc.contributor.authorDalgleish, Maten
dc.date.accessioned2016-11-28T16:03:08Z-
dc.date.available2016-11-28T16:03:08Z-
dc.date.issued2016-12-
dc.identifier.issn0000-0000en
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2436/620295-
dc.description.abstractMusical instruments today exhibit a split between old and new. On one side, there are a modest number of canonical forms that have slowly evolved over millennia; they are now extremely familiar and a few can reasonably be labelled “iconic”. However, rather than idealized or even near-optimal designs, they are necessarily the product of compromise between incompatible acoustical and human factors, and therefore invariably imperfect. For some musicians and composers these limitations are a source of creative stimulation (Eno 1996; Strauss 2004), but many more rarely deeply consider their interaction possibilities — good or bad. In either case there may be little to no demand for changes to be made in the design of an individual instrument, let alone to a family of instrumentsen
dc.language.isoenen
dc.publisherCanadian Electroacoustic Community (CEC)en
dc.relation.urlhttp://econtact.ca/18_3/dalgleish_unconventional.htmlen
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/*
dc.subjectMusical Instrument Designen
dc.subjectDigital Musical Instrumentsen
dc.subjectDIYen
dc.subjectDisabilityen
dc.subjectAdaptationen
dc.titleUnconventional Inputs: New/Old insturments, design, DIY and Disabilityen
dc.typeArticleen
dc.identifier.journaleContact! (18.3)en
dc.date.accepted2016-11-
rioxxterms.funderInternalen
rioxxterms.identifier.projectUoW281116MDen
rioxxterms.versionVoRen
rioxxterms.licenseref.urihttps://creativecommons.org/CC BY-NC-ND 4.0en
rioxxterms.licenseref.startdate2016-12-01en
This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License
Creative Commons
All Items in WIRE are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.