What Makes a Good Musical Instrument? A Matter of Processes, Ecologies and Specificities

M. Rodger, P. Stapleton, M. V. Walstijn, Miguel Ortiz, Laurel Pardue
{"title":"What Makes a Good Musical Instrument? A Matter of Processes, Ecologies and Specificities","authors":"M. Rodger, P. Stapleton, M. V. Walstijn, Miguel Ortiz, Laurel Pardue","doi":"10.5281/zenodo.4813438","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Understanding the question of what makes a good musical instrument raises several conceptual challenges. Researchers have regularly adopted tools from traditional HCI as a framework to address this issue, in which instrumental musical activities are taken to comprise a device and a user, and should be evaluated as such. We argue that this approach is not equipped to fully address the conceptual issues raised by this question. It is worth reflecting on what exactly an instrument is, and how instruments contribute toward meaningful musical experiences. Based on a theoretical framework that incorporates ideas from ecological psychology, enactivism, and phenomenology, we propose an alternative approach to studying musical instruments. According to this approach, instruments are better understood in terms of processes rather than as devices, while musicians are not users, but rather agents in musical ecologies. A consequence of this reframing is that any evaluations of instruments, if warranted, should align with the specificities of the relevant processes and ecologies concerned. We present an outline of this argument and conclude with a description of a current research project to illustrate how our approach can shape the design and performance of a musical instrument in-progress.","PeriodicalId":161317,"journal":{"name":"New Interfaces for Musical Expression","volume":"88 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-07-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"16","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"New Interfaces for Musical Expression","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4813438","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 16

Abstract

Understanding the question of what makes a good musical instrument raises several conceptual challenges. Researchers have regularly adopted tools from traditional HCI as a framework to address this issue, in which instrumental musical activities are taken to comprise a device and a user, and should be evaluated as such. We argue that this approach is not equipped to fully address the conceptual issues raised by this question. It is worth reflecting on what exactly an instrument is, and how instruments contribute toward meaningful musical experiences. Based on a theoretical framework that incorporates ideas from ecological psychology, enactivism, and phenomenology, we propose an alternative approach to studying musical instruments. According to this approach, instruments are better understood in terms of processes rather than as devices, while musicians are not users, but rather agents in musical ecologies. A consequence of this reframing is that any evaluations of instruments, if warranted, should align with the specificities of the relevant processes and ecologies concerned. We present an outline of this argument and conclude with a description of a current research project to illustrate how our approach can shape the design and performance of a musical instrument in-progress.
什么是好的乐器?过程、生态和特性的问题
理解是什么造就了一件好乐器的问题提出了几个概念上的挑战。研究人员经常采用传统HCI的工具作为解决这一问题的框架,其中乐器音乐活动被视为包括设备和用户,并应以此进行评估。我们认为,这种方法不能完全解决这个问题所引起的概念问题。乐器到底是什么,乐器如何为有意义的音乐体验做出贡献,这些都值得我们思考。基于结合生态心理学、行动主义和现象学思想的理论框架,我们提出了一种研究乐器的替代方法。根据这种方法,乐器被更好地理解为过程而不是设备,而音乐家不是用户,而是音乐生态中的代理人。这种重新定义的结果是,如果有必要,对工具的任何评价都应与有关过程和有关生态的具体情况保持一致。我们提出了这一论点的大纲,并以当前研究项目的描述来结束,以说明我们的方法如何影响正在进行的乐器的设计和性能。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信