SENsorb/SENsegg HAND-HELD SENSOR BASED WIRELESS CONTROLLER

SENsorb/SENsegg

HAND-HELD SENSOR BASED WIRELESS CONTROLLER

ASSUMPTIONS

ASSUME BASIC KNOWLEDGE SYSTEMS AND TECHNOLOGIES

BASIC OVERVIEW

BackgroundKey findings of literature search so far

Aims and objectivesMethodology

BASIC OVERVIEW

Progress so farProject planSummary

Prototype and scenariosQuestions

BACKGROUND

Threeways School Placement

Technology available and how used in the school Technology that was needed in the school

Need for flexible system

LITERATURE SEARCH AREAS

Controlling sound with interfaces, past and current developments

Networking and handling sensors and data Technology in SEN schools

LITERATURE SEARCH AREAS

Music and sound therapy in schools Designing interactions and mapping

Interface design

CONTROLLING SOUND WITH INTERFACES

Systems in use

Current developments

Popular solutions to common problems

THE SQUEEZABLES (Weinberg and Gan 2001)

pressure sensors in gel-filled balls

AIRSTICK (Franco 2005)

Instrument containing array of infrared sensors

SOUNDSTONE (Bowen 2005)

Handheld wireless controller

MUSICAL BALL PROJECT (Jensensius and Voldsund 2012)

Novel spherical device with sensors

NETWORKING AND SENSORS

Comparing Bluetooth, ZigBee, and WiBree WPAN technologies (Kooker 2008)

Sensor technology and remaking instruments from the past (Gallin, Sirguy 2009) Rapid DIY design of real-time instruments (Schmeder and Freed 2009)

NETWORKING AND SENSORS

Wireless sensor data collections based on Zigbee communication (Renton and Jensensius 2010)

Wireless digital/analog sensors for music and dance performance (Todoroff 2011)

TECHNOLOGY IN SEN SCHOOLS

Soundbeam (Swingler 2009) –getting better all the time paper

Skoog (Skoogmusic 2013)

Making music multimodally (McDowall 2009) benefits of using computer music based technology in schools

MUSIC AND SOUND THERAPY IN SCHOOLS

Music education for pupils with severe or profound and multiple difficulties (Ockelford et al 2002)

Projects such as MUSE-multimedia used in special education (Farrimond et al 2011)

DESIGNING INTERACTIONS AN MAPPING

Mapping performer parameters to synthesis engines (Hunt and Wanderley 2002)

The importance of parameter mapping in electronic instrument design (Hunt et al 2003)

New digital musical instruments: control and interaction beyond the keyboard (Miranda and Wanderley 2006)

INTERFACE DESIGN

Principles for Designing Computer Music Controllers(Cook 2001)

Building low cost controllers (Jensenius et al 2005)

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

Develop wireless sensor system for disabled children

PHASE 1

Requirements capture

Defining unit specification

Design prototype unit

Implement prototype unit

Characterise single unit

PHASE 2

Wireless capability

Extend to multiple units

Bench characterisation multiple units

Evaluate system in school context

METHODOLOGY

Agile scrum rapid prototyping Qualitative case studies Using set frameworks

PROGRESS SO FAR

Initial literary search Made headway into phase 1 Prototype in development Visited Threeways school Explored some scenarios for device usage

GANTT Chart

SUMMARY

On target

Still issues such as mapping

Harnessing the data

New technology

PROTOTYPE AND SCENARIOS

Educational

Device is used by student to trigger

Musical

Pitch slider with blow sensor

QUESTIONS?

References

Bowen, A.,2005. Soundstone: a 3d wireless music controller. In: Hoskinson, R., ed. New interfaces for musical expression, 26-28 May 2005 Vancouver. Vancouver: NIME, 268-269.

Cook, P., 2001. Principles for designing computer music controllers. In: Poupyrey, I., ed. New interfaces for musical expression, 1-2 August 2001 Seattle. Seattle: NIME. 1-4.

Farrimond, B., Gillard, D., Bott, D., Lonie, D., 2011. Engagement with technology in special education & disabled music setting. London: Youthmusic.org.

Franco, I.,2005. The airstick: a free-gesture controller using infrared sensors. In: Hoskinson, R., ed. New interfaces for musical expression, 26-28 May 2005 Vancouver. Vancouver: NIME, 248-249.

Gallin, E., and Sirguy, M., 2009. Sensor technology and the remaking of instruments from the past. In: Dannenberg, R., and Sullivan, T., ed. New interfaces for musical expression, 4-6 June 2009 Pittsburgh. Pittsburgh: NIME. 199-202.

Hunt, A., Wanderley, M.M., 2002. Mapping performer parameters to synthesis engines. Organised sound, 7(2), 97-108.

Hunt, A., Wanderley, M.M., Paradis, M., 2003. The importance of parameter mapping in electronic instrument design. Journal of new music research. 32(4), 429 – 440.

Jensensius, A.R., Koehly, R., Wanderley, M.M., 2005. Building low cost music controllers. In: Kronland-Martinet, R., Voinier, T., Ystad, S., ed. Computer music modelling and retrieval. Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 123-129.

Jensenius, A.R., Voldsund, A., 2012. The musical ball project: concept, design, development, performance. In: Essl, G.,ed. New interfaces for musical expression, 21-23 May 2012 Michigan. Michigan: NIME.

Kooker, J., 2008. Bluetooth, zigbee, and wibree: a comparison of WPAN technologies. John Hooker. Available from: http://johnkooker.com/blog/wpcontent/uploads/2009/05/jkooker_BTZigBeeWibree.pdf [Accessed 10/11/13].

McDowall, J., 2009. Making music mulitmodally: young children learning with music technology. International journal of learning, 16 (10), 303-315. Available from: http://ijl.cgpublisher.com/product/pub.30/prod.2484 [Accessed 1st October 2013].

Miranda, E.R., Wanderley, M.M., 2006. New digital musical instruments: control and interaction beyond the keyboard. Vol. 21. Wisconsin: A-R Editions, Inc.

Ockelford, A., Welch, G., Zimmerman, S., 2002. Music education for pupils with severe or profound and multiple difficulties – current provision and future need. British journal of special education, 29(4), 178-182.

Renton, S., and Jensenius, A.R., 2009. Wireless sensor data collection based on zigBee

Communication. In: Beilharz, Kristy., ed. New interfaces for musical expression, 15-18 June 2010 Sydney. Sydney: NIME. 368-371.

Schmeder,A., and Freed, A., 2009. A low-level embedded service architecture for rapid diy design of real-time musical instruments. In: Dannenberg, R., and Sullivan, T., ed. New interfaces for musical expression, 4-6 June 2009 Pittsburgh. Pittsburgh: NIME. 121-124.

Skoogmusic Ltd. 2013. Meet the Skoog [photograph]. Edinburgh: skoogmusic.com. Available from: http://www.skoogmusic.com/skoog [Accessed 10th October 2013].

Swingler, T., 2009. Getting better all the time: using music technology for learners with special needs. Australian journal of music education, 2, 49-57.

Todofoff, T., 2011. Wireless digital/analog sensors for music and dance performance. In: Jensenius, A.R., Tveit, A., Godoy, R.I., Overholt, D., ed. New interfaces for musical expression, 30th May- 1st June 2011 Oslo. Oslo: Department of musicology. 515-518.

Weinberg, G. and Gan, S.L.,2001. The squeezables: toward an expressive and interdependent multi-player musical instrument. Computer music journal, 25(2), 27-45.

Images – All others not stated from Wikimedia commons under free use.

Foundation- http://raftertales.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/11/building-foundation-2.jpg

Target -http://www.smarta.com/umbraco/ImageGen.ashx?image=/media/1937848/setting%20targets.jpg&width=435

Key - http://rhinebeckcfc.com/themag1.jpg

Arrows -http://www.colourbox.com/preview/3540330-953574-red-and-green-arrows-cycle.jpg

Chisseling at wood- http://www.closedtruth.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/stone-mason-chiseling-a-block-of-stone.jpg

Blueprints - http://www.gethatched.ca/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/blueprint-300x199.jpg

Xbee- http://www.zagrosrobotics.com/images/Xbee-1.jpg

Soundbeam - http://media.soundonsound.com/sos/oct01/images/emssoundbeam1.gif

Muse logo-http://www.museproject.co.uk/meet-the-team /

Dot to dot- http://www.raisingourkids.com/activities/connect-dot-to-dot/038-dot-to-dot-coloring-pages.html

Chaplin- http://chaplin.bfi.org.uk/images/720/bfi-00n-8qx.jpg