Chapter 8: Networked Improvisational Musical Environments: Learning through online collaborative music making.

Chapter 8: Networked Improvisational Musical Environments: Learning through online collaborative music making. Andrew R. Brown and Steve C. Dillon Introduction This chapter explores the potential for computers to provide a vehicle for collaborative music making through improvisation using computers on a network. Networked improvisation suggests a contemporary musicianship which embraces the computer as instrument, the network as ensemble and cyberspace as venue. In this chapter we will discuss the emerging learning opportunities of real-time improvisation using digital instruments connected via electronic networks and draw from a selection of school and community based case studies as illustrations. In particular we will discuss issues, approaches and strategies for educators using Networked Musical Environments that model style and afford interactions in an accessible way as virtual and present collaborative learning spaces. These environments exploit the interactive qualities of ICT to provide supportive learning environments for action and reflection. The computer as instrument Like the complex technology of the piano, a computer can respond to gestures which result in expressive changes in sound in real-time. DJs and contemporary bands frequently utilize the computer as an instrument where the output is generally recombined chunks of music rather than individual notes as exemplified by playing sound samples and manipulating loops of sonic materials. Despite dealing with larger musical segments, the computer still plays a significant role as an expressive instrument for today s musicians. Networked Improvisation with generative music algorithms uses the computer as an instrument and also as a partner, and provides musical experiences through meta-level control. 1

Networked improvisation can be broadly described as collaborative music making over a computer network. There are two further classifications that are useful, those systems that directly send musical gestures over the network as MIDI, Audio or OSC data, and those that send parameter data for controlling generative algorithms. Programs like Band in a Box have been using this kind of algorithmic representation of contemporary music styles for many years, but have not been either interactive or networked. In this chapter particular attention is paid to Networked Improvisation using algorithmic functions because we believe such systems provide unique educational opportunities and are an elegant solution to the technical limitations of network latency (Chafe & Leistikow 2001). For many decades computer musicians like David Cope (1992) and Iannis Xenakis (1991) have used generative algorithms in the production of complex music compositions constructed over many hours, days or weeks. The recent advances in computer technology have made it possible to design music algorithms based upon specific pitch, timbre and rhythmic qualities that can be manipulated in real time with a simple interface that a child can control. Furthermore this operation can be a collaborative one that utilizes a network to facilitate virtual ensembles. Is it the same as a real instrument? The personal satisfaction and meaning gained by users of a computer instrument have been documented as being similar to those described by musicians using acoustic instruments (Brown, 2000, 2003; Dillon, 2001). Computer instruments that use specifically designed algorithms, based on the theoretical rules of known musical styles, can provide a focused curriculum experience that affords experiences of direct manipulation of style. The student can actively influence the sound and reflect on the changes in musical elements. The computer can also be used as an instrument within a mixed ensemble as is evident in many performances by contemporary musicians where electronic and acoustic instruments are combined. 2

The network as ensemble Until the advent of the Internet, real-time interaction was possible only for musicians who were physically collocated, but these days it is possible to interact over a network in real-time. This allows ensemble activity to occur at separate sites for musicians who share the network and the software, this means they can play together in a collaboration where each can see and hear the result their gestures have, facilitating real musical communication between them. This enables a broad range of collaborative activity on a network and makes cyberspace into a new meeting place not unlike a musical chat room where the music takes the place of speech as the primary mode of communication between users. Cyberspace as venue Networked musical environments allow cyberspace to become a venue where improvisers can participate in a musical dialogue, do solo performances, or listen to the performances of others. With algorithmic musical instruments that do not depend upon continuous gestural input, the user can be both listener and performer, both producer and consumer. In the same way that chat rooms facilitate online communities, networked musical environments create a cyber venue for participatory cultural experiences. What is networked improvisation? A networked improvisation involves two or more musicians operating software that connects over the Internet or a local area network. Musical information generated by the musicians is sent over the network linking musicians via their computers in realtime; that is, so quickly as to be perceived as immediate. The musical information sent over the network can be in symbolic form such as Musical Instrument Digital Interface (MIDI) note data, as raw audio data, or it can be parametric data controlling key, density levels, and so on. Communication between musicians during networked improvisation is asynchronous, that is, information can simultaneously flow in any direction; like speech in a telephone system. Therefore, a networked music environment is an interactive distributed computer system for real-time music making by multiple users. 3

Elements of an environment for network improvisation Networked Improvisation activities reinforce existing musical skills focused around sonic expression and communication, but also involve new skills and understandings to provide a range of opportunities for engaging with music making. In this section we will explore the skills, knowledge and resources used in a networked improvisation. A contemporary musicianship Musicianship in a networked environment requires skills that account for the new digital context. This contemporary musicianship acknowledges the computer as an instrument, and understands a networked group as a form of ensemble, and cyberspace as the venue for their networked music making. Because these instruments utilize digital technologies to store, represent and communicate musical knowledge and experience, it is necessary for the musician to have a reasonable understanding of how these technologies operate. Essentially contemporary musicianship includes skills in using computer hardware and software to record, review, generate, produce and publish music. This form of musicianship acknowledges the unique techniques and knowledge demonstrated by DJ s, sound designers, electronic composers and music producers. Musicianship involves the understanding of music representations, and just as composers and performers have traditionally used common practice notation as a principal means of representing, storing, communicating and thinking about music, the contemporary musician uses digital representations of music, such as waveforms, graphs, event lists, and computer code to analyse, compose and perform. Modes of Creative engagement Networked environments using algorithmic processes allow a variety of modes of creative engagement. The facility to both participate in the changing of parameters or to sit back and analyse the current state of the music, provides an increased range of relationships with the music making process over systems where constant gestural input is required. An improviser can choose to play, direct, explore, select or listen and, in turn, the technology used by the musician can serve as an instrument, tool, 4

model, generator and container of musical knowledge (Brown, 2000, 2003). Functionally this means that learners can engage in different ways within the same performance experience, enhancing the opportunities for music learning. Using generative networked improvisation systems we have observed improvisers collaboratively switching between being listener (judging the quality of the rhythmic groove) to explorer (experimenting with the pitch range of an instrumental parts) then director (making adjustments to the tempo so that the groove felt danceable). The generative nature of the software provides the ability to oscillate between acting and reflecting during performances, while the real-time nature of the algorithmic music generation provides instant feedback to the student on the musical choices they make. These provide opportunities for increased development of across a broad spectrum of musical intelligence. Resources for Network Improvisation As mentioned earlier, systems for networked improvisation fall into two main types: 1) Systems where the musician s gestures are directly controlling the note level detail of the music in the way traditional co-present acoustic improvisation does, 2) Systems where musicians control meta-level parameters and the details of the sound material are based on prepared or generated material; as with a DJ or live algorithmic music performer. Network improvisation systems are available that support one or both of these methods of operation. The most established networked improvisation resources come from the academic computer music community. As such, a number of them require significant computing expertise and may be beyond the reach of many school students or teachers, however they do illuminate the history and future of this field and so a quick overview is in order. In the same way that MIDI was a revolution in connecting synthesizers together in the 1980s the Open Sound Control (OSC) specification (Wright & Freed 1997) has been 5

the catalyst for a number of real-time music systems to embrace network-jamming capabilities. Programs that implement the OSC standard can communicate with each other sending text, symbolic or audio data between computers over a network. Some of the programs that support networked musical performance using MIDI or OSC are SuperCollider, Max/MSP, Pure-data, Algorithmic Composer and AudioMulch. With these systems the user builds a musical patch (instrument) from components and programs the way in which instructions and data are sent as messages and responded to when received. Another format that is emerging to do a similar job as OSC via MIDI is the RTP payload format for MIDI (Lazzaro & Wawrzynek 2005), the development of which is worth keeping an eye on as it specifically intends to foster networked music performance applications. Code Jamming An even more flexible, and challenging, trend in the academic computer music community is live programming, where lines of computer code are written and sent over a network during live performances. These lines of code describe the music and sounds to be played. Examples include, ChucK (Wang and Cook 2003), Co-Audicle (Cook et al. 2005), SuperCollider (McCartney 1996) and Impromptu (Sorensen 2005). The code fragments can describe synthesis processes, generative music algorithms, or commands to currently running operations and functions. The flexibility of such systems is vast, however, the coding skill and knowledge of digital music systems required to manage the task under time pressures of live performance is equally large. As a result, these are rarely used in schools, but are increasingly common in University music programs and electronic music festivals. The TopLap web site has much more detail about systems for live programming and networked performances using these systems. Some more simple networked improvisation software that are suitable for classroom usage include the jam2jam program (Brown, Sorensen, & Dillon, 2002) described later in this chapter, the PitchWeb application that is part of William Duckworth s Cathedral online music project, John Klima s GlassBead application for sharing 6

musical fragments in a virtual space, the Cyberjazz system, a performance network where instrument gestures are sent as note-by-note MIDI messages directly over the network. A reasonably simple Live Programming system based on a conversational narrative model is Quoth (Latta 2005) which may be suitable for use in school music programs. The Continuator (Pachet, 2002), is a generative improvisation instrument that works as a call and response system that reflects, through imitative variations, the human s performance. However, this system does not support multiple users over a network. There are a number of networked composition environments that are related to the work discussed in the chapter, including DrumSteps (McCarthy et al. 2005) and MICNet! but they will not be covered in any detail because our focus is on improvisatory performance systems. A networked improvisation example A networked improvisation system designed specifically for music education is jam2jam. The authors designed jam2jam specifically to enhance meaningful engagements with music at the personal, social and cultural level. In this section we will describe a situation where children used jam2jam in a music and dance activity. This vignette will illustrate how networked improvisation can be conducted. Observations of students a number of examples across a variety of age groups, contexts and cultural groups using jam2jam suggests that the meaningful experiences achieved through networked improvisation share the same qualities as a real ensemble experience. The jam2jam software jam2jam is a network improvisation system that allows users to modify musical parameters of an algorithmically generated musical style. It provides users with a next-to-immediate audio feedback as parameters are altered by adjusting sliders, and any number of jam2jam systems can be connected into an ensemble over a network. The software can be used on a local network or over the Internet where users are 7

connected by the shared music and the mirroring of moving sliders across each connected computer. A built-in instant message chat-box provides text communication between performers, but the more important communication occurs as students listen to the collaborative sounds that they share. Music can be played by one or more of the connected computers. It is sensible to only have one machine at each physical location playing, and all others at that location acting simply as remote controllers. Figure 1 shows the Bass page of the jam2jam interface. Figure 1. The Bass page of the jam2jam software. 8

A network improvisation session A series of music lessons using networked improvisation was set up using four Apple imac computers in two locations, two in a city school and the others in a country school. At each school a classroom ensemble consisted of about ten year 8 students. Each classroom had several Orff percussion instruments, acoustic guitars, a Theremin/ synthesizer and a turntable plugged into a mixing desk. Four students at each location had been selected to play the computer and the remaining students played other instruments or sang/rapped. The musical results were coordinated similarly at each school with jam2jam linking the classrooms over the internet. The performance was loosely synchronized but instruments were just heard locally at each site. The teachers had prepared printed charts with the rhythmic and note possibilities of the Vox pop algorithm for students and each group composed a short ostinato based on these for acoustic instrument use in the performance. They practiced separately in their classrooms using jam2jam as a backing track and prepared graphic scores that indicated when each instrument was to play. Several students had composed short vocal choruses and raps for the event. The learning objectives focused upon the core content of musical knowledge found in the contemporary Hip hop-like style. The key objectives were to demonstrate an understanding of the elements of hip-hop through composing/improvising, listening/ analysis and performance. More specifically, students were expected to demonstrate an understanding of form/structure, syncopated rhythm, timbre and texture. The teachers made audio recordings of each iteration of the improvisation and students adjusted their performances and scores following reflective sessions where they listened critically to these recordings. The musical descriptors on the jam2jam interface were used to frame the reflective sessions and guide the discussion. These descriptors include, volume, solo, density, range, length, progression and sound (timbre). The students using the computers on the network had to attend to both the acoustic performances and to the generative possibilities of the computer, whilst the 9

acoustic performers were focused on the structure of the piece and keeping in time and in tune with the computer-generated music. The learning was evident in the evolution of the piece from the chaos of early performances to the more considered and tasteful later rehearsals. It was also evident in the development of their scores and the demonstration of individual control over the musical elements. Most important for the students was the idea that the music they made sounded like an authentic contemporary piece, mainly possible because of the computer-based sounds and generated drum and bass parts. After the initial rehearsals as class groups, the two classes did a series of networked performances at an agreed time. Just as the individual class performances took shape as rehearsals progressed, so to the networked performances developed as the computer players learnt to cooperate and sync their combined ensembles. The text chat boxes in jam2jam enabled them to coordinate activities between sites during the performance. Initially students were engaged with the whole idea of using the chat boxes to just simply chat across the network, but eventually the students began to use musical terms in the chat to communicate what they had planned on their scores or in response to what they heard. Some of the more musical chat comments included: Let s solo the bass guitar the next time round Put more hi hats in the chorus The guitar is too loud in the mix The last chorus is next. The students learnt to use appropriate musical terms for each instrument and it s activity. Such concepts as shuffle, range, density and length which are the names on jam2jam sliders and dials become associated with a musical change that could be identified aurally. The repeated association between the experience, the sound and the naming, reinforced the use of the musical terms to direct the music. Put simply, as a result of the software design the students were guided to use the musical terms with 10

understanding to make satisfying music together. What was specific to online music making in this vignette was that the same piece had two different interpretations in the two locations simultaneously. Furthermore the networked performance enabled an authentic basis for the style that provided examples of musical phrases and rhythms which acoustic players could play in unison with or counterpoint against. This provided an immersive environment where several modes of engagement were available to the learner. They could listen, play and improvise with materials, select effective passages and replicate them. The software modeled the style and a range of materials and generated music in real time providing a scaffold for the experience. This vignette describes a new kind of musical activity networked improvisation and perhaps a new form of educational experience where students are able to share a networked aural environment and develop an extended form of musicianship. Musical knowledge is encountered through real-time experience constructed and focused by the generative musical algorithm because it directs the style and focuses the learning experience on specific musical knowledge. The issues for educators in networked improvisation are about how software and lesson design can inform and enhance each other. In the vignette described above, the teachers used the characteristics of the generative algorithm (the inherent harmonic and rhythmic ideas) as the core musical knowledge for their unit plan. Clearly many musical ideas are rule based and it is relatively simple to turn rules into an algorithm, and conversely derive musical lesson from an analysis of the algorithmic rules and constraints. There is an opportunity here to focus the learning on the core musical knowledge and also involve aesthetic decisions affecting the intensity, density and texture of the piece, and for the students to encounter both the analytical and intuitive (Swanwick, 1994) musical knowledge as well as composing/improvising, performing and focused listening/audition (Swanwick, 1981) experiences; all in the one improvisational environment. Educators in this constructivist context become the 11

designers of these environments that enable experience and engage students with making music collaboratively. The software design needs to include, as jam2jam does, the capacity for this kind of engagement by embodying conceptual frameworks and philosophies that promote meaningful interaction. Operating a network improvisation In order to successfully utilise networked improvisation systems, some technical and educational background is helpful. The skills of understanding computer networks may not be a traditional part of a music teacher s skill base but only a small amount of the skill is required to operate an networked musical environment. The ways of organising students to maximising the benefits of the interactions have a very significant impact on the learning. In this section we will explore these two areas of operating a network improvisation. Maximising the learning benefits The emerging learning opportunities of real-time improvisation using digital instruments connected via electronic networks are exciting. A network improvisation environment using a generative algorithm can encourage shifts in the modes of engagement for participants during performances by maintaining a musical phrase while the user listens to it and discuss future changes via text chat. This freeze frame capacity has great potential for ensemble learning and for developing students aural perception. It enables a change of focus from the local to global musical detail without fear of the surface level of the music failing. These systems also afford the exploration of style with a range of genres quickly and easily accessible. They provide a virtual learning environment that enables interaction in accessible and inclusive ways. There are opportunities for distance education and, with a suitable interface, can allow physically and mentally impaired musicians access to complex and meaningful musical experiences. A network improvisation environment can be used as the heartbeat of a mixed electric/acoustic ensemble which can focus and facilitate both real and virtual 12

experiences. This allows the computer to be perceived as an instrument and as just another vehicle for expressive music. These systems can help students connect with the digital music making that is part of contemporary life, demystifying it and its abstract presentation in commercial video and audio forms. Interactive experiences with network improvisation systems encourage the development of musical intuition and enable meaningful learning. Each type of networked improvisation system accentuates particular skills and learning outcomes. The systems that transmit real-time MIDI or AUDIO data will primarily focus on traditional performance techniques such as timing, phrasing and pitch selection. These will be of particular benefit where students are isolated and have limited access to ensembles. Whereas systems that use generative engines focus on higher order structure including arrangement, texture, instrumentation, and form. These will be most effective as an adjunct to other improvisational and ensemble experiences allowing for meta-cognitive development and the breaking down of geographic music making boundaries. Students can, for example, focus their understanding upon the structure of a song over time, while the algorithm takes care of surface level compositional detail. Or, alternately, the students can focus on parameter changes to the drum densities to achieve just the right amount of drive for a dance track. Secondary students working in pairs in one school made the following comments: It s pretty snazzy I like the way u can talk to them as well as compose! Jam 2 Jam was heaps good and its good that you can be connected with heaps of people at the same time and also how u can chat at the same time. We both found the program very fascinating. It is effective as an alternative to MSN. It looks cool when one of us moves the buttons and the other sees the results. These year 8 students make the association between the gesture and sound and value the opportunity to talk about music to each other while they are making the sounds in real time. The teacher commented about how the chat boxes encouraged musical conversation that focused student attention on making a good groove together. 13

Teaching strategies for networked improvisation In the same way that a good lesson plan contains core content knowledge, an algorithm contains the rules that circumscribe a musical style. Interaction with the software provides interaction with that content and is therefore an effective curriculum resource. Critical reflection on the relationship between the gesture of moving the slider and the sound is important for learning. In a classroom this can be done using headphones and a set of reflective questions that might be used as a basis for discussion or on a network students can respond in writing using the chat boxes. Aural exercises where participants listen to and replicate a groove sequence mirroring the creators sequence and groove. Aural perception skills that deal with larger chunks of musical information than individual pitches and durations become the focus of learning here. Using networked pairs or groups improvising together increase the range of possible changes and makes the aural perception activity more complex. A good reflective strategy is working with student pairs with one playing whilst the other describes the activity. The listening student s task is to describe what is happening using musical language and recognising the intensity of the instrument activity. They can listen to and identify timbres or instrument, go through each instrument solo and listen to the changes that each slider makes to the sound, or create a groove using different style presets and describe the differences in groove using musical terms. A creative activity for individuals or small groups could involve writing a rap or song lyrics to a generative groove, recording the jam using an audio capture program, tape or video recorder, publishing it as an MP3 file or podcast of the music, pressing a CD and making labels and promotional material, or the use of a MIDI file saved from a generative groove as a starting point for composition within a sequencing program. In the following sections we present some more details teaching ideas for the use of 14 networked improvisation systems.

Dance party in the Lab. A metaphor for motivating students to participate in a network improvisation session is to present the experience as part of a dance party. DJ s and laptop performers use this kind of interaction in nightclub dance venues and so this activity replicates a common performance activity in electronica. The jam can involve others using live percussion, acoustic instruments or vocals. A jam might be accompanied by other students dancing, singing or VJing (Video Jockeys who process live and prepared images which are projected). Mixed ensemble The network improvisation environment can be one part of an electronic/acoustic performance using the algorithmic material as a basis for live performer improvisation. This can be as passive as 'music minus one with a printed chart, or where computer performer(s) and acoustic musician(s) interact. More exciting performances mix several networked performers interacting with live performers as in the jam2jam vignette above. Style analysis With network improvisation software that uses generated styles can be used for better understanding those styles, and the nature of style differentiation. As an aural perception activities students can describe and identify musical features of the generated music and compare it to recordings of music in a similar style. The repetition allows the students to focus deeply on short fragments of music, the use of mute and solo buttons allowing specific focus on a single part to isolate it. The varying of parameters can be used to test the boundary of style definitions, seeing how much different parameters can vary whilst maintaining the integrity of the style. Multimedia producers The idea of VJ s who use video mixers to interact with both live and recorded image material is common in dance clubs and Electronic music venues. This can be done as a live performance or as a video production using programs like Union by Livid Software to do live video mixing or with programs such as Apple s imovie to edit 15

video footage and cut in the recording of the jam. Students can prepare, produce and present a digital video of their improvised song, using voice and live instruments and videotaping it or pre-recording it using an audio program and editing that to separate video footage. Curriculum integration The potential of cross-curricular outcomes are strong with ICT and computational music algorithms. These can include the writing of lyrics for language studies, discussion of digital network communication potentials in media studies, the science of sound in physics classes, the mathematical concepts of beats and time, performance considerations in drama, backing music for dance, issues of culture and style in studies of society and environment, for example. Conclusion A networked improvisation environment is an immersive, interactive, virtual sonic stage where music making can be experienced by groups of participants who have a dialogue over a network shaped by their own gestures. The environment is delimited by the musical rules that govern compositional structures as imbued in the system s design. The educational benefits of networked improvisation are that they are accessible and engaging, and they embody musical knowledge in an aural environment allowing simultaneous reflective discussion or demonstration of musical understanding. A networked improvisation environment provides opportunities to develop a contemporary musicianship taking into account ICT and interpersonal skills. They are similar to other musical activities in their need for skills of control over media and gesture in order to be expressive and sonically communicative. They are unlike instrumental improvisations in their ability to provide meta-control of musical parameters and to break down the barriers of geography. In the development of curriculum materials for networked improvisation environments teachers should encourage intuitive and creative activity and focus on the expressive qualities of music. Reflective structures should be encouraged to draw 16

out the knowledge and to turn experience into understanding. Constructivist and transformative teaching methodologies are required rather than mimetic teacher centered approaches. The potential for networked improvisation environments is to provide access to complex musical systems and to engage participants in musical understandings that link gesture and sound with concepts of musical knowledge and interaction. The dynamic development of these systems relies on designs which apply philosophical and pedagogical principles that encourage and sustain meaningful and engaging interaction and are sufficiently complex to allow the revisiting of musical knowledge at progressively deeper levels, both within the moment and over time. References Brown, A. R. (2000) Modes of Compositional Engagement, Mikropolyphony, vol.6. http://farben.latrobe.edu.au/mikropol/volume6/brown_a/brown_a.html Brown, A. (2000). Modes of compositional engagement. Paper presented at the Australasian Computer Music Conference-Interfaces, Brisbane, Australia. Brown, A. (2003). Music composition and the computer: an examination of the work practices of five experienced composers. Unpublished PhD, University of Queensland, Brisbane. Brown, A., Sorensen, A., & Dillon, S. (2002). jam2jam (Version 1) [Interactive generative music making software]. Brisbane: Exploding Art Music Productions. Chafe, C. and Leistikow, R. (2001) "Levels of temporal resolution in sonification of network performance," paper presented to the International Conference on Auditory Display, Espoo, Finland. Cook, P. R., Davidson, P., Ananya, M. and Wang, G. (2005) "Co-audicle: A collaborative audio programming space," paper presented to the International Computer Music Conference, Barcelona, Spain: ICMA. Cope, D. (1992). Computer Modelling of Musical Intelligence in EMI. Computer Music Journal, 16(2), 69-83. 17

Dillon, S. C. (2001). Making computer music meaningful in schools. Mikropolyphonie-online journal http://farben.latrobe.edu.au/mikropol/, 6. Latta, C. 2005. Quoth description and demonstration. http://netjam.org/ Lazzaro, J. and Wawrzynek, J. (2005) RTP Payload Format for MIDI. http:// www.cs.berkeley.edu/~lazzaro/sa/pubs/txt/current-mwpp.txt McCarthy, C., Bligh, J., Jennings, K. and Tangney, B. (2005) "Virtual Collaborative Learning Environments for Music: Networked DrumSteps", Computers & Education, vol.44, no.2, pp.173-195. McCartney, J. (1996) "SuperCollider: A new real-time sound synthesis language," paper presented to the The International Computer Music Conference, San Francisco: ICMA, pp. 257-258. Pachet, F. (2002) "The Continuator: Musical Interaction with Style," paper presented to the International Computer Music Conference, Göteborg, Sweden: ICMA, pp. 211-218. Sorensen, A. (2005) "Impromptu: A live programming system using AiME," paper presented to the Australasian Computer Music Conference, Brisbane: ACMA. Swanwick, K. (1981). A Basis For Music education. London: NFER- Nelson Publishing Co. Ltd. Swanwick, K. (1994). Musical Knowledge: Intuition, Analysis and Music Education. London: Routledge. Wright, M. and Freed, A. (1997) "Open Sound Control: A New Protocol for Communicating with Sound Synthesizers," paper presented to the International Computer Music Conference, Thessaloniki, Greece: ICMA. Wang, G. and Cook, P. R. (2003) "ChucK: A Concurrent, On-the-fly, Audio Programming Language," paper presented to the International Computer Music Conference, ICMA. Xenakis, I. (1991). Formalized Music. New York: Pendragon Press. 18

Web Links Algorithmic Composer: http://www.users.bigpond.com/angelo_f/ AlgorithmicComposer/algorithmicComposer.html AudioMulch - http://www.audiomulch.com/ Band in a Box - http://www.pgmusic.com/ ChucK - http://chuck.cs.princeton.edu/ Continuator I - http://www.csl.sony.fr/~pachet/continuator/ CyberJazz - http://www.ccd.net/projects/search.html?projectid=1076574545 GlassBead - http://www.cityarts.com/glasbeadweb/ Impromptu - http://impromptu.moso.com.au Jam2jam: http://www.explodingart.com/ Max/MSP - http://www.cycling74.com/products/maxmsp.html MICNet! - http://collaboratory.nunet.net/micnet/index.html Open Sound Control - http://www.cnmat.berkeley.edu/opensoundcontrol/ PitchWeb - http://www.pitchweb.net/pwmu.htm Pure-data - http://sourceforge.net/projects/pure-data/ Quoth - http://netjam.org/ Supercollider - http://www.audiosynth.com/ TopLap http://www.toplap.org Union - http://www.lividinstruments.com/software_union.php 19