Skip to main content

Copenhagen Meeting Event Report

Published onJan 19, 2022
Copenhagen Meeting Event Report
·

The meeting took place between November 30th and December 2nd 2021

Event schedule: https://feedback-musicianship.pubpub.org/pub/1z5a0jmx

The even kicked off with a concert, follwed by a day of practical work and finally a symposium day for discussions.

All images are Creative Commons Licensed, and will download as full-size.

Concert

Some images from soundchecks:

The concert was live-streamed and archived here: https://youtu.be/Su83xY4bP2E

Palle Dahlstedt’s performance https://youtu.be/J6SeqlGEQVA

Christian Blandhoel’s performance https://youtu.be/hbZ0XooBGDk

Jesper Larsen of DOXTV very kindly made this film of the ending jam session: https://dkdox.tv/videos/DK22003

Day 1:

Keynote: Nicolas Collins

Talk: https://youtu.be/Ox6RxTwZ1g4

Here are the slides:

Feedback Instrument in a Day Workshop

These are some of the instruments participants made at the workshop:

Self-resonating single string with feedback-controlled tuning (Daniel, Adam, Halldor)

Day 2: Symposium Day

Demos:

We had four demo sessions during the day:

Daniel Araya: Piezothing

Christian Blandhoel : Feedbackers

This is Christian Blandhoel’s Catalog of Feedbacker Instruments:

Palle Dahlstedt’s video description of his feedback organ setup: https://sussex.box.com/s/gstfkolppblsja9h6bbg680u919vh5tx

Oeyvind Brandtsegg: Piezo-Finger-Feedback-Plates

Discussions:

The discussion methods are documented in these slides:

We used two group discussion methods: World Cafe and Consensus.

World Cafe: Making, design and innovation in feedback instruments

These are the instructions we followed:

  • Step 1: each group goes to their first table and brainstorms responses to the questions

    • ask questions, make suggestions, generate ideas

  • Capture on ‘table cloths’ using pens as a mind map

  • After [10-15] mins, on the sound of the bell, move clockwise, and repeat

  • One person stays behind to summarise the previous conversation (not the same person each time)

  • Final task after all tables are completed:

    • Go to the table you felt most energized and inspired by

    • Work with others to identify the top 5 recommendations in that domain that this group could take forward

    • Share back ideas with the whole group, questions of clarification

We considered the following questions:

  • Table 1: What artistic / research fields feed into feedback instruments? How do we go about incorporating wider communities into our field?

  • Table 2: How do we ensure diffusion and adoption of our instruments? Also considering social diversity

  • Table 3: What new technologies should we be trying to make the next generation of feedback instruments? How do we use our current technologies in better ways?

  • Table 4: How do you make a feedback instrument that you could play Mozart on? Should a feedback instrument try and do that?

  • Table 5: How do we best document and teach our instruments​? What are the best strategies for preservation and longevity?

Here are images of the resulting mindmaps and key point summaries: (to see the mindmap images in more details, you can download, or view in another tab)

Table 1: What artistic / research fields feed into feedback instruments? How do we go about incorporating wider communities into our field?

Table 2: How do we ensure diffusion and adoption of our instruments? Also considering social diversity

Table 3: What new technologies should we be trying to make the next generation of feedback instruments? How do we use our current technologies in better ways?

Table 4: How do you make a feedback instrument that you could play Mozart on? Should a feedback instrument try and do that?

Table 5: How do we best document and teach our instruments​? What are the best strategies for preservation and longevity?

Consensus Method Exercise: What are the most important questions we should be asking in feedback musicianship research? Where are the gaps in our knowledge, experience and practice?

The instructions were as follows:

  • Step 1: Individually, list your ideas (up to 10), star the most important ones

  • Step 2: Get together in pairs (find person you know least well), and select 6

    best ideas, respecting diversity of perspectives

  • Step 3: Find another pair, select best ~6 ideas across the group

  • Step 4: Write top ideas on A5 post-its

  • Step 5: Share cards with facilitator

  • Step 6: Cluster related issues, remove duplicates

  • Step 7: Name clusters

  • Step 8: Does this fully answer the question? Any thing missing?

After much discussion, here’s the mindmap as it stood at the end of the session (although we would have probably edited it further, given more time)

Comments
0
comment
No comments here
Why not start the discussion?