v.zappi
2020-07-25 00:25
Actually, my comment was not referring to the split/unified roles of performer, composer and builder.
From the perspective of a member of the audience [like me], it seems that the instrument devolves great part of the "control" to the AI, leaving the performer with a narrow [but I have to say very fascinating] range of action, not far from the micro-movements investigated by @a.r.jensenius.
My question is: *was this a deliberate choice, or was it somewhat imposed by some characteristics of the AI?*
I am getting more and more interested in any discourse about how performer and AI share their space within DMIs and I'd love to hear your experience. I guess @f.morreale and @charles.martin may also point me to other perspectives published in the literature.
Let me add that my perception of Al-terity also suggests an incredibly intimate autotelic experience, which I'd love to try and reminded me of your NOISA performance at NIME 2015 [we should have some kind of hashtag to reference previous NIMEs!].
Also, if you have time could you please elaborate on the issues you have with the word "design"? Do you feel that this instrument was NOT "designed"? Does this relate to the presence of the AI?