Note: This post is in response to Soundwalk 9:09 by John Luther Adams; which “takes its title from the time it takes to walk between The Met Fifth Avenue and The Met Breuer: nine minutes and nine seconds. The composition, in two parts ‘Uptown’ and ‘Downtown’.”
As a former student of apparent local celebrity Dan Phiffer, I am familiar with soundwalks overall, and selected this one for two reasons:
Because of its emphasis on mixing the sound in the walk with the sound in real-life: I mostly use headphones to block out the sound around me, not partially take it in. So this was a unique opportunity to experience the mix.
Because of the deliberate timing of the walk. I wanted to see if I could walk faster or slower than the soundwalk would assume. (Spoiler: it ended up taking 9 minutes both ways)
Turn the clocks back to 2011, and people are engaged in debates about whether Super Mash Bros., the pinnacle of mashup artistry, are really making their own music or not.
It was clear the end-result songs produced by the Bros were ‘unique’ and original from either of the pieces they used. They had entirely different genres, vibes, tempos, etc. But for some it still wasn’t clear whether it was ‘original’ work just because it was unique.
To me, interaction is indeed a feedback loop between two or more people/things that involves them taking turns sensing, thinking, and responding to each other (and, alternatively as Chris Crawford says: inputting, processing, and outputting).
However, interactions come in all shapes and sizes, and unlike Crawford, I feel that the opening of a refrigeration door fully counts as an interaction, just not a very ‘rich’ one.
Some interactions are more ‘rich’ than others, and it seems to be based on the quality with which something performs the sensing, thinking, and responding phase in the cycle. But I don’t think scoring low in one of those categories should disqualify the interaction.
Computational Media is super cool to me for a couple reasons:
Pulling back the curtain on programming and thinking like a computer. I have limited programming experience that mostly involves expletives and frustration. I see this class as the perfect opportunity to increase my code literacy and increase the intuition involved when trying to get the computer to do what I say!
I like what we have done so far in p5 because its a very WSYIWG approach to programming. Instead of having to print() every line and interpret it, you can visually see what changing a function or number is doing to your program. Yet I look forward to the challenge of this no longer being available, just now equipped with a new understand of how the computer works, and being able to navigate the internet for the answers I need more efficiently (i.e. how to google like a programmer.
Many many years ago, my friends and I created a “logo” for our “squad” called The Muffin Men. The logo itself is a muffin that reflects the sentiment of the name: funny & cute, but maybe serious?
You can see one (pixelated) rendition of the logo at the top of the page. For this week’s exercise I created the muffin in p5 and it looks like this:
To do this I utilized the p5 Shape reference page and made the muffin out of shapes primarily including the curveVertex() function to make the curves you see around the muffin top. To make the eyes, I tried a different curve function called quadraticVertex(), which I like much better.