Body Storming Documentation

1. What did you learn from the process?
The body storming process encouraged me to rethink the ways in which my project could have been developed. From the minor things such as placement of contact mics to the overall presentation, the body storming process allowed me to envision a close-to-end product realization.

The body storming allows the closest participant to installation presentation and therefore I found it very useful. For me, I have a vivid imagination as to the end product. Therefore, the body storming process brings it down to the basics and ensure I find more flaws in whatever idea I have in mind.
1. What surprised you while going through the process?
By having a 1-1 audience to system interaction, I could know first hand as to how an audience could react, purely from their faces/gestures and personal feedback. For instance, I had Kee Yong to be my tester. His reactions were of an initial confusion but also interest. Given the proper feedback, he navigated through the sonic installation quite well and showed mild interest.

I was honestly surprised as to how well it seemingly went. There were, however, a few faults in the entire layout. Namely the drawn-out waves that had him confused. I wasn’t sure how to replace the model as it is a simple representation of speaker+water ripples sculpture I am working on. Either way, upon going through the process — it seemed that he understood it and I felt quite surprised by it.
1. How can you apply what you have discovered to the designing of your installation?
The body storming process allowed me to think through as to how an audience would actually react to the sonic installation. A few salient points were
1. Ensuring that no echo feedback is picked up by the mic.
2. Setting a time limit as to how long the audio can be recorded by the participant into the system
3. Utilize a usable space, that ties in well to interstices — the project concept.
4. Encouraging a more participatory experience, by creating a visually enticing interest.
5. Allow a polyphonic experience of multi-mic inputs, for a more complete and complex experience.
Nonetheless, much of the feedback given was already ideas that I had tried to figure out / thought before. I was quite open to receiving new ideas but to me, I do feel quite confident with the final outcome of my current concept.

password: bodystorming

a liminal space we don’t hear – ideas/sketches/ramblings

What is an echo chamber? (literal)

The echo chamber seeks to exist with its reflections (reverberations) and delays. Monophonic sounds (vocals) are reflected continuously, within a temporal space. Space therefore exists, as a physically static being, yet inherently unique. No space nor chamber are alike. Alluding towards the quality that a sonic experience in an echo chamber possesses qualities that make it spatially special.

Metaphorical (sociological/new media)

Echo Chamber alludes to the human nature of ideological conformity through means of interaction. We seek what we wish to confirm. Confirmation bias aids to relieve anxiety but also deny possible beings of alternate realities. Individuals in echo chambers ‘mimic’ out one another — to reassert what they believe is true and only their truth. These ‘chambers’ are therefore metaphysical spaces where idealogical biases exist within and seethe.

Interstices

a liminal space we don’t hear explores the interstices of the psychological gap to which we as human beings, behave and consequently form social structures within it.. The concept of an echo chamber arrows down towards the notion of the unconscious interaction, the confirmation bias. Is it, therefore, normal to find justifications to our own means, and to our own ends?

By understanding the way in which our own unconscious have ultimately led to the creation of such chambers, we realize that these spaces are, somehow interstices too. Not only are these symbolic to the gaps of our imperfect human being but also spaces that are not literal. And thus by this definition, echo chambers are interstitial spaces made subconsciously. Even if, the truth is a reconstructed image of their own truth. Interstices in this respect, draws back to the meta-understanding that an echo chamber, is in a way, a voluntary act of participating in the cohabitation of your own gaps, subconsciously. An interstitial space thus symbolizes the gap between truth and false.

Being a rather site-specific installation, the concept carries itself as not being limited to the confines of a single space. The setup is visualized to be modular — to provide an experience both sonically and visually, site-specific. The concept, as it is sustained inasmuch as space it can be afforded to exist in. Ideally, spaces that are not used/abandoned/small/large/raw/brutalist are appealing locations. Drawing back to the idea of interstices, I intend this project to be launched in more lo-fi locations — places you would never expect to have a drop of life; the interstices.

Concept

Using the notion of reverberations and delays that exist in a literal echo chamber, the liminal space we don’t hear surveys the metaphorical concept of an echo chamber vis-a-vis the recreation of the sonic experience of an echo chamber. A liminal space is a gap in which we as human beings behave, interstices of an unconscious interaction. Participants are encouraged to explore the space and interrogate how movement inflects their looped speech. Movement in this aspect references directly to the act of finding information, the pursuit of reconfirming your biases.

detailed plan

Basic Walkthrough

a liminal space we don’t hear observes the way we unconsciously pursue spaces that reconfirms our own biases — echo chambers. The interactive element attempts to be both sonically and visually interesting. A mic will be set up for participants to input their speech into it. The speech will be replayed through a buffer and run through a reverb+echo (to mimic continuous talking in an echo chamber). Participants are encouraged to walk all over the space. In this space itself, floor mics or contact mics will be placed all over the space to pick up the audio of the footsteps and then used to alter the recorded speech continuously.

Ideally, there would be a few speech mics and a multi-participatory interaction can occur. Whereby if this exists, layers of multi-person speeches will reverberate into space. As each speech can be modulated as long as a participant moves all over the space, a new sonic experience can be heard.

fun mockup – cr: marko

Input: participant’s speech (mic)

Modulation: movement

Output: altered/distorted speech, echoing

laymans

iLights 2019

The iLights festival runs in conjunction with Singapore Art Week. Mainly focusing on the use of LED strips and visual gimmicks, it is no different than how it’s previous editions were focusing on.

There were, however, certain installations that were highly interactive and provoked interest.

Transporta by Pixels

This interactive artwork was located in the interactive rooms titled ‘The Incubator’. Out of the many rooms that had fun and interactive art, Transporta was by far the most interesting and intriguing.

Firstly, presents itself as a journey of the Big Bang process. Where many of these small particles would appear upon closer interaction, our interaction proceeds to give direct meaning to it. When the Big Bang occurred, particles had to move in rapids states to form nuclear fusion. These particles were namely the Hydrogen Atom. I assume that our interaction, especially if there were multiple people could, in fact, represent the act of fusion itself. If one participant represents hydrogen, atom multiple interactions that can be seen on the wall would crash and then modulate an effect of fusion itself.

There is also a soundscape that modulates upon user interaction. As the particle shifts closer to another set of particles, the pitch would be modulated and we can hear a subtle ringing sound.

password: iLights

Secondly, I was interested as to how the projection and touch interaction was made. Upon closer inspection, I had realized that it was simply a projection onto a non-conductive plaster wall. But looking left to right, I had only noticed one single sensor located centrally, top and bottom. Perhaps this could be the sensor that was used to detect movement, whenever there was one near the plaster wall.

This illustration below explains the mechanics behind the system.

Halo by Michael Davis

The second interactive installation was titled Halo by Michael Davis. In this interactive piece, Concentric rings were stacked vertically and strips of LED were connected within. Upon touch, the LED’s would be triggered and the ongoing soundscape will be modified. The surrounding area also contains many of such structure.

Interesting enough, the concentric rings were made from resin with a strip of LED on the inside. However, I believe the rings are conducive to touch and could be made from a special type of resin. This installation perhaps hopes to illustrate the idea of the past and present through a continuous sonic experience. Previous participants would edit the soundscape and further edits will be made by future participants, therefore signify the past reconnecting to the present, vice versa.

Found below is a rough idea passage as to how the entire interactive system could have been made.