WG1 MEETING: OCTOBER 22, 2007 – IRCAM, PARIS

Homepage of WG1: http://www.cost-sid.org/wiki/WG1Percept


PARTICIPANTS

Roberto Bresin (WG chair), Dik J. Hermes, Rolf Inge Godøy, Fabien Gouyon, Guillaume Lemaitre, Cornelius Pöpel, Patrick Susini


PRESENTATION OF PARTICIPANTS AND OF THEIR RESEARCH INTERESTS RELATED TO WG1

Participants to the meeting introduced themselves (their affiliation can be found on the WG1 homepage), and listed their research interests related to the SID COST Action as follows:

CP: Cornelius Pöpel – music – influence of interaction on perception of music

DJH: Dik J. Hermes – perception of everyday sounds – sound design for car industry

FG: Fabien Gouyon – computation methodology – emulate auditory perception in computer – especially expressivity from rhythm – automatic classification of genre

GL: Guillaume Lemaitre – sound perception – sound design

PS: Patrick Susini – sound perception – sound design

RB: Roberto Bresin – sonification of gesture (e.g. athletes, musicians), auditory/motor coupling

RIG: Rolf Inge Godøy - composition – music theory – objet sonore – musical gesture – auditory/motor coupling – ecological psychology


METHODS

Participants observed that there is a general lack of methods for evaluating sound quality in (continuous) interaction.

RIG: Tells us about his research group experiments of matching sounds with movements. Subjects do a gesture for explaining a specific sound. Which are the mental associations between sound and movements?

DJH: Situation awareness is a method used for evaluation

RIG: Proposes that WG1 should provide examples of sonic interaction

DJH: Proposes the example of the dentist drill/synthetic sound


METHODOLOGY IN SONIC INTERACTION

Participants identified the following topics:

  • State-of-the-art
  • Limits
  • Recorded sounds
  • Synthetic sounds
  • Everyday sounds
  • Quality of sounds
  • Example: walking sounds (Li, Logan & Pastore, 1991)


GUIDELINES FOR THE DESIGN OF SONIC INTERACTION

  • Guidelines for the design of sonic interaction should be divided in two classes, one for designers and one for experimenters. DESIGNERS are interested in the mapping between acoustic cues and physical parameters. EXPERIMENTERS want to know how to design psychophysical experiments.
  • Guidelines for synthesizing everyday sounds


CHALLENGES

RIG: provide a list of challenges


TO DO - TO DO - TO DO - TO DO

The following proposal has been discussed during the WG1 meeting and accepted by all participants.

State-of-the-art study on similarities between everyday sounds and synthetic sounds

RB proposes to do a collection of studies on everyday sounds and synthetic sounds and see if there are common cues. Similar to the study by Juslin and Laukka on similarities between expression in speech and music (P. N. Juslin and P. Laukka, “Communication of emotions in vocal expression and music performance: Different channels, same code?” Psychological Bulletin, vol. 129, no. 5, pp. 770–814, 2003)

Florence meeting

Invite a speaker to the workshop. Proposals are Gallese or Kohler.

Publication list

  • “Filter” the publication list proposed by the WG1 members (see attached list)
  • Define classes in which divide the publications/references
  • Write 10 lines annotation for each publication