ixiQuarks & 2x Performance Feedback. . .

ixiQuarks is a software environment designed for live improvisation that allows for user interaction on hardware, GUI and code level. The environment enables innumerable setups with flexible loading of tools and instruments. The ixiQuarks consist of different types of tools: basic utilities, instruments, effects, filters, spectral effects and generators.

Here are some of the tools;

Basic utilities: AudioIn, Recorder, Player, BufferPool, PoolManager, FreqScope, WaveScope, EQMeter, MixerNode, Amplifier, ChannelSplitter, TrigRecorder.
Instruments: SoundScratcher, StratoSampler, Raindrops, Mushrooms, Predators, Gridder, BufferPlayer, GrainBox, PolyMachine, Quanoon, ScaleSynth
Audio effects: Delay, Freeverb, AdCVerb, Distortion, ixiReverb, Chorus, Octave, Tremolo, Equalizer, CombVocoder, RandomPanner, MRRoque, MultiDelay, Cyberpunk, Moog
Filters: Bandpass, Lowpass, Highpass, Resonant Lowpass, Resonant Highpass, Resonant, Klanks
Spectral: SpectralEQ, MagClip, MagSmear, MagShift, MagFreeze, RectComb, BinScramble, BinShift
Generators: Noise, Oscillators

Our class got divided into 5 groups of people to create an ensamble using ixi Quarks. Once we had a mess around on this software and got to know the many different ways of making sounds, we created our piece and played it to the class where then after we got feedback. Here are my opnions of the groups and our own ensamble.

FIRST ENSAMBLE.

Group 1.

This group listened well to each others individual sounds they were making, which created a good dialogue.  I think listening to each other really helps as it means you have control over your own sounds allowing others to let theirs fit in well with the whole thing. They played similar sounds and had various pausing during it. They also used a panning effect. It had good structure but I feel they could have worked on it a bit more.

Group 2.

This group used process based music and also listened to each other, which allowed the sounds to work well with each other. It sounded simple but very effective. It didn’t sound jumbled at all. Very well planned and I just wanted to keep listening to it!

Group 3.

Good use of processes and improvisation like group 2. They allowed pausing to disallow any clashing of sounds. This group’s members came in at different parts then all faded out in turn near to the end.

Group 4.

This group relied more on a drum beat to get themselves a good piece going. They also used other sounds ontop of this to make it sound too layered. This is when they started to improvise. It seemed like too much was going on, which didn’t really fit the criteria. I feel they needed to work more as a team together.

Group 5.

Our group used a drum beat also, but changed the rate of play from the start, so then once we got a regular but slow beat going, I could then add ‘Scale Synth’ sounds. Elliot scratched a sound effect from a sound recording using ‘Soundscratcher’ while Sammy used a Drone effect and was also using the Scale Synth. Dan added the beat to get the ensamble going.  All though we made it sound random, it was carefully put together to create a calm musical piece. If we had met up more than one time, I think we could have planned it more carefully and messed around on it more.

Listening to what other people have come up with has helped us because it gives us the chance to hear what other groups have created and gives you new ideas for your future tasks.

SECOND ENSAMBLE.

Group 1 (our group)

This week we had more communication than last week which helped us structure the piece better. We all had ques of when to come in and start our individual sounds. Our group decided to keep the drum loop warp and drone effect. The drone sound still prominent, giving the piece a harmonic glue to bind to.

Group 2

This group had good use of sound and had rythmic structure throughout the performance. The piece had a successful build up which helped by each person giving eachother space when playing their own thing.

Group 3

Although this group had 2 people down they still managed to create a good limited formation of sounds going. Some very good dynamic crescendo’s provided by a sound triggered at a certain point which gave the main melody something to work with. Good use of bells, and random sounds. Included elements of dramatic sounds bursting in half way through, then went. Very expressive sound.

Group 4

Although this group had 2 people down they still managed to create a good formation of sounds going. This time round we heard more sounds, with a better structure. It was a clever idea to add bursting of sounds half way through, it made you wanna listen to it more as you don’t know what is coming next. It was dramatic and unexpected.

Group 5

At the start is sounded very ‘sci-fi’ and random. A good build up of sounds but not too cluttered. They improved during the middle but sounded much more constructive. It made it sound colourful as they had various samples.

Advertisement