This paper presents a process-based approach to considering workshops as a route to participation in collective creative musical practice. We evoke the notion of the Music One Participates In, which focuses on a shift from the listener-as-consumer to participant-actor actively engaged in sound perception and production. We look at the range of different methods that make up the term ‘workshop’, as well as emergent relationships between facilitator and participant in creative do-it-yourself activities to frame our discussion of participatory music practice. We then examine the nature of participation across a range of disciplines from social and cognitive science through human computer interaction to radical and contemporary art, and identify possible contradictions in horizontal utopian organisational models. With this conceptual frame as a backdrop, we present four types of workshop that we have conducted across time at different sites with diverse groups of participants. We apply concepts from the participation literature to analyse our music workshops, and attempt to reconcile the potentially diverging agendas of facilitator and participant to arrive at a process-based view of ‘workshopping’.

Historical models may often provide some of the greatest inspiration for the creation of new technologies. A DIY approach appropriating older paradigms in technology is discussed, with special attention paid to how old concepts can become relevant within a modern context. The author's electronic instrument, the Phantastron, is introduced as an example of this DIY approach. The Phantastron's creation is detailed in practice and methods such as repurposing, redesigning, hacking and circuit bending upon a historical design are described. A wider angle is then cast upon the concept of repurposing older technologies, and the works of other artists and DIY makers are considered. The concept that antiquated technology is in the common domain and ready to be utilised in the synthesis of new ideas is discussed. Finally, a generalised DIY approach to integrating historical ideas into new creations is posited.

Teaching live electronic music techniques to instrumental performers presents some interesting challenges. Whilst most higher music education institutions provide opportunities for composers to explore computer-based techniques for live audio processing, it is rare for performers to receive any formal training in live electronic music as part of their study. The first experience of live electronics for many performers is during final preparation for a concert. If a performer is to give a convincing musical interpretation ‘with’ and not simply ‘into’ the electronics, significant insight and preparation are required. At Birmingham Conservatoire we explored two distinct methods for teaching live electronics to performers between 2010 and 2012: training workshops aimed at groups of professional performers, and a curriculum pilot project aimed at augmenting undergraduate instrumental lessons. In this paper we present the details of these training methods followed by the qualitative results of specific case studies and a post-training survey. We discuss the survey results in the context of tacit knowledge gained through delivery of these programmes, and finally suggest recommendations and possibilities for future research.

In a musical context, the word ‘sound’ implies a set of sonic characteristics. Within popular music, this notion of sound sometimes supplies the very identity of a tune, a band or a musician. Sound is often conceptualised as a virtual space and in turn compared to actual spatial environments, such as a stage or an enclosed room. One possible consequence of this tendency is that this virtual space can become utterly surreal, displaying sonic features that could never occur in actual physical environments. This article concerns the ways in which the increased possibilities for creating a spatially surreal sound, thanks to new technological tools, have been explored within the field of popular music over the past few decades. We also look at the ways in which the effect of such features may have changed over time as a consequence of what we call processes of naturalisation. As a particularly interesting example of the complexity of such processes, we explore ‘the music sound stage’. In addition, we analyse three songs by Prince, Suede and Portishead to reveal the possibly surreal aspects of these productions.

If nineteenth-century aesthetics distinguish between distinct, colourful French instrumentation and doubled, equalised German orchestration, this distinction softens when the ‘New German’ orchestration of Wagner and Strauss exploits individual instrumental colours before dissolving them into massive orchestral sonorities. Similarly, if early French electroacoustic music counteracts the meta-serialism of early twentieth-century German electronic music, Pierre Schaeffer's Traité des objets musicaux combines his early anecdotal Noise Studies with a noise-reduction process into a new, rather German aesthetic of electroacoustics. In search of musical objects through a reductive, analytical listening (entendre), Schaeffer's neutralisation of anecdotal noises into musical objects is analogous to New German orchestration's neutralisation of individual orchestral colours in order to synthesise new orchestral combinations. Although this orchestral synthesis is different from the analytical probe for new valeurs involved in entendre, the separation of the noise from its residual signification are fundamental processes within both nineteenth-century orchestrational and twentieth-century electroacoustic musical aesthetics. If our current understanding of electronic music aligns Schaeffer and Pierre Henry wholly with modernity and its putatively radical and self-conscious break with Berlioz, Brahms and historical tradition, this article suggests that an essential underlying continuity in the French-instrumentation/German-orchestration binary persists even in the face of the decline of the musical and cultural traditions that created and sustained them.

Barbara Ballard's ‘carry principle’ defines the core elements of the mobile experience: small, personal, communicative, multifunctional, battery operated and always connected (Ballard 2007: 71). These qualities have ensured that for many of us some form of mobile device has become indispensable. Developments in mobile computing have meant that consumer devices are capable of increasingly sophisticated sound processing, leading to the emergence of new forms of mobile music. If this music is looked on as a new sub-genre of folk music, we might be able to put it in the context of live electronic music-making. With this in mind, this article will ask whether the mobile device has the potential to be considered a new folk instrument.

The conceptual starting point for an ‘action–sound approach’ to teaching music technology is the acknowledgment of the couplings that exist in acoustic instruments between sounding objects, sound-producing actions and the resultant sounds themselves. Digital music technologies, on the other hand, are not limited to such natural couplings, but allow for arbitrary new relationships to be created between objects, actions and sounds. The endless possibilities of such virtual action–sound relationships can be exciting and creatively inspiring, but they can also lead to frustration among performers and confusion for audiences. This paper presents the theoretical foundations for an action–sound approach to electronic instrument design and discusses the ways in which this approach has shaped the undergraduate course titled ‘Interactive Music’ at the University of Oslo. In this course, students start out by exploring various types of acoustic action–sound couplings before moving on to designing, building, performing and evaluating both analogue and digital electronic instruments from an action–sound perspective.

Although the pedagogy of music technology more closely resembles that of other academic subjects, the teaching of electroacoustic composition involves a significant degree of creativity, and thus relies on different creativity-specific parts of the brain and memory systems (Lehmann 2007). This paper reviews recent neuroscientific research that may assist differentiation between effective pedagogical approaches of these two subjects where knowledge is stored in separate, discrete and sometimes competing long-term memory locations (Cotterill 2001). It argues that, because of these differences, the learning of music technology and electroacoustic composition is best kept separate, at least in the beginning stages. These points are underscored by an example of a demonstrably failed pedagogical model for teaching electroacoustic composition contrasted with a subsequent highly successful model employed in the same university music programme; an experience that may translate well to other learning environments.

This article starts by arguing that in diverse approaches to electronically produced sound in music of recent times a shift in focus has occurred, from the creation of novel sounds to the manipulation of sound materials inherent in a culture of electric and electronic devices of sound production.

Within these practices, the use of lo-fi devices, circuit-bending, cracked electronics and a resurfacing of older technologies is coupled with digital technology in a process which emphasises the devices characteristic modes of sound production and artefacts. Electronic sound becomes regarded as embedded on a reservoir of qualities, memories and registers of technologies that inhabit our sound environment.

From this starting point our apprehension of technologically produced sound is reassessed, constituted as the crossing of particular conditions of production and reception, cultural traces and codes inherent in the practices and characteristics of media.

This perspective lays the ground for a compositional approach that exposes and problematises the interaction of these multiple conditions.

At Penn State, music technology is something of a stranger in a strange land. As a programme, it began in the early twenty-first century, when the necessity of the moment was an anticipated revision to the guidelines from the National Association of Schools of Music (NASM), the North American accrediting body. Music schools were charged with ensuring that music majors were exposed to ‘relevant technologies’. It was left largely to individual institutions to interpret what this meant. At Penn State, a course was created to address this guideline, and it generated interest among students. This course then spawned a series of related courses. These courses eventually created enough of a curricular presence to warrant creating an undergraduate minor. We now expect that the minor will spawn an undergraduate major. The music technology programme's locus lies not solely within the School of Music; rather, it overlaps as an interdisciplinary area with a variety of programmes throughout the university's offerings. These overlaps are a unique feature of the programme. It is an unusual arrangement, but it is a product of its time and place. Three populations of students have coalesced, and the pedagogical challenge has been to create a curriculum that can serve all of them. The programme might be thought of as series of concentric spheres; each is centred around the same general concept structure, but with expanding breadth for different levels of student involvement.

New interface artefacts are changing the way we interact with machines, and this is particularly important for the musical domain. Conversely, the growing do-it-yourself (DIY) culture is subverting the manufacturer–consumer model. Regarding music, software such as Pure Data and Max/MSP allows users to build their own interactive systems. These factors contribute to the emergence of new digital musical instruments (DMI). However, DMI creation still requires a strong technical background. Based on the importance of prototyping in the process of designing things, this paper presents the Sketchument, an environment devoted to help non-technical users to easily prototype DMIs, using multiple input modes and allowing the integration to other useful technologies. From a lo-fi paper prototype, to functional ones, passing through movies, questionnaires, interviews, Sketchument has been developed following the same prototyping philosophy we intend to propose to its users. The cyclic process of design–implementation-evaluation has produced valuable feedback from potential users, which has been very useful to back design choices and to push modifications.

This article describes a manual actions expressive system (MAES) which aims to enable music creation and performance using natural hand actions (e.g. hitting virtual objects, or shaking them). Gestures are fully programmable and result from tracking and analysing hand motion and finger bend, potentially allowing performers to concentrate on natural actions from our daily use of the hands (e.g. the physical movement associated with hitting and shaking). Work carried out focused on the development of an approach for the creation of gestures based on intuitive metaphors, their implementation as software for composition and performance, and their realisation within a musical composition through the choice of suitable mappings, sonic materials and processes.

This paper presents recent work in engaging both students and working professionals from a variety of disciplines and backgrounds with the practice of collective and site-specific electroacoustic music creation. The emphasis is placed on embodied, deep listening in tandem with a manual approach to sonic art creation that bridges an understanding of the interplay between digital sound manipulation, larger composed structures and the physical presentation of a work in a given space. Through a practice-oriented approach, participants gain insights into areas such as the abstract world of digital sound recording and representation, the extreme influence on this content enacted by a given sound delivery system and a given space, and the subjective experience of listening to sounds from a variety of orientations and postures, and with varying levels of understanding of the original source recordings. Finally, through a group approach to composing larger structures, participants begin to understand the often mysterious and unsaid processes involved in the normally solitary act of composing electroacoustic music.

This article presents a framework for describing, understanding and evaluating the experience of voice in acousmatic electroacoustic music and related genres through the maximal–minimal model. This model, which is inspired by literary theory, theories of radiophonic voice as well as theories of electroacoustic music, presents maximal and minimal voice as loosely defined poles constituting end points on a continuum on which experienced voices can be localised. Here, maximal voice, which parallels the informative and clearly articulated speaking voice dominant in the radio medium, is described as the converging fulfilment of seven premises. These premises are seen as partly interconnected conditions related to particular aspects or features of the experience of voice. At the other end of the continuum, minimal voice is defined as a boundary zone between voice and non-voice, a zone which is related to the negative fulfilment of the seven premises. The two poles are presented as centre and periphery, respectively, with the seven premises constituting multiple axes spreading out from the centre. These features, it is argued, parallel Lakoff's cluster model of categorisation. Lastly, the article briefly discusses the use of the framework in analysis of electroacoustic works with voice, and it demonstrates two ways in which the evaluations according to the framework can be visualised.