Category: Sound Design

The Setup consists of:

• a Snare;
• two Exciters placed on the respective membranes of the Snare (Top/Bottom);
• t.amp TA50 Amplifier
• an electric Piezo placed on the side of the Snare;
• a lavalier Microphone inside the Instrument;
• Coffee Beans;
• 4 metal Wires attached to the Screws to tune the top Membrane;
• MIDI Controller;
• Sound Card.

The idea of the Piece is to perform a LE through a feedback System applied to a Snare.  Since the Instrument has two Membranes, I applied two different Exciters in order to combine their timbral properties.
By using external Materials such as coffee Beans and metal Wires, I create a kind of “prepared Snare” which, thanks to the excitation of the Membrane, alters the sound output.

The Piece is mainly divided into two Sections, marked by the Performer´s introduction of the Snare´s ” Wire ” (WIRE in the score):

• The first is of concrete nature, using the two Feedback Signals combined with the use of beans and metal wires;
• The second, on the other hand, is purely electronic and uses two rhythmic Pulses that are reproduced by the Exciters on the two Membranes (Top/Bottom).

The Time is expressed on the Score by means of vertical red Lines that divide the piece each Minute till the end (~7´).

My sonic Idea is that of a continuous Feedback that is altered by concrete Elements that are gradually replaced by electronic ones. The result is a Drone that changes as the Amplitude changes.
Using the RMS of the input Signal of the Microphones, I try to make the array of Delays to interact, modifying the Index through the continuous variation of amplitude Peaks due to the interaction of the Performer with the System:

            delay = DelayL.ar(local, 2, [2, 3, 5, 7, 11, 13, 17, 19, 23, 29, 31, 37, 41, 43, 47, 53]**1.3/1000 * rms)

For the Performance, the Performer has 6-Faders at his disposal, which interacts with the feedback System via a MIDI Controller to adjusts its Amplitude:

1. Amp Top;
2. Amp Bottom;
3. Kick1 Rate;
4. Kick1 Amp;
5. Kick 2 Rate;
6. Kick 2 Amp.

The whole System is based on two feedback Signals. The Exciter on the top of the Snare is combined with the lavalier Microphone inside it, while the Piezo one is connected to the Exciter on the bottom membrane:

“Mic1 on the audio Interface represents the lavalier inside the Snare, Mic2 the Piezo.

I use a Y Cable from Output 1-2 into the Amplifier where the two Exciters are connected.

(1 Top, 2 Bottom)”

The Piece is based on a reverberation model made with sixteen delay lines. Using the parameter rms I vary the index within the array, changing the sonic Result.

The patch I have created with Supercollider is divided into three synths.
The first two consist respectively of an Input ( local = LocalIn.ar(16) + SoundIn.ar(0) ) that goes into a DelayL, a compressor to control the Feedback and a LocalOut to trigger the recursion.
The third one is entirely dedicated to the generation of pulses by means of a SinOsc multiplied by an envelope.

How to Perform the Piece:

• gradually increase Fader1 (amp1/Top) until feedback is triggered for ~1´;

“The sound you are looking for is a drone sound with slow but steady timbral changes”

• from ~45´´ increase Fader2 (amp2/Bottom) until Feedback is triggered

“As with the first Fader, same dynamic characteristics but not timbre”

• once a stable point has been found, drop the coffee beans from a height that can influence the sound result of the feedback;

      “The sound to be heard consists of a spectrally rich impulse (like a stone being thrown onto a sheet of ice)”

• at this point begin to place the wires on the upper membrane trying to find points of vibration;

    “The aim is to obtain high-pitched resonances due to the vibration of the two objects in contact”

• increase the Fader1 until the beans and wires vibrate;

      “Try to reach the sound of a Snare with the wire inserted, making the objects vibrate”

• gradually attenuate the amplitude of the two exciters in a sustained FadeOut;

• once a point of stability between the two feedbacks has been reached, firmly insert the wire and switch off the feedback, bringing the first two faders to 0;

      “Here the sonic result is an abrupt censure involving the resonance of the concrete elements and of the feedback itself”

• from ~4´20´ start playing with the amplitude and Rate of the two respective Impulses;

      “From the silence arise these isolated impulses that timbrally are totally detached from the material previously heard”

• slowly add Fader1 trying to make the impulses interact with the respective induced feedback;

      “The sonic result induces a sort of SideChain Effect due to the continuous Feedback that is interrupted by the impulses, changing its timbric qualities”

•  from ~5´ insert Fader2 making further changes to the sound result;

      “Similarly as with Fader1, try to obtain the same result”

• play until the end with the various parameters of amplitude and rate, creating a sort of counterpoint between the two membranes;

      “Create a rhythmic counterpoint, trying to get as much interaction between the feedback and the various pulses as possible”

• FadeOut the faders till Silence is achieved.

The Score:

During this semester I was invited to analyse one of my own composition to better understand my technical-artistic composition development during the past years of studying. That sounds like a fascinating opportunity for self-reflection and artistic growth! Analyzing your own compositions can provide valuable insights into your artistic development over time. You can examine aspects such as your use of musical techniques, harmonic choices, melodic development, structural organization, and overall expressive intent. Pay attention to how your style may have evolved, whether you’ve incorporated new ideas or techniques, and how your compositions reflect your personal artistic voice. Additionally, consider seeking feedback from peers or mentors to gain different perspectives on your work. This process can be immensely beneficial in honing your skills as a composer and deepening your understanding of your own artistic path.

Common Speach is a piece of concrete music made during my first semester at IEM. As such, it reflects the techniques and trends of the French school of Schaffer.
The material used includes the recording of various concrete sounds with which I composed the entire piece. Through the techniques of cutting, reversing and pitching I combined the different sound objects to create others, studying the interaction between the different materials and how they behaved together, such as contrasts between iron and glass or plastic and water. The piece is based on the dialogue between the various objects that intersect in a wide stereo landscape, communicating through questions and answers.

The composition is divided into three sections, which are alternated by short breaks:
– 1st: 0´ until 1´04´´;
– 2nd: 1´04´´ until 1´58´´;
– 3rd: 1´58´´ until 3´12´´.

In the first section we listen to the combination of metal, produced by the rays of a bicycle, with a bunch of keys and the glass of a glass of wine. This section is characterized by the presence of melodic elements that follow one another within the discourse, merging with rhythmic percussive gestures.
The piece begins with a gesture made up of three elements that are articulated between them:
– glass (298 Hz);
– scotch;
– keys.

At the beginning a question is asked that finds an answer to the second 8“ and that develops for 18 seconds ending with a rallentando produced by the manipulation of the sound of the chavi. In this part we can analyze the glass/metal contrast reproduced by the rallentando elements that constitute the sound object.
In fact, it is precisely the metal that conducts the dialogue, merging with the glass that continues with much more harmonious and melodic gestures, with consonant spectrum.
In the ear stands out the intervention of a gesture more harsh in the low register ( 21´´, 25´´, 28´´) that concludes the three sentences that follow one another from the second 18´´ to arrive at the rallentando(28´´) that heralds the final cadence ( 39´´), closing the first section.

In the second section the material used consists of a coin thrown in an iron bowl, a box of paper and glass. In contrast to the first section, here we have the predominance of rhythmic elements that chase each other within the stereo landscape. Always through a dialogue of question and answer, the section does not explore the timbre potential of sound objects, but is limited to the search for their interaction over time. In fact, we find the presence of discontinuous and harsh sound spectra, which, intersecting, create a sterile plot with few musical hints. The only exception is the crescendo that starts at the minute 1´25´, which camouflaged by the beats, leads the piece into a crescendo/decrescendo that concludes the section.

In the third section the material consists of a plastic glass, a glass glass, coins and spilled water.
This part is characterized by the presence of textures that accompany the composition towards its end. Rhythmic and melodic elements alternate with a less frenetic and more dilated trend. Unlike the other sections, here we find the presence of a very specific melody that starts at the minute 2´25´´ and that brings the composition to an end.

Born 1964 in Bogotá. First music theory studies at the Universidad de los Andes in Bogotá, composition studies and Master degree in arts at the University of Music and Performing Arts, Vienna. Conducting courses with Karl Österreicher and Dominique Rouits. Studies on electroacoustics and computer music in Vienna and at IRCAM in Paris.

Rulfo/ecos I is part of a a cycle of 5 pieces for violin, viola, violoncello and live-electronics after the work of mexican writer Juan Rulfo (1917-1986). His work, consisting of a novel and 17 short stories, depicts rural Mexico at the time of the Mexican Revolution as a world marked by hopelessness and solitude. His poetic language, rough, unadorned and of deep musicality is language of myth, language of remembrance.

The pieces were initially intended as studies on melodic writing. In the case of Rulfo/ecos I descending sequences based on very high natural harmonics are captured and overlapped by the electronics and transformed in slowly changing harmonic fields. The movement up/down in Rulfo’s novel “Pedro Páramo”, can be seen as motivic element related to a change of state, crossing a border and approaching an endpoint. This point is in Rulfo’s fictional space always the death.

For the control of live-electronics two persons are needed: one for the mix and one for the computer. The electronics consists of four patches for the software Max/MSP and will be provided on request by the composer:

• 4 patches on MAX/msp;
• Computer with 8-channel sound interface and software Max/MSP;
• Midi controller (8 fader);
• Mixing desk: 15 in / 7 Out 7;
• loudspeakers, 2 on the ground, 5 on stands;
• 5 microphones on stands;
• 3 contact microphones ;

Regarding the sound synthesis, 8 oscillators are used which, once the input of the ~fiddle cello has been analyzed, re-synthesizes it;
The sound is then used to make the spectrum denser by modifying its harmonic nature during composition. The same sound, present during the whole performance, modifies the acoustic perception through the resonances generated inside the room.

The electronic part is written/notated by means of numbers present in the score (37) which indicate technical configurations in the patch of max. The performer will press the corresponding button, activating the presets.
The sound, used from the synthesis, is recorded in the points where the triangles are present. 38 throughout the piece!

The composition is divided into 6 sections ( a – F ). At a first listening Ecos I is very regular and coherent with itself. The electronics is limited in a way to extend what is the sound dimension of the cello inside the concert hall, exploring its resonances inside the space.

With a very similar behaviour, both parts, instrumental and electronic, behave like two essential elements within the sonic enviorment, but during the performance they assume singular characters, sometimes dominating one over the other.
The charm of this composition should not be investigated from a technical point of view, but from an aesthetic/dramaturgical one. Toro-Pérez tells in music the difficulties and atrocities of a country that wants to get up again, of a country with a very long story to tell, that due to corruption and war, still does not find its identity.
Each section brings with it a different character, a different story to tell. The focus is based on the dialectic relationship between instrument/electronics, where, as in a story told, there is room for imagination and singular interpretation.

On 7th and 8 th July 2023 at the Parco Dora in Tourin, The electronic music is the very protagonist. This edition of Kappa Future Festival hosted 40 artists for a total of 24 hours of music divided within two days, each starting from 12 am till midnight.        

 FutureFestival born in the 2009 to celebrate the 100th anniversary of the Futurism, has always hosted the most important artists of the musical world, becoming in 2015 the first format in Italy introducing the cashless technology, a new system that allows you to buy inside the festival area only by means of a prepaid card that substitutes cash.                                 Thanks to the success of the previous editions, the festival has been mentioned on the Times newspaper, as the main event of the year conquering the attendance record from abroad, hosting up to 62 different nations.                         More than 50.000 people has come from all around the world to enjoy one of a kind experience. …What can you breathe inside the Parco Dora? The feeling of being part of something huge.

This was the alien Line Up:

Day 1 – Saturday 7 Luglio

JAGER STAGE: APPARAT DJ Set, ERIC PRYDZ, JOSEPH CAPRIATI, KÖLSCH, LOLLINO, SOLOMUN, THE MARTINEZ BROTHERS, TIMO MAAS                                                            

BURN STAGE: ANDREA OLIVA, DJ TENNIS, EATS EVERYTHING, GIORGIA ANGIULI Live, PATRICK TOPPING, RICHY AHMED                                                                                            

FUTUR STAGE: ADAM BEYER, AMELIE LENS, MARCO FARAONE, SAM PAGANINI      

DORA STAGE: BODY & SOUL, FRANÇOIS K, JOAQUIN “JOE” CLAUSSELL, DANNY KRIVIT, Live Performance JOSH MILAN (from BLAZE)

Day 2 – Sunday 8 Luglio

JAGER STAGE: FATBOY SLIM, JAMIE JONES, KiNK Live, LUCIANO, MARCO CAROLA, SETH TROXLER, STACEY PULLEN                                                                                            

BURN STAGE: ADRIATIQUE ,DJ RALF, HOT SINCE 82, JACKMASTER, PACO OSUNA  

FUTUR STAGE: DERRICK MAY, ILARIO ALICANTE, PAN-POT, ROBERT HOOD, RØDHÅD 

DORA STAGE: MR FINGERS Live aka LARRY HEARD, MOTOR CITY DRUM ENSEMBLE, PEGGY GOU

It mustn’t be that easy to figure out how to organize a timetable able to valorize both the stages and the artists, but FutureFestival did it. Instead of focusing all the “bigs” at the end of each slot, they achieved a heterogeneous distribution among the entire day. Given the high number of Dj’s, in this edition has been set up another stage: Jäger (its name already suggests what kind of music this area reserved…).

Within 12 hours of music is quite difficult to find lazy spots, if a stage presents someone that we for example don’t like, we have other three possibilities to find someone else that makes us fell half that good. There is no discrimination, some headliner are playing at 15 on the Main Stage while others at 22.                                                                                                  This strategy provides entry from the very beginning of the festival, collecting the most fancy and variegated audience in all groups of ages , from 18 up to 50 years old.

Due to the huge turnout of this edition, the entrance has been divided into gate A and B, two endless walkways equipped with turnstiles and security, each of 20 meters. The inspection made by the police was maniacal, besides the search and the metal detectors, each person had to be checked by the search dogs that where looking for drugs and explosives. I red on the newspaper that only during the first day, more than one kilos Hashish and 500 pills where seized.                              After more or less one hour waiting in line, you could finally access into the festival’s area.    

The location plays an important role inside this adventure. Parco Dora offers 450.000 square meters of space, with a river that in the past was not accessible due the factories. Nevertheless the decontamination, this park reminds the industrial life typical of that part of the city, by keeping most of the pre-existing building, like steel hangars and chimneys. Stationed between grass and iron, the stages where build all around the area. The main one (Jäger) was characterized by this huge open-air rectangular hall, with an iron roof on a cement floor, a minimal structure decorated only by means of speakers all around the ring.                                                                                                                                  The other stages where looming on grass and mulch, giving the possibility to chilling in the sun, listening to a “softer” sound, drinking a cocktail or a beer sold by the several stands spread all around the area.                                                        Peculiarity of this allocation where the ways used to link the different location.                                                                            The organization created a sort of path through the ruins and the rubbles, reviving what might have been the industrial life at that time.

Despite the massive success and the maniacal organization, I think that the “Sound” factor was a bit overlooked. Due to the different normative about the breaches of the peace, FutureFestival, different from the others editions, adopted a peaceful political by reducing drastically the volume. It’s incredibly frustrating to see 20 meters line array towers and 70 subwoofer playing as an open-air theater. Ignoring the sound feedback between the stages, perhaps because was required a better and more precise acoustic intervention for that situation, it was unavoidable to listen to the surrounding area instead of the music.

Techno music is a very standard and metric genre, the entire construction is based on the subdivision of the piece into: Intro, Breakdown and Drop, the “pumping” part. Elements to appreciate this music are the volume and the pressure that, together, play an important role on the perception… even a cheesy composition can sounds amazing with the correct amplification. From this point of view the Kappa FutureFestival was a flop, the only solution, to get the sound from one source, was to get closer to the stage, among the most fiercest ravers, surviving the bumps and the jabs. Really to appreciate have been the visuals, that through projections and screens have colored this unique adventure.

Kappa FutureFestival remains, without a doubt, a great experience to meet fantastic people and to have an electronic contact with the world. Waiting for the next appointment…

As a reference for this project, I present two different examples that I researched for the realization of the “One Wire Hackbrett”. Approaching these projects, I got an idea of how to realize the instrument and the different ways of playing it. Even though both examples could result similarly from the technical point of view, each of them presents innovative aspects that I can implement into my project:

• “Autoklavierspieler”: realized by Winfried Ritsch, is a robot piano player, also called “Vorsetzer”, designed to play every common (grand) piano with individual dynamics for each key as fast as possible. A massive frame with 88 electromechanical fingers, which are moved by solenoids, is mounted on a keyboard. Controlled by microcontrollers, which are driven over a dedicated computer, the “Autoklavierspieler” can be controlled over Network, MIDI files and real-time generated algorithmic music.[1]

An example of its application can be seen at the following link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wpt3lmSFW3k

• “ballet mécanique”: is the most famous composition of the American composer George Antheil. Originally composed to be a soundtrack of a film, the composition is composed for 16-player pianos, four kick drums, three xylophones, a tam-tam, seven electric bells, a siren, and three propellors. [2] Since the technological possibilities of the time did not allow for the creation of a machine capable of playing and synchronizing instruments with each other, this performance became a challenge for several contemporary performers. I had the pleasure and opportunity to work with Professor Ritsch during the preparation of his version of the piece.

---

[1] Autoklavierspieler Overview (2022) Atelier Algorythmics. Available at: https://algo.mur.at/projects/autoklavierspieler/overview (Accessed: January 23, 2023).

[2] https://www.antheil.org/balletmec.html

Since I have already assembled the electrical parts necessary to be able to play the instrument, next semester will focus mainly on the realization of the physical prototype through the following steps:

1. Implement PlatformIO[1] to connect the Arduino´s codes together and have a better and more fluent programming environment;

• create a GUI that communicates with the instrument via Wi-Fi. Through OSC messages, I will map the following parameters:
  • the time interval between the beats of the solenoid;
  • velocity;
  • the degrees of rotation of the lever to vary the pitch;
  • the degrees of rotation of the tuning screws;

• build two wooden sticks to support two hammers for each string. At this point would be interesting to implement additional DC motors, like for a 3D printer, to control the movement of the sticks along the strings to get timbral variations;

• change the tuning system of the “Hackbrett”, similar to a guitar´s one, to decrease the required torsion force for the DC motor to rotate them;

• create different supports that fits the servos in order to change the tuning of the strings;

• regarding the performative aspect of this instrument, I will implement one IR sensor to control the lever. I will map the movement of the hand to the steps of the motor to change the pitch through movement,

• implement a small DC motor to control a sort of mute rail of the piano, damping the strings.

---

[1] PlatformIO (no date) Platformio is a professional collaborative platform for embedded development, PlatformIO. Available at: https://platformio.org/ (Accessed: January 26, 2023).

Here the circuit of the “One Wire Hackbrett”:

After applying the 24V power supply to the circuit, the signal splits into two directions. The first one goes directly to the Solenoids that are driven with PWM signals through the microcontroller:

• PWM stands for Pulse Width Modulation. It is a technique used to control the amount of power delivered to a load by controlling the duration of a series of pulses. The duty cycle of a PWM signal is the proportion of time that the signal is in the “on” state (high) compared to the total period of the signal. It is typically expressed as a percentage. For example, if a PWM signal has a duty cycle of 50%, it means that the signal is in the “on” state 50% of the time and in the “off” state 50% of the time. The relation between the duty cycle and the power delivered to the load is that a higher duty cycle corresponds to more power delivered to the load. To avoid burning the magnet,

The second goes across the DC/DC Stepdown converter that transforms the power into 5V since the ESP32 microcontroller produces only 3.3V (not enough to drive efficiently the motors).

Besides this project, I had already some experiences this semester to explore the possibilities in the field of music machines. For the final presentation in “ESC medien kunst labor” I presented a plastic “Hackbrett” played by one DC Motor. The generated sound was then recorded and processed in real-time via PureData.

The interaction with the instrument occurred using a 3D-printed cylinder mounted on the motor. The different slices on the sides were positioned at equal distances to insert guitar picks. The goal was to emulate an analog score capable to play different patterns according to the distances between the picks.

Even though this process seemed to be satisfying, due to the distance to the strings and the movement of the motor, it was difficult to manage a continuous pattern or intensity. For this reason, after discussing the idea with professor Ritsch, we obtain for the solenoids to play the instrument.

Next, I designed a prototype with only one string and a hammer with additionally a lever to be able to change the pitch of the string and obtain further nuances in the timbre.   The idea is to build a simplified version of the final machine to analyze the possibilities, limitations, and different technical challenges of this instrument. Although the construction is very rudimentary, through this process, I would learn useful information to better set the technical components and then decide how to play it from the artistic point of view.

The system works mechanically through two core elements: the hammer that reproduces the percussive sounds (solenoid) and the lever (servo motor) that contributes to shifting the pitch. With the first one I reproduce different rhythmical patterns that can be modified in real-time by means of pre-programmed sequences and with the lever, like for an electric guitar, I produce timbral variations in the frequency domain.

The image below represents the first sketch of the prototype:

Regarding the electronic part of the development process, I took inspiration from a project made by Professor Ritsch during my second semester at IEM, the “Coeus”:

“previous “autodrummer” and later percussion robot aka “Doppelschlagwerke”, now robot musician is targeted building robotic instrument player with microcontrollers in the IoT generation, which are designed to play all kind of drums, gongs, pipes, strings … or other similar new created instruments or sounding objects very accurate and  dynamically as quickly as possible or slow with optional dampers – making up a automata as instrument player, a robotic musician controllable over a network via OSC (Open Sound Control Syntax).”[1]

Analyzing his concept, I reorganized the electronic parts I needed to design a robot that would meet my technical requirements. Here the list of electronic components that I used:

• One Solenoid push-pull;
• DC Motor[2];
• DC/DC Stepdown converter[3];
• ESP32-DevKit-Lipo with battery over WIFI;
• 24V external power supply

---

[1] https://git.iem.at/ritsch/coeus/-/tree/master/

[2] Servomotor – CDN-Reichelt.de (no date). Available at: https://cdn-reichelt.de/documents/datenblatt/A300/COM-MOTOR02-DATENBLATT.pdf (Accessed: January 26, 2023).

[3] DC-DC Stepdown Modul LM2596S (no date) 3DJake Österreich. Available at: https://www.3djake.at/bigtreetech/dc-dc-stepdown-modul?gclid=CjwKCAiA5sieBhBnEiwAR9oh2v_YBqQJkIaTMVZ3Pr1sqGGeMtlf2k7Fa4m72bm-v9hGE5iRAfGhzxoCTWoQAvD_BwE (Accessed: January 26, 2023).

The “Hackbrett”, also known as a hammered dulcimer, is a stringed musical instrument that is played by striking the strings with small hammers. The strings are stretched over a trapezoidal-shaped soundboard and are divided into two sections: the treble, and the bass. The treble section typically has more strings and is played with the right hand, while the bass section has fewer strings and is played with the left hand.

It is a diatonic instrument, meaning that the notes it produces are based on a specific diatonic scale and not chromatic like piano for instance.

The hammers or beaters have padded heads, which allow the player to produce a variety of different tones and dynamics depending on the amount of force used to strike the strings.

The “Hackbrett” is a versatile instrument that can be used to play a wide range of musical styles, including folk, classical, and popular music. It has a unique and distinctive sound that is often used to add a touch of character and interest to a musical arrangement.

The way it works is by using the hammers to strike the strings, the hammers will make the strings vibrate and produce sound waves. These sound waves will then travel through the soundboard and out of the instrument, which is how the sound is projected. The hammers can be used to strike the strings at different points along their length, which produces different pitches.

The “Hackbrett” has a long and rich history in Austria, where it has been played for centuries. The earliest known reference to the instrument in Austria dates back to the 15th century. The instrument was brought to Austria by German and Italian traders, and it quickly became popular among the peasant population.

In the 16th and 17th centuries, was primarily used as an accompaniment instrument for folk music and dances. It was also commonly used in religious music and in the courts of noblemen and aristocrats. The instrument’s unique sound and versatility made it a popular choice for both solo and ensemble performances.

During the 18th and 19th centuries, the “Hackbrett” experienced a decline in popularity, as it was replaced by the piano in many musical settings. However, the instrument continued to be played in rural areas and among folk musicians, who kept the tradition alive.

The “Hackbrett” is essentially a resonance box with strings strung above it that are played with wooden sticks, “Ruten” or “Schlägerli” in German. One note can be played onE up to five strings. Choruses are the name given to such chords. 

A middle bridge that divides the strings in a specific ratio is frequently found on these choirs. Pure fifth results, for instance, from dividing a string in the ratio 2:3. This could mean, for instance, that a C is located on the bridge’s right side and a G is located on its left, or the opposite. For the best results, you should hit the strings three to four centimeters from the bridges.

After concluding my studies at the Institute for electronic music (IEM), where I wrote my bachelor thesis about a possible application of a glove as a musical interface, I decided to continue my research in the field of music machines and their capabilities.

Since the Sound Design department of the “FH Joanneum” has been invited to participate to the event “Salzkammergut 2024” to produce a physical music machine employing the traditional instruments from that region, I focused my work on the analysis and research of the “Hackbrett” as a topic of this semester. I aim to discover the peculiarities of this percussive-melodic instrument to produce a prototype able to reproduce human behavior while playing it.

Using small electronic components such as DC motors and solenoids, this project attempts to reproduce the technique and aesthetics of this instrument. The final product will be a music machine equipped with different servo motors and two solenoids for each string.

Under the supervision of Professor Winfried Ritsch, I conducted some research regarding its tradition and its role in the Austrian culture, to propose a simplified system that should represent the core of the instrument that I’m going to build next semester: the “One Wire Hackbrett”.