Gather eight performers and eight computers with Logic Pro. It is possible to perform the piece with other DAWs or synths as long as they can make MIDI loops and sequences.
Download SeqOctet.logicx. Open the file in Logic Pro X (version 10.7 or higher).
Assign one performer to one of the tracks (Arp1, Arp2, Arp3, Arp4, Pad1, Pad2, Drum1, Drum2). One performer should not play all tracks. If there are fewer than eight performers, some performers can play more than one track.
Notation
Triangle noteheads: Improvise the sequence patterns. The number of notes per stem indicates the maximum number of notes per quarter note.
Rectangle noteheads: Make the sequence pattern similar to the shape of the notation.
Fermata: Continue improvising until the conductor’s cue.
Make a gradual, well-paced change when moving from one section to another. Do not make a sudden pattern change. The notation indicates the ideal shape/pattern each part should achieve in 30-60 seconds.
50% and 100% in sections 8 and 9: Improvise with 50% or 100% of all available notes in the sequencer.
Sections 10-13: End the piece by gradually eliminating notes in the sequencer. In section 12, all performers should play one note per measure.
Performance Instruction
Designate a conductor who can give a cue. The conductor decides the length of each section. Section 9 should be relatively long.
At the beginning, performers press the play button in their assigned track’s loop (the yellow square in the live loop grid). Then, they improvise the sequence pattern according to the score.
Aim for a constant change. Improvise with notes. Improvise with effects and plugins. But respect the number of notes per measure.
I often prepare a set for solo show opportunities. A set is a performance practice of playing multiple pieces without significant pauses (i.e., no “set changes”). It is often long (30+ minutes), and the works presented within have a common theme or instrumentation. The ability to perform a solo set is helpful, if not essential, to electronic music performers in getting gigs and collaborative projects. A DJ set at music festivals is a good example of a set performance.
I played a set consisting of seven original compositions at the 16th Strange Beautiful Music (SBM) Festival in September 2023. I will use the recording of this particular set to show how I organize a 40-minute set. I hope the readers get a macro and micro-level insight into an electronic set performance, especially when read together with my analysis of solo set gears.
I go through four preparation steps for a set performance.
Decide pieces
Decide the order
Practice transitions
Practice sound check
I will explain the details of each step in the subsequent sections. Please refer to the chart below to see the overall timeline of the SBM set. The chart lists the estimated starting time and instrument used in each section.
The selection of pieces depends on external factors I cannot control. Examples are the total duration decided by the organizer, sound check time, and the venue’s equipment. Once I learn the external factors, I decide which pieces to include in a set. I was invited to perform for 40 minutes for the SBM at Andy Arts Center’s Hanger. I had one hour of tech time with an excellent audiovisual team. Given this information, I decided to play the following pieces.
Scramble and Sort (2023) – for computer and drum machine
Each piece in the set features uniquely electronic sound and instrument. All pieces involve improvisation, so the audience hears an event-specific version of the piece. The SMB performance also included a world premiere of Scramble and Sort – Adding an artistic risk prevents me from potential practice fatigue.
Decide the Order
The order of the pieces in a set should be carefully tweaked for seamless transitions between the pieces. A well-thought-out sequence of compositions keeps the audience engaged as well. My theme of the SBM set is to show multiple electronic instruments in different contexts, so the order of revealing different instruments and styles was a priority. I opened the set with Scramble and Sort as an appetizer – music with an easy-to-digest rhythm and the familiar sounds of a drum machine. The following two pieces, Page Turner’s Agony and Gums, had more abstract and timbre-based electronic sounds, featuring a MIDI controller and no-input mixer. Then, as a main course, Cobalt Vase, Func Step Mode, and Toccata feature an unconventional combination of familiar instruments. The sounds of these pieces were most aggressive and noisiest- they were not appropriate as opening pieces. As a palate cleanser, I ended the set with Elegy No. 2, a slow and minimalistic piece featuring melodica.
The visual elements are also a factor in deciding the order. One person playing an instrument with relatively little flexibility for an extended period is not exciting by default. I try to improve this by introducing new instruments for each piece. In the SBM set, a drum machine, no-input mixer, found objects on contact mic, and melodica were sequentially introduced. The above chart shows the order and amount of appearance of the instruments for a better insight.
Practice Transitions
Smoothly connecting one piece’s ending to the next piece’s beginning is a concept I do not consider when composing a work. But I am responsible for making the transition musically satisfying in a set. I want the audience to enjoy the process of timbral and stylistic changes in gradual motion.
In music production, a crossfade function gradually transforms one sound into another (it is the equivalent of the cross dissolve in movie editors). Most of my practice for the set focuses on devising and practicing live crossfades. Because the order of the pieces could be unique to each gig, the crossfades are unique to each event. I consider crossfades of significant length (2-3m), as heard five times in the SBM set, mini event-specific compositions.
Practice Sound Check
Setting up and striking the gear should be part of the practice and preparation. A solo set often needs a suitcase full of cables and instruments. There is no time to think about signal flow during soundcheck. It takes me a few hours to test all the gear and figure out the optimal configuration for every gig. When the configuration is finalized, I practice setting up and tearing down the equipment. I aim to be ready for the sound check within 30 minutes of arrival at the venue.
Being as self-contained as possible in terms of gear increases efficiency. I packed all the gear and bought a folding table for the SBM set. The less time I spend on finding the right table and setting up the gear, the more time I can use during the allotted sound check to troubleshoot and tweak the sound for the room. For the SBM performance, I forgot the box of toys I use for Toccata at home. So, I finished the sound check early and picked up rocks, bolts, and other objects in the venue’s parking lot. I hope no one noticed my mild panic before and during the permanence.
Outro
Organizing and presenting a set is a skill that helped my career as an electronic music performer. A well-practiced set is suitable for tours, guest lectures, and festival performances for its efficiency and flexibility. Many collaborative opportunities came from meeting musicians and dancers from presenting in this format. Audiences also experience music they heard from phones and computers in more intimate and focused contexts. As for artistic growth, curating a set allows me to improve and reimagine the existing works. Every set performance is a practice for a future show. Sometimes, transitions become seeds for new compositions.
I am looking for opportunities to share my music in 2024. I will be on sabbatical next year and wish to do concerts, lectures, workshops, and short-term residencies. I can provide the following types of presentations.
Solo concert of electroacoustic music. Here is a link to a recent 40min set
A concert consisting of solo works and electronic music ensemble pieces. I can teach participants a couple of laptop ensemble pieces in a 2-hour rehearsal. Then the performers and I can do a concert. Performers do not need to have previous experience in electronic ensemble performance. Here is a link to possible electronic ensemble pieces
Korean Cultural Society of Boston, MA, Online (2020)
University of Aberdeen, Scotland, Online (2020)
University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT, Online (2020)
University of Nebraska Omaha, NE, Online (2021)
6 Improv Clinics Live by Domino Ensemble, Online (2021)
American Composers Forum, Philadelphia, PA, Online (2021)
Arkansas School for Mathematics, Sciences, and the Arts, AR, Online (2021)
George Washington University, DC, Online (2021)
SPLICE Institute, MI, Online (2021)
University of North Texas, TX, Online (2021)
Young Dancers Initiative, MI, Online (2022)
Michigan State University, MI (2023)
Nief-Norf Summer Festival, Knoxville (2023)
Let’s talk if you are interested in hosting me during Jan-Jul of 2024. I can drive anywhere within a 10-hour radius of Detroit and would also be happy to fly. I would appreciate any assistance in covering the travel cost. Please forward this message to the fitting venues, festivals, and music schools.
Use your laptop as a versatile and expressive musical instrument. We are going to learn three pieces written for the laptop ensemble and will perform them in the evening concert. Learn electronic music repertoire that is easy to assemble and fun to play together. Previous experience in electronic music performance is not required. The ability to read simple music notation is a plus but is not necessary.
How much time and energy does a musician spend on an interdisciplinary project? A three-month-long production period does not equal 90+ days of labor. How many days are spent on music, and how many of them are spent on meetings with the collaborators? How much of the music created for the show ends up in the show? I ask myself these questions to better understand the practical role of a music creator in a project involving performing artists of other fields. Answers to these questions require measurable data, such as the total working days and total minutes of music composed. These numbers lead to an insight into the productivity of music creators.
In 2023, Artlab J, Detroit Puppet Company, and I created a one-hour show titled Objects at Play (video link). It was a non-verbal dance and puppet show aimed at young audiences. The first meeting was on February 18, 2023, and the show premiered on May 27, 2023, at the Detroit Film Theatre. I recorded my production process from the start of the project to study my collaboration productivity. I gathered and organized the data according to the numbers I worked and the minutes of music I produced as I composed, recorded, and mixed music. The analysis and statistics revealed that a fraction of the total collaborative period is spent on person-to-person interaction. About two-thirds of the total music communicated with the collaborators ended up in the show.
There are three limitations to this article.
I am sharing my work process as a solo electronic musician who could compose and share music without other musicians. The workflow described in the following section may not apply to performers or composers of non-electronic genres.
No similar data were collected from the collaborators of Objects at Play. Comparison of productivity across the discipline was outside the plan.
The analysis focuses on the practical aspects of collaboration. There will be no aesthetic discussion of Objects at Play.
Data gathering
I used a production diary consisting of a web folder with a session log, screenshots, and photos to record the project’s progress. In the SessionLog text file, I briefly described the work I have done in a workday. Each entry has links to photos of hand-written notes or screenshots of the hard drive folder containing music files used for the project. The screenshots function as a reminder of content changes in music tracks. The Old Versions folder in the screenshots contains obsolete or rejected session files. I kept these files to calculate the amount of music that had not been used at the premiere.
Work Routine
The creative team of me, choreographer Joori Jung of ArtLab J, and theater director Carrie Morris of Detroit Puppet Company shared a Google Drive folder for remote communication and file transfer. The team worked on multiple projects, so daily or weekly meeting was not an option. The list below shows how I worked on the project in this context as a musician.
The first in-person meeting with Joori and Carrie was on 2/16. The three discussed the overall vision of the piece.
After meeting #1, I worked on short and independent tracks that could match the to-be-developed scenes.
I shared nine music tracks with the collaborators via Google Drive before the second meeting.
At the second meeting on 3/9, Joori and Carrie shared their work-in-progress scenes. The directors also shared current music tracks-to-scene placement.
After meeting #2, I made five additional tracks. I also revised and expanded the tracks used in the scenes.
I shared the updated tracks with the collaborators before the third meeting.
At the third meeting on 4/25, the directors shared new tracks-to-scene placement. The deadline for the final version of the music was set.
After meeting #3, I made three additional tracks. I continued revising and mixing the tracks to a presentable form.
I delivered the final versions of the tracks. The directors and performers continued working on the project until the premiere on 5/27, but I did not create more music for the show.
Separate from the theater premiere, I worked on a 14-track album with edits suited for audio-only release. It was published on Bandcamp a day after the premiere.
Note that I had the aesthetic decisions in creating music, but the directors in charge of movement and stage decided the music’s length, order, and selection. Unlike solo projects, the decisions that drove the project forward were not mine by design.
Data Organization
I organized the information in the production diary into two categories. The first category traces how allocations of the music track to one of the seven scenes change after the collaborator meeting. The second category is statistics on days worked and the amount of music produced.
Tracks-to-Scene Organization
Figure 1 shows how each track I made and shared with the collaborators changed their use throughout the project. The blocks with letters A to Q represent 17 tracks with independent musical themes. I composed the first nine drafts after the first meeting, five after the second meeting, and three more after the third meeting. These tracks were available as separate mp3 files on Google Drive for the choreographer and the theater director.
<Figure 1>
The middle column represents the tracks-to-scene assignment after the second collaborators’ meeting. Four scenes needed new music. The two scenes required a combination of tracks. All tracks needed expansion and revisions in terms of the music’s length and formal development. Note that four out of the nine tracks shared before the second meeting were rejected.
The right column represents a revised tracks-to-scene assignment after the third meeting. It became the final version. Some tracks included in the previous version, such as tracks A and L, ended up being excluded from the show. All but one rejected track after the second meeting came back as a part of Scenes 5 and 6. Track M changed its function from the theme of Scene 6 to the finale of Scene 5.
Productivity Analysis
I measured the amount of work by the days I spent on the project and the length of music created and shared with the directors. There are 102 days from the initial meeting on 2/16 to the album premiere on 5/28. According to the production diary,
I worked 37 days on this project (36.3% of total project days).
I met with collaborators in-person for 3 days (8.1% of the working days, 3% of total project days).
I did not record the minutes I worked on each day, so I cannot calculate the hours I worked on.
In terms of the total amount of music, I gathered the following from screenshots and project files.
14 out of 17 tracks made it to the show (82.4%).
The total amount of music communicated with the collaborators was 11474 seconds consisting of 34 drafts (figure 2).
The premiere used 3319 seconds of music (figure 3). That is 28.9% of the music communicated with the collaborators.
The project used a total of 14.1GB in the hard drive. The files were Logic Pro sessions, SuperCollider files, and audio recordings of me playing a melodica.
<Figure 2>
<Figure 3>
Interpretation of the Data
The collaborative process is about quickly adopting and adapting to changes. My role as a music composer was to react to the developing dance and puppetry. It meant constant addition, elimination, and revision. 14 out of 17 tracks making it into the final version looks like a satisfactory rate, but it is less than a third of the music shared with the collaborators. At the same time, once-rejected music can become useful if the circumstances change. Keeping the Old Versions folder intact was a strategically right decision.
I worked on the project for about a third of the total project period and waited for collaborators to develop their part asynchronously to my music production schedule. Waiting is part of the process for musicians in interdisciplinary projects. It is possible to have time to work on a separate project while engaged in a long-term collaboration.
Notice that I did not discuss budget and fees in this article. The amount of time and energy spent on a project does not account for the creator’s previous experience and skill. 30 days I spent on Objects at Play could have been 90 days of work for some or 10 days of work for others. My productivity analysis is not a suggestion for budgeting or calculating artist fees. Its object is to be a reference for a better collaborative practice.
