Category Archives: Research

Learning Aphasia

Influences, Performances, Research, Teaching

Mark Applebaum’s Aphasia (2009) for solo performer is a difficult but rewarding piece. I have been intermittently practicing it since 2021, but I have yet to reach a satisfactory level. Knowing that my run of the piece today is better than in any other day, it gives me joy and energy to keep practicing. I wanted to share that delight in the last month’s Wayne State Faculty Recital Series. Despite many mistakes, the performance was received well by students and guests. Aphasia attracts and affects audiences and performers like no other electronic pieces I know. I can think of two, perhaps very personal, reasons.

Soulslike 

Aphasia is an Elden Ring-equivalent of electroacoustic music. The unforgiving difficulty is part of the fun. In practicing Aphasia, I had innumerable  “YOU DIED” moments. Learning small sections required focus and discipline, and still, the chance of succeeding was slim. But like a soulslike game, the process of achieving goals was fun. I understood more about the piece’s structural relationships, sound design techniques, and choreographic thoughts through repeated readings, listening, and failing. 

When I memorized the piece, I felt joy, similar to the moment I beat the final boss in Elden Ring after hundreds of hours of playtime. I learned to work consistently to achieve seemingly impossible goals. Musicians, of course, acquire this trait, but I needed a reminder and reinforcement.  Practicing Aphasia during the COVID quarantine semesters did that job. 

The audience watching Aphasia immediately gets its pleasant-but-difficult aspect. It’s fun but serious. It’s confusing, but there’s the order. And it’s inviting – instead of “I can’t do what I see on stage,” the audience may feel “I want to try it one day.” Aphasia seems to be an excellent introduction to studying the performance aspect of electronic music. Once a person has experience of doing Aphasia, watching the performance has a new meaning. It’s like watching a PVP match when knowing the mechanics and insights of a video game.   

Notation

Aphasia is a fully-notated piece composed in 2009. Hundreds of performers, mainly percussionists, played it in the 2010s. In contrast to many graphic notations,  the score is not to be freely interpreted. There is a clear notion of a mistake when the performer misses the timing or makes a wrong hand gesture. This aesthetics contrasts with my solo performance practice in the 2010’s, in which I freely improvised on stage with found objects, MIDI controllers, and found objects. The improvisatory nature of my performance made the audience expect the unexpected at the expense of irreplicability – I was the only person who could perform my solo electroacoustic works. In the composer of Aphasia’s words, I was the best and the worst performer of my piece.  

While only the improviser could perform their pieces, hundreds of percussionists performed Aphasia as the composer intended. Aphasia’s technology barrier is low, and the piece is a hit in every concert. When done correctly, the piece is indistinguishable from many high-tech compositions using motion sensors or controllers. Performers can make such an experience by studying notation, like many other pieces that they have studied previously. 

Aphasia taught me the effectiveness of low technology and low dependence on improvisational skill. With well-written notation, such a composition travels far, invites more performers, and lasts long. Many mixed pieces (i.e., those with an instrument and prerecorded electronics) have the same strength, but Aphasia stands out by featuring the most accessible instrument. My recent electronic ensemble pieces reflect this approach. They are built to be transferable, non-virtuostic,  and have low technological/financial barriers. 

Summary

Aphasia reinforces the music fundamentals I often forget – practicing and overcoming challenges is an essential part of musicianship, and great notation makes performers change and improve. I forgot these, perhaps as a byproduct of pursuing the new and the cutting-edge as a profession. 

Learning Aphasia also rekindled my role as a student. To create and teach, I need to study and practice. Consistently and continuously. The result of doing so does not have to be perfect, but sharing and explaining what I experienced is what teacher-artists do. Knowing me, I will probably forget the lessons. When that happens, I will relearn Aphasia (and/or play Elden Ring) to remember it again.

Solo Electronic Improvisation

Computer Music Practice, Performances, Research, ,

Since 2009, I have been presenting a solo set of live electronic music. Among the many electronic performance techniques, I specialize in creating electronic sounds on stage without pre-recorded samples. I use a combination of digital effect processors coded with SuperCollider to improvise a uniquely electronic soundscape in concerts and recordings. For more than a decade, I have marketed myself as an expert in that specific style. It is represented as a yellow rectangle in the diagram below. 

The categorization is not meaningful to anyone else, but it was a useful research goal for me in the 2010s. I share three representative pieces of my solo electronic improvisation for listening and analysis purposes.

Three Examples 

100 Strange Sounds (2012-2014) is a set of one hundred short video recordings featuring my live electronic music techniques. Each piece pairs a sound-making object with my SuperCollider code that processes its sound. I invite viewers to notice and enjoy the unexpected relationship between what they see and what they hear. For example, the sound of a cabbage becomes something else with a bunch of effect processors in 100 Strange Sounds #77. 

Large Intestine (2013) is a piece I made after 100 Strange Sounds #42. As described in the blog on style analysis, the no-input mixer improvisation enhanced with SuperCollider has been my favorite electronic instrument for more than a decade. Large Intestine, as the title suggests, epitomizes my interest in noise, digital signal processing, and improvisation. I plan to play this work in as many concerts as possible in the future.

Touch (2014) is my kitchen-sink piece that pairs multiple sound objects with multiple effects. It’s a summary of 100 Strange Sounds, in which I bring random objects on stage and improvise the combination and sequence of sounds. The piece opened many doors to career opportunities in the 2010s as an electronic music improviser. The techniques and technologies I learned in performing and refining Touch became a source for future non-improvisational compositions for electronic ensembles. 

Technology

All three pieces mentioned above use a variation of a single SuperCollider patch, available for download at this link. And this linked PDF explains the hardware and software setup to perform the pieces (warning: it is a little outdated). 

When I run the patch, it creates a GUI with multiple buttons that trigger customized effects. I control the number and timing of the effects’ on/off states with a mouse click – No MIDI controllers or control surfaces. A few clicks, probably unnoticed by the audience, are enough because I wanted the listeners to focus on the interaction I have with the non-electronic objects on the stage. 

As for the hardware,  I use a couple of microphones for Touch, one audio interface, and a laptop. This article explains the gear I used over the past 11 years.

Technique

Like other improvisations, the key technique in performing solo live electronic music is listening. I listen for variations that the computer part adds to the acoustic instruments, then respond with another instrument or effects. Because I cannot play a scale or harmony with the instrument (like cabbage), the listen-and-react decisions are often non-musical and raw. “The current sound is long, so I’ll play short sounds next.” “I will go from a simple to a complex texture.”  “The sound is very high in pitch. I’ll complement it with a very low rumble.” I also ask questions and try to come up with the best answer on stage. “What happens if I granularize the chattering teeth sound?” “The plastic block sounds harsh. Can I make it harsher?” “What is common between a slinky and a coin sound?”  

Free improvisation focusing on reactions and questions is fun, but it can quickly lose control of the length and form. So I plan a specific gesture or sound combination for transitions. The Extension and Connection blog linked earlier has such an example in Touch.  

Annecdote

More than fifteen years of experience in improvising with live electronics forms the foundation of my musicianship. I identified myself as a composer after earning a PhD in composition in 2008, but it did not lead to a gig or collaborations when I moved to Philadelphia for my first job as a music technology professor. The dire situation led me to develop a solo set I can prepare and present quickly in any situation. The strategic change, fortunately, worked, giving me ample opportunity to refine my performance and improvisation techniques. 

These days, I am comfortable identifying myself as a composer-performer of electronic music. My sound may not be fresh or cutting-edge at this point, but I think I have a bit more to contribute to the current solo setup. Perhaps the contribution is a documentation and theorization. Perhaps it is just one more new piece!

More electronic music composition/performance/practice articles are found at the Computer Music Practice project.

Scale – Computer Music Composition Method

Compositions, Computer Music Practice, Research, ,

Control and presentation of sound in different scales is a distinguishable feature of computer music. In this context, scale does not refer to a group of notes in different pitches, like a C major scale. It instead refers to proportions, as in big vs. small, long vs. short, and few vs. many. Music technology is capable of rendering a single musical idea in extreme proportions, and the collection of those sounds could become a composition.

I will demonstrate a scale-based electronic music composition process with Control Click, a sound installation composed in 2016. The piece is an 11-minute site-specific work for eight or more computers, creating an arcade-like environment with electronic blips and blinks. The computers are networked to play the same SuperCollider file, functioning as both a performer and a lighting device. The video below is a version of Control Click presented at the 2016 Third Practice Electroacoustic Music Festival.

Sound Design With Proportions

Featuring various scales/proportions in computer music means applying different values to a control parameter. If one can control the pitch of an electronic instrument, experiment with low Hz and high Hz. If the duration of a note in an electronic instrument could be programmed, make very short and very long sounds. The keyword here is extreme. A computer is capable of following laborious or precise instructions that are difficult or impossible for humans to execute. 

In Control Click, each computer algorithmically generates a melodic line based on a chord. I cannot control the exact sequence of pitches, but I could control the chord type, note duration, and tempo. The range of note duration and their playback pace is wider than that of acoustic instruments, thus capable of creating different timbres and moods. The audio example below plays the melodic line in normal, slightly longer, and very short note durations.

By playing the melodic line heard above with very long note duration and decelerating tempo, I could create the sound below. Note that the tremolo of individual notes reveals more as the note duration becomes longer. Longer and stacked notes with different tremolo rates create a sense of a chord with long reverb.

The sound heard above was inspired by the FFT time-stretching technique, which inspired composers to discover hidden sounds too short to be heard and appreciated in an audio file. The technique can also make a long audio phrase so short that one cannot identify the pitch. In other words, time-stretching scales the duration parameters in extreme proportions. But such an idea is applicable beyond FFT. The audio below is how I applied the duration/tempo scale to the percussion sound.

Composition With Proportions

The idea of applying different proportions can also be applied beyond parameter change. In Control Click, the example sounds in the previous section are meant to be played by multiple computers. But as a site-dependent piece with random number generators, each computer emits a distinguishable note sequence at different physical locations. My goal was to create a sonic environment of an arcade from my childhood – chaotic, overwhelming, and delightful. 

Links below point to the moment in the piece that uses previously mentioned scaling examples in an ensemble format. 

  • The normal melodic line with percussion (1:30)
  • Long note duration (2:30-2:50)
  • Short note duration (5:30-6:00)
  • Extreme extension of note duration and tempo (8:50-10:00)

In the third link, Long note duration, the melodic line is detuned by a random amount at synced timings. The effect of one computer doing so is not so noticeable. But when multiple computers are out of tune in a large space, it creates an impact that I cannot recreate in a concert hall.

Notation of Proportions

The concept of controlling a range and scope of musical parameters, rather than instructing specific notes to play, is transferable to human performance. A proper notation to play an electronic instrument within a limited range can be considered as proportional control of choices. Seven Bird Watchers (2019) for drum machine ensemble is an example.

Seven Bird Watchers uses drum machines with customized sync tracks, and the sync track defines the form—the piece is simply seven sections with an increase in tempi and sonic range.  While the composed sync track holds Korg Volca Beats’ tempo together, the human performers change the drum machine’s parameters according to the score. The score depicts the range of parameters performers can improvise.


For example, the early section has limited parameter changes and choices. It lasts about 35 seconds with a moderate increase and decrease in tempo. The performers, as shown in the score above, have a very limited choice of parameter change – the dark area of the Time/Depth/Pitch/Decay knobs, as well as the dark areas in the instrument choice, are the areas in which the performers can move or use knobs and buttons in Volca Beats.

The latter section, in contrast, has a bigger range of tempo changes with an extended duration of 85 seconds. The performers are free to use the entire range of the knobs with almost all available sounds. The proportion of choices and resulting sounds is more varied. For example, the tempo gets so fast that the sixteenth-note run of some percussion instruments loses sense of rhythm. It starts to sound like a bird chirping.

References

For further study, read Curtis Road’s Microsound. I learned the musical application of scale and proportion from this book. Research the scale and proportion in visual art as well. There are ample examples of how different scales make ordinary events extraordinary. Watching a movie on a big screen feels different than watching it on a phone screen. A slow-motion video effect is fun. Similarly, a sound with varying time scales and contrasting parameter values fascinates me.

Computer Music Composition Method has other related entries. Read them if interested


Tool and Variations – Computer Music Composition Method

Compositions, Computer Music Practice, Research,

Create a patch, make different sounds with it, and arrange them in order. This is my go-to method for computer music composition. Instead of a theme in the theme and variations form, a computer musician begins a composition by making an electronic instrument or an audio app patch. Then, the composer explores different sonic possibilities of the instrument. The sounds created with the instrument are then presented in a particular order. The article demonstrates this process with my old composition. I will also provide more recent practices of the method with the entries in Computer Music Practice.

Tool and Variations in Decrescendo (2003)

Step 1. Make a software instrument

A computer music composer’s first job often is to design a digital instrument or a patch. A patch in this context is a specific connection of features/modules in an audio programming environment, such as Max, Csound, or SuperCollider.  In Decrescendo, a fixed-media piece published in 2003, I wrote a Csound patch that generates a series of sine tones according to an adjustable overtone series.  The formula to make a pitch series is as simple as the one below, but I could control tempo, note duration, and pan to my taste.

Note of a scale = fundamental frequency* (overtone number *detune value)

Here are two sound examples generated from the Decrescendo instrument.

Step 2. Make variations with the instrument 

A customized instrument has the potential to generate sounds of various timbres with different, sometimes randomized, settings of its parameters.  The second step in the tools and variations method is to experiment and document as many different parameter settings as possible that yield distinct sounds. In Decrescendo, I adjusted the fundamental frequency, note duration, scale direction, pan position, and detune value to create different, but related, sounds. Some variations are created with duplication and overlap (more on this in another article). Below are some audio examples.

Documented variations of parameter settings in a digital instrument are called presets. Featuring presets of an instrument is a distinct characteristic of electronic music compositions. Here’s an article about presets for further study.  

Step 3. Sequence the variations 

The next step after gathering a library of presets is to make decisions on when to play which sounds. The decision-making and its documentation involve selecting a few from many sounds in Step 2. The deciding factor depends on the context and personal taste. In the case of Decrescendo, the piece opens with an unaltered overtone series, followed by slightly detuned scales. The second section (00:30) contrasts the opening by presenting a few descending overtone series. The third section (00:50)  reminds the listener of the opening gesture with a further exploration of detuning and tempo variation. The preset choices for the rest of the piece are my answers to the question, “What makes sense based on what we have heard so far?”

The sequencing, an act of ordering events, of various sounds made with an instrument, is not formulaic. There is no right answer, but the choices are based on the context, experience, and taste of the creator. 

Computer Music Practice

Tool and variation is a method that could be applied to many digital music formats. Here are my recent applications of the method in installation, fixed media, and electronic ensemble works. The entries are part of the Computer Music Practice project.

Control Click (2016): In this installation for multiple desktops, every computer plays the same SuperCollider patch. The instrument is designed to generate a randomized rhythm and timbre at a pre-scored and fixed timing. In other words, the instrument randomly generates timbre at a fixed sequence of changes. I saved a surprising and best preset setting I found for the climax. 

Seven Bird Watchers (2019): In this electronic ensemble piece, I did not design the instrument, but made a specific drum pattern for Korg Volca Beats. The score displays seven variations of button combinations and gestures that performers need to create with the said drum pattern at a specific timing. The variable tempo is composed/sequenced with SuperCollider.

RMHS (2020):  RMHS is a drone generator made with SuperCollider. A user can download the patch, set parameters, press a button, and create a drone of microtonal harmonies. The RMHS album consists of eight examples of such drones. The sequence portion of this project is the track order, which reflects my interpretation of consonant and dissonant harmonies.

Four Hit Combo (2024): The preset variation and sequence creation process is similar to that of Seven Bird Watchers – I notated different instances of presets for performers to interpret. But the instrument in Four Hit Combo does not have a set sound. Instead, it is a platform that processes any incoming audio files with a set of gestures based on granular synthesis. It is possible to create an instrument without sound in computer music!

Electronic Ensemble Workshop Examples

Computer Music Practice, Research

I have been running electronic ensemble workshops at recent festivals, concerts, and summer camps. At the workshop, participants from any musical background and level gather to make music together with sound-making devices, such as phones, computers, synthesizers, drum machines, and mixing consoles. I find that such a workshop is an effective activity to introduce the genre to audiences and colleagues. It provides benefits that concerts and recordings cannot.

First, an active participation in electronic music-making adds visual and tactile reference to the electronic sounds. People who have played a drum machine will have a better understanding of its sounds and operations than those who have only heard the sounds. They can imagine and admire the intriguing rhythmic patterns that artists create on stage. Active engagement in music-making adds an extra layer of context, appreciation, and understanding. 

Learning becomes a part of entertainment when it occurs at concerts. The linked video of a drum machine trio was shot at Tec-Troit 2025. I set up three synced drum machines and one synthesizer for the festival attendants to play. When a person showed interest, I taught them basic operations of Volca Beats or MicroKORG. Many participants played electronic instruments for the first time. Most stayed more than 15 minutes performing music with friends and strangers. 

The accessible ensemble experience, such as one described above, is another benefit of electronic ensemble workshops. Playing music together is an irreplaceable human-to-human experience. Bands and orchestras provide such moments, but it often takes years of individual and group practice to be at a presentable level. Technology can shorten the time it takes to produce good sounds together, allowing participants more time to experience the ensembleness—a special and personal connection only possible when people create music together. It’s like singing our lungs out together at late-night karaoke, but with synthesizers.

In the drum machine ensemble video, the performers do not need to worry about keeping the tempo, as all drum machines were synced. It eliminated the need to learn to play music in tempo, allowing participants more time to explore patterns and their combinations. In May 2025, I did a laptop ensemble workshop with a group of volunteers in Saginaw, MI. I taught Singaporean Crosswalk and  Save Point By the Lake to local musicians, fans, and students of all ages. The group rehearsed two pieces in 1.5 hours and performed in a concert following the workshop. The participants did not need to learn to play scales or articulations. They had to rehearse some choreography and timings to press keys on the laptops during a short rehearsal. And then enjoy the sound while rehearsing and presenting. 

In addition to drum machines, synthesizers, and laptops, I have conducted electronic workshops featuring ensemble performances. In no-input mixer workshops, I teach students the basics of no-input mixing patching. There are often fewer mixers than the participants, so I ask students to team up. The workshop participants then proceed to perform Benjamin Damann’s The King of Nothing as a group. In a similar spirit, my workshop recently has included Piyawat Louilarpprasert’s Shrimp Raptors in the repertoire, in hopes of introducing DIY instruments and multimedia to the audience. 

The effect of running electronic ensemble workshops has been quite positive so far. I get energized sharing what I love about live electronic music. Participants of the workshop remember my music and concert as more than a sound – it is a great promotional activity. Hopefully, they would try performing as an electronic ensemble after the workshop. If readers are interested in running or attending a workshop,  please do not hesitate to contact me. My workshops require some planning, but they are portable and require minimal equipment from the hosts.

This article is a part of Computer Music Practice – Presenting.