Clarinet Wins Robotic Orchestra Competition

Sasha writes "The Australian designed robotic clarinet beat out Dutch and Finnish entries this year at the robotic orchestra competition. The researchers don't expect to replace human musicians, but are instead interested in what makes the difference between playing music well and playing music poorly. There is also a video available of the performance."

But does it run Linux?

[bersl2]

Actually, the answer is yes [cio.com.au].

Contest website and longer article

[againjj]

Here is the contest website [artemisia-...iation.org] and a longer article [computerworld.com.au].

Re:Innovation without purpose...

[Translation Error]

Now pause to ask: What do I think of this project and WHY was it undertaken?

Well, I suppose if you REALLY wanted the answer to that second question, you could--oh, I don't know--actually read the article, whose writer goes to the effort of explainining the reasons for both the entire competition and the clarinet project in three (tiny) paragraphs.

Re:Innovation without purpose...

[Kjella]

I feel we have to weigh the importance of the output against the cost of the task.

How about time spent without "purpose" in general? What about all the time people spend being entertained or doing one of a million different hobbies and amateur sports? Or posting on slashdot for that matter? It's almost by definition that the output is not important, only the process. Some people like doing silly and innovative things, why should we just hold them to that standard? Call it what you want, but I still more useful than how most people spend their time. Your opinion might differ but I honestly don't care because the reasons I like my useless habits and hobbies aren't the same as yours since that's all about utility, not output.

Re:Look on the bright side...

[radarsat1]

Are you referring to McBlare [ece.ubc.ca]?

From a member of the robot team

[MusicAcoustics]

A colleague told me of this discussion and suggested that I give a brief explanation of the motivation for this project. I'm from the Music Acoustics Group at UNSW. We maintain a large web site http://www.phys.unsw.edu.au/music/ [unsw.edu.au] for the benefit of musicians, students and interested others. It has more details on the robot. The introduction on our site is aimed at a good high school student, but if you go deep enough it leads to our technical research papers. - Most of the time, we study real musical instruments, real musicians, the voice and the ear. Some of this is sponsored by companies (instrument makers, a medical device company, a museum), but much of it is curiosity research. - For us, the robot project complements one of our areas in which we study real musicians and how they play. We want to know, in some detail, why a real musician plays better and makes a better sound than a beginner. (Curiosity research, but with an obvious application in music teaching and sometimes instrument design.) - The robot is a tool for testing our understanding of the clarinet-player system. The current version is very primitive: it was put together in a hurry for the competition. But in the next year or so we shall use it to understand a range of questions: * Why does a clarinet reed squeak? How can you stop it? * What are the important parameters in a good sound? * How important are tongue position, soft palate, glottis? What are the best combinations? * How important is lip damping, and how does it depend on the reed? * What are the important parameters in fine pitch control? * What are the important parameters in expressive performance? * What is necessary to convey warmth? * What is necessary to follow a conductor? - To some of these, of course, we already have answers from our previous research. But we want to have more confidence in those answers. - So for the Music Acoustics Lab, this robot is a very useful tool. It was also a good project for two undergraduate students (Paul and Jean) in physics: a project that required a range of experimental and analytical techniques. The other groups in the robot team have different motivations. - For Mechanical Engineering, this robot was an interesting challenge. It was a good undergraduate student project for Kim: a range of questions to answer and difficulties to overcome. - It was also an interesting challenge for Mark, a Computer Engineering student Mark. In fact all of the students involved were highly motivated, worked well, learned a lot -- and had a good time. For university staff, this alone would justify the project. - For NICTA (a national research centre in ICT), the contest was a formal challenge. A good way of displaying expertise and applications in embedded systems, and a good way of inspiring students. (John Judge is from NICTA). - The team details and some more discussion is at http://www.phys.unsw.edu.au/jw/clarinetrobot.html [unsw.edu.au] Music Acoustics.