Analyse the extent to which the Electroplankton and Tenori-on systems

overcome barriers to creativity in modern music production

Computers and digital devices are still developing. I think these tools cannot catch
people’s detailed expression yet, like an unplugged instrument. They are expected to
improved further more. But at the same time, I believe we need to think differently.
Toshio Iwai1

Introduction

This paper will examine the ways in which systems designed by Toshio Iwai, the

Tenori-on and Electroplankton, seek to overcome some of the shortcomings of existing

systems for the creation of music, and how successful they are in doing so. It does not

seek to come up with a definitive judgement on the issue, but simply to explore existing

material on the subject of creativity and control systems, and compare this against user

experiences of these systems. Section one looks at some of the potential drawbacks of

existing systems for music creation. Section two looks at some of the historical context,

both of the changes which have occurred in the recording industry, and some historical

approaches to creativity which have relevance to the Tenori-on and Electroplankton, such

as Minimalism, and the work of Brian Eno. Section three examines in detail the design and

operation of the Tenori-on and Electroplankton, and includes a brief history of the work of

Toshio Iwai. Section four draws largely on interviews conducted by the author for this

paper, in attempting to assess the success of these systems in overcoming some of the

drawbacks of existing systems. The conclusion attempts to draw together and summarise

the key points of the previous sections.

1 Toshio Iwai, interviewed by Pixelsurgeon, http://www.pixelsurgeon.com/interviews/interview.php?id=239 (10th

January 2008)

1
Section 1 – Drawbacks of Existing Systems

The majority of music produced today utilises some sort of computer based package for

recording and/or sequencing and editing (referred to herein as DAWs – Digital Audio

Workstations), such as Cubase or ProTools. In some genres, especially of electronic

music, tracks are created entirely within the sequencer. Samples are combined with

hardware or software based instruments and effects to create tracks, normally with a midi

keyboard/controller used as an input device. Though there is a wide array of software and

hardware available, a great deal of music is made using this basic set-up. Those who are

immersed in this field of music production may feel that this is the only real option for

creating or recording music; 'for many composers the computer may be the only musical

instrument available which is capable of providing them with a means of expression

appropriate to their needs'2.

However, a number of artists have become frustrated with such an approach to

making music, feeling that the nature of this set-up is restrictive and not conducive to a

free creative process. While this approach gives access to an almost limitless array of

samples, instruments, effects, and options, this is seen by some as a drawback rather than

an advantage:

One of the biggest problems, I think, with computers [is] that all of the designed
energy is going into multiplying the options inside this box. Now, fine: that's
wonderful, we're very pleased, in one sense; but the important thing, as anyone
who's played synthesizers knows, is not the number of options that you have, but
the rapport you can have with the instrument.3

Here, musician and writer Brian Eno suggests that far more important than the number of

options available to an artist is the physical connection that the artist has with their

2 Michael McNabb, 'Computer Music: some aesthetic considerations' in Emmerson, Simon (ed.) The Language of
Electroacoustic Music (Basingstoke 1986), p.141
3 Brian Eno, quoted in Paul Schütze 'Strategies for Making Sense', The Wire, Issue 139 (September 1995)

2
instrument. The standard set-up of midi keyboard and sequencer is seen by some as

lacking in this tactile, responsive connection. Even expensive weighted keyboard

controllers struggle to have the same tactile appeal and connection between feeling and

sound which an acoustic piano does. The Japanese sound artist and designer of two of

the systems examined in this text, Toshio Iwai seems to be alluding to this in an interview:

For the digital instrument, interface, exterior design, software, sound and so on are
independent each other. I am examining the way all of them naturally unite, just like
in the violin. 4

Iwai feels that electronic instruments lack the unified purpose and cohesion of a traditional

instrument. Composer and academic Simon Emmerson describes this relationship

between musicians and acoustic instruments, and the process of 'coupling':

Woodwind and brass players adjust their reed or lip vibration to match the
resonance vibration of the air tube of the instrument. The string player learns to bow
at the correct pressure and bow velocity for the slip/grip of the frictional bow to co-
ordinate perfectly with the string vibration5

This highlights the important role of physical feedback from the source of the sound,

influencing the musician and the way they use the instrument and shape the sound. It is

this kind of feedback which is potentially lacking in a DAW set-up using conventional MIDI

controllers.

Brian Eno also highlights the importance of having this connection and sense of

rapport with a tactile instrument, and contrasts it negatively with the use of computers and

synthesizers:

This is why people playing crappy 35 year old electric guitars consistently come up
with more interesting results, musically, than synthesizer players do... And these
things [computers] as instruments are so pathetic. They depend so much on a kind
of nerd's eye view of what sort of thing would be fun to do.
The whole physical experience is what you make things with. Anyone who works
with any tactile art form knows this. And with any tactile instrument. They know that
a lot of your intelligence about what you're doing is not happening, here [the head],
it's happening all over other parts of your body. It's how your body feels about this

4 Toshio Iwai, interviewed by Pixelsurgeon, http://www.pixelsurgeon.com/interviews/interview.php?id=239 (10th

January 2008)
5 Emmerson, Simon Living Electronic Music (Aldershot 2007) p.19

3
 sort of thing. Well, unfortunately, computer interfaces are so crude they've
completely ignored that possibility. So, if I want drawing programs that automatically
work with a pad or a pen or whatever - I have one in fact! - then I want music
programs and I want synthesizers that give me that same kind of physical
relationship, that physical musical relationship.
A lot of contemporary electronic music gives the impression of having been
designed remotely, by a music software program such as Cubase. On paper, the
software offers you an unlimited number of options, but the interface steers you in a
series of very rigid and dull directions...6

Eno believes that the interface through which one attempts to create music using DAWs is

inherently restrictive and non-intuitive, and often produces music which is lacking in

character.

Former Abbey Road engineer and producer of acts such as Stone Roses,

Radiohead and The Verve John Leckie highlights another aspect of DAWs which is

potentially problematic; the added levels of complexity and proliferation of options.

Before, you had a knob that said ‘Bass’. You turned it up, said ‘Ah, that’s better’ and
moved on. Now, you have to choose what frequency, and the slope, and how many
dBs, and it all makes a difference. There’s a constant temptation to tamper.7

This constant temptation to tamper is one of the key aspects affecting creative use of a

DAW. Although having a virtually unlimited palette of sampled sounds, synthesizer and

sampled instrument and effects plug-ins gives massive creative potential and power, this

ability combined with an almost total undo facility, means that there is always the potential

for indecision and nagging doubt. If one was in a studio with only one reverb unit available,

one would experiment with it for a while to get the best sound, then use it. With a DAW you

might find a plug-in reverb that seemed to work, but then the thought occurs, ‘what about

this other plug-in?’ ‘or this one?’, each with hundreds of its own presets. Obviously one

doesn’t need to go through them all, but because they are there, it is tempting to think that

6 Brian Eno, quoted in Paul Schütze 'Strategies for Making Sense', The Wire, Issue 139 (September 1995)
7 'Why All Records DO Sound the Same', Word magazine 26th February 2008,
http://www.wordmagazine.co.uk/content/why-records-do-all-sound-same (April 30th 2008)

4
if one spent enough time looking for it, something better could be found. Of course not

everyone uses presets anyway, and one might say it is the task of a talented producer to

ignore these distractions and get straight to the best sound possible, but even

experienced producers such as John Leckie acknowledge the problems of the 'constant

temptation to tamper'8.

8 ibid.

5
Section 2 – Historical Context

Brian Eno has experimented with a number of techniques to aid the creative

process and attempt to break free from 'orthodoxy'. One such attempt was the use of

Oblique Strategies, a system of cards suggesting actions such as 'Try faking it!', to be

drawn when inspiration is needed, as a means of stimulating a fresh approach. Some of

these notions about the creative process and the use of limitations and systems in

composition are similar to the ideas which motivated artists in movements such as

Serialism and Minimalism. Serialist composers such as Arthur Schoenberg, Karlheinz

Stockhausen and Pierre Boulez created music based on certain self-imposed rules.

Minimalism did not rely on the use of rules, but made use of essentially simple elements,

focussing on repeating motifs and evolving textures and polyrhythms, often using found

sounds and field recordings. Minimalist composer and writer Tom Johnson describes

Minimalism:

The idea of minimalism is much larger than most people realize. It includes, by
definition, any music that works with limited or minimal materials: pieces that use
only a few notes, pieces that use only a few words of text, or pieces written for very
limited instruments, such as antique cymbals, bicycle wheels, or whiskey glasses. It
includes pieces that sustain one basic electronic rumble for a long time. It includes
pieces made exclusively from recordings of rivers and streams. It includes pieces
that move in endless circles. It includes pieces that set up an unmoving wall of
saxophone sound. It includes pieces that take a very long time to move gradually
from one kind of music to another kind. It includes pieces that permit all possible
pitches, as long as they fall between C and D. It includes pieces that slow the
tempo down to two or three notes per minute.9

Leading minimalist composer Steve Reich describes using sampled instruments with a

MIDI sequencer as an excellent tool for composing orchestral pieces, but also points to the

limitations:

9 Tom Johnson, The Voice of New Music: New York City 1972-1982 – A Collection of Articles (Eindhoven 1989), p5

6
 So, I think the computer makes a difference, but it didn't make anyone who wasn't a
good composer a good one. People say "Oh, now they've got this, they can do so
and so." Yeah, you can now have people churning out a lot of garbage faster and in
a prettier looking score. You can definitely produce it quicker, but copy and paste
ain't gonna make you a good composer.10

Reich highlights the way that despite the advances in computer technology, the ease with

which music can be created creates the potential for limitless amounts of music devoid of

character and ideas.

John Leckie articulates some other frustrations with the current status quo in music

production

There’s no big equipment any more,” says John Leckie. “No racks of gear with
flashing lights and big knobs. The reason I got into studio engineering was that it
was the closest thing I could find to getting into a space ship. Now, it isn’t. It’s like
going to an accountant. It changes the creative dynamic in the room when it’s just
one guy sitting staring at a computer screen11.

Interestingly, he highlights the aesthetic appeal of the ‘flashing lights and big knobs’ of

vintage studio equipment, as well as the importance of the ‘creative dynamic’ of a studio

which changes when the tangible is replaced by a computer software package. He sees

the modern studio environment as a sterile venue for creative enterprise, and seems to

largely blame the advent of the DAW for this. While it may seem trivial to hark back to

'flashing lights and big knobs', the point is that these hardware units were, to him, inspiring

to use and to be around. It is this kind of subtle aid to the creative process which may be

lost by the exclusive use of DAWs.

During the early period of the recording industry in the 20th Century, there were

clearly defined roles in the recording studio. Producers were responsible for creative

decisions on the overall sound of the record, as well as answering to the record company:

10 Steve Reich, interview for NewMusicBox (7/98),

http://www.newmusicbox.org/archive/firstperson/reich/interview5.html (28th April 2008)
11 Why All Records DO Sound the Same', Word magazine 26th February 2008,
http://www.wordmagazine.co.uk/content/why-records-do-all-sound-same (April 30th 2008)

7
meeting budgetary requirements and producing a product that the record company thought

it could sell. Engineers were just that, white-coated scientists who were responsible for the

technical aspects of getting the sounds recorded. These roles were fairly clear and there

was little crossover between them; the band would never really be allowed into the control

room to feedback on mixing issues, for example. The equipment and expertise required to

operate in this way meant that recording was beyond the reach of most people.

With the ‘democratisation’ of music production brought about in the late stages of

the 20th Century by the advent of computers with sufficient power to record, create and

mix tracks entirely using a home computer and minimal amounts of equipment, a change

to this structured environment occurred. With the means to write, record and mix at home,

many people could now act by themselves as songwriter, performer, engineer, producer,

sound designer. The theory of 'democratisation' of music is that these changes can

potentially take away the need to have a large record company financing the production of

music, as a skilled person with relatively inexpensive equipment can often achieve

professional sounding results. While these developments were a huge breakthrough in

terms of what could be achieved by ‘the masses’ at home, the breakdown of the

traditional, clearly defined roles in recording is not necessarily an advantage. Having to

constantly switch between roles during the creative process can potentially stand in the

way of the all-important creative ‘flow’.

As an example, imagine a musician improvising and coming up with a musical idea

which he finds really inspiring and exciting. He decides to record it, but while setting up to

record he notices an unpleasant off-putting hum coming through the speakers. He then

spends the next 10 minutes thinking why this might be happening: rearranging

power/audio cables in the studio, checking whether the hum is present on the recording or

just the monitoring, experimenting with EQ cuts to reduce the hum, and so on. Even if he

8
manages to sort out the problem, remember the idea and get a decent recording down,

probably the energy and momentum he had when he first came up with the idea has

dissipated somewhat, and what could have been the basis for a great piece of music is

now just another half-finished idea which will never come to fruition. Another common trap

as a producer/writer/engineer/artist is once a piece starts to come together, get drawn into

mixing: detailed EQ and compression settings for example, before the arrangement of the

song is really complete.

Australian musician and producer Dean Morris points out that in many interviews

with revered artists, they describe an extremely streamlined writing process: ‘They remove

anything from the songwriting armoury which gets in the way of capturing the inspirational

10 percent of stuff on which the 90 percent perspiration of songwriting rests’12. Morris

suggests that the need to act in a number of different roles when attempting to produce

music alone using a DAW is not particularly conducive to creativity.

Rene Lysloff highlights some of the ways in which the advent of electronic music

and computer music production 'forces us to reconsider the Cartesian mind-body divide'13.

The notion that mind and body are separate entities is associated with the French

philosopher and mathematician Rene Descartes. Lysloff holds that with traditional acoustic

instruments, this dualism remains intact. Western music has long valued virtuosity, which

hinges on the close relationship between the body and music-making; musicians are

valued for their performance similar to the way in which athletes are, for their speed and

power, with 'an intimate and direct control over the sound they produce'14. The composer

handles the 'mind' side, in terms of the composition, while the performers are interpreters

and technicians. Modern computer music production upsets this relationship, as potentially

excellent pieces of music can be created without the technical skills of a talented

12 Dean Morris, 'Sounding Off', Sound on Sound, (September 2007) p. 189

13 Rene T.A. Lysloff, and Leslie C Gay Jr. (editors), Leslie C, Music and Technoculture, Middletown (2003), p.45
14 ibid.

9
musician/performer being involved at any stage. The role of the musician as an interpreter

of the composer's vision is bypassed. This also begs the question of whether the modern

producer/composer is simply a technician themselves. The blurring of these boundaries,

as we have seem above, has potential drawbacks as well as advantages.

Composer Pierre Boulez discusses some similar issues influencing modern music

creation.

...we stand at the crossroads of two somewhat divergent paths: on the one hand a
conservative historicism which, if it does not altogether block invention, clearly
diminishes it by providing none of the new material it needs for expression, or
indeed for regeneration. Instead, it creates bottlenecks, and impedes the circuit
running from composer to interpreter, or more generally, that from idea to material,
from functioning productively; for all practical purposes, it divides the reciprocal
action of these two poles of creation. On the other hand, we have a progressive
technology whose force of expression and development are sidetracked into a
proliferation of material means which may or may not be in accord with genuine
musical thought...15

Boulez suggests that obsession with music history and the effect of commercial pressures

on new instrument development combine to create a separation between musical ideas

and the ability to successfully implement them. Instruments such as the Tenori-on claim to

strip away some of these conflicting roles and layers of complexity, and attempt to create a

more direct connection between the initial creative impulses and a coherent piece of

music.

15 Pierre Boulez, 'Technology and the Composer' in Simon Emmerson (ed.) The Language of Electroacoustic Music,
(Basingstoke 1986), p.9

10
Section 3 – Operation of Tenori-on and Electroplankton

Tenori-on

There have been a number of attempts to create more intuitive interfaces and systems for

music creation. The Tenori-on, produced by Yamaha from designs by the Japanese artist

Toshio Iwai, is one such system. Iwai expresses similar sentiments to those espoused by

Brian Eno in an interview about the Tenori-on:

Computers and digital devices are still developing. I think these tools cannot catch
people’s detailed expression yet… Any instruments are characterised by their
physical interface, such as the key of a piano or the bow of a violin. And these
physical interfaces give important direction to the way they are played and the
sound itself. However, as long as electric instruments are concerned, this aspect is
not emphasised very much. In the Tenori-On project, we started from thinking what
is the reasonable interface for an electric instrument or digital instrument… For the
digital instrument, interface, exterior design, software, sound and so on are
independent each other. I am examining the way all of them naturally unite, just like
in the violin.16

The Tenori-on is a ‘new digital musical instrument for the 21st century' designed by artist

Toshio Iwai in conjunction with Yamaha. Toshio Iwai is a renowned Japanese media artist

with a history of work involving interactivity and using computers. In 1987 he created the

first game to make use of generative music processes as part of the game-play. Otocky

was a sideways scrolling ‘shoot-em-up’ in which musical sequences were created by the

firing of a ball in different directions to dispose of various enemies. Another project, called

Sound Fantasy was developed for Nintendo by Iwai in the early ‘90s but was never

released, though the main ideas were carried through to a PC game called SimTunes, in

which musical pictures were made and interacted with in various ways by characters

16 Toshio Iwai, interviewed by Pixelsurgeon, http://www.pixelsurgeon.com/interviews/interview.php?id=239 (10th

January 2008)

11
known as ‘Bugz’. These projects can be seen as important precursors to the Tenori-on, as

well as the development of Electroplankton, an interactive musical ‘game’ for the Nintendo

DS, discussed later in this paper.

The Tenori-on comprises a grid

of 16 by 16 backlit LED buttons, which

react to touch in various ways to

create music. The button matrix is

used as an input device, both for live

use and sequencing, as well as

providing visual feedback via the

lights. There are 6 different performance modes which Figure 1: Yamaha

Tenori-on17

offer different ways to create and play music. The score mode is the basic default mode for

the Tenori-on, and acts in away which is familiar to users of midi sequencers. The left-to-

right axis represents time, with the vertical axis used to represent pitch. This is similar to

the midi ‘piano roll’ found in virtually all computer sequencing packages. Looping patterns

can be created in this mode (or one of the other 5 modes), and 16 different patterns with

their own sounds or voices can be combined together. Each set of 16 layers is known as a

block, and 16 of these can be saved and recalled instantly during a performance. There

are various other functions to control parameters such as looping speed and loop points,

but again these features have similar equivalents on DAWs.

The Tenori-on’s other modes start to diverge from the computer sequencing model

in some interesting ways. The true level of innovation of the Tenori-on could be said to rest

17 http://www.digitalexperience.dk/wordpress/wp-uploads/tenori_on.jpg (April 30th 2008)

12
or fall on these features. Random mode still uses the vertical axis for pitch, but the way the

looping operates is radically different. As notes are entered, they light up on the matrix,

and a light traces between then on the display, triggering them in turn, then looping back to

the first point selected (see Fig.

2)

Figure 2 – Tenori-on Random Mode operation18

These shapes can then be ‘spun’ at different speeds in either direction by holding down

one of the side buttons and running a finger around the matrix in the desired direction and

speed. This results in the pitch of each point shifting as the shape spins, returning to its

original state once every revolution. This creates the potential for some interesting poly-

rhythmic parts.

Draw mode allows the user to ‘draw’ musical shapes on the matrix in a sweeping

motion, which are then repeated and looped. In Bounce mode pitch is on the horizontal

axis, left to right similar to a piano. When you press a button on the matrix, the trace light

falls to the bottom row, where it triggers a sound, then ‘bounces’ back up to the original

point on the matrix, and repeats. The nearer to the bottom of the matrix the point was, the

more frequently it will repeat. Up to 16 of these can be triggered at different intervals on

18 Tenori-on Quick Start Guide,

www.global.yamaha.com/tenori-on/ downloads/pdf/quick_guide.pdf (14th January 2008)

13
each layer. Push mode means that you can push and hold a button, as you hold it the

character of the sound changes, while the area around the button you are pressing glows

brighter and wider. In Solo mode, the pitch is again laid out like a piano. Pushing a button

on a column makes that note repeat, the height at which the button was on the column

determines how frequently the note will be repeated.

Electroplankton

Electroplankton is a piece of software released for the Nintendo DS portable games

system. Nintendo describes it as an ‘artistic musical experience’, and ‘a beautiful

combination of art and music that unfolds in a different way with every touch of the

screen’19. The user interacts with various animated plankton, each with its own

characteristics, in order to create music. The plankton react to user input in different ways,

including being able to respond to input from a microphone. For example, with the ‘Tracy’

character, drawing lines on the screen creates triangles, which the Tracy follows, triggering

sounds as it goes. The pitch is dependant on the direction in which the triangle points,

while tempo can be altered with the directional control pad. Each different colour of Tracy

has its own timbral characteristics. Another character is the Luminaria, of which there are

four different types, with different speeds and voices. These can interact with each other

and be manipulated in various ways using the DS’ pen.

19 http://electroplankton.nintendods.com/flash.html (April 30th 2008)

14
Section 4 – Analysing the success of these systems

The Tenori-on has received a good deal of media attention since its release. In

December ’07 US magazine PC World (not to be confused with the UK store of the same

name) listed the Tenori-on at number 16 in a chart of the 25 most innovative products of

the year, describing the Tenori-on as an ‘inspired and intuitive instrument which redefines

music making’20.

Radio 1 DJ Pete Tong described the Tenori-on as ‘revolutionary’ and a ‘work of art’

in a video review posted on YouTube21. It is interesting that he refers to the aesthetic value

of the instrument itself. One of Toshio Iwai’s stated aims in the creation of the Tenori-on

was to attempt to restore some of the relationship between instrument and performer

which was attained in traditional instrumentation. Developing a rapport with the instrument

and appreciating its intrinsic beauty is not something one commonly associates with

electronic instruments and midi controllers, for example.

The visual feedback offered by the Tenori-on is a potentially important means of

attempting to restore some of this rapport between instrument and performer. Composer

Norman Fairbanks describes this visual feedback as being ‘a pleasure to work with’22,

highlighting how it makes using the Tenori-on very easy to become quickly acquainted

with. He has also stated that ‘with [the]Tenori-on small melodies quickly turn into absorbing

musical structures that set a completely new energy level within my music. It’s

wonderful…’23. This is an important point, as it would seem to show that the visual

feedback of the Tenori-on is important in terms of eliminating some of the creative

20 'The 25 Most Innovative Products of the Year', PC World (December 27th 2007),
http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,140663-page,4-c,technology/article.html (April 30th 2008)
21 'Pete Tong's Fast Trax' (13/12/07), http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-R4BjF007V0 (April 30th 2008)
22 Norman Fairbanks, author's interview
23 Norman Fairbanks interview for Yamaha, http://www.tenori-on.co.uk/news/news1.php (16th Jan 2008)

15
constrictions arising from the use of DAWs. Artists such as Richie Hawtin have also

highlighted the importance of the visual aspect in terms of live performance, stating that

technology can only work for a performer if it is visually interesting for a crowd to watch24.

The Tenori-on has this in mind with the fact that the dynamic lighting of the button matrix is

visible from both sides, although performing with the unit at a vertical angle might prove

problematic.

Other users have dismissed the Tenori-on’s visuals as something of a pretty

gimmick. Paul Nagle, who reviewed the Tenori-on in audio recording and production

magazine Sound on Sound, described the visual feedback on the Tenori-on as ‘jolly nice. I

do like pretty lights, especially after a nice smoke’25! While appreciating the pleasant

nature of the visual feedback, he did not feel it contributed in any meaningful way to the

creative process. Thomas Milburn was asked whether the visual feedback of

Electroplankton added significantly to the user experience, and responded 'Not particularly,

actually. It's distinctive, but it doesn't offer me much beyond what I could normally "hear."'.

Differing opinions on the importance of visual elements may simply reflect, to borrow a

term from education studies, different ‘learning styles’; some people respond better to

visual stimulus than others. Toshio Iwai interestingly highlights the way in which vision and

sound have become divorced with the onset of electronic music creation:

I think that the visual world and sounds are in an inseparable relationship. Actually
when a sound is generated in our living world, there is some kind of physical
phenomenon – a motion or form which we can see. Since it became possible to
make sound electrically or electronically, the synthesizing of sound has been
separated from the visual world. However with the senses we are borne with, we
think it is more natural to experience sound and vision at the same time. 26

Iwai suggests that an unnatural separation between the visual and audio senses has

24 Richie Hawtin interview by Gavin Herlihy, Mixmag (November 2007), p.47

25

Paul Nagle, author's interview
26 Toshio Iwai, interviewed by Pixelsurgeon, http://www.pixelsurgeon.com/interviews/interview.php?id=239 (10th
January 2008)

16
occurred, and sees his work as an attempt to redress some of this balance.

One of the key features of the Tenori-on and Electroplankton is accessibility. They

are designed to be able to be picked up and played by people who are not necessarily

musicians. Toshio Iwai here expresses his desire to make the process of creating music

accessible to everyone, in order to allow them a greater connection with and enjoyment of

music.

Previously, playing and composing music was only for people who had been
specially educated or trained. But, everybody yearns to play or compose music
comfortably. I myself am one of them. I thought this could be realised thanks to new
technology like computers. By these means, I believe people can easily feel more
close to music and more satisfied than times when they just listen to music that
somebody else has composed. 27

Iwai sees it as important that people who are not trained musicians can still feel able to

take part in creating music. However, one possible criticism which could be levelled at

Electroplankton and the Tenor-ion is that in attempting to make these systems accessible,

they could have been 'dumbed down' to the extent that they are not particularly worthwhile

means of composing music. Peter Arkley sees the Electroplankton as an inspiring starting

point for non-musicians; 'I believe it SHOULD be easy to pick up an instrument and create

music. Not necessarily 'brilliant' music, but good enough to inspire people to carry on

creating music, honing their craft and learning new skills'. Electroplankton user Thomas

Wilburn believes that accessibility is very important, and adds:

I have no problem with making music creation easier to pick up--who would I be to
complain about it, since my own skills are far from perfect? It's an act of real hubris
when someone says that this 'cheapens' music. Why was it expensive in the first
place?28

Tenori-on user and composer Norman Fairbanks agrees, and again points out the

advantages of being able to streamline the creative process of getting from idea to

27 ibid.
28 Thomas Wilburn, author's interview

17
realisation:

The second piano concert by Brahms will be always difficult to play while making
modern electronic music is getting easier and easier to produce. Both things are ok.
It’s a different context and it’s the result that counts in a given context. The easier
you get into it the less it will hold you back to come to the point. This applies
especially to people without any formal music education / training. 29

All of these users see accessibility as a positive thing and key to the appeal of the

systems, but it seems there is a balance to be struck between there being enough

accessibility to 'draw you in', while having enough depth to warrant longer term use and

more involved musical work. It would seem that the Tenori-on perhaps succeeds in this

aim rather better than Electroplankton.

As we have seen, limitations in systems for creating music is not necessarily a

negative factor, but there are some limitations with both of these systems which some see

as a serious drawback to their overall effectiveness as music creation systems. In a review

in Sound on Sound magazine, Paul Nagle points out that with the Tenori-on there is no

capability for timbral control over the built-in voices, and that custom voices using user-

loaded samples are limited to three30. While expressing interest in the concept of using

limitations in composition, Thomas Wilburn sees the Electroplankton system as overly

restrictive:

I am actually a big fan of limiting options. In my bass projects, I've tried to keep my
effects and sonic palette fairly limited, forcing me to do more with them. But that's
the rub--when the equipment is limited, I can still stretch out through techniques. I
am not sure to what degree new techniques can be applied to Electroplankton.
What would they be? That's not necessarily a bad thing--its limitations lower the
difficulty curve for making musical sounds, and I like that. But the accessibility (in
this case) seems to have meant sacrificing the ability to tweak and stretch in new
directions.31

It is this lack of ability to adapt and be flexible which seems to let down Electroplankton.

Interestingly, Wilburn sees the most successful elements of Electroplankton to be those

29 Norman Fairbanks, author's interview

30 Paul Nagle, 'Yamaha Tenori-on', Sound on Sound (February 2008), p. 138
31 Thomas Wilburn, author's interview

18
which mimic other systems:

It puts a lot of constraints on its user, and adds a lot of self-generated noise and
randomness. Some of the modes are more useful than others--but those tend to be
the ones that more closely mimic a traditional musical experience, like rec-rec (a
four-track tape loop) and lumiloop (simple synth pads).32

The benefit of limiting options is appreciated by other users of Electroplankton and Tenori-

on, as Peter Arkley comments; 'even for someone in my shoes who uses harder-working

software, I find that you end up using the limited effects you have at your disposal to really

try and push the boundaries of what you believe is capable of the program'33. Norman

Fairbanks expresses similar sentiments about the Tenori-on:

The point here is that the Tenori-On does not try to be Cubase but an enjoyable
instrument to play with. There are certainly limits but there are not substantial for the
concept of the instrument. I like limits because you have to use your brain a bit
more in order to achieve something – maybe through a simple workaround.34

Both of these users highlight the way in which limitations can be a stimulus to creative

thought. While appreciating to an extent the creativity inspired by limitations, both Peter

Arkley and Thomas Wilburn have attempted to expand on the sonic palette available by

experimenting with using Electroplankton in conjunction with external effects, such as a

Kaoss Pad, as well as other instruments.

The Tenori-on has been promoted as a system well-suited to improvisation and

collaboration. Multiple Tenori-ons can be linked up via midi and synced together, and parts

can be exported and loaded into other units. Norman Fairbanks made available the files

from his Tenori-on album 7 Days of Microsleep, which would allow other Tenori-on users to

easily 'remix' his work. In many ways this is similar to what can be achieved via

exchanging DAW project files, however he highlights the ease with which syncing up two

32 ibid.
33 Peter Arkley, author's interview
34 Norman Fairbanks, author's interview

19
Tenori-ons can be achieved35. Attempting something similar with computers would

introduce the possibility of a number of conflicts in terms of hardware and software

compatibility. In highlighting the improvisational capabilities of the Tenori-on, he again

stresses the importance of the visual feedback:

The Tenori-On is so accessible to do improvisation. I guess this is one of its key

advantages. You also experiment a lot more. You start to try out graphical things,…
you just draw something in the interface to experience how it would sounds. There
is a much greater level of just – playing and exploring.36

Thomas Wilburn has used Electroplankton as a device to help break out of his

conventional thinking in terms of composition:

I think it's a good tool for coming up with new ideas. I've used Hanenbow a couple
of times to see if I could generate riffs--unlike me, it doesn't necessarily think in a
4/4 time signature, so it's good to get me outside of the box37.

Interestingly though, he feels the need to export the sounds into Cubase in order to 'beat

them into usable shapes'. Peter Arkley feels that Electroplankton is somewhat limited as

an improvisational tool because there is too little control, in that it is actually impossible to

deliberately recreate sequences, resulting in something which is different each time38.

There is no sequencer as such built in to Electroplankton, and the only way to save work is

to use the output to record into an external device.

While appreciating the creative approaches stimulated by systems such as the

Tenori-on, the users surveyed shared a belief that the DAW was not in itself a barrier to

creativity. Thomas Wilburn argues that it is possible to use DAWs in a variety of ways, and

that in general he finds them ‘tremendously freeing’39. Rene Lysloff suggests that the

supposed limitations of existing systems are hyped up by the creators of new technology

as part of their marketing campaigns:

35 ibid.
36 ibid.
37 Thomas Wilburn, author's interview
38 Peter Arkley, author's interview
39 Thomas Wilburn, author's interview

20
 …advanced technologies are often sold on the premise that they can deliver
elemental experiences which are no longer available through the technologies they
are seeking to supplant. According to this pitch, our current toys have formed an
obstructive, mediating layer that the new ones will leap over and restore to access
to the authentic stuff40

He describes this as being a key component of what he terms ‘techno-primitivism’41. Peter

Arkley points out that the variety of DAW software now available, along with the advent of

new technology such as the 'Automap' feature of Novation MIDI controllers (which allow

instant mapping of plug-in parameters to hardware controls without needing to become

familiar with complex mapping of MIDI parameters) means that using DAWs can be

tailored to suit the individual in an intuitive way.42

Simon Emmerson has pointed out that the advent of Midi combined with the

revolution in sampling technology allowed and encouraged the free mapping of

performance (body) gestures to sound43. Modern users of MAX/MSP, Pure Data and

similar modular systems have taken this ability to a new level. Curtis Bahn and Tomie

Hahn created pieces Pikapika and Streams which involved Tomie dancing equipped with

hand sensors measuring tilt and pressure. This data is transmitted via radio to a computer

running MAX/MSP, where it was used to trigger sonic material, played back on speakers

on her arm. This created a feedback loop in which ‘Hahn said she was often unsure

whether she was dancing the music, or the music was moving the dance’44.

While the use of a computer with some kind of expressive control device can give

an admirable level of nuanced performance, the fact remains that to operate such a

system involves not only a computer with the appropriate software and interfaces, an

40 Rene T.A. Lysloff, and Leslie C Gay Jr. (editors), Music and Technoculture, Middletown (2003), p.379
41 ibid.
42 Thomas Wilburn, author's interview
43 Simon Emmerson Living Electronic Music (Aldershot 2007), p. 69
44 Tina Blaine 'New Music for the Masses', http://www.adobe.com/designcenter/thinktank/ttap_music/ (12th March
2008)

21
expensive Midi control device, and an operator/programmer sufficiently capable to map the

incoming data to trigger sounds in a useful way. Attempting to compare creating these

expressive systems with using the Tenori-on is somewhat flawed of course, as it is almost

more akin to designing the interface for the Tenori-on in the first place.

Section 5 – Conclusion

This paper set out to analyse the extent to which the Tenori-on and Electroplankton

overcome some of the barriers to creativity in modern music production. In doing so, we

have looked at some of the potential drawbacks of standard music creation/production

systems such as DAWs, as well as the historical context. From this we have seen that

there are a number of potential problems with the development of music technology, which

has essentially seen progress as expanding the range of options available to the user. As

Pierre Boulez would have it, 'Few have the courage or the means directly to confront the

arid, arduous problems, often lacking any easy solution, posed by contemporary

technology and its rapid development'45. This would appear something of an extreme

position, but highlights the danger of technology developing without a sufficient framework

to allow its successful employment.

We have explored a number of ways in which a proliferation of options can have a

negative impact on the creative process. Tom Jenkinson, also known as the musician

Squarepusher, suggests that the "modern" composer, robbed of his constraints, finds

himself in a wasteland of desolate freedom46. One of the issues highlighted was the sense

of rapport which can exist between a musician and their instrument, which is a feature not

commonly associated with DAW music production. Toshio Iwai used the example of a

45 Pierre Boulez, 'Technology and the Composer' in Simon Emmerson (ed.) The Language of Electroacoustic Music,
(Basingstoke 1986), p.9
46 Tom Jenkinson, Collaborating with machines, March 2004 edition of Flux magazine,
http://www.warprecords.com/news/?offset=0&ti_id=789&filter=sqp (4th April 2008)

22
violin as an instrument which successfully unites elements which are often separate in a

modern DAW environment: interface, exterior design, software, and sound. Changes to

the music industry which have led to moving away from tactile hardware towards software

based set-ups are seen by some to have had a negative effect on the creative

environment in studios.

The analysis of user experiences has shown that the Tenori-on and Electroplankton

have achieved differing levels of success in achieving the aim of overcoming barriers to

creativity extant in DAW systems. Electroplankton, while appreciated for its visual appeal

and accessibility, is essentially seen to be too limited to be considered a serious

development in technology based music-making. Electroplankton could in some ways be

seen as a basic prototype for the Tenori-on, which adds much greater capabilities in terms

of sequencing and composition, while retaining the key accessibility and responsiveness.

While some see the Tenori-on as also being too limited to warrant serious long-term use,

others have embraced its simplicity. Rather than necessarily being opposing concepts in

competition with each other, we can see that the Tenori-on and developments in modern

DAWs and MIDI controllers are part of a welcome trend, which seeks to focus upon the

ability of modern technology to create responsive, tactile, expressive systems, which can

be used as easily and intuitively as possible.

23