Overaching Themes

​

Tangible Experiences: Groups primarily designed tangible, largely wearable, technologies such as interactive hats, hand sensors, and palm pushbuttons that could interface with the musical performance. Groups transformed both music and feedback into experiences that could be manipulated with tangible technologies. For instance, one group suggested creating tangible  “sound chips,” discrete bits of music that audiences could append to performance melodies. Another group suggested using a wearable forehead sensor to gauge audience engagement from head nodding and shaking. 

 

Addressing Personal and Group Preferences: Groups made it clear that individual preferences for the experience of the performance must be considered, and designed technologies that encouraged personalized experiences. For instance, one group designed hats and earbuds that allowed them to add accompaniment to the piano performance that only they could hear. When making changes to the performance as a whole, aggregate feedback was generally sought to ensure everybody's desires would be addressed.  For instance, children designed a button that changed the music based on audience members' overall mood.  

 

Multimodal Interactions: In study 2, groups created multimodal interactions with which to engage in the performance. For instance, groups proposed using hand gestures to change sound effects, throwing tokens onstage to get better seats, clapping physical blocks to control volume, and waving LED pompoms to conduct the musicians. Groups also suggested using tactile feedback, throwing colored paintballs at the stage, or using paper planes to send messages to each other. 

 

Multisensory and 4D Experiences: All groups designed multisensory experiences into performances. For instance, one group wanted to control wind gusts to lift a bride's veil, another wanted to tickle a performer with remote controlled feathers, and a third wanted to graffiti a performer's outfit with a cellphone. Groups also wanted to influence their own multisensory experience; one group created a game played with performers where they could fall into ice water, and another had performers influence the type of food audience members had available during the show. 

 

Rules for Democratization and Fairness: The team strongly considered issues of fairness and democratization in their designs for interactive participation--either offering everyone a chance to participate, or including everyone and allowing individuals to opt out. In the democratized experience, the group proposed using a video camera that allowed audience members to play air guitar with the onstage performers from their seat. Similarly, in the fair experience, children sat in a line and took turns going onstage. While it was recognized that this dynamic created peer pressure on audience members, the team suggested this might keep audiences more engaged because they would be “constantly on [their] toes.”

 

Distinct Spaces: Throughout the many designs there were clear boundaries between the audience and performance spaces. Audiences were either interacting from their seat, or distinctly transitioning from audience member to performer by going on stage. For instance, the group suggested that audience members could find out that they'd been selected by having their seat buzz, then go to a different room to become the performer, or could disappear into the group and reappear on stage. Interestingly, the group also emphasized a boundary between their role as an audience member or a performer; rather than participating throughout the performance, groups wanted audience members to enjoy the performance passively at times.