Mumyo — evaluating and exploring the myo armband for musical interaction

Proceedings of the International Conference on New Interfaces for Musical Expression

Volumn , Issue , 2015, Pages 215-218

  Nymoen, Kristian ^a   Haugen, Mari Romarheim ^a   Jensenius, Alexander Refsum ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OSLO   (Norway)

Author keywords

Accelerometer; EMG; Interaction; MYO; Wireless

Indexed keywords

EMG; INTERACTION; MYO; PROTOTYPE INSTRUMENT; SENSING PLATFORMS;

EID: 85139849123     PISSN: 22204792     EISSN: 22204806     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (12)

1. B. Burger and P. Toiviainen. MoCap Toolbox – A Matlab toolbox for computational analysis of movement data. In R. Bresin, editor, Proceedings of the Sound and Music Computing Conference, pages 172–178, Stockholm, 2013.
2. C. Cadoz and M. M. Wanderley. Gesture—Music. In M. M. Wanderley and M. Battier, editors, Trends in Gestural Control of Music [CD-ROM], pages 71–94. IRCAM, Paris, 2000.
3. B. Caramiaux, M. Donnarumma, and A. Tanaka. Understanding gesture expressivity through muscle sensing. ACM Trans. Comput.-Hum. Interact., 21(6):31:1–31:26, Jan. 2015.
4. A. R. Jensenius, K. Nymoen, S. A. Skogstad, and A. Voldsund. A study of the noise-level in two infrared marker-based motion capture systems. In Proceedings of the Sound and Music Computing Conference, pages 258–263, Copenhagen, 2012.
5. R. B. Knapp, J. Jaimovich, and N. Coghlan. Measurement of motion and emotion during musical performance. In 3rd International Conference on A↵ective Computing and Intelligent Interaction and Workshops, pages 1–5, 2009.
6. T. Kvifte and A. R. Jensenius. Towards a coherent terminology and model of instrument description and design. In Proceedings of the International Conference on New Interfaces for Musical Expression, pages 220–225, Paris, 2006.
7. K. Nymoen, S. A. Skogstad, and A. R. Jensenius. Soundsaber — a motion capture instrument. In Proceedings of the International Conference on New Interfaces for Musical Expression, pages 312–315, Oslo, 2011.
8. K. Nymoen, A. Voldsund, S. A. Skogstad, A. R. Jensenius, and J. Torresen. Comparing motion data from an iPod touch to a high-end optical infrared marker-based motion capture system. In Proceedings of the International Conference on New Interfaces For Musical Expression, pages 88–91, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 2012.
9. S. A. Skogstad, K. Nymoen, and M. Høvin. Comparing inertial and optical mocap technologies for synthesis control. In Proceedings of the Sound and Music Computing Conference, pages 421–426, Padova, 2011.
10. A. Tanaka. Musical technical issues in using interactive instrument technology with application to the biomuse. In Proceedings of the International Computer Music Conference, pages 124–124, 1993.
11. G. Vigliensoni and M. M. Wanderley. A quantitative comparison of position trackers for the development of a touch-less musical interface. In Proceedings of the International Conference on New Interfaces for Musical Expression, pages 103–108, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 2012.
12. D. Wessel and M. Wright. Problems and prospects for intimate musical control of computers. Computer Music Journal, 26(3):11–22, 2002.