Designing the Drum Loop

A constructivist iOS rhythm tutorial system for beginners

by Ethan Hein
Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Master of Music in
Music Technology in the department of Music and Performing Arts Professions
in the Steinhardt School of Culture, Education, and Human Development, New
York University

Advisor: Dr. Alex Ruthmann

December 17, 2013

1
Table of Contents
Acknowledgments 5
Abstract 6
Introduction 7
The Drum Loop development process 9
The Max prototype 10
The iOS app 13
The Drum Loop’s approach 15
Methodology: design-based research 15
Software development as research 16
Evaluating meaningful engagement 17
The problem: Why are so many young people alienated by music class? 19
Classroom music is alien 19
Exercises are culturally inauthentic and musically unsatisfying 19
Beginners start at the wrong level of abstraction 20
Steep barriers to entry 22
Music technologies enable creativity 22
Expanding the idea of musicianship 23
Recognizing the aesthetic power of syncopated rhythms and breakbeats 24
Looping and feedback support traditional music pedagogy 24
A need for authentic music in the classroom 25
Eurocentric music education undervalues rhythm 26
Riffs and loops: the building blocks of dance music 27
Changing consumers into producers 27
Constructivist practice in music teaching 28
Music and flow 28
How popular musicians learn 30
Learner agency and motivation 31
Participatory music vs presentational music 32
Communities of practice 32
The zone of proximal development and legitimate peripheral participation 33
Fighting option paralysis 34
The virtues of tinkering 34
Visualizing rhythm 35
Bodily metaphors 36
Time-Unit Box Systems 37
Meter relates non-adjacent musical events 39
Representing cyclical music with a cyclical graph 40
Visualizing swing 42
Visual metaphors for music in software 44
Liberating ourselves from the tyranny of the keyboard metaphor 49
Intuitive notation systems 50
Notable circular rhythm interfaces 51
Propellerhead Figure 51

2
 O-Music O-Generator 53
Casual Underground Loopseque 54
Inspiration from the digital studio 57
Studio as instrument, not documentation tool 57
Informal education in the home studio 58
Software as an active participant in the creative process 59
Pedagogical goals of the Drum Loop 61
Target audience 61
Rhythm appreciation 61
The backbeat 62
Visualizing evenness and modularity 63
Teaching computational thinking 64
Creating a beginner-friendly environment 66
Avoiding skeuomorphism 66
Enforcing 4/4 time 66
Common time and cut time 67
Sounds and drum kits 67
Tone, velocity and effects 69
Color and typography 69
The major design challenge: maximizing the target area within the grid 73
The three-dimensional torus solution 73
The spiral ramp solution 74
Logarithmic radii 74
Radii at equal intervals 75
Variable radii 75
Drum patterns and exercises 78
Classic Breakbeats 78
The Funky Drummer 79
Take Me to the Mardi Gras (Agogô) 80
Impeach the President 81
Cold Sweat 82
When The Levee Breaks 83
Genre templates 84
Basic rock 84
Basic hip-hop 85
Four on the floor 86
Afro-Cuban exercises 87
Compositional challenges 91
Subtractive rhythm 91
The sound of silence (The Big Beat) 92
Monophonic rhythm 93
Random rhythm 94
Curriculum ideas 96
Music 96
Cultural/social studies 96
Mathematics 97
Future work and feature wish list 101

3
 The pattern sequencer 101
The Amen break 102
Apache 102
Exclusive open/closed hi-hat 103
Durations greater than one rhythmic unit 103
Participatory discrepancies 103
Arbitrary time signatures 104
The Drum Loop in the browser 104
Discussion/Conclusion 106
References 107
Audio recordings 111
Software applications 112
Appendix: matching the Drum Loop to New York State’s mathematics standards 113

4
Acknowledgments
The author wishes to thank the following people:

Christopher Jacoby, without whom this project would have been purely hypothetical.

NYU faculty, students and alumni—Alex Ruthmann, Kenneth Peacock, Mary Farbood,
Paul Geluso, Tae-Hong Park, John Gilbert, Morton Subotnick, Uri Nieto, Don Bosley,
Ben Guerrero, Alven Pulliam, Tim Stimpson, Rachel Wardell, Marc Wilhite, Shashank
Aswath, Amar Lal, John Turner and Alex Marse.

Friends who provided inspiration, support and input—Robert Baensch, Barbara Singer,
Jeremy Withers, Ryan Senser, Roger Bender, Lauren Porosoff, Kester Allen, Debbie
Chachra, Nick Seaver, Will Kuhn, Matthew Culnane, Wayne Marshall and Diana
Avagyan.

And most of all, my family: Anna, Milo, Mom, Ralph, Molly, Dan, and the whole
mishpokeh.

Dedicated to the memory of Michael Hein

5
Abstract
People wishing to learn dance music production are largely left to their own
devices. Even those would-be producers who have access to formal music education are
ill served by Eurocentric teaching methods and curricula. This is unfortunate, because
learning how to create beats benefits all music students, not just electronic dance
musicians. The ability to actively create and alter rhythms and to match their visual
notation with the resulting sounds in real time can sharpen the rhythmic abilities of any
musician.

Most dance musicians must self-teach, and they face some significant obstacles in
doing so. Even “beginner-oriented” programs like Apple’s Garageband presume
significant musical knowledge. Nearly all music production tools are based on the
keyboard/piano roll or multitrack tape paradigms. Beginners struggle to learn these
visualization schemes on top of the musical concepts underlying them. A simplified
and more intuitive interface would help to prevent frustration and abandonment of
musical study.

A clock face metaphor is a more intuitive visualization scheme for the loops that
form the basis of dance music drums. The present project consists of the design of The
Drum Loop, a radial drum machine interface and a series of rhythm programming
exercises following constructivist principles, teaching methods well-supported by
psychological research.

6
Introduction
Global musical culture is dominated by music of the African diaspora as filtered
through American pop. This music is beat-driven, cyclical and percussion-centered.
However, music education in America is focused heavily on the European common-
practice era classical tradition, which is focused more on linear melodies and
harmonies. There is a wide disconnect between the music animating the inner and
social lives of young people and the music they encounter in school and formal lessons.
While this disconnect is typically framed in terms of "low" versus "high "culture, the
true conflict is between two different conceptions of what the most important and
salient components of music are: melody and harmony, or rhythm and groove. In
western tradition, melody is broadly considered to be the fundamental basis of music.
In the dance music derived from the African diaspora (including nearly all of American
popular music), rhythm is the fundamental basis.

In our Eurocentric pedagogical tradition, rhythm is a neglected subject compared

to melody and harmony. Dance music is generally considered to be insufficiently
sophisticated or artistically legitimate to merit inclusion in the music classroom.
Students who hold this music close to their hearts and want to create it for themselves
must primarily learn to do so outside of school, on their own or in ad hoc peer settings.
Music teachers who recognize the artistic significance of beat-driven dance music and
wish to include it in the classroom similarly face a lack of good teaching materials.
While other cultures have rich pedagogical traditions around drumming and rhythm
generally, in America such pedagogical materials are specialized, and are not as
accessible to musicians generally; certainly not to novices.

In the past decades, there has been an explosive growth in software both for
producing and recording music, and for learning it. However, little of this software
addresses rhythm in a way that is authentically connected to dance music. There has
also been a proliferation of software tools for the production of dance music, but while
these are highly culturally authentic, they can be as intimidating to the novice as
standard music notation.

The Drum Loop is an iOS app that is designed to fill the vacuum in rhythm
pedagogy. It uses a simple and intuitive interface to introduce complete novices to the
creation of dance, rock, hip-hop and Afro-Cuban beats. Rather than presenting users
with a daunting blank slate, each exercise in the app is centered around a pre-existing,
culturally significant, “real world” beat. The user may then alter and customize this
beat, within certain constraints that guarantee a musically satisfying and idiomatically
appropriate result. The exercises do not proceed through a linear sequence with
concrete goals and milestones; rather, they encourage a spirit of discovery, of
experimentation through trial and error. Users are free to define success on their own
terms according to their own tastes. More advanced users can also use the Drum Loop
as an ordinary drum machine, without the constraints in the lessons.

7
 The development of the Drum Loop has required a thorough examination of
music visualization techniques and software interface paradigms. When examining any
visual representation of music, we must ask whether it allows us to work with our
figural and formal understandings (Ankney, 2012). Is the representation flexible enough
to meet students’ developing knowledge of musical structure? Does it connect to pre-
existing musical knowledge, and does it facilitate the building of new knowledge? And
on a more practical basis, can a good representation be implemented in code with a
reasonable amount of effort?

As it details the background and development of the Drum Loop, this thesis
addresses the following questions:
• What are the present limitations of music education practice in the area of
beginner-level rhythm teaching?
• How can beginner-level music education be made more effective, more engaging
and more inclusive?
• How can software support better music learning generally, and rhythmic
learning in particular? Which visualization and notation methods are the most
intuitive? Which beginner-level applications scaffold more advanced learning?
• How does the Drum Loop address the questions above? What vacuum does it fill
in the present music education software landscape?
• What was the rationale behind the Drum Loop’s design? How did the
development process inform the final product? What future work remains to be
done?
• Can the Drum Loop be of value in the learning of subjects other than music?

8
The Drum Loop development process
I collaborated closely on the
technical aspects of the Drum Loop with
my fellow masters student Christopher
Jacoby. He graciously agreed to give me
extensive assistance in exchange for jazz
guitar lessons and music production tips.

Christopher’s contributions to the

project include substantial guidance with
Max coding and a wide variety of specific
feature implementation methods;
implementation of the Max prototype’s
user interface in JavaScript UI; and
considerable insight into the problem of
maximizing target areas on the grid. He
also learned Objective-C and the audio
and MIDI functionality of iOS while
simultaneously developing the back end
of the app.

I created the user interface design, including all guidelines and requirements. I
also developed all musical and pedagogical content. We received additional assistance
on iOS audio implementation from NYU PhD student and programming instructor
Oriel Nieto, as well as from the Stack Overflow community.

Before developing the iOS app, we first created a working prototype using
Max/MSP/Jitter. This prototype was intended as a “minimal viable product” and
implemented only the most basic functionality. After we completed the Max prototype
and I performed some testing with it, we faced the choice of whether to continue to
develop additional functionality in Max, or whether we should start over in iOS. We
opted to move forward using iOS, even though that meant revisiting solved problems.
Or so we thought—iOS turns out to be dramatically more difficult to work with than
Max, and seemingly simple problems like polyphonic sample playback consumed
considerable development time. It is our hope that this effort will have turned out to be
worthwhile, for several reasons:
• Max is not suitable for robust commercial software releases. It is optimized for
ease and accessibility while developing, not for producing well-optimized and
stable code. Furthermore, each application created with it is platform and
operating system specific. Of course, iOS apps are locked to a platform as well,
but iPad usage continues to grow explosively, particularly in schools, so this
limitation should prove less burdensome.
• Unlike the Max prototype, the iOS app sends and receives MIDI messages. This
creates the possibility for having the Drum Loop communicate with other
hardware and software via MIDI as well.

9
 • There is a robust ecosystem of iOS music apps that can send and receive audio to
one another in real time using inter-app audio. A user might set up a pattern in
the Drum Loop, improvise a synth lead on top with Animoog, and record them
both in Garageband.
Over the long term, we also plan to adapt the Drum Loop into a web-based app
running entirely within the browser, using the emerging HTML 5 web audio standard.

The Max prototype

We created two functioning prototypes with Max. The first is highly skeletal. It
uses simple Button UI objects arrayed in wedges, that are themselves arrayed around a
circle. The inner ring of buttons shows kick drum hits as blue dots; the second ring
shows snare hits as red dots, and so on. By clicking each button, the drum hit in that
slot can be toggled on and off. The downbeat is at twelve o’clock, and playback runs
clockwise. The playback head is shown as a row of yellow dots sweeping the circle like
a clock hand.

Drum patterns can be stored, retrieved and played back from a Jitter matrix.

10
 The second, more full-featured Max prototype used the same back end, but had a
more elegant user interface. In order to implement it, we had to find the best method for
creating the radial grid. My initial plan was to simply create static PNG images for the
empty grid, the filled cells, the playback head, and any additional graphics needed for
animation. We would then display and hide these images as needed, and map regions
of the screen for hit detection. This method had the advantage of superficial expediency,
since I would have been able to produce the necessary images myself very easily.
However, it would have been a cumbersome and inflexible system, requiring new sets
of images for every possible number of wedges or alteration to the design scheme.

The alternative to static images was to render the grid, filled cells and animation
entirely in code. Christopher advocated for this approach, since it is better
programming practice and offered the greatest flexibility for design changes.
Christopher suggested using JSUI, a Max object enabling interactive graphics using
JavaScript. He was able to learn the syntax in a matter of hours, and I was not far
behind. We were able to create a working user interface in a few weeks.

11
 Accessible though it was, the combination of Max and JSUI had significant
performance disadvantages. Max is optimized for ease of programming, not
performance; the standalone apps it produces are notoriously slow. To make matters
worse, JavaScript is a single-threaded language, placing a severe bottleneck on the app’s
throughput. While the prototype loaded and ran on the various computers I tested it
on, it was quickly overwhelmed by the demands of polyphonic audio playback and
continuous screen redrawing. Within a few minutes, the prototype became slow to
respond, with lags of several seconds between mouse clicks and corresponding action.
Thirty-two step patterns and faster tempos overwhelmed the prototype instantly.

While performance limitations were to be expected, the Max prototype suffered

additional problems from our less-than-optimal algorithm for drawing the grid.
JavaScript lacks a good method for drawing complex shapes using Bézier curves, so we
were forced to generate the interface using simple wedges. The outermost ring of cells
was actually a set of wedges originating at the center of the grid. The next ring inwards
was a set of wedges extending not quite as far from the center. Each ring was its own
complete set of wedges, all of which were redrawn every time the screen refreshed. This
method would have performed poorly regardless of the language in which it was
implemented.

12
The iOS app
It was always my intention to create the Drum Loop in iOS. While there is no
logical distinction between clicking on a grid cell with the mouse pointer versus tapping
it with a fingertip, the latter has significantly greater intuitive appeal. Furthermore, iOS
offers the possibility of multitouch control. However, iOS is also a significantly more
challenging production environment than Max.

Below is an example screenshot of the iOS app. The functionality is much the
same as in the Max prototype, though with several cosmetic differences.

The right side of the screen shows the list of buttons triggering the eight drum
sounds in this kit. The icons on the right side of each button draw focus to that
instrument within the grid—that functionality is discussed in depth below. The center
shows the drum grid itself. Unlike the Max version, here the outer ring holds the snare
drum. The next ring inwards holds the snare, then the closed hi-hat, and so on down
the list. The left column contains mostly self-explanatory basic functions. The row of
icons along the bottom of the screen are a sequencer for stringing multiple patterns
together—this feature is still taking shape.

13
 On the back end, the app is structured as follows. The DrumLoopViewController
contains the main user interface: drum buttons, tempo, kit, swing, save, load and so on.
It also contains the square DrumCircleView, which contains the radial grid itself.
DrumCircleView communicates with three components. DrumWedge, as the name
suggests, draws the individual wedges making up the grid. SequenceHolder is a matrix
of values that stores drum patterns. SamplePlayer plays the AIFF drum samples
themselves by sending messages to MIDIHost, which in turn communicates with an AU
sampler unit.

14
The Drum Loop’s approach
The goal of the Drum Loop is to bridge the gap between the rhythmic knowledge
of a complete beginner and the skills required to make satisfactory use of intermediate
tools like GarageBand. The Drum Loop should be simple enough to be learned easily
without prior experience or formal training. But it must also have sufficient depth to
teach substantial and transferable skills and concepts, including:
• Familiarity with the component instruments in a drum beat and the ability to
pick them individually out of the sound mass.
• A repertoire of standard patterns and rhythmic motifs. Understanding of where
to place the kick, snare, hi-hats and so on to produce satisfying beats.
• Awareness of different genres and styles and how they are distinguished by their
different degrees of syncopation, customary kick drum patterns and claves,
tempo ranges and so on.
• An intuitive understanding of the difference between strong and weak beats and
the emotional effect of syncopation.
• Acquaintance with the concept of hemiola and other more complex rhythmic
devices.
The user experience is predicated on the following constructivist principles:
• The user should engage with authentic cultural materials, and should be able to
produce personally meaningful works.
• The difficulty level must be calibrated to the user’s skill level, to steer a course
between boredom and anxiety, thereby maximizing flow.

Methodology: design-based research

How does one evaluate the success or failure of a creative educational tool? Is it
possible to conduct procedurally rigorous experiments that give reproducible results?
Can we use random assignment and experimental control to avoid misinterpreting
confounds or covariates? In the context of music learning experiences, it is doubtful that
such rigor is possible. Experimental control is difficult in the complexity of real
classrooms, and even more difficult in informal or ad-hoc learning situations. There is
no good way to control for learners’ prior experiences. Furthermore, double-blind
studies are effectively impossible; how do we prevent teachers from knowing what
treatment they are administering?

As detailed by Hoadley (2004), design-based researchers treat these problems as

the basis for a different approach to rigor. Much as cultural anthropology cannot be
conducted experimentally, design-based research must similarly embrace complexity
and subjectivity. Outcomes are the culmination of interactions between designed
interventions, individual and group psychology, personal histories or experiences, and
situational contexts. Uncountably many factors interact to produce the measurable
outcomes related to learning. In design-based research, the enacted intervention is a

15
dependent, not an independent, variable. Design-based research, therefore, proceeds in
a very different manner than experimental research:
• Studies involve a tight relationship between researchers and teachers or
implementers, rendering total objectivity impossible.
• Generalization will be tentative at best.
• The research project can be altered in mid-stream by new discoveries and
revelations, resulting in adjustment to both the intervention and its
measurement.
• Design-based researches must document both the design and its evaluation as
broadly as possible in order to catch unanticipated consequences and
serendipitous discoveries.
Because researchers are both participants and observers who intervene deliberately in
the settings they study, it is incumbent on them to document their own agenda and
biases. Such introspection is usually undesirable in empirical research, but there is
simply no better or more rigorous way to document design thinking or its effects in the
world.

Software development as research

Brown‘s (2007) notion of software development as research, or SoDaR, is an
attempt to restore rigor to the study of complex interactive software and its human
users. SoDar uses qualitative, anthropological inquiry, involving a substantial amount
of introspection on the part of the researcher, in order to encompass the complexity of
messy real-life environments.

Software development is an excellent way to test educational concepts. The

software itself is a concrete manifestation of the designer’s theories and assumptions,
stated and unstated. Brown describes software as “a mirror on researcher
understanding.” Seeing the software in action puts those theories and assumptions to
the test, and gives the designer ample opportunity for ongoing reflection. Rather than
waiting for the study to end before drawing conclusions, one can gather conclusions
constantly and apply them to each iteration of the design.

Brown draws parallels between SoDar and ethnography, case study, and design-
based research. All of these research methods deal with the messiness of people in real-
world settings. Controlled laboratory environments are ideal for studying specific
components of our cognition and social functioning, but we can only get the full picture
from looking at the world. Unfortunately, that means going without control groups,
clean separation of cause and effect, and other seemingly basic requirements for
empirical objectivity. The results of SoDaR research are therefore difficult to generalize,
since they are necessarily so dependent on context. Nevertheless, for people in natural
settings, qualitative observations are the best data we have. Software development
forces us to externalize our ideas, to do continual small-scale experiments, and to reflect
on those experiences. As my collaborator Christopher and I struggle with each iteration
of each function of the Drum Loop, we are in effect performing extensive user testing on
ourselves.

16
 The SoDaR approach has three stages. Each one includes description, data
collection, and reflection. The first stage is to identify the learning opportunity, the gap
to be filled. (For the Drum Loop, this gap is the paucity of good entry-level dance-
oriented rhythm tutorials.) The second step is to design and produce the software. The
third step, overlapping heavily with the second, is to test, iterate and repeat. The goal
with the Drum Loop is to arrive at a minimum viable product that is robust enough for
real-world classroom testing. The results will be the basis for future revision, followed
by more testing, followed by further revision.

SoDaR draws on Activity Theory, the idea that our intelligence is distributed
rather than purely individual. Our knowledge and skills are enacted through
interactions between people, and between people and technology, all in social contexts.
We can therefore only understand the effectiveness of learning technology in social
contexts. We must ask of our tools:
• Are the learning activity and software mutually reinforcing?
• What are the differences between the expected and actual behavior of the
students/users?
• How can the software and its use be improved?
• Are the students achieving the desired learning outcomes?
• Does the software open up new and unintended learning possibilities, or does it
restrict them?
In Brown’s own SoDaR research, he finds that most of the major findings occurred in
the first few trials and iterations. The same has been true with the Drum Loop.
Watching users interact with the prototypes, it is obvious within the first minute or two
what makes sense to the users and what does not. Unpromising ideas get weeded out
quickly.

Evaluating meaningful engagement

Dillon, Adkins, Brown and Hirche (2008) propose the Meaningful Engagement
Matrix to evaluate creative pedagogical tools. The x-axis lists modes of creative
engagement:
• Appreciating—Listening carefully to music and analyzing music representations.
• Selecting—Making decisions about musical value and relationships.
• Directing—Managing music making activities.
• Exploring—Searching through musical possibilities and assessing their value.
• Intuiting—Participating in intuitive music making.

The y-axis lists types of meaning:

• Personal—The extent to which the activity is intrinsically enjoyable.
• Social—How well the user is able to develop relationships with others through
the activity.
• Cultural—The degree to which the student achieves a sense of self-worth by
participating in (or succeeding at) activities valued by the community.

The activity under evaluation should address all combinations of the modes of
creative engagement and types of meaning listed above. For the Drum Loop and similar
software, we must ask what modes of creative engagement are enabled or discouraged,

17
and what types of meaning can be created as a result. The Drum Loop attempts to fulfill
the Meaningful Engagement Matrix in the following ways.

Modes of creative engagement:

• Appreciating—The user is given culturally authentic and aesthetically satisfying
beats to study and manipulate.
• Selecting—The user chooses which exercises to engage in, and how much time to
spend on each one.
• Directing—All exercises involve self-directed creative beatmaking on the user’s
part.
• Exploring—There is no single “correct” solution to a Drum Loop exercise; nor is
there a linear path to search for one. Users proceed by trial and error, placing and
removing beats and immediately hearing what works and what does not.
• Intuiting—Beyond the rudimentary “notation” implicit in the user interface, all
pedagogical content in the Drum Loop is aural. The correct answers are the ones
that sound good.

Types of meaning:
• Personal—Beyond the pleasure of producing the kinds of beats familiar to and
enjoyed by the Drum Loop’s intended young users, there is also the appeal of the
visually complex and aesthetically pleasing radial grid.
• Social—Beat-driven music is intrinsically social, designed to be enjoyed in
groups. The hope for the Drum Loop is that its users will be proud of their beats
and will be eager to show them off.
• Cultural—Beatmaking is a highly regarded and much-desired skill among
American adolescents. By offering an accessible introduction to this skill, the
Drum Loop should prove to be quite compellingly and meaningfully engaging.

18
The problem: Why are so many young
people alienated by music class?
Of those high school students in North America who have elective music
programs available to them, only five percent choose to enroll. In the United Kingdom,
the equivalent statistic is closer to two percent (Lowe, 2012). These low enrollment
figures are startling when we consider the central role of music in the inner lives of
adolescents. We should not blame students for voting with their feet if the music classes
available to them do not offer what they want and need from music. Instead, we must
ask why so many young people are so alienated by their music education experience.

Classroom music is alien

The music academy continually laments students’ lack of interest in “legitimate”
art music, and their preference for (supposedly) vacuous pop. From the student’s
perspective, however, there are valid reasons to find it difficult to connect to the music
they encounter in most classrooms. The music education establishment draws its values
and axiomatic assumptions from the European classical tradition, with its score-
centrism, rigidly-defined canon of works that are often centuries old, and lack of
improvisation and spontaneity. Casual pop listeners in America are immersed in a
musical culture that lacks the melodic and harmonic richness of the European classical
canon, but is considerably more rhythmically sophisticated, and delivers a much
broader variety of timbres as well.

Students in the traditional music classroom are not just being challenged by the
complexities of chord and scale theory and notation. They are also challenged to stay
interested in spite of the absence of knowledge that is important to them: how do the
songs on the radio work? Why are some of them so much more compelling than others?
How are they made, creatively and technically?

There is a widespread fear among music educators that including pop music in
the classroom necessarily entails pandering to students or “dumbing down” the
curriculum. However, this does not necessarily follow. Bringing the level of rhythmic
sophistication of classroom music up to the standard of African diasporic dance music
would engage young people in a challenge that they might be a great deal more eager
to take on.

Exercises are culturally inauthentic and musically

unsatisfying
Beginner music students are rarely engaged with actual music beyond the
simplest nursery rhymes and folk songs. It may be years before a beginner musician

19
starts playing something that they would recognize as “real music.” In the meantime,
they study decontextualized fragments of scales, melodies and chord progressions.
These fragments are designed for their pedagogical content, not their intrinsic musical
value, and they rarely hold much interest in and of themselves.

Software for music education has largely continued the traditional approach. The
state of the art in interactive music learning software is well represented by My Note
Games!, released by Appatta Ltd for iOS in 2011. The app comprises several distinct
music theory, reading and ear training games:
• Hear It, Note It!—Hear a melody and use the game’s notation editor to transcribe
it.
• Tap That Note—Given a simple melody with a row of note names below, tap the
note names in the sequence they are written on the score.
• Play That Note—Sight-read a short melody on your instrument into the iPad’s
built-in mic; the game tracks your accuracy note-by-note.
• Play-A-Day—perform more demanding sight-reading exercises, requiring more
exact timing. You are given eight melodies, and when you can play all of them
correctly, you advance to the next eight.

These games are self-paced, easy to understand, and presented with attractive
graphics. But the examples are devoid of musical interest or cultural authenticity.
Indeed, many of the melodies are generated randomly and are often barely even
recognizable as music. Having to engage closely with emotionless and arbitrary strings
of notes would be enough to demoralize any music student, especially those that may
not be intrinsically motivated to begin with.

Beginners start at the wrong level of abstraction

Beginner music classes typically begin with the smallest units of music: beats,
notes, and rests. However, beginner musicians are best served by learning what
Bamberger (1994) calls “musical structural simples,” the smallest meaningful units of
music: motives, phrases and sequences. Bamberger draws an analogy between different
levels of musical abstraction and the linguistic concept of phonemes and morphemes.
Phonemes are the smallest sonic components of speech: individual vowels and
consonants. Morphemes are the smallest grammatical components of speech: individual
words and short phrases. In music, “phonemes” are individual notes, rests, and
rhythmic values. “Morphemes” are motives, phrases and sequences. Young children
and beginners intuitively understand music at the morpheme level. However,
traditional musical education begins with the phonemes.

20
 While the phonemes are the atomic units of music, working with them requires a
nontrivial degree of musical sophistication: beginner students would need to
understand and be able to dictate proportional rhythm, to conceptualize musical
metadimensions such as key, scale, and meter, and to be able to grasp chromatic
divisions of the octave. Unfortunately, too many beginning students are presented with
decontextualized phonemes that they are unable to connect to their existing implicit
musical understanding. At this early stage in their learning, students may
understandably conclude that music is too abstract or difficult for them.

Most music production software also operates at the phoneme level of single
notes and beats, whether these are represented in traditional music notation or
otherwise. Users get some assistance from packages that include prefabricated loops,
like Apple's Garageband. However, while the loops might be useful morphemes, they
tend to be complex and compound, limiting their generality.

Musician Tor Bruce (personal communication, February 10 2013) draws a helpful

analogy between music and graphics software. Blank-slate MIDI sequencers and audio
recorders are like working at the pixel level. Loops are more like clip art—expedient but
limited in their creative potential. Unlike music software, graphics software offers many

21
tools in between the pixel level and the clip art level: geometric shapes, text, bezier
curves and the like. Bruce asks, what are the equivalent tools in music? Where is the
software that enables you to work with musical structural simples?

There have been some attempts to invite novice musicians to compose with
meaningful structural elements, musical molecules rather than atoms. The composition
program Hyperscore provides a visual analogue for structural events in diatonic music
(Farbood, Pasztor & Jennings, 2004). It displays musical events as colorful shapes and
lines, rather than in procedural notation or as a set of parameters, as is often the case
with other graphical composition systems. Hyperscore’s major virtue is the manner in
which it modularizes compositional tasks, thereby keeping the complexity level
manageable. It is much easier for naive composers to relate to the notion of making
small bits of music and then assembling those bits into a larger work than it is to start
with a completely unstructured task.

Steep barriers to entry

Anyone who has attempted to learn an instrument from scratch has experienced
the discouragingly long time span between when study begins and when it becomes
possible to produce musical sounds. The weeks or months of practice that come before
the making of actual music are an obstacle that a great many students never overcome.

Music production software generally has much lower barriers to entry than
acoustic instruments. Presuming familiarity with the conventions of computer
operating systems, it is possible for a novice user to produce something that sounds
reasonably good in a matter of hours. However, the beginner still faces obstacles to
entry. Professional-level programs like Digidesign’s Pro Tools and Apple’s Logic are
formidably complex. There is a more accessible “prosumer” level of product, promising
professional capabilities with amateur-friendly interfaces and price points. Apple’s
GarageBand is the emblematic example. However, these programs still presume a
considerable degree of implicit musical sophistication on the user’s part.

Explicitly beginner-oriented programs do exist that strive to get their users

making music immediately and effortlessly. Propellerhead Figure is an excellent
example. While it succeeds in its goal of being learnable by a young child in a matter of
minutes, however, it sacrifices a great deal of depth and variety. Figure is more of a toy
than a tool, limited in its expressive capabilities, and it does little to scaffold learning of
more complex tools. The same is true of most beginner-oriented tools.

Music technologies enable creativity

When schools do address music technology, they tend to focus on the nuts and
bolts of the technology itself, rather than its creative applications. This is ironic, since
common-practice notation and instrument design are themselves forms of technology.
Dillon (2007) observes:

22
 The violin bow and the saxophone mouthpiece are perhaps the most expressive
pieces of music technology in Western history yet composers and virtuoso
performers did not undertake courses in these technologies. To understand
them they actively explore what the expressive capabilities of these technology
enable, what they revealed and concealed to us as musicians.

So it should be with electronic music production tools. But to truly engage such tools
for creative music-making, we must address their most culturally significant context:
electronic dance music and hip-hop. This music falls well outside the canon of what is
widely considered suitable music for the classroom. I will argue that such music should
nevertheless be included, and not simply because young people enjoy it. Rather than
“dumbing down” music education, the inclusion of popular dance music would
significantly enrich the curriculum, particularly in areas traditionally neglected:
rhythm, timbre and space.

Expanding the idea of musicianship

Traditional music pedagogy takes a narrow view of what constitutes
musicianship: instrumental technique, music reading, and some common-practice tonal
theory. It is a rare American school music class that will incorporate composition,
improvisation, or transcription from recordings. (The United Kingdom and Australia
are moving to include these practices broadly in the classroom.) Still fewer classes
venture into recording, production, publishing, reviewing, or applying metadata to
music. It is vanishingly unusual for students to encounter DJs, sound designers,
electronic composers, producers or engineers in schools; nor are students likely to have
access to the tools of their trade: audio waveforms, the MIDI piano roll, graphic
visualization, event lists and computer code.

Western classical tradition takes the linear narrative as its defining metaphor.
Electronic dance and pop music are based on a very different basic image: the endless
loop. Copy-and-paste is the defining gesture of digital editing tools, and infinitely
looping playback their signature sound. The cyclic nature of pop, dance and hip-hop
music unites the many styles and genres, and is much lamented by “sophisticated”
musicians. However, repetitiveness is not coextensive with a lack of musical richness.
Loop-centrism is ubiquitous in contemporary art music as well, with African-American
dance music as its major vector of cultural transmission. McClary (2004) argues that the
music of Missy Elliott, Steve Reich and John Adams are fundamentally more similar
than different, united by their shared cyclic structures.

Why is repetitive music not boring to listen to? Why we can play repetitive music
without getting bored? Butterfield (2010) argues that we do not hear each repetition as
an instance of mechanical reproduction, even in looped electronic samples and
sequences. Instead, we experience the groove as a process, with each iteration creating
suspense. We are constantly asking ourselves: will this time through the pattern lead to
another repetition, or will there be a break in the pattern?

23
Recognizing the aesthetic power of syncopated rhythms
and breakbeats
What does the human brain find exciting about syncopated rhythm, even when
repeated heavily? The answer is likely to be: predictable unpredictability. The brain is a
pattern-recognition machine. We like repetition and symmetry because they engage our
pattern-recognizers. But we only like patterns up to a point. Once we’ve recognized and
memorized the pattern, we get bored and stop paying attention. If the pattern changes
or breaks, it grabs our attention again. And if the pattern-breaking happens repetitively,
recursively forming a new pattern, we find that extremely gratifying.

Good breakbeats and drum patterns are just complicated enough to challenge
our pattern recognition ability without totally overwhelming us. Repeating a complex
and unpredictable rhythm in a simple, predictable structure, and then sometimes
breaking that structure, holds our attention without completely dominating it. A good
groove ties the room’s attention together while still leaving enough bandwidth for
people to dance, rap, sing, socialize or daydream. Breakbeats are good for social music
because listeners can let their attention wander, and then easily pick the thread back up
at will.

Butterfield (2010) describes a groove as an experienced present that is

“continually being created anew.” Each repetition gains particularity from our memory
of the immediate past and our expectations for the future. In live performances and
recording played by live musicians, small deviations from the expected pattern add
interest to a groove. There is tension between the expected identical repetition and the
imperfections of the actual performance. This is why a hip-hop breakbeat sampled from
a live performance can be so much more exciting than a drum machine pattern
quantized exactly to the grid. The uncanny perfection of perfectly quantized synths and
drum machines hold their own hypnotic pleasures, perhaps by relentlessly defeating
our expectation of small imperfection. Each type of groove holds its own aesthetic
power, and each is worthy of inquiry in its own right.

Looping and feedback support traditional music

pedagogy
Beyond being a valuable method of musical expression in its own right, the
open-ended loop has considerable value in support of more traditional instrumental
and vocal pedagogy. Repetition is fundamental to all human learning, in the forms of
drilling and rehearsal. Software is ideally suited to producing endless repetition in
support of rehearsal.

The key to effective music learning is “chunking,” breaking a long piece into
short, tractable segments and then building those segments into larger meta-segments
(Snyder 2001). Electronic dance music is built from loops of such chunks. Music learned
on acoustic instruments or voice can be similarly broken into dance-music-style loops.
Students can repeat loops in tempo until they are mastered. Then the loops can be

24
chunked into ever larger loops of loops, without ever disrupting the underlying
rhythmic groove.

Saville (2011) cites the music educator’s truism that “accurate feedback may be
the single greatest variable for improving learning.” The longer the delay between the
performance and the feedback, the less effective it is. It is best to give feedback in the
moment, while the student plays along with the loop, “in the heat of battle.” The loop
can continue to run indefinitely, so students need not lose the flow when they drop a
note or receive feedback. I have certainly found that having my students rehearse
manageably-sized loops sustained by a steady groove can turn potentially tedious
drilling into a satisfying and even joyous experience of real music-making. Even the
most basic introductory exercises can sound like music and induce flow; the loop
structure makes that possible.

A need for authentic music in the classroom

Ruthmann (2006) argues that the best curriculum activities derive from real-
world activities, ideally retaining the essential values of the original. The objects and
operations of the adapted activity should be genuine instances of the original activity,
however simplified. Classroom music and "real" music should be one and the same
whenever possible.

Martin (2012) concurs, advocating teaching “from within authentic music

making contexts.” However, he undermines his own argument, in a highly illuminating
way. He believes that students should be able to explore electroacoustic music and
sampling. However, while his desire for a more inclusive curriculum is admirable, his
version of decanonization simply entails swapping in a different canon, the twentieth-
century avant-garde. While Martin deserves credit for recommending teaching non-
academic artists like Aphex Twin, he is unfortunately quick to dismiss popular music.
He takes a dim view of “the repetitive ostinati of typical dance club pieces,” preferring
more abstract and challenging musical paradigms. However, Stockhausen and Varese
are likely to alienate younger students even more than Mozart and Handel. Truly
authentic practice should embrace the culture in which students live.

Why is a modernist like Stockhausen even less suitable for music classes with
young students than Mozart? The answer can be found in a famous interview
conducted by The Wire magazine in 1995, in which Stockhausen was asked to comment
on some electronic music artists widely considered to be his musical descendants,
including Aphex Twin, Plasticman and Scanner (Witts, 1995). These artists might be
categorized as “pop” in the very broadest sense, but their music lies well outside the
commercial mainstream. Nevertheless, Stockhausen voiced considerable contempt for
their “permanent repetitive language,” their “ice cream harmonies” and other “kitschy”
indulgences. He advised Aphex Twin to “immediately stop with all these post-African
repetitions,” and “not allow to repeat any rhythm if it were [not] varied to some extent
and if it did not have a direction in its sequence of variations.” In other words,
Stockhausen utterly rejects the very qualities of electronic dance music that give it such
profound significance both in the lives of young students and in global popular culture.

25
 The value of electronic music in the classroom is not in its abstraction and
difficulty. Its value is in its absorption of African-American popular idioms, “converting
our collective sense of time from tortured heroic narratives to cycles of kinetic pleasure”
(McClary 2004). Prince (1990) drives home the point directly by singing:

There’s joy in repetition

There’s joy in repetition
There’s joy in repetition
There’s joy in repetition
There’s joy in repetition
There’s joy in repetition

Marshall (2009) wonders:

How to argue for the aesthetic value of deeply repetitive music—a quality
utterly taken for granted and celebrated by [electronic dance music] devotees—
without falling into two common traps: (1) searching for the hidden
complexities of seemingly simple sounds; (2) foregoing any sort of music
analysis at all, in favor of socio-cultural exegesis, and thus implying that EDM
does not need it (but also, perhaps, does not merit it). A great many journalists,
cultural critics, ethnomusicologists, practitioners, and aficionados have been
involved in the intertwined projects of explicating and celebrating EDM as
social phenomenon, as cultural product and practice, and—if, ironically, less
commonly—as music.

To truly come to appreciate the value of dance music in the classroom and in elevated
cultural discourse in general, we must relinquish our present valorization of
complexity, and instead, to investigate the aesthetic power of the loop.

Eurocentric music education undervalues rhythm

What value does dance music offer to the music curriculum? Certainly, its
production techniques make wildly diverse use of timbre and space. For the present
argument, however, the chief virtue of dance music is its oft-underestimated rhythmic
sophistication, even compared to the furthest fringes of the classical avant-garde.
McClary (1989), writing about “System of Survival” by Earth, Wind and Fire, observes
that the groove is a foundational musical skill sorely undervalued by the gatekeepers of
our culture:

As is the case with most Afro-American music, the rhythm itself constitutes the
most compelling yet most complex component of the song. I would argue that
the skill required to achieve and maintain a groove with the degree of vitality
characteristic of "System of Survival" is far greater than that which goes into the
production of the self-denying, "difficult" rhythms derived by externally
generated means. One need only observe professional classical performers

26
 attempting to capture anything approaching "swing" (forget about funk!) to
appreciate how truly difficult this apparently immediate music is.

Groove offers the best of both worlds: it requires a depth of focus and discipline rivaling
any other musical challenge, but it also offers young people intense and immediate
gratification.

Riffs and loops: the building blocks of dance music

Monson (1999) proposes the riff as the fundamental unit of the musical African
diaspora, the morpheme-level building block of much popular music. Since American
popular and dance music dominates global musical culture, and African-Americans
dominate American dance music, the riff deserves status as a foundational element of
the music curriculum, alongside scales, chords and meters.

The riff faces some powerful intellectual opponents, however, Theodor Adorno
prominent among them. Monson cites Adorno’s oft-quoted stance equating the
repetition in popular music with industrial standardization, loss of individuality,
military marching, and fascism. Monson vigorously disagrees; he cites the “dynamic
and open structure” of riff-based music as a liberating force for self-expression and
community-building. Furthermore, because Afrocentric music has a high tolerance for
imperfection (“participatory discrepancies” in Monson's terminology), the music opens
up "the possibility of participation, sensuous immersion in sound.” It is ideally suited to
the goal of opening up legitimate participation in music to more students, not just the
“talented” ones.

Changing consumers into producers

Even those educators open to including more African diasporic music into the
classroom may balk at contemporary pop. What is it that makes the disposable
ephemera of commercial culture worthy of serious study? Marshall (2010) invites us to
consider that students need not passively absorb pop culture in the classroom the way
they customarily do on their own. Digital audio editing makes it possible to actively
engage the artifacts of our culture, to remix and recombine them, to personalize and
mold them, and to use them as raw materials for entirely new work. The ability to claim
creative ownership over pop culture is a tremendously empowering sensation,
especially for young people who may not feel much empowerment otherwise.

Marshall advocates particularly strongly for the role of the mashup in music
education. By deconstructing and recombining familiar pop texts, mashups open the
door to broader critical thinking. As Marshall puts it, through mashups “we discover
correspondences, connotations, and critical readings of performances that we may not
have given a second thought—or even a first listen.” Marshall also recommends that the
study of the mashup go hand-in-hand with producing them, thus “folding musical
analysis into musical experience.” The same argument can be applied to the study of
programming drums in popular dance styles.

27
Constructivist practice in music teaching
Music education will be most engaging and meaningful when the teaching
strategies support students’ agency in their own learning (Brennan, 2013). Agency, in
this sense, refers to students' ability to define and pursue their learning goals, so that
they can play a part in their self-development, adaptation, and self-renewal. While
learner agency is often viewed as being incompatible with a structured learning
environment, Brennan argues that structure and agency need not be in opposition.
Ideally, we can create structures that support learner agency. Constructivist practice is
designed to do just that.

Constructivist pedagogy operates by the following axiomatic assumptions:

• Learning by doing is better than learning by being told.
• Learning is not something done to you, but rather something done by you.
• You do not get ideas; you make ideas. You are not a container that gets filled
with knowledge and new ideas by the world around you; rather, you actively
construct knowledge and ideas out of the materials at hand, building on top of
your existing mental structures and models.
• The most effective learning experiences grow out of the active construction of all
types of things, particularly things that are personally or socially meaningful,
that you develop through interactions with others, and that support thinking
about your own thinking.
• Learning takes place through four main activities: designing, personalizing,
sharing and reflecting.

Music and flow

Before asking what types of music we should teach and how we should teach
them, it is worth asking a deeper question: why teach music at all? People enjoy music,
but there are plenty of other activities we enjoy that are not taught in school. What
makes music so special that it is worth spending finite educational resources on? Dillon
(2007) argues that the primary purpose of music is to create deeply gratifying flow
states, for both performers and listeners. Csikszentmihalyi (1990) lists the elements of
flow:
• Immediate feedback contributing to a balance between skill and challenge
• Merged action and awareness, completely occupying students’ attention
• Deep, sustained concentration
• Control of the situation, and the freedom to generate possibilities
• Loss of self-consciousness

If an activity’s challenge level is beyond than your ability, you experience anxiety. If
your ability at the activity far exceeds the challenge, the result is boredom. Flow
happens when challenge and ability are well-balanced, as seen in this diagram adapted
from Csikszentmihalyi.

28
 Dillon (2007) sees more at stake for music educators than just providing people
pleasure. He proposes that flow is a matter of public health, calling it “a powerful
weapon against depression.” Music-induced flow unifies the individual with the social.
It draws out troubled, antisocial and developmentally disabled young people, and helps
them integrate into the group. It gives voice to those who might find it difficult to
express themselves otherwise. And flow is physiologically beneficial as well, though the
precise workings of its support of physical well-being are not well understood.

Csikszentmihalyi (1990) observes that people with a self-motivated “autotelic”

personality type have a predisposition to flow, an ability to seek and construct their
own challenges. While some of us may be lucky enough to have been born autotelic, it
is also a trait that can be learned, and taught. Autotelic people are better equipped for
positive thinking and resilience. Studying music may help develop these qualities.

Flow experiences encourage autotelicism, a state that self-reinforces through

pleasure. If you learn the ability to take satisfaction from self-challenge in a musical
context, it is a tool you can carry with you into any other context. The challenge, then, is
to create music learning experiences that encourage autotelicism. Dillon (2007) lists
effective psychological motivators for music students:
• The image of successful achievement through playing
• Encouragement from one’s immediate cultural setting
• Internal and personal satisfaction
• Social relations and the reciprocal response of family and community
• Sharing in the teacher’s love of music
• Social meaning

29
 Music has both analytic and intuitive aspects. The analytical components of
music include technique, accuracy and clarity. The intuitive component includes
music's expressive, aesthetic content. To induce flow, the sides have to be balanced,
with a productive tension between the analytical (repetitive practice, studying theory)
and the intuitive (playful experimentation and improvisation).

If we take a flow-centric view of music education, we are freed from the pressure
of having to decide which kinds of music should be taught. The specific means by
which the music creates flow is less important than the fact that it does it at all.
Whatever the kind of music being played, and whatever instruments are being used to
play it, if it induces flow, then it is a worthwhile pursuit. There are many roads up the
proverbial mountain, and the right road for a given student will depend heavily on
their inner life and their social context. The best strategy to serve all students is to offer
a wide variety of musical experience.

There is social and aesthetic value in the experience of being part of an orchestra
playing classical repertoire, of the sense of belonging that comes from subsuming one's
ego into a complex machine under the conductor’s control. There is a different kind of
social and aesthetic value in being in a rock trio and having to figure out all of the music
by ear, making musical decisions by consensus. And there is yet another in the
experience of sequencing a hip-hop track in software. Dillon proposes that the correct
approach is to choose “all of the above.”

How popular musicians learn

Music educators use the term “popular music” to encompass such sundry styles
as pop per se, rock, jazz, country, R&B, hip-hop, dance, and a great many other distinct
styles that have widely varying degrees of actual popularity. I will use the term
“popular” to refer to Afrocentric western dance music and hip-hop, though much of my
argument applies to any of the styles referenced above.

Most practitioners of popular electronic dance music learned their craft

informally outside of schools. Given the global reach of electronic dance musicians,
their informal learning practices must be fairly effective. If we wish to introduce
popular music into the classroom, we would do well to examine those practices.

Popular musicians are substantially self-taught, using ad-hoc methods cobbled

together from peers, books, videos and simple trial and error. A great deal of this
learning happens at the mid-level of musical morphemes—riffs, phrases, chord cycles,
beat patterns and samples. Popular musicians may only approach the phoneme level of
pitch and rhythm values late in their education, if ever. Typical pop music practice
involves the study of specific songs that are meaningful to the student, rather than
abstract chord/scale theory and technical exercises. In the absence of formal method
books and courses, popular musicians must piece together information from recordings,
books, online resources, word of mouth and whatever other sources are at hand.

30
Learning may occur in a “student-teacher” setting, but it is just as likely to take place
among peer networks, or alone

Green (2002) proposes integrating the following informal, pop-oriented

pedagogical practices into formal music education for young students:
• Allowing learners to choose the music.
• Learning by listening to and copying recordings.
• Learning in friendship groups with minimal adult guidance.
• Learning in personal, often haphazard ways.
• Integrating listening, playing, singing, improvising and composing.

Ideally, music class should be a genuine community of learning that speaks to

students’ musical selves. We are all too familiar with students expressing social
solidarity by resisting their teachers. It would be wonderful if social solidarity
motivated students to participate instead.

Learner agency and motivation

Constructivist learning is closely linked to the idea of intrinsic motivation, also
known by its more common name, enthusiasm. Papert (1976) sees a good example of
constructivism in action in the Brazilian escola de samba. The literal translation is
“samba school,” though that term might be a misleading one, as Papert explains: “It
would be more likely to describe itself as a ‘club,’ for although it is a school in the sense
that people do learn there, it is not a school in that learning is no more the primary
reason for participation in the Samba School then it is for membership in a baseball
team or for playing any game.” Papert (1993) continues:

The samba school, although not ‘exportable’ to an alien culture, represents a set
of attributes a learning environment should and could have. Learning is not
separate from reality. The samba school has a purpose, and learning is
integrated in the school for this purpose. Novice is not separated from expert
and the experts are also learning.

Teachers need not be expert in the subject matter at hand in order to teach it using
constructivist methodology. Learning alongside students is an excellent teaching
method, provided that teachers exercise openness, curiosity, and vulnerability as
learners.

It is a constructivist axiom that music students work best when they feel like they
are making something of value. But it is a challenge to assess such creative practice in a
school context. Constructivist practice is easily undermined by the pressure to “teach to
the test.” A teacher in Brennan’s (2013) study puts the conflict succinctly: “How do you
put a rubric on creativity?” Traditional testing methods are precisely the ones that
frustrate intrinsic motivation.

31
Participatory music vs presentational music
Music teachers face two conflicting goals. On the one hand, they must maximize
both the number of participants and those participants’ level of engagement. On the one
hand; teachers must also maximize the sound quality and individual virtuosity of
student performers. The two goals are mutually contradictory; one prioritizes inclusion
regardless of skill level; the other prioritizes exclusion of all but the most adept
performers. Very different pedagogical strategies apply, depending on whether the goal
is inclusion or quality. Music in schools is traditionally presentational—prepared by
musicians for others to listen to. Informal music, like that practiced on the playground,
is mostly participatory—not intended for listening except by the participants. The
conflict between inclusion and quality is alleviated if music teachers work with
participatory rather then presentational music.

Playground music has certain characteristics that make it suitable for keeping a
large group of children of various skill levels together: internal repetition, short musical
forms, predictability, and a level of rhythmic stability. Repetition of the rhythmic
groove and predictable musical forms are essential to getting and staying in sync with
others. Social synchrony is a crucial underpinning of feelings of social comfort,
belonging, and identity. In participatory performance, “these aspects of being human
come to the fore” (Harwood & Marsh, 2012).

Popular dance music is closer to playground music than the more “serious”
music usually taught in schools. When we ask children to learn repertoire that is
unfamiliar to them while simultaneously asking them to learn it in a way that is
unfamiliar and unpracticed, we place our learners and ourselves at a double
disadvantage. Having students work with familiar music in a participatory format
might go a long way toward stemming the epidemic rates of abandonment of music
study.

Communities of practice
The reproduction and evolution of knowledge happens most effectively within
communities of practice (Hoadley 2012), structured groups that give learners a sense of
membership, or at least aspiration to membership. The group should include expert
practitioners to whom learners have access. And the community should create space for
legitimate participation by the least expert, most peripheral members. Hoadley
contrasts communities of practice against the traditional organizational scheme at work
in schools, with students segmented into grades, levels or tracks. The community of
practice is predicated on situated theories of knowledge. In these theories, “knowledge
is a property enacted by groups of people over time in shared practices, rather than the
idea that knowledge is a cognitive residue in the head of an individual learner.”

Members of a community of practice need not be in close physical proximity, as

long as they can communicate. The internet supports communities of practice by

32
linking experts with learners, supporting platforms for storing and disseminating
resources and tools, and enabling discussion. Communities of practice can and do
coalesce around music production software. The software’s affordances, presets and
included sounds constitute a repository of resources and implicit instruction on the use
of those resources. Documentation, user groups, online forums and informal peer-to-
peer learning round out the community. In the best case scenario, the software and its
surrounding community connects novice users to expert practitioners and real-world
music.

The zone of proximal development and legitimate

peripheral participation
A central tenet of constructivist pedagogy is that learning is most effective when
it takes place within the “zone of proximal development” (Wiggins 2001). We
understand new concepts and experiences in relation to our understanding of existing
concepts and prior experience. To learn, we create meaning by making connections to
understandings that we already hold. If we have no frame of reference from which to
draw, new information and experience may be meaningless to us. We perform best
within the zone of proximal development under guidance or in collaboration with more
advanced peers, rather than operating on our own.

Schools generally draw a clear separation between observing or reading about an

activity and actively engaging with it, with the former preceding the latter. However,
the constructivists hold that the best learning occurs where there are opportunities for
active participation from the outset. Consider the way that children learn playground
games. There is no formal training; children simply hang on the edge of the circle and
follow along until they feel confident enough to jump in and stumble through the
activity. There is no clear separation between observer and participant; simply standing
in the circle implies membership. Samba schools work along similar principles.
Beginner drummers begin playing on day one, tapping out simple clave patterns. As
they advance, drummers work their way up to more complex foreground drumming.
Both the clave and the lead parts are valuable and intrinsic components of the music.
Learning in these settings is coextensive with the social experience. Peripheral
participation is a robust scaffolding that students can release as they no longer need it.

The Drum Loop not an intrinsically social experience; like most iOS apps, it
presumes a single user. However, it is designed to offer the software equivalent of
legitimate peripheral participation. Rather than being presented with a blank slate,
beginners begin working with real drum patterns immediately. The quantized rhythmic
grid makes it impossible to produce results that are completely unmusical. Since the
included drum patterns are drawn from actual practice, they foster a sense of a
community of advanced practitioners that the user can learn from. Since users progress
through the Drum Loop’s exercises at their own pace and in the order of their choosing,
they are free to operate within their personal zone of proximal development. The goal is
to create a learning experience so supportive and dynamically calibrated that it should
hardly feel like “learning” at all.

33
Fighting option paralysis
Computers and synthesizers give musicians unprecedented control over the
most minute parameters of audio. Nowhere is more detailed control possible than in
audio programming environments like SuperCollider, Max/MSP and ChucK. These
tools offer the skilled musician/programmer virtually unlimited sonic freedom.
However, that freedom does not always result in richer creative output. The most
sophisticated audio production tools can just as easily stifle creativity under the weight
of option paralysis. For this reason, music made with the most advanced tools seldom
makes it past the experimentation stage into fully-realized works, and performances too
often take the form of technical demos.

Simple, limited interfaces have two major virtues. First, a small feature set can be
learned quickly. Second, the most obvious uses will quickly become tiresome, forcing
the user to push the tool’s limits. Magnusson (2010) speaks approvingly of interfaces
that “proscribe complexity in favor of a clear, explicit space of gestural trajectories and
musical scope.” If presented with a finite feature set, users are more likely to move
quickly past the knob-twiddling stage into a search for musical expressiveness.

The virtues of tinkering

When we hear the word “tinkering,” we typically think of aimless fiddling.
Resnick and Rosenbaum (2013) would instead have us consider tinkering to be a
valuable pedagogical method. They define tinkering as working without a clear goal or
purpose, or without making noticeable progress. While classroom activities are usually
highly planned and predictable, tinkering is a playful, exploratory, iterative style of
engaging with a problem or project. Resnick and Rosenbaum advocate tinkering in the
specific context of teaching of science, technology, engineering and math (STEM). While
the popular image of these disciplines is one of meticulously structured planning, real-
world STEM work is considerably more ad-hoc in practice. Expert practitioners in
STEM disciplines typically employ much more tinkering in their work than is common
in STEM classroom activities. The same is true for music.

How should we design pedagogical materials for tinkerability? Resnick and

Rosenbaum list three qualities that such materials should offer: immediate feedback,
fluid experimentation, and open exploration. These three descriptors also apply to ideal
constructivist music teaching materials. The Drum Loop is designed for maximal
tinkerability. All digital music production environments offer immediate feedback; the
consequences of user actions can be heard instantaneously. The Drum Loop encourages
a spirit of experimentation by giving users preprogrammed rhythms and inviting them
to find out what happens if they add or remove drum hits, speed or slow the tempo,
play it back on different drum kits, and so on. While the Drum Loop’s expressive
possibilities are limited by design, ideally users will graduate to more sophisticated and
open-ended production environments.

34
Visualizing rhythm
Standard music notation draws a simple and direct connection between pitch
height and staff position. However, no such direct visual mapping exists between a
note’s duration and its length on the page. The illustration below shows two measures
of 4/4 time. One might naively expect the measure on the left to be much longer than
the one on the right, but they occupy precisely the same amount of musical time.

Asking beginner music students to simultaneously learn rhythmic concepts and a rather
abstract system for representing them is asking a great deal. The MIDI piano roll is a
better aid to comprehension for beginners, since it shows longer notes as being visually
longer. The relationship between frequency of onsets and tempo is reinforced by the
combination of the sight of the playback head sweeping across the piano and the
resulting sounds.

Toussaint (2013) compares eight different visual representations of the Cuban

rhythm son clave, known to American rock audiences as the Bo Diddley beat. The top
four representations are variations on standard musical notation. The bottom four are
simplified and abstracted visualizations, less culturally specific.

35
 The fifth of these representations is called the Time-Unit Box System, and will
already be familiar to producers of electronic music, who have encountered variations
on it in their hardware and software. It is the Time-Unit Box System that forms the basis
for the Drum Loop.

Bodily metaphors
We frame all abstract thought using metaphors relating back to states of our
bodies. Indeed, body states are the only basis for abstract thought that we possess
(Lakoff & Johnson, 2003). In music, we "climb up" a scale, we "ratchet up" tension and
"release" it, we "land" on the tonic chord after a cadence. The closer a metaphor is to a
state of the body, the shorter the chain of abstraction we must parse out, and the easier
it is for us to understand. Metaphors that are several layers of abstraction removed from
bodily states will be more difficult to learn and remember.

Musicians take bodily metaphors for granted, but it is worth pausing to reflect on
the strangeness of finding visual expression for purely auditory phenomena. Music
does not “look like” anything; it is remarkable that we have nevertheless evolved so
many strongly felt ideas for how it looks. Brower (2008) lists the six most commonly
used visual metaphors for music:

Wilkie, Holland and Mulholland (2010) demonstrate that the most effective
bodily metaphors for aiding in musical understanding include containers, cycles,
verticality, balance, the notion of center-periphery, and a narrative of source-path-goal.
The music software should use these metaphors to create intuitive mappings between
sound and image.

36
Time-Unit Box Systems
The Time-Unit Box System (TUBS) is a simple method for transcribing rhythm.
Each time unit, usually an instance of the underlying beat or tactus, is represented by a
box. If a box contains an onset, it is filled; otherwise, it is empty. The TUBS
representation is popular among ethnomusicologists, especially when dealing with
percussionists who are unfamiliar with Western notation. Toussaint (2013) shows the
six fundamental 4/4 time clave and bell patterns in TUBS notation:

The hip-hop transcriptions created by Charlie Hely turn standard western notation
into a TUBS by quantizing it spatially on graph paper.

Drum machine interfaces are almost always predicated on TUBS. For example, the
image below shows a drum pattern in Ableton Live’s MIDI clip editor. Time goes from
left to right, and then circles back to the leftmost edge. The vertical axis lists different
drum sounds: kick, rim shot, snare, clap, hi-hat and so on. The MIDI sequencer adds
another axis to the basic TUBS, using both a color scheme and vertical lines below to

37
show each hit’s loudness (velocity).

The MIDI piano roll can be thought of as a kind of “super TUBS” with an infinite
number of boxes that can represent arbitrarily large or small units of time. The image
below shows part of “Four In One” by Thelonious Monk, as represented in
Propellerhead Reason’s MIDI piano roll. This time, the vertical axis represents pitch, as
indexed by the piano keyboard on the left. The vertical line shows the playback
position, which the user can manipulate at will.

MIDI sequencers are a remarkable hybrid between music notation, recording and
performance. There is no distinction between recording and notating a MIDI

38
performance. Reading the “score” and hearing the playback are almost coextensive as
well.

Appealingly intuitive though the MIDI piano roll may be, it still has some
shortcomings as a music visualization system. It gives little indication as to the function
of the musical events. While it is easy to see the short repeated whole-tone scale figure
in the Thelonious Monk composition above, it is not so easy to grasp the broader
metrical scheme without doing a great deal of meticulous counting. How might MIDI
and other TUBS systems help us see the structure of the music beyond just a series of
sequential events?

Meter relates non-adjacent musical events

Most music is organized into repeated rhythmic cycles, and cycles of cycles, and
very often cycles of cycles of cycles. We make sense of these cycles using meter, “the
grouping of perceived beats or pulses into equivalence classes” (Forth, Wiggin &
McLean, 2010). Linear musical concepts like small-scale melodies depend mostly on
relationships between adjacent events, or at least closely spaced events. But periodicity
and meter depend on relationships between nonadjacent events. Linear representations
of music show meter only indirectly. We must count grid lines (or implicit grid lines in
standard western notation) in order to understand where in the cycle a particular event
lies.

If we wrap the musical timeline into a circle, meter becomes much easier to
parse. Metrically related events can be placed adjacently, and their position on the circle
can represent their position within the meter. This system works especially well for
repetitive, loop-oriented music. This graphic by Forth, Wiggin and McLean (2010) uses
circular notation to show different subdivisions of triple meter:

39
 There is some precedent for circular representation of other cyclical music
concepts. Pitch class is commonly represented as circular, organized either by semitones
or fifths.

Representing cyclical music with a cyclical graph

Benadon (2007) observes that a linear left-to-right orientation tends to conceal the
recursive nature of beat-based patterns. He uses circular representations to describe the
nuances of a performance’s rhythm and pitch. For example, the graphic below
represents Bubber Miley’s trumpet solo on “Creole Love Call” by Duke Ellington:

40
 There is a long historical precedent for radial depictions of rhythm. The Book of
Cycles, an Arabic book about rhythm written by Safi al-Din al-Urmawi in 1252, depicts
rhythms as circles divided into wedges. Shaded wedges show beat onsets, while
unshaded wedges are rests (Toussaint 2004). This notation is remarkably similar to the
system I arrived at independently for the Drum Loop.

The fundamental unit of hip-hop and electronic dance music is the loop. This is
nowhere more true than in the case of drums. Rhythm patterns in electronic music
repeat with little to no variation throughout long passages of the music. In this idiom, a
traditional linear visualization of the patterns is not the clearest representation; a
circular visualization describes the music more intuitively. The Drum Loop’s radial grid
was inspired by circular visualizations of samples and breakbeats that I created using
the Polar Coordinates filter in Adobe Photoshop. The image below shows the opening
keyboard figure from Herbie Hancock’s
“Chameleon.” The figure is repeated
identically for a considerable length of
time, and the circular representation feels
appropriate.

The next image below is a screen

capture of the loop from "The Funky
Drummer (Bonus Beat Reprise)" by James
Brown, loaded into Propellerhead Recycle,
and given the same polar transform in
Photoshop. As with the Hancock piece, the
beat goes through an enormous number of
identical repetitions over the course of the
track, and again, the circular graphic feels
like the most appropriate visualization.

While circular representation is

rarely used at the level of entire songs or
pieces, a few intriguing examples do
exist. One such is the Infinite Jukebox by
Paul Lamere (2013). The software uses
the Echo Nest API to search for repeated
musical elements within a song. Repeated
segments are connected by colored arcs.
The image below shows “Billie Jean” by
Michael Jackson as visualized by the
Infinite Jukebox. The software plays the
song clockwise around the circle,
sometimes jumping across arcs when it
encounters them (as seen with the green
arc below.) By seamlessly connecting
repeated segments of a song, the software
algorithmically creates an extended dance
remix that, in theory, could go on forever.

41
Visualizing swing
Swing is a subtle concept, not
easily grasped by beginners, but it is an
essential component in dance music
drum programming. Drum machines
typically represent swing with a knob
ranging from 0% (straight eighth notes) to
100% (quarter note/eighth note triplet
feel.) Some drum machines, like the
Roland TR-808 and its various software
emulators, refer to swing as “shuffle.”

Jazz rhythms create a continual

feeling of anacrusis (anticipation). Devices like the backbeat, syncopation and swing
create metrical tension at multiple levels: the beat, the bar, the phrase, and the section.
The continual flow of information provided by swung eighth notes draws focus to the
quarter notes by perceptually grouping the shortened upbeat eighth both with its
predecessor and the following on-beat. This device strengthens the tactus, making it
easy to follow against the disruptive effects of the backbeat and other syncopations. Jazz
musicians use rhythmic tension and release to motivate active and participatory
listening (Butterfield, 2011).

Swing is rarely visualized in any explicit way. Sequencing software will

sometimes show swing by displacing alternate eighth notes on the MIDI piano roll.
Most drum machine interfaces do not show swing at all, except by reading a numerical
value from the Shuffle knob. Swing is sometimes shown in classical music notation in
exaggerated triplet form, but this is not an accurate representation. Jazz and country use
more swing than any other idioms, but their practitioners do not notate swing at all; at
most, they will make a terse verbal notation on the top of the lead sheet. By and large,
swing is implicitly understood more than it is explicitly specified.

The Drum Loop uses a novel (and to my knowledge unprecedented) literal

graphical representation of swing. The wedges alternately expand and contract in width
according to the amount of swing specified. At 0% swing, the wedges are all of uniform
width. At 100% swing, the first eighth note in each pair is twice as long as the second, so
the first wedge is twice as wide as the second. As the user adjusts the swing slider, the
wedges dynamically change their width accordingly.

42
Users who have difficulty understanding swing by ear can reinforce their learning
visually.

43
Visual metaphors for music in software
Levin (2000) lists the three most common metaphorical paradigms in music
software: score displays, control panels, and “interactive widgets.”

The score metaphor can be seen in sequencers and DAW editing windows.
Sequencers and DAWs show parts or voices as stacks of horizontal bars scrolling from
left to right. For example, the image below shows the Arrangement View in Ableton
Live, a typical score-like representation.

The plugins at the bottom of the screen are examples of simplified control panels.

Propellerhead’s Recycle is a significantly simpler score display, showing a single

audio sample shown as a stereo waveform sliced at its transient points.

44
Celemony’s Melodyne blends traditional notation and an audio waveform view.

Control panel metaphors can be found in software instruments, plugins and

hardware emulators. The most literally rendered control panels usually accompany
software that emulates specific pieces of hardware, like Bomb Factory’s BF76
compressor plugin, based on the hardware compressor of the same name.

45
Control panel metaphors are frequently skeuomorphic, using decorative elements
meant to evoke the hardware object being simulated in software. The textured knobs
and VU meter on the BF76 are examples of skeuomorphism.

Antares’ Auto-tune resembles the control panel of an analog piece of gear, even
though it does not emulate any actual piece of hardware.

46
 The least skeuomorphic control panels can be found in Ableton Live, which
eliminates skeuomorphic “eye candy” in favor of geometric shapes rendered in flat
colors.

DJ software like Serato uses rotating “turntables” to show the passage of musical
time. The user can move forwards and backwards in time at any speed by rotating
(“scratching”) the turntables. This rotary metaphor is useful even to musicians who
have never touched a vinyl record, by putting the cyclical nature of the music front and
center. This idea will be discussed in greater depth below.

The interactive widget model is a catch-all for interfaces that involve the
movement of semi-autonomous “objects” around the screen. The generative iOS
electronic music app Nodebeat uses an elegant widget model.

47
 Levin’s list of metaphors is by no means exhaustive. Ableton Live’s Session View
uses a spreadsheet metaphor to organize a collection of samples that the user can play
improvisationally like the individual notes on a keyboard.

48
 Regardless of the metaphorical scheme at work, interface designers all face the
same challenge: offering users the widest possible variety of expressive techniques, but
not overwhelming them with unmanageable complexity. Nodebeat sacrifices the former
consideration in favor of the latter; while it is simple enough that my preschool-aged
niece can express herself with it effortlessly, the range of sounds it produces are
severely limited. Conversely, the possibilities within Ableton Live are effectively
infinite, but novice users find it bewildering.

Liberating ourselves from the tyranny of the keyboard

metaphor
The piano keyboard has dominated western conceptual understanding of music
since its inception. Music notation evolved to serve the needs of the piano first and
foremost, and it is implicit in all of our discussions of music theory. Software whose
output is utterly un-piano-like is still likely to be controlled by MIDI, and the “piano
roll” view of MIDI data preserves the keyboard metaphor intact.

Morton Subotnick (personal communication, December 2012) has struggled to

find an electronic instrument interface that liberates the musician from the constraints
of the keyboard metaphor. The Buchla synthesizer, for example, is controlled entirely
with knobs, patch cords and other low-level electronic elements. A Buchla patch by the
author is shown below.

49
 Novel interfaces like the Buchla synth are full of possibility, but they all come
with a built-in obstacle to creativity: musicians must now learn a new set of mappings
from gesture to sound entirely from scratch. The past century has seen a variety of
experiments in non-traditional control schemes, from the Theremin onward, but none of
those schemes has found widespread use. The hegemony of the keyboard (and other
acoustic instrument metaphors) remains substantially unchallenged. Software interface
designers have struggled with this problem by turning to other metaphors from the
physical world, as detailed in the following section.

Intuitive notation systems

Like the MIDI piano roll, music games are interactive graphical scores. They use
accessible abstractions like time-unit box systems to create a symbiotic relationship
between their notation systems and the corresponding sounds being triggered. The
graphic below shows the TUBS system in Guitar Hero. Time progresses into the screen,
like a train moving down a track (Schultz 2008).

While this notation system is necessarily simplified tremendously, it does

succeed in conveying core musical concepts like metric hierarchy, subdivision,
measurement and pattern identification.

50
Notable circular rhythm interfaces
There are few existing music software programs with circular interfaces. The
following section analyzes three of the most prominent commercially available
examples. It is significant that all three were released within the past year,
demonstrating that this is a still largely under-explored interface paradigm.

Propellerhead Figure
Propellerhead’s electronic music production software represents both the worst
and best of user interface design. Its flagship products, Rebirth and Reason, are heavily
skeuomorphic, recreating the look of the hardware whose sound they are modeled on.
Rebirth was designed to emulate the classic Roland TB-303 bass synth and the TR-808
and TR-909 drum machines, hardware popular with dance music producers.
Propellerhead did an admirable job of reproducing the sound of these devices.
Unfortunately, they also chose to reproduce the originals’ impenetrable user interfaces.
Users are forced to step-sequence drum patterns and basslines, without being able to
see the entire pattern at once. This makes for a frustrating music-making experience, to
say the least.

Reason is a substantial improvement on Rebirth because it includes a MIDI

editor in addition to a fuller-featured step sequencer. Elsewhere, however, the interface
continues to be excessively skeuomorphic. Reason is larded with nonfunctional
“realistic” decoration evoking physical hardware: screws, labels, vents. The functional
interface elements are modeled after the knobs and displays on rack-mounted gear. This
aesthetic is attractive at first glance, but it swiftly becomes an obstacle to usage. You
have to mentally struggle to distinguish functional onscreen elements from decorative
ones. The skeuomorphisms occupy valuable screen space, making the usable elements
smaller and harder to read. Turning fake knobs with the mouse is needlessly difficult
and imprecise.

51
 For users who started with software and have never even seen a vintage synth or
analog compressor, the hardware metaphor is not helpful to begin with.

Unfortunately, graphic synthesizers which use the control-panel schema

replicate all of the undesirable aspects of multi-knob interfaces—such as their
bewildering clutter, their confusing homogeneity, and their unobvious
mapping from knobs to underlying sound parameters—and none of their
positive aspects, such as their gratifying physical tactility, or their ability to be
used by multiple hands simultaneously. Furthermore, because identical knobs
are often assigned control of wholly dissimilar aspects of sound, control-panel
graphics share a disadvantage with scores and diagrams: namely, that they
must be “read” with the aid of a symbolic or textual key (Levin, 2000).

Propellerhead’s mobile Figure app,

shown in the image to the right, represents a
clean break with the company’s prevailing
design aesthetic. It has no skeuomorphism
whatsoever. The interface is comprised
entirely of flat-colored polygons and large,
legible text. Everything on the screen is
functional; nothing is decorative. Mobile
devices force minimalist design choices
simply by virtue of their limited screen real
estate. For this reason, mobile apps and web
sites tend to be less cluttered than their
desktop counterparts. Propellerhead appears
to have made the limitations of mobile into a
virtue.

Figure is aimed at the casual beginner,

and its input methods are designed to be
maximally intuitive and effortless. The
interface for selecting rhythmic patterns is
particularly successful. A musically
meaningful pattern is pre-loaded by default.
The user selects different patterns simply by
swiping a finger up and down within the
ring.

Most input in Figure is performed by dragging with a

fingertip inside a rectangle. This paradigm works well for
controlling the filters on the synths. Dragging left and right
controls frequency, and dragging up and down controls
resonance. The result invites playful exploration of the
interplay between the two parameters. However, the rectangles
are less effective for sequencing drum patterns. Drum hits fall
on discrete rhythmic intervals, and it is quite difficult to hit a
specific beat with the rectangles, because there is no indication
as to which screen regions map to what beats.

52
 In fairness, Propellerhead’s goal with Figure is not pedagogical, and they are not
trying to provide professional-level electronic music production capabilities. Interface
designer Kalle Paulsson (personal communication, 2013) wanted to quickly move the
user past sequencing and into the filters and effects, where most of the expressiveness
of techno music lies. The clean aesthetic of Figure has been a major source of inspiration
for the Drum Loop; a teaching tool with a similar look and feel would be invaluable.

O-Music O-Generator
The O-Generator aims to connect external representations of music like
visualizations on the screen or standard notation to students’ intuitive understanding of
musical structure (Ankney, 2012).

Like the Drum Loop, the O-Generator represents rhythmic events on a clock face.
It uses common time, labeling both the quarter notes and sixteenth notes, though it does
not quite explain what the distinction is between the two. Rather than having each ring
contain an individual sound, the rings hold collections of sounds: bass and snare, or
percussion, or assorted samples and sound effects. While the choice of sounds is
limited, the available sounds are of good quality and are well representative of the
timbres one might hear on pop radio. Each grid cell can hold one sound from a given
collection, accessible from pull-down menus. Multiple loops can be sequenced to form
complete phrases and songs.

The creators of O-Generator are quite explicit that the software is intended for
the creation of popular dance music in 4/4 time. More specifically, “the objective is for
students to compose back-up tracks to support lyrics they have written in dance music

53
style” (Ankney, 2012). Alternative African and Latin sound collections are available for
purchase separately, but none of the versions support any time signature other than
4/4. There is no way to output a track in standard notation; the software produces
audio recordings only.

Users of O-Generator who wish to compose tracks using multiple loops cannot
view the contents of more than one loop at a time. This is a severe shortcoming, since
other programs are able to at least show simplified or miniaturized representations of
the entire piece in addition to the section that is in immediate focus. For example, see
the elegant solutions used in Loopseque, discussed below.

O-Generator’s developers deserve credit for attempting to include the ability to

create melodies and basslines. However, the interface for doing so is awkward at best.
Tapping a cell brings up an unwieldy pulldown menu of the chromatic scale spanning
three octaves. Some pitches are flatted and others sharped, seemingly arbitrarily. The
user receives no guidance whatsoever as to what pitches might sound good together.
Perhaps the designers are expecting users to have learned music theory previously.
Nevertheless, the O-Generator would be significantly more accessible if the user could
select a key or mode and have the pitches from that mode be given some priority in the
selection.

Casual Underground Loopseque

The strongest analogue to the
Drum Loop presently on the market is
Loopseque, an iPad app made by
Casual Underground. The superficial
similarities present themselves
immediately: concentric rings divided
into sixteen steps, wrapping a time-unit
box system into a loop.

Loopseque handles the problem

of visualizing multiple loops with
considerable deftness. Four loops run
simultaneously, two containing drums,
two containing synthesizer patterns. My
initial plan for a sequencer within the
Drum Loop was to show miniature
graphics of the loops lined up along the
bottom of the screen. These loops
would play sequentially by default,
though the user could skip to a
particular one by tapping it. Loopseque
uses a similar paradigm, but it is more
sophisticated. Instead of progressing
through the sequence in a linear

54
fashion, the loops are arranged into columns, and you can jump freely between them
the way you would with clips in Ableton Live's Session View.

When a new loop is selected, the app waits to begin playing it until the current loop has
completed, thus guaranteeing seamless transitions and making it impossible to produce
jarring or unmusical sounds. The rhythmic “safety net” invites playful improvisation.

Loopseque has a pedagogical component in its “Master Class” mode. The lessons
are enjoyable, but they do not delve very deeply into musical content. Users are given
blank patterns with blinking boxes that they tap to activate. Like the Drum Loop,
Loopseque introduces generic patterns in various dance music styles. However, there is
no explanation as to what makes one style different from another. Text boxes pop up to
explain the exercises, but they are not very illuminating, consisting of unhelpfully
vague advice like “pay attention to the interaction of the bass and drums.” There is no

55
real mention of musical terminology like strong beats and weak beats. There is some
discussion of syncopation, but the text uses the words “symmetric” and “asymmetric”
incorrectly in its explanations. There are no loops explicitly drawn from actual music,
and the exercises have a “paint by numbers” quality, a linear structure that discourages
tinkering and play

In spite of their visual similarities and beginner-friendliness, Loopseque and the

Drum Loop diverge widely in their respective intended audiences. Loopseque is aimed
at the casual market, would-be DJs, “non-musicians” and people seeking entertainment.
To that end, perhaps to appease its investors, Casual Underground is attempting to
“gamify” Loopseque. From the web site copy (http://loopseque.com/):

Despite its apparent simplicity, Loopseque is a challenge to the musician. How

fast you can change the patterns, which patterns you create, what effects you
use – that’s what makes the difference and determines the quality of music
material… Loopseque is a game in which ‘achievements’ are measured by the
richness of sound created by the musician on the fly, and ‘high score’ is the
number of listeners who enjoy the music of the artist.

It makes sense for Casual Underground to build in a community aspect; they want
users to keep coming back to the app, and not just toy briefly with it before forgetting it.
A competitive game aspect seems a reasonable enough strategy. But does it make sense
for a music tool like this? What is the win condition in Loopseque? On what basis are
users competing with one another? The answer is unclear.

By contrast to Loopseque, the Drum Loop is primarily intended for the education
market. It acts a music teacher, not a game. Loopseque wants to be a destination; the
Drum Loop wants to be a gateway into broader musicianship.

56
Inspiration from the digital studio
While technology has revolutionized music production, music education has been
slow to absorb the implications. Too frequently, computers in music classrooms are
used as a more expensive platform for the same teaching materials that were formerly
delivered on paper and the blackboard. Ruthmann (2012) criticizes bad technologically-
mediated classroom tasks as being “information technology tasks applied in the context
of learning about music, rather than engaging students directly in making, creating and
responding to sound and music.” For example, while having students research a
composer on the internet is more expedient than doing so in the library, it is not
profoundly different.

Teachers should find ways to leverage technology in support of active, social

music making—doing music, rather than simply learning about music. However, getting
students to do music can be easier said than done.

Many traditional music and non-music software programs (e.g., notation,

sequencing, looping, audio editing, word processing) are based on the
metaphor of a blank canvas or void. When the program is launched the user is
presented with a blank slate upon which to place notes, audio waveforms,
images or words. For many students, it can be intimidating starting from
scratch. In my own teaching I have seen many students who have been
reluctant to add their first notes to the page, sometimes wondering if they have
anything of value to say. Of course they do have something valuable to say, but
starting from scratch is not always the best place for them to begin (Ruthmann,
2012).

One way to avert the terror of a blank slate is to use pre-existing materials, e.g.,
GarageBand loops. Rather than the usual process of having students place loops in a
blank project, Ruthmann suggests making a game of a subtractive process. Students can
be given a dense collage of loops, a “sound block,” which they must transform into a
new work by slicing and subtracting pieces only.

Studio as instrument, not documentation tool

As the cost of digital recording equipment falls within the reach of more schools,
new teaching opportunities present themselves. Thibeault (2011) urges music teachers
to think of the studio not just as a means of documenting “real” performances, but as a
musical instrument in its own right, carrying with it an entire philosophy of music-
making. The digital studio collapses composition, recording and editing into a single
act. To meaningfully participate in the musical world, students must become familiar
with the studio’s particular demands and affordances. For example, the studio expands
the definition of the word “musician” beyond traditional performers and composers to

57
include anyone with the patience and the will to learn the software and explore its
possibilities.

Within the context of interactive video game soundtracks and rhythm games,
Herber (2008) argues that the traditional distinction between composition and
performance is less meaningful than in traditional instrumental settings. The same is
true for digital music production environments. When software is used both for
conceptualizing ideas and realizing them, it erodes the creative distinction between the
two acts. Herber focuses primarily on generative music like Terry Riley’s In C, where
the composer’s role is to facilitate emergent and participatory interactive experiences.
However, he might also have noted that prosaic dance music production software
similarly gives the user the simultaneous experience of composer, performer and
audience.

Dance music producers have a bad reputation in the broader music world. There
is a widespread sense that simply playing loops and samples created by other people is
not legitimate musicianship, that it is “just pushing buttons.” This attitude is
unfortunate, because dance musicians have a great deal to offer other musicians and
composers. DJs and producers are looking for samples, loop points, sections—they are
extracting the cyclical content from the linear auditory stream. The most important skill
we can learn from dance musicians is to be able to listen closely at several different
levels of detail: to songs, to phrases, and to individual beats or hits (Thompson, 2012).
Rather than listening to recordings as complete and inviolable, dance music producers
listen for the ways that the recordings could be altered, customized, or combined with
other recordings. In other words, dance musicians treat recordings as the raw material,
not simply the finished product.

Informal education in the home studio

In music pedagogical circles, the terms “popular musicians” and “informally
trained musicians” are used interchangeably. While the situation is more complex than
this casual linguistic equation would suggest, it is true that when it comes to education,
popular musicians are substantially on their own.

For nearly a century, formal music education has turned its back upon the
learning practices of the musicians who produce most of the music that comes
out of loudspeakers. But perhaps by constructively embracing those same
technological developments which many people consider to have alienated
music-making, and noticing how they are used as one of the main means of self-
education for popular musicians, we can find one key to the re-invigoration of
music-making in general (Bell, 2013).

For the first several decades of recording, the music was composed in its entirety before
recording began. While some adjustments were made in the studio, composition and
production were almost completely separate processes. In contemporary pop music
practice, however, composition, arrangement, and recording are a single intertwined
process. Popular musicians can hear sounds in a near-finished form and react to them,

58
continually readjusting their approach as the track develops. In hip-hop and dance
music in particular, there may be no plan whatsoever before the production process
begins.

Music education has tended to treat composition and audio engineering as

separate practices, but in the case of the solo bedroom producer, the distinction is no
longer meaningful. There is precious little in the way of formal education for such
musicians. In this context, software presets and default sounds become a critical
educational resource. Bedroom producers may learn everything they know about EQ or
reverb simply by scrolling through the built-in settings in their plugins. As Bell (2013)
puts it, “purchasers of computers are purchasers of an education.” How good an
education are we buying? How could it be better?

Software as an active participant in the creative process

Electronic musicians tend to begin their work by playfully experimenting with a
piece of equipment or software, a period of open-ended “knob-twiddling.” The
discoveries made during this period, particularly those not intended by the musician or
the software’s designers, are crucial raw materials for the more formal composition and
editing that follows. One subject interviewed by Gelineck and Serafin (2009) described
his tools as “having a life of their own.”

Marrington (2011) draws a contrast between the computer as a musical tool and
the computer as a musical medium. We use computers as musical tools when they
make composition or recording easier or faster, in the service of realizing music that
lives in the “real” world. An example of the computer as tool is a composer writing a
string quartet with Sibelius, rather than with pencil and paper. By contrast, when we
use the computer as a medium, it enables musical practices that would be impossible or
inconceivable otherwise. An example of the computer as medium is a dance music
producer manipulating an audio sample with Ableton Live.

It is not only the end result that is different when working with the computer as
medium; a software tool’s visualization system can change our entire conceptual
imagining of music. Marrington observes that all DAWs enable the user to zoom in and
out to view the music at any resolution. At one extreme, we can manipulate fragments
less than a millisecond long; at the other, we can view the entire piece compressed to fit
into a single screen. We can manipulate blocks of audio and MIDI of any arbitrary
length, treating them as “things” rather than sequences of events. Rather than solely
experiencing music as unfolding in time, we can also conceive it a group of objects in
visual space.

Wise, Greenwood and Davis (2011) describe the way that students use Sibelius as
a medium rather than a tool. Like all notation software, Sibelius is effectively a
specialized MIDI sequencer, and younger students are likely to regard scores they
create with it to be the finished product rather than an intermediate stage culminating
in live performance. The software enables its users to create wildly complex patterns,

59
copied and pasted into dense ostinati and played back on improbable instrument
combinations.

Copy and paste is a forbiddingly tedious compositional strategy on paper, but it

is so effortless on the computer as to constitute the de facto norm. Furthermore,
software encourages naive and untrained experimentation in a way that paper-based
composition does not. Formal theory need not be a prerequisite to such exploration,
since students receive immediate auditory feedback of their every move and quickly
discover on their own what works and what does not. The distinction between tool and
medium may not even be a meaningful one when applied to music software.

60
Pedagogical goals of the Drum Loop
The Drum Loop aims to teach beginners with no drumming experience, or musical
experience of any kind, to program beats in a variety of pop, dance and Afro-Cuban
styles. The patterns that users learn with the Drum Loop can be used across a variety of
drum machines and software—Pro Tools, Logic, Ableton Live, Garageband and the
like. Patterns learned by ear (and eye) with the Drum Loop will also be easier to learn
on physical drums and percussion instruments.

Users of the Drum Loop will practice connecting the experience of hearing beats to
seeing corresponding visual patterns. The app thereby scaffolds the learning of the
rhythmic axis of traditional music notation. The Drum Loop will be hopefully be of
particular value to those students who suffer from dyslexia and other challenges to
music reading. By connecting accurately-played authentic rhythms to a dynamically
interactive notation system, the Drum Loop should lower the barrier to entry for more
technically demanding musical skills and concepts.

More broadly, prolonged attention to the Drum Loop’s included beats, and those
created by users themselves, result in a great deal of practice of analytical listening and
musical timekeeping. Users can experience for themselves which specific arrangements
of rhythmic patterns and timbres create a satisfying groove after many repetitions, and
which are unmusical or unsatisfying.

Target audience
The target audience for the Drum Loop is high school students. It is my hope that
the app’s simplicity also makes it accessible to younger children, and that its depth
offers the opportunity for meaningful creative engagement by adult beginners. While
the Drum Loop presumes no musical knowledge or experience of any kind, it may still
be of some value to intermediate musicians, especially those without a background in
drumming, percussion or dance music production.

Rhythm appreciation
Rhythm is much neglected in music education, unless you study drums or
percussion specifically. Western musical pedagogy devotes enormous attention to
harmony, but gives only the most cursory consideration to rhythm. There is a shortage
of opportunity for students to consider the aesthetic and emotional meaning of rhythm,
beyond simply the ability to follow and execute it correctly. For example, Temperley
(2010) posits syncopation as a kind “rhythmic dissonance.” The rhythms of common-
practice classical music are organized hierarchically, with notes on weak beats

61
conditional on the adjacent strong beat notes. Syncopation is the violation of this
hierarchy, making weak beats more salient than strong beats.

All music contains structures of rhythmic tension and resolution as rich with
metaphorical meaning as their harmonic equivalents. Indeed, the rhythmic structures
of music can be considered to be more fundamental. A great deal of world music lacks
triadic harmony, and is largely or entirely unpitched. By contrast, it is difficult to find
music without any rhythmic structure. (I would debate whether completely rhythm-less
music is even possible.)

The Drum Loop relates rhythmic dissonance to “angular dissonance.” The

strongest beats fall on the largest subdivisions of the circle: 180 degrees, then 90 and 270
degrees, then 45, 135, 225 and 315 degrees. The weakest beats fall on the smallest
subdivision of the circle. For a sixteen-step pattern, those are 22.5 degrees, 67.5 degrees,
112.5 degrees, and so on. Students with no ear for rhythm whatsoever may nevertheless
find the visual equivalent to be quite intuitive, with a sense that the cardinal angles are
more “basic” somehow than oblique angles. Through extended exposure, such students
should be able to translate their visual intuition into musical intuition.

The backbeat
The common feature of nearly all western dance music is the accented backbeat.
A backbeat rhythm places percussive accents on the “back” half of the phrase, as
opposed to the more metrically salient front half. In 4/4 time, the backbeats are beats
two and four. Alternatively, in cut time, the backbeat is the third beat of each measure.
The snare drum most commonly carries the backbeat, but it can be accented by any
instrument. In early twentieth century American music, accented backbeats were quite
common, but the term “backbeat” itself did not enter widespread use until the early
1950s (Baur, 2012). The backbeat originated in Dixieland jazz, country and gospel, and it
became a defining characteristic of rock, funk, R&B and hip-hop. The backbeat and its
associated music styles have been considered throughout their history to be
disreputable, low-class, primitive and barbaric, even threatening to undermine the
moral fabric of society entirely. This is unsurprising, given the backbeat’s origins in
marginalized groups: African-Americans, rural whites and immigrants.

The backbeat arose independently from early jazz banjo and piano, climactic
embellishments in “Chicago-style” jazz drumming, New Orleans processional
drumming, handclaps and tambourine hits in sanctified gospel music, staccato guitar
and mandolin accompaniment in country music, and slap bass techniques in both
country and jazz (Tamlyn, 1998). The backbeat gradually expanded its role over the
course of the twentieth century from an accent or embellishment to a foundational
rhythmic gesture.

Why is the backbeat so compelling? Why has it come to dominate global popular
music? The answer may be its balance between surprise and predictability. The
backbeat is a form of syncopation, but it is the least destabilizing form of syncopation.
We can define metric salience as the number of equally sized subdivisions of the

62
musical pattern it takes to reach a given position. The more subdivisions it takes to
reach a given event, the lower its metrical salience. The downbeat is the most salient
position, while the backbeat is the second most salient. We understand syncopated
patterns better when the syncopations happen in more metrically salient positions
(Ladinig, Honing, Háaden & Winkler, 2009). The backbeat is syncopated enough to be
interesting, while still being metrically salient enough to be understood.

Nearly all of the patterns included in the Drum Loop’s exercises use a backbeat.
Users will quickly come to appreciate how fundamental the snare hits on the east and
west of each pattern are to creating the groove so familiar from the music around them.

Visualizing evenness and modularity

Why are traditional rhythms like clave patterns so compelling even after a great
many repetitions? Perhaps we are reacting to symmetries that are challenging to detect
on a one-dimensional timeline, but that are readily apparent on a two-dimensional
circle. For example, this illustration of 2-3 son clave by Barth (2011) shows an axis of
reflective symmetry between the fourth and twelfth beats of the pattern. This symmetry
is considerably less obvious when viewed in more conventional notation. We may be
responding to these symmetries without being able to easily parse them completely,
which sustains our attention across long timescales.

Traditional rhythms have a tendency toward “evenness,” a relatively equal

distribution of beats across different regions of the metrical unit. This makes sense from
an attentional standpoint; excessively long intervals of silence make us lose the thread
of the beat, and undermine its “drive” (Toussaint, 2013). The most sophisticated
rhythmic cultures use beats that are even, but not perfectly symmetrical. The drumming
practices of Africa and the Caribbean balance a steadily predictable beat with

63
destabilizing syncopation, to hold the listener’s interest without confounding the sense
of groove.

Claves often hold our attention by means of a rhythmic call-and-response

structure. The first part of the pattern poses a “question” by creating rhythmic tension
(syncopation), and the second part answers the question by releasing tension. The 3-2
form of son clave creates tension in its first half with three onsets spaced three pulses
apart, in conflict with the underlying duple meter. The second half has two onsets
spaced two pulses apart, with the second on the relatively strong backbeat.

[I]n the most interesting rhythms with k onsets and timespan n, k and n are
relatively prime (have no common divisor larger than 1). This property is natural
because the rhythmic contradiction is easier to obtain if the onsets do not
coincide with the strong beats of the meter (Demaine, Gomez-Martin, Meijer,
Rappaport, Taslakian, Toussaint, Winograd & Wood, 2009).

Traditional rhythms also make use of modularity, rotating groupings of beats around
the circle like beads on a necklace. The three-against-two hemiola common to Afro-
Cuban patterns is easy to conceptualize once viewed on a circular graph; one simply
skips around the circle in increments of three. This is quite similar to the way that we
can use the circle of half steps or the circle of fifths to understand harmonic
relationships and transpositions.

A planned feature of the Drum Loop will multitouch gestures to give users
access to the expressive possibilities of rhythmic modularity. By twisting a ring with
three fingers, the user will be able to rotate the drum hits in that ring any number of
units earlier or later, during playback if they so choose. Rhythmic transformations that
would normally require very sophisticated music-reading and performance skills to
understand and execute will thereby be effortlessly accessible to beginners.

Teaching computational thinking

One could consider written music to be a method for “programming” human
musicians. The analogy between programming and music composition becomes more
direct when the musician is a computer. Drum and synthesizer programming makes the
connection literal. A key concept in programming is that a particular activity or task is
expressed as a series of individual steps or instructions that can be executed by the
computer. Like a recipe, a sequence of programming instructions specifies the behavior
or action that should be produced. In music, the behaviors and actions are notes and
drum hits. The composer must specify various parameters for these events: when
should they happen? What should be their pitches and durations? What sounds should
they produce? What timbres should those sounds possess?

Music composition involves the computational concept of control flow. Loops

are a fundamental organizing principle in both programming and music, particularly in
dance music. Both domains make extensive use of the recursive nesting of loops within
loops. The musical command “repeat until cue” is an exact parallel to the while loop.

64
Composers and programmers alike benefit from the ability to modularize and re-use
units of code.

Beyond computational concepts, music also opens doors into the broader social
context in which programmers operate. Building on other the work of others has been a
longstanding practice in programming (Brennan & Resnick, 2012). It makes little sense
to write commonplace code like sorting algorithms, database structures or device
drivers from scratch when you have easy access to open source examples via the
internet. The open-source ethic of programmers enables them to develop much more
complex software than would be possible if everyone worked in complete isolation.
Musicians similarly benefit from a culture of re-use and remixing, though we usually do
not think in those terms explicitly. Why work through every possible note or chord
combination by trial and error when you can use a standard scale, motif or chord
progression?

Both in programming and music, reusing and remixing require critical code-
reading capacities, and they provoke difficult questions about ownership and
authorship. When is it reasonable to borrow from others? What constitutes appropriate
credit and attribution? How should teachers assess cooperative and collaborative work?
Is originality the chief virtue, or is the result the only important basis for judgment?

Students who learn through creative undertakings face a psychological obstacle

around the notion of failure. In traditional schooling, being wrong is shameful. But
programmers almost never get it right the first time. They fail, and iterate, and fail
differently, and then iterate some more. A program is never totally finished; there is
always another bug to chase down, another feature to implement, something that could
be executed more elegantly. This is why the software we use every day is constantly
being updated. A strong parallel exists with music. It is a truism among musicians that
a piece is never finished; you simply stop working on it. The iterative nature of creative
practice like programming and music can be at odds with the success/failure binary
that predominates in schooling, as we will explore in the following section.

65
Creating a beginner-friendly environment
The electronic musician Tor Bruce (personal communication, February 10, 2013)
offers an excellent set of criteria for a beginner-oriented music application:

If someone who doesn't know the first thing about music, and never used the
software before, sits down and tries it out for a couple of minutes, will they be
able to make something that sounds like music? Or will the output just be
random sounds, without even the most basic harmony or rhythm in place? Is
this an app for making music, or just an app for making sounds (from which
you can make music, if you already know how music is made)?

When studying an instrument, it can be weeks, months or even years before it is

possible to produce a satisfyingly musical sound. Software is easier than acoustic
instruments, but beginners can still be easily discouraged by the difficulty of producing
something that sounds good. The Drum Loop imposes some limitations on the user that
are designed to make it impossible to produce totally unmusical sounds. By giving the
user “freedom from choice,” users are not overwhelmed with a rush of new concepts.

Avoiding skeuomorphism
There is a widespread tendency in musical interface designers toward
skeuomorphism, the practice of retaining ornaments and metaphors from older
technology that were necessary in the original, but are unnecessary in simulation.
Graphical representations of “realistic” hardware like mixers, rack-mounted effects
processors, amplifiers and so on are ubiquitous in music software. These visual cues are
informative and helpful if the user is familiar with the original equipment. However,
for a great many users, the software is their first experience of any kind of music
production tool. They must learn hardware interfaces by clumsily manipulating
onscreen graphics

The Drum Loop eschews skeuomorphism. Its visual vocabulary consists entirely
of flat-colored geometric shapes and text. The graphics refer to no other experience
except the Drum Loop itself. In addition to the lack of distracting or misleading visual
metaphors, the flat design has the added virtue of being attractive in its own right,
drawing the user in.

Enforcing 4/4 time

Nearly all electronic dance music is in 4/4 time. Very occasionally, one may
encounter triple meter or more complex time signatures. The Drum Loop could easily
be programmed to support any arbitrary time signature simply by changing the
number of wedges. But it was decided that the user should be limited to time signatures
that are idiomatic to dance music. The Max prototype allowed the user to select

66
between loops of eight, twelve, sixteen or thirty-two steps in length. However, for the
sake of simplicity, the iOS app is limited to eight or sixteen step patterns only. Perhaps a
future version will offer “advanced mode” in which the user can select any number of
steps.

Common time and cut time

Even when we are confined to 4/4, the tactus (the perceived underlying pulse) is
a matter of some confusion. Martens (2011) demonstrates how tactus choices are
ambiguous between individuals and within musical excerpts, demonstrating that they
do not have a straightforward basis in tempo. Untrained listeners search for the tactus
in surface features of the music, but if they do not detect a consistent pulse there, they
will seek it at the next metrical level up. A single individual can hear the same piece of
music as possessing a different tactus on different listenings.

Given the inherent ambiguity in the definition of a beat, labeling the steps in a
time-unit box system poses a challenge. Should each step be an eighth note? A sixteenth
note? A thirty-second note? Common 4/4 time uses a sixteenth-note pulse, placing
snare backbeats on beats two and four. However, many musicians dislike having to
read sixteenth notes, and prefer to use cut time. The pulse is counted twice as fast, so
the snare backbeat is the third beat of each measure. In my experience, formally trained
musicians tend to prefer common time, while informally trained musicians (like myself)
tend to prefer cut time. For beginners, the distinction between the two is a major source
of confusion.

The Roland TR-808 drum machine evades the common versus cut time issue by
simply labeling the steps in the drum pattern one through sixteen. Users can choose to
interpret those numbers how they see fit. One must simply learn that snare hits go on
steps five and thirteen. The steps are grouped by color into sets of four, which helps
visualize the metrical scheme, but it is far from a user-friendly system. Most software
drum machine interfaces use a variation on the TR-808 paradigm.

The Drum Loop allows the user to choose between common time (each wedge is
a sixteenth note) and cut time (each wedge is an eighth note.) The grid looks the same
either way; only the labeling of the wedges changes. Rather than having to count steps,
users can use visual cues to conceptualize the metrical scheme. Snare backbeats fall on
right and left, or three o’clock and nine o’clock, or east and west, however you prefer to
think. Beginners do not need to worry about the nomenclature; they can focus on the
broader concept of time being subdivided equally. Users may toggle the common/cut
time switch out of curiosity, which presents an opportunity for self-directed learning.

Sounds and drum kits

The number of sounds in each Drum Loop kit is limited by the spatial constraints
of the user interface. It is practical to include at most eight sounds in a given kit;
otherwise the grid rings become too narrow to be easily read and written to.

67
 All kits have the same four basic sounds: kick, snare, and closed and open hi-hat.
Many dance beats require no sounds beyond these four. Each kit also has four more
ornamental sounds: clap, rim shot, ride cymbal, bells, congas, tambourine and so on.
Due to onscreen space limitations, the Max prototype was only able to accommodate six
sounds per kit, a significant limitation of the ring spacing scheme (see below.) In theory,
using the current layout, any number of sounds could be included, but eight represents
a reasonable compromise between variety and simplicity.

The initial three drum kits were acoustic, hip-hop and techno. All three were
sampled from Ableton Live for expediency. The acoustic kit uses one of Ableton’s rock
drum kits; the hip-hop kit consists of Roland TR-808 samples; and the techno kit uses
Roland TR-909. (If I release the Drum Loop commercially, I will need to create my own
samples.) The problem is that these three kits were insufficient for all of the patterns I
wished to include, especially the Afro-Cuban ones. So several more specialized kits
needed to be developed to accommodate the different needed combinations of
percussion sounds. Specific patterns are associated with certain kits by default,
although the user is welcome to change them.

I struggled to find a set of eight drum sounds that could accommodate the
stylistic range of the lessons. One possible solution would have been to use different
drum instruments in the three kits, giving a possible twenty-four different sounds total.
Practically, though, fewer drum sounds were possible because all kits needed to have
basic sounds in common. The problem was that if, say, the cowbells were included in
the Acoustic kit and the congas in the Techno kit, there would be no way to use those
sounds in the techno and acoustic timbres respectively.

The ultimate solution was to expand the list of drum kits to have six different kits
comprised of a total fourteen drum and percussion instruments: kick drum, snare
drum, closed hi-hat, open hi-hat, handclap, rim shot, tambourine, shaker, ride cymbal,
crash cymbal, high conga, low conga, high cowbell and low cowbell. All kits include
kick, snare, and closed and open hi-hat. Each kit has four additional more specialized
sounds, as follows:
• Soul kit: clap, rim, tambourine, shaker
• Rock kit: clap, rim, ride, crash
• Conga kit: rim, ride, high conga, low conga
• Bell kit: rim, ride, high bell, low bell

The Hip-Hop and Techno kits use the same set of instruments as the Soul kit.
However, rather than using the Soul kit’s acoustic samples, the Hip-Hop and Techno
kits contain equivalent instruments sampled from drum machines.

A wider variety of sounds would present a wider variety of sonic choices.

However, placing strict limits on the sounds available has its own creative advantage. It
eliminates option paralysis and forces users to concentrate on creating interesting
patterns rather than struggling to choose from a long list of sounds.

68
Tone, velocity and effects
In the current version, the Drum Loop does not offer any tone controls like
duration, pitch, EQ and the like. This choice was due to a combination of expediency
and the push to reduce option paralysis. However, velocity (loudness) control is a high-
priority future feature. While nuanced velocity control is not necessary for the artificial
aesthetic of electronic dance music, a basic loud/medium/soft toggle would make the
Drum Loop a more useful production tool. For example, the “Ashley’s Roachclip” break
has a tambourine hit on every sixteenth note. When these hits played at a uniform
velocity throughout, the result is exceptionally awkward; the pattern only sounds
musical when each alternate hit is softer. The planned user interface design for velocity
is to default all drum hits to medium. Users can then swipe upwards or downwards on
a filled cell to toggle the velocity to loud or soft respectively. Velocity will be indicated
with greater color saturation for loud and less color saturation for soft.

Color and typography

The goal with the color scheme is to make user interface elements maximally
distinguishable, while still using an economy of colors, re-using wherever possible.
Initial versions of the design, including the Max/MSP prototype, used a white
background. This choice makes sense on a desktop or laptop screen, but is less
satisfying on an iPad. Many iOS music apps use dark or black backgrounds, including
GarageBand, O-Generator, Loopseque and (to a lesser extent) Figure. The dark
background forced the use of light-colored text, the brighter the better for legibility.

69
 Nearly all text is Helvetica Bold, though text boxes and menu options are regular
Helvetica for ease of legibility.

Menu structure
The menu structure is diagrammed below.

70
71
 The main menu is the first screen visible when the app loads.

The other menus follow an identical graphical presentation; for example, here is the
screen listing the Breakbeat exercises.

72
The major design challenge: maximizing
the target area within the grid
As I began to make my first concept images, a practical difficulty of the radial
grid presented itself immediately: the innermost grid cells were unusably small. I
discovered this difficulty when I had trouble lining up the Photoshop paint bucket tool
to fill in the cells. If I struggled to hit the targets with a one-pixel crosshair, how would
users be able to accurately hit them with fingers on a touchscreen? This problem turned
out to be the single greatest design conundrum of the project, and it took a series of
iterations to solve.

The three-dimensional torus solution

My fellow Music Technology student Don Bosley was interested in possibly
collaborating on a commercial version of the Drum Loop, and convened a group of
programmers and designers to discuss the idea. One solution to the target area problem
was proposed: instead of a two-dimensional radial grid, we could map the grid to a
three-dimensional torus. The advantage
was that each grid cell could then be
generously sized. However, only a few
rings would be visible at a time; to access
the others, the user would need to
somehow twist the torus inside out. We
nicknamed this solution “the groove
donut.”

The idea continues to intrigue me,

but it has two main difficulties. First,
representing such a mathematical object is
a significant programming challenge.
Second, there is an existing rhythm app
that uses a toroidal representation of time,
The Donut by Strange Agency, shown at
right. It is an appealing and futuristic
looking interface, but after considerable
effort, we were unable to make any sense
of it. We therefore abandoned the “groove
donut” idea quickly.

73
The spiral ramp solution
A drum loop unspooling in time has
the topology of a spiral, not a circle. The drum
patterns could be visualized using a spiral
“parking garage” ramp, the Riemann surface
f(z) = log z. To the right is a hand-drawn
rendering of such a spiral ramp by Penrose
(2004).

However conceptually elegant this

solution would be, however, it posed the
same practical obstacle as the “groove donut,”
or really any three-dimensional object
rendered on a two-dimensional screen: only a
portion of the ramp would be visible at any
one time. The user would have to continually
rotate the ramp in three dimensions. This ran
against my requirement of simplicity, in
addition to the programming challenge it
would have posed.

Logarithmic radii
By the time we created the Max prototype, I had arrived at a purely two-
dimensional solution: to maximize the area of every grid cell by spacing the radii
logarithmically. (In effect, this created a two-dimensional projection of a three-
dimensional sphere bulging “outward” toward the user in the center.) We initially
hoped to produce the radius values dynamically in code, but JavaScript lacked the
necessary mathematical functionality. Instead, we used the logspace function in Matlab
to generate a vector of logarithmically
spaced values that we then hard-coded into
an array in the JavaScript UI code.

The logspace function takes in three

values a, b and n, and generates n points
between decades 10^a and 10^b. We
generated seven points between decades 10
and 1 and normalized them to fit within the
total size of the grid:

(1.0-((logspace(1.0, 0, 7))./10));
ans./max(ans);
ans*.97

74
 This solution produced equally-sized cells throughout the grid and made for an
attractive graphic, but it was still ultimately unsatisfactory. The innermost cells became
long, narrow wedges, and the outermost cells became thin arcs. Both shapes were still
difficult target areas.

Radii at equal intervals

When we began the iOS version of the Drum Loop, Christopher quickly threw
together a grid with equally spaced radii for expediency. We had this version under our
eyes for several weeks, and during that time, its attractiveness grew on me. It is simple
and clean-looking, and has the added virtue of being easy to represent algorithmically.

How, then, to reconcile these advantages with the problem of uneven cell size?

Variable radii
A new approach to the radius problem was inspired by Eric Rosenbaum's
sampling application MmmTsss—the name refers to the sounds you make with your
mouth and throat to simulate a techno beat. MmmTsss is a simple multitrack looping
program, with each track represented by amplitude blobs around a circle. The circles
are concentric, and each new track adds a circle on the outside, pushing the existing

75
circles inwards. As the user selects a circle, it expands to fill most of the application
window. This is as an exceptionally elegant solution to the problem of inner circles
being unusably small, and inspired the ultimate solution to the ring sizing problem:
varying their size dynamically.

In the Drum Loop, tapping the name of a drum sound while playback is stopped
makes its home ring double in radius, while the other radii become proportionally
smaller to accommodate it. (I misremembered MmmTsss as working this way, rather
than simply zooming in and out.) The target area becomes reasonably sized, and also
reinforces the connection between the name of the sound and its corresponding ring
previously indicated only by color. The size cue also makes the app considerably more
accessible to colorblind users, a requirement we discovered inadvertently during testing
of the Max prototype. This image shows the Funky Drummer exercise with the snare
drum ring selected:

76
 The variable ring size also solves another problem that unexpectedly arose
during testing of the Max/MSP prototype, that of visually indicating which ring plays
which sound. An obvious solution would have been text labels within the rings
themselves, but that proved to be an unworkable solution. Either the text paths would
need to curved algorithmically or each label would need to be a static PNG. Either way,
the text would layer awkwardly with the other information presented in the grid, and
would become unreadably small toward the center of the circle.

The rings default to being equal in radius. This makes the area of the outermost
ring much larger than the inner one. While this initially appeared to be a design
deficiency, it became apparent that it had advantages as well. Placing more salient
sounds on the outside rather than the inside gives visual reinforcement to their greater
importance. The foundational kick and snare are larger than more “ornamental” sounds
like tambourine and handclaps, and therefore seem more significant.

During playback, sounds can be entered live simply by tapping the name label.
Some users will prefer entering sounds this way, especially if they have some
percussion experience. This mode makes the target size within the grid irrelevant; now
we need only be concerned with the size of the labels, which are quite generous.

77
Drum patterns and exercises
In keeping with the constructivist value of working with authentic cultural
materials, the exercises in the Drum Loop are based on rhythms drawn from actual
dance music. Most of the patterns are breakbeats—drums and percussion sampled from
funk, rock and soul recordings that have been widely repurposed in electronic dance
and hip-hop music. There are also generic rock, pop and dance rhythms, as well as an
assortment of traditional Afro-Cuban patterns.

In each exercise, the users are presented with a pattern. They may alter this pattern
as they see fit by adding and removing drum hits, and by rotating instrument parts
within their respective rings. There are restraints of various kinds, to ensure that the
results are appealing and musical-sounding. The restraints are tighter for more basic
exercises, and looser for more advanced ones. For most exercises, the learning value is
in the user’s engagement with an influential or historic rhythm, and in the springboard
for creativity that it provides. But in some instances, there is an additional pedagogical
motivation, which is specified in the exercise description.

All descriptions of the following patterns are given in cut time. Unless otherwise
specified, each pattern is sixteen steps long, two measures of cut time.

Classic Breakbeats
The cultural richness of hip-hop and dance beats lies not just in the rhythms
themselves, but in their broader musical context. By tracing a breakbeat through the
various songs that sample it, one can glimpse a small lineage within the broader
musical genome. The web site WhoSampled.com is a crowdsourced repository of
samples, interpolations and covers. It is possible to trace a sample through several
generations of re-use and quotation.

What constitutes a “classic” breakbeat? I used two criteria: frequency with which
the break has been sampled, signifying cultural significance, and musical
distinctiveness, to give a diverse array of examples. The top ten most sampled
breakbeats appearing in commercial recordings, according to Whosampled.com, are:

1. “Impeach the President” by the Honey Drippers (1973)

2. “Funky Drummer” by James Brown (1970)
3. “Synthetic Substitution” by Melvin Bliss (1973)
4. “Amen, Brother” by The Winstons (1969)
5. “It’s a New Day” by Skull Snaps (1973)
6. “Apache” by the Incredible Bongo Band (1973)
7. “Papa Was Too” by Joe Tex (1966)
8. “Hihache” by the Lafayette Afro Rock Band (1973)
9. “The Big Beat” by Billy Squier (1980)
10. “Ashley’s Roachclip” by The Soul Searchers (1971)

78
 There is some musical redundancy in this list. For example, “Synthetic Substitution,”
“It’s a New Day” and “Hihache” are all nearly identical patterns. So I chose to
supplement the top ten with other well-known breakbeats in a broader variety of styles.

The Funky Drummer

“The Funky Drummer Parts One And Two” by James Brown and the JBs is one
of the most-sampled recordings in history. It takes the form of open-ended groove, with
extended solos traded back and forth between James Brown on organ and Maceo Parker
on tenor saxophone. Four and a half minutes into the recording, James Brown tells the
band: “Fellas, one more time I want to give the drummer some of this funky soul we got
going here.” He tells drummer Clyde Stubblefield, “You don’t have to do no soloing,
brother, just keep what you got… Don’t turn it loose, ’cause it’s a mother.”

Though he was only eighteen years old at the time of the “Funky Drummer”
session, Clyde Stubblefield was already a master drummer. On the recording, James
Brown tells him not to cut loose and solo because it might break up the groove and let
all the air out of the balloon. So when his cue comes, Stubblefield continues to play the
main rhythm pattern, with more emphasis but not a lot of variation. James Brown does
a short rap over the beat and then counts the band back into the original vamp. While
the band plays, he names the tune on the spot:

The name of this tune is The Funky Drummer

The Funky Drummer
The Funky Drummer
The Funky Drummer
The Funky Drummer
The Funky Drummer

The Funky Drummer drum break was much-loved by the first generation of hip-hop
producers. They sampled it enthusiastically and repeatedly. In 1986, Polydor
capitalized on James Brown’s new-found cachet and released In The Jungle Groove, a
compilation record of the hard-edged, open-ended funk grooves preferred by hip-hop
listeners. This compilation was the first album release of “The Funky Drummer Parts
One And Two.” It also included a remix called the “Funky Drummer Bonus Beat
Reprise,” the Clyde Stubblefield drum break looped for three minutes with samples of
James Brown’s raps overlaid periodically.

The Funky Drummer break has been sampled in thousands of tracks, from hip-
hop to pop to rock to every flavor of electronica. James Brown even sampled it himself,
on “She Looks All Types A’ Good.” Public Enemy used the break on seven different
tracks, and they refer to it by name in opening lines of “Fight The Power.”

1989, the number, another summer

Sound of the Funky Drummer

Stewart (2000) traces James Brown’s rhythmic style to three major sources: African and
Caribbean culture as filtered through New Orleans; a style of gospel singing and

79
clapping known as “rocking and reeling;” and bluegrass and string band music. The
Funky Drummer template is a cornerstone of hip-hop and many other American dance
styles: a phrase beginning with an eighth-note/eighth-note/quarter-note figure
(“boom-boom-cha”) that then becomes more varied and syncopated (Greenwald 2002).
While the bass drum states the pulse in most dance music, in hip-hop, it does so only
rarely. Instead, after sounding the first downbeat in each hypermeasure, the bass drum
often falls into a sparse syncopated pattern. The snare drum is most often placed on the
backbeats, along with additional weak beats.

Exercise: the pattern is given, and steps one through five (the “boom-boom-cha”) are
locked. Users are free to alter the rest of the pattern as they see fit. The pedagogical goal
is to demonstrate the versatility of the Funky Drummer template: a simple boom-boom-
cha beginning followed by a more complex or unpredictable response.

Take Me to the Mardi Gras (Agogô)

Bob James‘ instrumental version of Paul Simon’s song “Take Me to Mardi Gras”
has a distinctive opening: a funk beat played on drum kit, an African bell pattern and
samples of radio chatter and static. This introduction has been sampled in hundreds of
hip-hop songs. Its most iconic usage is in “Peter Piper” by Run-DMC, which was itself
sampled in “Work It” by Missy Elliott. The bell pattern is an example of Agogô, from a

80
Yoruba word meaning gong or bell. Agogô spread from West Africa to America via the
Caribbean, where it also became one of the foundational sounds of samba.

Exercise: The pattern is given. The kick, snare and hi-hat are locked. The user is free to
alter the bell pattern and hi-hats, and to add rim and ride cymbal. This is in contrast to
the Afro-Cuban exercises described below, where the bell patterns are locked and the
user is free to create supporting rhythms around them.

Impeach the President

The opening seconds of “Impeach The President” by the Honey Drippers have
become the most sampled breakbeat in history. Shields (2010) claims that about one hip-
hop song in five samples “Impeach The President.” That seems improbable, but
according to Whosampled.com, the break has verifiably been sampled on at least one
commercially released recording every year since 1987. Examples include:
• Audio Two – “Top Billin’” (which was, in turn, sampled in “Real Love” by
Mary J Blige)
• De la Soul – “Ring Ring Ring (Hey Hey Hey)”
• Digable Planets – “Rebirth of Slick (Cool Like Dat)”
• Eric B and Rakim – “Move the Crowd”
• Nas – “I Can”

81
 • Nice & Smooth – “Funky for You”
• Notorious B.I.G. – “Ready to Die” and “Unbelievable”
• Slick Rick – “It’s a Boy”
• Wu-Tang Clan – “Wu-Tang Clan Ain’t Nothin’ to F**k Wit’”

Exercise: the pattern is given. The two most distinctive features of the rhythm, the
slightly asymmetric kick drum pattern and the open hi-hat accent, are locked. The user
is free to create new patterns around them.

Cold Sweat
“Cold Sweat” by James Brown is a cornerstone both of hip-hop and more
uptempo breakbeat-based music like drum n bass. On James Brown’s album of the
same name, “Cold Sweat” sits alongside jazz standards like “Nature Boy” and run-of-
the-mill blues and R&B. Compared to those more traditional songs, “Cold Sweat”
sounds like it belongs in another era entirely. It has a radically simple two-chord
structure and an African-influenced intricacy to its rhythmic groove, making it sound
quite fresh more than thirty years after its release.

“Cold Sweat” has been a particularly rich source of inspiration for Public Enemy,
who sample it on “How to Kill a Radio Consultant,” “Prophets of Rage” and “Welcome
To The Terrordome.” The latter track has itself been sampled and quoted many times,

82
by KRS-One, Non Phixion and Ice Cube, among others. Mongo Santamaria’s cover
version of “Cold Sweat” spawned a much-sampled breakbeat of its own.

Exercise: the pattern is given, and the driving quarter-note ride cymbal pattern is
locked. The user must find rhythms within the constraint of the single-bar pattern and
with its quarter-note pulse.

When The Levee Breaks

John Bonham’s drum intro from Led Zeppelin’s “When The Levee Breaks” is
irresistible to samplers for its stately grandeur and its arrestingly strange timbre. The
song was recorded by engineer Andy Johns in Headley Grange, a Victorian-era
poorhouse in England. Bonham’s drum kit was placed at the bottom of a large stairwell,
and the microphones were placed at the top of the stairs three stories above. The
stairwell created a huge natural reverb. The tape was then slowed slightly, lowering the
pitch and giving the sound a thick, sludgy quality.

The Levee break is popular in hip-hop not just for its timbre, but for its kick
drum pattern. While a typical rock beat has a kick on every downbeat, the Levee break
anticipates its second kick to the "and" of four, giving it a syncopated funk feel. Outside
of hip-hop, high-profile uses of the Levee break include “Damn, I Wish I Was Your
Lover” by Sophie B. Hawkins and “Army Of Me” by Björk.

83
Exercise: The pattern is given. The kicks on the downbeat and the "and" of four are
locked. The user must create a pattern that matches this asymmetry.

Genre templates
The central animating philosophy of the Drum Loop is to use real-world musical
examples rather than artificially contrived ones. Nevertheless, there is some value in
exploring generic examples of various major rhythm styles.

Basic rock
Rock beats are typically less rhythmically complex than those in dance or hip-
hop. The vast majority of rock drum patterns feature kicks on each downbeat and
snares on the backbeats. Aside from the backbeats, syncopation is limited to
embellishments, or is entirely absent. Two conspicuous exceptions are found in “The
Big Beat” by Billy Squier, which features a prominent kick drum anticipating the first
backbeat, and “When the Levee Breaks” by Led Zeppelin, in which the kick anticipates
the second backbeat rather than hitting it squarely. It is no accident that these two

84
patterns are staple hip-hop samples, and they are addressed in other exercises. Here the
purpose is to engage a more standard rock rhythm.

Exercise: The kick and snare are locked on the downbeats and backbeats respectively.
There are unlocked closed hi-hats on each quarter note. The user is free to alter the hi-
hat pattern and the unlocked kicks, and to layer on other drum hits.

Basic hip-hop
Like rock, hip-hop beats are anchored by snare backbeats. Also like rock, there
are typically closed hi-hats on the strong beats, or on every beat. However, unlike rock,
hip-hop kick drum patterns are highly syncopated after the initial downbeat. In fact, the
kick is almost never found on the second downbeat in hip-hop beats.

85
Exercise: There is a locked kick on the first downbeat and locked snares on each
backbeat. There are also unlocked closed hi-hats on the quarter notes and unlocked
kicks playing syncopated accents. Users are free to change any of these; however, a
popup text box encourages them to leave the kick off of the second downbeat.

Four on the floor

Disco, house, techno and a great many other dance styles are based on a “four on
the floor” kick drum pattern, with kicks on all downbeats and backbeats. There may be
snares or claps on the backbeats, but unlike in rock or hip-hop, these are optional.
Closed hi-hats often appear on beats two and four of each measure, with further
syncopation being commonplace. “Four on the floor” patterns are essentially defined by
the tension between the kicks on the strongest beats and higher-pitched sounds on the
weaker beats.

86
Exercise: There are locked kicks on the downbeats and backbeats, the “four on the
floor” pattern . There are unlocked snares, claps and hi-hats filling out a typical house
beat. The user is free add additional kicks, and to add or remove the other instruments,
guaranteeing a result that is within the dance idiom.

Afro-Cuban exercises
American popular music is saturated with Afro-Cuban rhythms, though we are
frequently unaware of them. We may describe a piece of music as having a “Latin” or
“tribal” feel, or we may simply unconsciously enjoy the extra syncopational richness.
The Drum Loop includes six African and Latin American rhythms identified by
Toussaint (2013) as “fundamental.” When viewed in circular representations, these six
patterns share an interesting property: the pairwise sums of their “geodesics” (distances
between beats) are all equal (Demaine, Gomez-Martin, et al, 2009).

87
For the first three exercises, the rim pattern playing the clave is locked, as is the kick on
the first downbeat.

88
89
For the other three exercises, the locked clave pattern is played on bells.

90
Compositional challenges

While the Drum Loop mostly adheres to the constructivist principle of working
with authentic cultural artifacts, there are a few more abstract compositional exercises
included as well. These are intended to serve more as “icebreakers” than as carrying
any specific pedagogical or cultural content. Users who feel uncomfortable or
uninspired working with the existing patterns may be liberated by the more abstract
givens and constraints of these exercises.

Subtractive rhythm
Inspired by Ruthmann’s notion of carving from a “sound block” (2012), every
beat is initially activated. Needless to say, this sounds terrible. Deleting the “wrong”
notes can be easier than identifying the “right” ones. This exercise also communicates
the idea that silences are not simply the absence of sound, but rather are crucial
rhythmic elements in their own right.

91
Exercise: Create a rhythm by removing drum hits only.

The sound of silence (The Big Beat)

Beginner drum programmers have a natural tendency to want to make their
beats more “interesting” by filling all of the available space with activity. It is a
counterintuitive truth that simpler, less busy rhythms can be more attention-grabbing
and compelling. Silences create anticipation and encourage the listener to imaginatively
fill in the gaps, thus engaging them more actively with the beat. Some of the most
effective patterns are composed mostly of silence. “The Big Beat” by Billy Squier is a
classic example.

92
Exercise: The Big Beat pattern is given. Any hit can be turned on or off; however, no
more than half the wedges can contain a drum hit at any one time.

Monophonic rhythm
Over the course of implementing the iOS app, we have encountered some
unexpected behaviors. While these have been mostly undesired, they sometimes
stimulate new ideas. For example, while Christopher was able to make the app play
monophonic sound quite effortlessly, polyphony turned out to be significantly more
difficult. As a result, there was an extended period when the app could only play one
drum sound at a time. While working to resolve this problem, Christopher created a
series of monophonic drum loops, and these loops invariably sounded highly musical.
This inspired me to create a new programming exercise: the user creates a monophonic
loop in which no more than one sound plays in each wedge. Adding a sound to any
wedge automatically disables all of the other slots in that wedge. As with the previous
exercise, it reminds users that an economy of musical material can give the most
compelling results.

93
Exercise: A monophonic pattern is given. The user may alter it freely, but each wedge
can contain no more than one drum sound at a time. A more advanced exercise for
future addition: constrain the user to use each sound exactly once.

Random rhythm
This challenge is simple: aside from a kick on the first downbeat, the grid is filled
at random. The user must make musical sense of the result.

94
Exercise: The user adds or subtracts beats at will. In most exercises, the Reset button
restores the pattern to its initial state; in this one, the Reset button generates a new
random pattern.

95
Curriculum ideas
While the Drum Loop is well-suited to individual self-guided study, it is
intended for use in a creative classroom environment. Its most obvious application is in
general music class, but it can also be a useful basis for lessons and activities in
cultural/social studies and mathematics.

Music
The Drum Loop has always been predicated on a role in the music classroom.
There is some flexibility in what specifically that role would be. For teachers of drums
and percussion, the answer is clear. I would hope that the Drum Loop could also find a
place in the general music classroom, as a way to convey appreciation for the rich
history of the rhythms of pop and dance. Furthermore, the Drum Loop offers a new and
inviting doorway in for students who find it difficult to engage with music-making
through more traditional routes.

The Drum Loop may be a tough sell for more traditionally-minded teachers,
administrators and policy makers. The decades-long bitter struggle to include jazz in
the classroom is still unfolding; it will be many more decades before hip-hop and
techno follow suit. It is possible that the Afro-Cuban content may overcome some
doubts. Furthermore, the Drum Loop need not be the focus of the class; if students are
already writing and performing songs, the Drum Loop could be easily deployed as a
convenient accompaniment tool. This is the intended use case for the O-Generator,
which has found widespread classroom adoption in the United Kingdom. I hope for the
Drum Loop to find a similar role in the United States.

Cultural/social studies
It is impossible to separate the study of music from the study of its social, historical
and political context. Nowhere is this more true than in the music of the African
diaspora in America. The Drum Loop would be valuable as an entry point into a
contentious set of social and historical issues. By tracing son clave or the Funky
Drummer beat from Africa, through the Caribbean and into the American mass culture,
we can tell the stories of the people who played the beats, the people who danced to
them, the people who sold and bought them. Specific social studies topics could
include:
• The linearity of Eurocentric music versus the circularity of Afrocentric music—
does this pattern extend to other art forms beyond music?
• What is the connection between repetition and dance? What makes a beat fill (or
empty) the dance floor?

96
 • Are drum machine beats “real” music? Are they authentic? Are electronic
musicians “real” musicians? Are they practicing the same art form as violinists
and pianists?
• Why is dance music so closely tied up with notions of sin, transgression and
excess in America? Do all cultures regard dance music in this way? Why do we
expect pop and hip-hop stars to behave in such conspicuously “antisocial” ways?

Mathematics
The Drum Loop may be an easier sell for math teachers than music teachers.
Math teachers do not have a cultural canon to protect, and are eager to find ways to
make their subject livelier. The Drum Loop could be used to teach or reinforce the
following subjects:
• Fractions
• Ratios and proportional relationships
• Angles
• Polar vs Cartesian coordinates
• Symmetry: rotations, reflections
• Frequency vs duration
• Modular arithmetic
• The unit circle in the complex plane

Bamberger and DiSessa (2003) have an epigrammatic credo: “Music is embodied

mathematics.” They echo Gottfried Leibniz, who famously said in a letter to Christian
Goldbach on April 17, 1712 that “Music is a hidden arithmetic exercise of the soul,
which does not know that it is counting.” The mathematical content of music has been
appreciated since Pythagoras. Music has rich value for teaching symmetry,
transformations and invariants. It is also an effective tool for helping elementary school
students understand ratios, proportions, fractions, and common multiples, concepts
which they frequently find difficult to master (Bamberger & DiSessa, 2003). It is
significantly easier to learn standard notation once you are intuitively familiar with the
concepts encoded by the symbols. The same is true of mathematical language.

The mathematical term for a repetitive beat is periodicity. Music usually has
several levels of beats operating simultaneously: quarter notes, eighth notes, sixteenth
notes and so on. In mathematical language, there is a hierarchy of temporal
periodicities. The ratios between different periodic frequencies are intuitive when heard
in the context of a beat, but understanding them can be tricky and confusing when they
are represented mathematically. Bamberger and diSessa (2003) ask what we mean when
we say “faster” in a musical context. Trained musicians know that “faster” music refers
to a faster tempo. But novice musicians listen for surface features, so if the feel goes
from eighth notes to sixteenth notes, they will hear it as the music being “faster” even if
the tempo does not change. Novices further stumble on the idea that a larger frequency
or tempo means smaller beat durations, and vice versa.

Bamberger and DiSessa (2003) observe that graphic representations of music

should help students come to attend to patterns such as symmetry, balance, grouping

97
structures, orderly transformations, and structural functions. By “structural functions,”
the authors refer to medium-level musical entities like phrase boundaries, tension and
resolution. Conventional notation does not show structural function, but to novice
listeners, these are the most salient features of the music. Here, computer software can
be an invaluable aid, with its ability to use dynamically interactive color-coding and
spatial organization to convey meaning.

Specific kinds of music can help introduce particular mathematical concepts. For
example, Afro-Cuban patterns and other grooves built on hemiola are useful for
graphically illustrating the concept of least common multiples. If you have a kick drum
pattern playing every four units and a cowbell playing every three units, you can both
see and hear how they will line up every twelve units. Bamberger and diSessa (2003)
describe the “aha” moment that students have when they grasp this concept in a music
context. One student in their study is quoted as describing the twelve-beat cycle pulling
the other two beats together. Once students grasp least common multiples in a musical
context, they have a valuable new inroad into a variety of scientific and mathematical
concepts: harmonics in sound analysis, gears, pendulums, tiling patterns and much else.

The Drum Loop is designed to take the best pedagogical features of the MIDI
piano roll and enhance them. The spatial location of events helps reinforce their musical
function. Users can see and hear for themselves the difference between a drum hit on a
strong beat/cardinal point and weak beat/oblique angle. They can compare the
duration of the wedges with the rate at which the playback head sweeps around the
circle. They can double or halve the tempo, and compare that to doubling or halving the
number of wedges in the pattern.

By rotating beat patterns, students can experience mathematical transformation,

and hear its musical effect. This diagram from Toussaint (2005) shows (a) the Bembé
rhythm, (b) Bembé rotated clockwise by one unit, and (c) Bembé rotated clockwise by
seven units.

Symmetries and hierarchies of beat division are more apparent when reinforced by the
rotational and reflectional symmetries of the circle. Furthermore, the Drum Loop can
help students distinguish linear from rotational speed, and between linear speed and
frequency.

The Drum Loop would be more useful for the purposes of trigonometry and
circle geometry if it were presented slightly differently. Presently, the first beat of each

98
pattern is at twelve o’clock, with playback running clockwise. However, angles are
usually representing as originating at three o’clock and increasing in a counterclockwise
direction. To create “math mode,” the radial grid must be reflected left-to-right and
rotated ninety degrees.

In this scheme, math students could describe beats in geometric terms. Snare
drums usually fall on the backbeats, at 90 and 270 degrees. In the Funky Drummer beat,
there are additional snare hits at 157.5, 202.5, 247.5 and 337.5 degrees. The “round”
angles go with the strong beats, and the more “fractional” angles sound more
syncopated. More advanced math students could perform a similar exercise using polar
coordinates.

99
 Now the relationship between simple/complex ratios and strong/weak beats is
quite a bit more clear. Also, it is an intriguing coincidence that the angle !/8 represents
an eighth note. One could go even further with polar mode and use it as the unit circle
on the complex plane. From there, lessons could move into powers of e, the relationship
between sine and cosine waves, and other more advanced topics. The Drum Loop could
even be used to lay the ground work for concepts in electrical engineering, signal
processing and wave mechanics.

The New York State Learning Standards and Core Curriculum for Mathematics
state as one of its objective that students “make mathematical connections, and model
and represent mathematical ideas in a variety of ways.” In an effort to make the Drum
Loop maximally useful to public school teachers and students in meeting these goals, I
have examined the state learning standards and identified some pertinent subject areas;
these can be found in the Appendix.

100
Future work and feature wish list
Software development is extraordinarily time-consuming and labor intensive. As
of this writing, development of the Drum Loop is still underway. There are a great
many additional features we would like to include in the future that will make the app
a dramatically more robust and versatile tool.

The pattern sequencer

Sequencing multiple patterns remains something of an unsolved problem. There is
space across the bottom of the screen to store patterns in miniature form. Patterns
stored there will simply play in order from left to right.

101
 The unresolved questions are: how should patterns be stored and retrieved? Must
they be played back in sequence, or should the user be able to jump among them at will,
as in Ableton Live’s Session View and Loopseque? The number of loops in the
sequencer row is perfectly arbitrary, a function of the screen real estate available. Is ten
the optimum number? Should it be more or fewer? If more, should the sequencer then
occupy a screen view of its own? But in that case, how will the user see the current
pattern and the larger sequence simultaneously? Considerable additional design,
development and testing will be necessary to resolve these questions.

Two breakbeats of major historical significance had to be omitted from the Drum
Loop’s exercises because they are sixty-four steps long: the Amen break and the Apache
break. Manipulating these breaks in the Drum Loop would require the ability to string
at least four sixteen-step patterns together, and to able to effortlessly jump back and
forth from one to another.

The Amen break

Gregory Cylvester Coleman is simultaneously one of the most influential and
least known drummers in contemporary music. He was the drummer in a 1960s soul
band, The Winstons. His claim to fame is a five and a half second break in an obscure
song called “Amen, Brother,” the B-side to the minor Winstons hit “Color Him Father.”
This short drum break rivals "Impeach The President" as the most-sampled breakbeat in
history.

Ironically, it took several decades for “Amen, Brother” to come into any sort of
prominence. Hip-hop producers started sampling the drum break in the 1980s after a
pitched-down version was included on the first volume of Ultimate Breaks and Beats
(Flores, 1986). Since then, the break has become ubiquitous not just in hip-hop, but in
every style of dance music. It almost single-handedly spawned entire genres of
electronica, particularly especially drum n bass and its various offshoots. It appears in
TV theme songs and commercials. Casual music listeners have probably heard it in
dozens, if not hundreds, of recordings. Given the ubiquity of the Amen break, its
inclusion in the exercises would significantly enrich the Drum Loop’s ability to put the
genuine artifacts of our culture into the hands of students.

Apache
“Apache” was first written as ersatz Native American music by Jerry Lordan in
the late 1950s, inspired by a cowboys-and-Indians movie. A group of studio musicians,
Michael Viner’s Incredible Bongo Band, recorded a funk version with an energetic
drum and percussion break. This break was so ubiquitous in urban dance music of the
1980s that DJ Kool Herc describes it as “the national anthem of hip-hop” (Matos, 2005).
As with the Amen break, Apache deserves a place in the list of classic breakbeats
offered by the Drum Loop.

102
Exclusive open/closed hi-hat
On a real drum kit, it is not possible to play the hi-hat in open and closed
positions simultaneously. Drum machines usually allow you to play both open and
closed hi-hats simultaneously if you would like, though the resulting sound is quite
awkward. I would like the Drum Loop to observe the real-life constraint, both to give
users a sense of what is physically possible to play on a drum kit, and to constrain them
into more aesthetically satisfying outcomes.

Durations greater than one rhythmic unit

Some sounds spill across the grid lines because of their long decay times,
particularly ride and crash cymbals. Drum machines conventionally do not represent
these sounds any differently than transient hits. Drum hit durations are most often
controlled globally, for example with a single knob controlling the duration of all snare
hits. MIDI sequencers will often enable control of duration by making the bars longer or
shorter—if the drum sample is long enough, it simply cuts off when the MIDI event
ends.

How might the Drum Loop give more control over duration? One possibility
would be to have events able to occupy more than one grid cell. That would preclude
other events occupying those cells, but it would mirror physical reality, since playing a
drum usually terminates the previous hit’s decay. For the time being, however, the
present system is adequate. Having the duration of a sound be an inflexible parameter
of that sound is just one of many constraints that force “drum machine” thinking.

Participatory discrepancies
The Drum Loop is more like a hardware drum machine than a MIDI sequencer
in that rhythmic events can only occur precisely on the grid lines. There is no possibility
of introducing “humanized” imperfections, aside from the conspicuously artificial-
sounding swing function.

Butterfield (2010) argues that repetitive music does not bore us because we do
not hear each repetition as an instance of mechanical reproduction. Instead, we
experience the groove as a process, with each iteration creating suspense. Will this time
through the pattern lead to another repetition or a break in the pattern? Butterfield
describes a groove as a present that is “continually being created anew.” Each repetition
gains particularity from our memory of the immediate past and our expectations for the
future. The groove becomes more suspenseful if each iteration of the loop is slightly
different due to participatory discrepancies. There is tension between the expected
identical repetition and the imperfections of the actual performance. While the purely
mechanical sound of quantized beats holds its own hypnotic charms, it would be
wonderful to give Drum Loop users the option of using imperfectly quantized beats as
well.

Some production software like Ableton Live and Propellerhead Reason enable
the user to extract grooves from audio recordings. It is then possible to quantize MIDI

103
events to the “live” groove, rather than the strict grid. Adding such “groove templates”
to the Drum Loop would enrich its expressive possibilities significantly. There would be
tremendous additional pedagogical value to visualizing the participatory discrepancies
through slight resizing of the wedges, in a more complex version of the swing
functionality.

Arbitrary time signatures

Because nearly all contemporary
western dance music is in 4/4, there is no need
to support other time signatures for the Drum
Loop’s pedagogical goals. Nevertheless, there
is no technical reason why this must be so; in
theory the Drum Loop could support any
arbitrary number of beats per cycle. An early
version of the Max prototype had a pulldown
menu allowing the user to choose from a
variety of meters. A future version of the iOS
app might well support triple meter. Afro-
Cuban tradition has a variety of patterns in
6/8 and 12/8 time that would make the basis
for highly satisfying drum programming
exercises. For example, to the right, Toussaint
(2003) lists ten bell patterns in 12/8.

Similarly, there a variety of folk

rhythms from eastern Europe and the middle
east that can form the basis for exercises in 5/4, 7/4, 11/8 and other more complex time
signatures. A more advanced version of the Drum Loop could include these rhythms as
well.

The Drum Loop in the browser

Once the iPad version is complete and on the market, the next step will be to
create a browser-based version. There are a number of advantages to software in the
browser.
• Web-based apps are highly platform-agnostic.
• The user is not tied to a specific computer.
• Sharing and collaborating on work becomes effortless. This is especially valuable
for classroom teachers who wish to use the software for assignments.
• It is easier to integrate a web-based app with an active user community.
• Web-based apps can connect together, in the same way that iOS apps can.
Specifically, I would like to be able to integrate the Drum Loop with the online notation
tool Noteflight. Students struggling to learn the rhythmic aspects of notation would
benefit greatly from being able to jump back and forth between Noteflight’s formal
representation and the Drum Loop’s friendlier one. The two representations would

104
reinforce one another, strengthening both. Furthermore, Noteflight itself integrates with
a variety of other web services, most intriguingly YouTube. It is possible to use
Noteflight to create a synchronized score or transcription to any YouTube video. I am
quite attracted to the idea of finding a classic drum performance and scoring it with
Noteflight, the Drum Loop or both.

105
Discussion/Conclusion
As I stated in the introduction, this thesis poses a series of questions about the
present state of music education and software, and how the Drum Loop might
contribute. We may now answer these questions.

Music education practice in the area of beginner-level rhythm teaching is limited

by counterintuitive notation, a Eurocentric focus and disconnection from the culture of
dance music. Beginner-level music education can be made more engaging and effective
by incorporating constructivist methods: having students create music that is authentic
and personally meaningful. When students are able to construct their own knowledge
rather than passively receive it, they are more likely to experience flow, which carries a
variety of secondary psychological and intellectual benefits.

Software can support better music learning generally, and rhythmic learning in
particular, by supporting open-ended exploration and experimentation, and by
appealing to the morpheme-level intuitive knowledge of music possessed even by
beginners. The most intuitive rhythmic visualization and notation methods are the ones
that represent music as patterns in space. Musical time should map onto physical space
in a proportional way, so that longer musical events correspond to greater visual
lengths. Rhythmic notation should make clear which events are metrically related, and
how rhythm is built up recursively from cycles of cycles. It should also ideally show
symmetries in the music that may not be immediately apparent to the ear.

The Drum Loop fills the vacuum of a beginner-friendly yet substantive rhythm
tutorial app by combining an interface of toy-like simplicity with a wealth of real music
to be engaged with and internalized. The Drum Loop uses a playful approach to
rhythmic pedagogy. It encourages the user to tinker with the building blocks of dance
music, using them as springboards to the user’s own musical expression. Users can
match challenge to ability by making their way through the exercises built into the
Drum Loop at their own pace and in the order of their choosing. With the Drum Loop’s
beats in their ears and its visualization scheme in their mind’s eye, students should be
able to move more confidently into dance music production, classical notation and
theory or any other field of musical pursuit.

The Drum Loop can support not only the broader learning of music, but also
social and cultural studies and a numerous subjects in mathematics. It is my hope to
develop the Drum Loop to the point where it can find its place in classrooms across
different subject areas, or anywhere music is learned or played.

106
References
Ankney, K.L. (2012). Alternative representations for musical composition. Visions of
Research in Music Education, 20.

Bamberger, J., & DiSessa, A. (2003). Music As Embodied Mathematics: A Study Of A

Mutually Informing Affinity. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical
Learning, 8(2), 123–160.

Bamberger, J. (1996). Turning Music Theory On Its Ear. International Journal of

Computers for Mathematical Learning, 1: 33-55.

Bamberger, J. (1994). Developing Musical Structures: Going Beyond the Simples. In R.

Atlas & M. Cherlin (Eds.), Musical Transformation and Musical Intuition. Ovenbird
Press.

Barth, E. (2011). Geometry of Music. In Greenwald, S. and Thomley, J., eds., Essays in
Encyclopedia of Mathematics and Society. Ipswich, MA: Salem Press.

Bell, A. (2013). Oblivious Trailblazers: Case Studies of the Role of Recording Technology
in the Music-Making Processes of Amateur Home Studio Users. Doctoral dissertation,
New York University.

Benadon, F. (2007). A Circular Plot for Rhythm Visualization and Analysis. Music
Theory Online, Volume 13, Issue 3.

Brennan, K. (2013). Best of Both Worlds: Issues of Structure and Agency in

Computational Creation, In and Out of School. Doctoral Dissertation, Massachusetts
Institute of Technology.

Brower, C. (2008). Paradoxes of Pitch Space. Music Analysis, 27/1.

Brown, A. (2007). Software Development as Music Education Research. International

Journal of Education & the Arts. Volume 8, Number 6.

Butterfield, M. (2010). The Power of Anacrusis: Engendered Feeling in Groove-Based

Musics. Music Theory Online, 12 (4).

Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2009). Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience. New York:

Harper Perennial Modern Classics.

Custodero, L. (2002). Seeking challenge, finding skill: Flow experience in music

education. Arts Education and Policy Review, 103(3), 3–9.

107
Demaine, E.; Gomez-Martin, F.; Meijer, H.; Rappaport, D.; Taslakian, P.; Toussaint, G.;
Winograd, T.; & Wood, D. (2009). The Distance Geometry of Music. Computational
Geometry 42, 429–454.

Dillon, S., Adkins, B., Brown, A.R., & Hirche. K. (2008). Communities of sound:
generative music making and virtual ensembles. In Proceedings from 2008 Seminar of
the Commission for Community Music Activity. Rome, Italy.

Dillon, S. (2007). Music, Meaning and Transformation: Meaningful Music Making for
Life. Cambridge Scholars Publishing.

Farbood, M. M., Pasztor, E., & Jennings, K. (2004). Hyperscore: A graphical sketchpad
for novice composers. Computer Graphics and Applications, IEEE, 24(1), 50-54.

Forth, J.; Wiggin, G.; & McLean, A. (2010). Unifying Conceptual Spaces: Concept
Formation in Musical Creative Systems. Minds & Machines, 20:503–532.

Fosnot, C. (Ed.). (1996). Constructivism: Theory, Perspectives, and Practice. Teachers

College Press, Teachers College, Columbia University.

Gelineck, S. & Serafin, S. (2009). From Idea to Realization – Understanding the

Compositional Processes of Electronic Musicians. Proc. Audio Mostly, Glasgow,
Scotland, 2009.

Green, L. (2002). How Popular Musicians Learn: A Way Ahead for Music Education.
Surrey: Ashgate Publishing Group.

Harwood, E., & Marsh, K. (2012). Children’s Ways of Learning Inside and Outside the
Classroom. In G. E. McPherson & G. F. Welch (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Music
Education, Volume 1. Oxford University Press.

Hely, C. Hip-Hop Transcriptions. Retrieved from

http://hiphoptranscriptions.tumblr.com/

Herber, N. (2008). The Composition-Instrument: Emergence, Improvisation and

Interaction in Games and New Media. In Collins, K., ed. From Pac-Man to Pop Music:
Interactive Audio in Games and New Media. Surrey: Ashgate Publishing Group.

Hoadley, C. (2012). What is a community of practice and how can we support it? In D.
H. Jonassen & S. M. Land (Eds.), Theoretical foundations of learning environments
(Second ed., pp. 287-300). New York: Routledge.

_______ (2004). Methodological Alignment in Design-Based Research. Educational

Psychologist, 39(4), 203–212.

Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M. (2003). Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University Of

Chicago Press.

108
Levin, G. (2000). Painterly Interfaces for Audiovisual Performance. MS Thesis,
Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Lowe, G. (2012). Lessons for teachers: What lower secondary school students tell us
about learning a musical instrument. International Journal of Music Education 2012 30:
227.

Magnusson, T. (2010). Designing Constraints: Composing and Performing with Digital

Musical Systems. Computer Music Journal, Volume 34, Number 4, pp. 62 – 73.

Marrington, M. (2011). Experiencing Musical Composition In The DAW: The Software

Interface As Mediator Of The Musical Idea. The Journal on the Art of Record
Production, (5).

Marshall, W. (2010). Mashup Poetics as Pedagogical Practice. In Biamonte, N., ed. Pop-
Culture Pedagogy in the Music Classroom: Teaching Tools from American Idol to
YouTube. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press.

_______ (2009). Unlocking the Groove: Rhythm, meter and musical design in electronic
dance music. Music Theory Spectrum, 31(1), 192.

Martens, P. (2011). The Ambiguous Tactus: Tempo, Subdivision Benefit, and Three
Listener Strategies. Music Perception 28. 5 (Jun 2011): 433-448.

Martin, J. (2012). Toward Authentic Electronic Music In The Curriculum: Connecting

Teaching To Current Compositional Practices. International Journal of Music Education
30: 120.

Matos, M. (2005). All Roads Lead to Apache. 2005 EMP conference. Retrieved from:
http://soul-sides.com/2005/04/all-roads-lead-to-apache.html

McClary, S. (2004). Rap, Minimalism and Structures of Time in Late Twentieth-Century

Culture. In Warner, D. ed., Audio Culture. London: Continuum International
Publishing Group.

_______ (1989). Terminal Prestige: The Case of Avant-Garde Music Composition.

Cultural Critique, No. 12, pp. 57-81.

Monson, I. (1999). Riffs, Repetition, and Theories of Globalization. Ethnomusicology,

Vol. 43, No. 1, 31-65.

New York State Learning Standards and Core Curriculum -- Mathematics

http://www.p12.nysed.gov/ciai/mst/math/home.html

Papert, S. (1993). Mindstorms: Children, Computers and Powerful Ideas. Basic Books.

Papert, S. (1993). The Children’s Machine: Rethinking School in the Age of the
Computer. BasicBooks.

109
Papert, S. (1976). Some Poetic and Social Criteria for Education Design. Appendix to a
proposal to the National Science Foundation. Retrieved from
http://www.papert.org/articles/SomePoeticAndSocialCriteriaForEducationDesign.ht
ml

Penrose, R. (2004). The Road to Reality. Vintage Books.

Peppler, K., Downton, M., Lindsay, E., and Hay, K. (2011). The Nirvana Effect: Tapping
video games to mediate music learning and interest. International Journal of Learning
and Media, 3(1), 41–59.

Renwick, J., & Reeve, J. (2012). Supporting Motivation in Music Education. In G. E.

McPherson & G. F. Welch (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Music Education, Volume 1
(Vol. 1, pp. 1–28). Oxford University Press.

Rosenbaum, E. (n.d. )MmmTsss [computer software.] Retrieved from

http://web.mit.edu/~eric_r/Public/mmmtsss/

Ruthmann, A. (2006). Negotiating Learning and Teaching in a Music Technology Lab:

Curricular, Pedagogical, and Ecological Issues. PhD dissertation, Oakland University,
Rochester, Michigan.

_______ (2012). Engaging Adolescents with Music and Technology. In Burton, S. (Ed.).
Engaging Musical Practices: A Sourcebook for Middle School General Music. Lanham,
MD: R&L Education.

Saville, K. (2011). Strategies for Using Repetition as a Powerful Teaching Tool. Music
Educators Journal, 98: 69.

Schultz, P. (2008). Music Theory in Music Games. In Collins, K., ed. From Pac-Man to
Pop Music: Interactive Audio in Games and New Media. Surrey: Ashgate Publishing
Group.

Shields, D. (2010). Reality Hunger: A Manifesto. Knopf.

Snyder, B. (2001). Music and Memory: An Introduction. Cambridge: MIT Press.

Thibeault, M. (2011). Wisdom for Music Education from the Recording Studio. General
Music Today, 20 October 2011.

Thompson, P. (2012). An Empirical Study Into the Learning Practices and Enculturation
of DJs, Turntablists, Hip-Hop and Dance Music Producers.” Journal of Music,
Technology & Education, Volume 5, Number 1, 43 – 58.

Toussaint, G. (2013). The Geometry of Musical Rhythm. Cleveland: Chapman and

Hall/CRC.

____ (2005). The Euclidean algorithm generates traditional musical rhythms.

Proceedings of BRIDGES: Mathematical Connections in Art, Music, and Science, Banff,

110
Alberta, Canada, July 31 to August 3, 2005, pp. 47-56.

____ (2004). A comparison of rhythmic similarity measures. Proceedings of ISMIR 2004:

5th International Conference on Music Information Retrieval, Universitat Pompeu
Fabra, Barcelona, Spain, October 10-14, 2004, pp. 242-245.

____ (2003). Classification and phylogenetic analysis of African ternary rhythm

timelines. Proceedings of BRIDGES: Mathematical Connections in Art, Music, and
Science, University of Granada, Granada, Spain July 23-27, 2003, pp. 25-36.

____ (2002). A mathematical analysis of African, Brazilian, and Cuban clave rhythms.
Proceedings of BRIDGES: Mathematical Connections in Art, Music and Science,
Townson University, Towson, MD, July 27-29, 2002, pp. 157-168.

Whosampled.com. “The 10 Most Sampled Breakbeats of All Time.” Retrieved from

http://blog.whosampled.com/2010/04/29/the-10-most-sampled-breakbeats-of-all-
time/

Wiggins, J. (2001). Teaching for musical understanding. Rochester, Michigan: Center for
Applied Research in Musical Understanding, Oakland University.

Wilkie, K.; Holland, S.; & Mulholland, P. (2010). What Can the Language of Musicians
Tell Us about Music Interaction Design?” Computer Music Journal, Vol. 34, No. 4, 34-48.

Wise, S.; Greenwood, J.; & Davis, N. (2011). Teachers’ Use of Digital Technology in
Secondary Music Education: Illustrations of Changing Classrooms. British Journal of
Music Education, Volume 28, Issue 2, 117 -­ 134.

Witts, D. (1995). Stockhausen vs the Technocrats. The Wire, Issue #141, November 1995.

Audio recordings
Brown, J. (1986). The Funky Drummer Parts One and Two. [Recorded by James Brown
and the JBs]. On In The Jungle Groove [iTunes]. Polydor Records.

Brown, J. & Ellis, A. (1967). Cold Sweat. [Recorded by James Brown and his Famous
Flames]. Cold Sweat [iTunes]. King Records.

Flores, L. (1986). Compilation. [Various artists]. Ultimate Breaks and Beats [out of print].
Street Beat Records.

Lordan, J. (1960). Apache. [Recorded by The Incredible Bongo Band]. Bongo Rock
[iTunes]. Pride Records.

Hairston, J. (1969). Amen, Brother. [Recorded by The Winstons]. Color Him Father
[iTunes]. Metromedia.

111
Hammond, R. (1973). Impeach the President. [Recorded by The Honey Drippers]. Alaga
Records.

Hancock, H. (1973). Chameleon. [Recorded by Herbie Hancock]. Head Hunters

[iTunes]. Columbia Records.

Page, J., Plant, R., Jones, J., Bonham, J. & Memphis Minnie (1971). When the Levee
Breaks. [Recorded by Led Zeppelin]. Led Zeppelin IV [iTunes]. Atlantic Records.

Prince (1990). Joy In Repetition. [Recorded by Prince]. Graffiti Bridge [iTunes]. Paisley
Park.

Ridenhour, C., Sadler, E., Boxley, H., & Boxley, K. (1989). Fight the Power. [Recorded by
Public Enemy]. Fear of a Black Planet [iTunes]. Motown.

Simon, P. (1973). Take Me to the Mardi Gras. [Recorded by Bob James]. Two [iTunes].
CTI Records.

Skylark. (1987). System of Survival. [Recorded by Earth, Wind & Fire]. Touch the World
[iTunes]. Columbia Records.

Squier, B. (1980). The Big Beat. [Recorded by Billy Squier]. Tale of the Tape [iTunes].
Capitol.

Software applications
Lamere, P. (2013). The Infinite Jukebox. Boston, MA: web-based application. Retrieved
from http://labs.echonest.com/Uploader/index.html

Rosenbaum, E. (2009). MmmTsss Playful Looper. Cambridge, MA: MIT Media Lab.
Retrieved from http://web.mit.edu/~eric_r/Public/mmmtsss/

112
Appendix: matching the Drum Loop to
New York State’s mathematics standards
Use of the Drum Loop by math teachers could support the following requirements
from the New York State Learning Standards and Core Curriculum for Mathematics.

Fractions—Grade 3
• CCSS.Math.Content.3.NF.A.1 Understand a fraction 1/b as the quantity formed
by 1 part when a whole is partitioned into b equal parts; understand a fraction
a/b as the quantity formed by a parts of size 1/b.
• CCSS.Math.Content.3.NF.A.3 Explain equivalence of fractions in special cases,
and compare fractions by reasoning about their size.
• CCSS.Math.Content.3.NF.A.3b Recognize and generate simple equivalent
fractions, e.g., 1/2 = 2/4, 4/6 = 2/3. Explain why the fractions are equivalent,
e.g., by using a visual fraction model.

Fractions—Grade 4
• CCSS.Math.Content.4.NF.B.3a Understand addition and subtraction of fractions
as joining and separating parts referring to the same whole.
• CCSS.Math.Content.4.NF.B.3b Decompose a fraction into a sum of fractions with
the same denominator in more than one way, recording each decomposition by
an equation. Justify decompositions, e.g., by using a visual fraction model.
Examples: 3/8 = 1/8 + 1/8 + 1/8 ; 3/8 = 1/8 + 2/8 ; 2 1/8 = 1 + 1 + 1/8 = 8/8 +
8/8 + 1/8.
• CCSS.Math.Content.4.NF.B.4 Apply and extend previous understandings of
multiplication to multiply a fraction by a whole number.
• CCSS.Math.Content.4.NF.B.4a Understand a fraction a/b as a multiple of 1/b.
For example, use a visual fraction model to represent 5/4 as the product 5 ×
(1/4), recording the conclusion by the equation 5/4 = 5 × (1/4).
• CCSS.Math.Content.4.NF.B.4b Understand a multiple of a/b as a multiple of 1/b,
and use this understanding to multiply a fraction by a whole number. For
example, use a visual fraction model to express 3 × (2/5) as 6 × (1/5), recognizing
this product as 6/5. (In general, n × (a/b) = (n × a)/b.)

Ratios & Proportional Relationships—Grade 6

• CCSS.Math.Content.6.RP.A.1 Understand the concept of a ratio and use ratio
language to describe a ratio relationship between two quantities. For example,
“The ratio of wings to beaks in the bird house at the zoo was 2:1, because for
every 2 wings there was 1 beak.” “For every vote candidate A received,
candidate C received nearly three votes.”
• CCSS.Math.Content.6.RP.A.3b Solve unit rate problems including those
involving unit pricing and constant speed. For example, if it took 7 hours to mow

113
 4 lawns, then at that rate, how many lawns could be mowed in 35 hours? At
what rate were lawns being mowed?

Ratios & Proportional Relationships—Grade 7

• CCSS.Math.Content.7.RP.A.2a Decide whether two quantities are in a
proportional relationship, e.g., by testing for equivalent ratios in a table or
graphing on a coordinate plane and observing whether the graph is a straight
line through the origin.
• CCSS.Math.Content.7.RP.A.2b Identify the constant of proportionality (unit rate)
in tables, graphs, equations, diagrams, and verbal descriptions of proportional
relationships.

Representation Strand—Grade Eight

• 8.R.1 Use physical objects, drawings, charts, tables, graphs, symbols, equations,
or objects created using technology as representations
• 8.R.2 Explain, describe, and defend mathematical ideas using representations
• 8.R.3 Recognize, compare, and use an array of representational forms
• 8.R.4 Explain how different representations express the same relationship
• 8.R.5 Use standard and non-standard representations with accuracy and detail
• 8.R.6 Use representations to explore problem situations
• 8.R.9 Use mathematics to show and understand physical phenomena (e.g.,
make and interpret scale drawings of figures or scale models of objects)

Geometry
• G.PS.3 Use multiple representations to represent and explain problem situations
(e.g., spatial, geometric, verbal, numeric, algebraic, and graphical
representations)
• G.CM.2 Use mathematical representations to communicate with
appropriate accuracy, including numerical tables, formulas, functions, equations,
charts, graphs, and diagrams
• G.CN.1 Understand and make connections among multiple representations
of the same mathematical idea
• G.CN.3 Model situations mathematically, using representations to draw
conclusions and formulate new situations
• G.CN.6 Recognize and apply mathematics to situations in the outside
world
• G.R.1 Use physical objects, diagrams, charts, tables, graphs, symbols, equations,
or objects created using technology as representations of mathematical concepts
• G.R.2 Recognize, compare, and use an array of representational forms
• G.R.3 Use representation as a tool for exploring and understanding
mathematical ideas
• G.R.5 Investigate relationships between different representations and their
impact on a given problem
• G.G.21 Investigate and apply the concurrence of medians, altitudes, angle
bisectors, and perpendicular bisectors of triangles
• G.G.54 Define, investigate, justify, and apply isometries in the plane
(rotations, reflections, translations, glide reflections)

114
 • G.G.55 Investigate, justify, and apply the properties that remain invariant
under translations, rotations, reflections, and glide reflections
• G.G.56 Identify specific isometries by observing orientation, numbers of
invariant points, and/or parallelism
• G.G.57 Justify geometric relationships (perpendicularity, parallelism,
congruence) using transformational techniques (translations, rotations,
reflections)
• G.G.60 Identify specific similarities by observing orientation, numbers of
invariant points, and/or parallelism
• G.G.61 Investigate, justify, and apply the analytical representations for
translations, rotations about the origin of 90º and 180º, reflections over the lines ,
and dilations centered at the origin

Algebra 2 and Trigonometry

• A2.R.6 Use mathematics to show and understand physical phenomena (e.g.,
investigate sound waves using the sine and cosine functions)
• A2.A.56 Know the exact and approximate values of the sine, cosine, and
tangent of 0º, 30º, 45º, 60º, 90º, 180º, and 270º angles
• A2.A.60 Sketch the unit circle and represent angles in standard position
• A2.A.61 Determine the length of an arc of a circle, given its radius and the
measure of its central angle
• A2.A.69 Determine amplitude, period, frequency, and phase shift, given the
graph or equation of a periodic function
• A2.M.1 Define radian measure
• A2.M.2 Convert between radian and degree measures

115