Starting last Tuesday, I worked on experiment #3 and tested it with two studio monitors in class room 818 in Shanghai campus. In this particular experiment I kind of hear a universal voice in my voice journey because it reminds me that my voice has certain quality of others. While observing the two testers, I personally had a couple of moments of their identity shifts.

There are several stages of user tests in three progressions:

 

On campus with original experiment #3 (in the red background), straightforward prompt as statements

Anna_

  • can we bring it to an real exhibition
  • stay with this as the experience is the heart of the project, i don’t like my voice bcos it doesn’t sound like me is the right thing to say for this prototype
  • which of the effect are they? what is the standard my actual voice sounds like and when that was? to get a sense of what is being manipulated,
  • what is the boundaries being play for high and low speed in the project? can play with that, probably the more interesting ones are not the very far ones.
  • ?the interaction you get to control? not even sure if that’s the right way to go
  • interesting about the project that you definitely want to keep is that the voice recording proofs that the sound we perceived is not how we hear ourselves. And none of those sounds like how we hear ourself. However one can identify the moment of how ones sound normally recorded and it’s good to stay with the artificiality of it.
  • make sure it’s not glitchy in the voice sound experience
  • the archive about everyone’s voice can be interesting

Benoit_

  • does it have to be a negative experience? can the prompt be free to allow new form of expression?
  • the low speed gave a different analogy/ metaphor, consider the effect of it to my work of listening to a human voice but all the sound are kinda funny, childish, feminine, inhaling gas
  • prefer to identify the voice change stage with a visual reference such as a number
  • how long will you have to experience? this can be linked to the change stage
  • the idea of the project can be perceived once hearing the voiced sound
  • how the surrounding people will perceive from the voice is a concerned, the social pressure
  • it is hard to ignore the speed acceleration is amplified and it is annoying
  • thinking about the interaction in recording – for example, wechat, pressing in recording

There were two of the testers continued to loop over and over again to create this giant soundscape, one almost demanding way. I did not stop them where that has becoming something a very different concept to talk about and I can see that they were a bit exhausted after it, especially he insensitivity of doing both speaking and listening. Or maybe they act to get into my core concept?

 

Thesis++ group tested in web (mostly failed to make it work with their chosen browser) or looked at Anna’s video

Again the instruction and prompt will play out quite important for participant to get in to the work in a right mood that I expected. The idea of allowing different attitudes to experience to the work is a strong takeaway for me, in terms of entering prompts and listening. My observation on what people really experience the work and see other experience the work through a video documentation really spark different opinion about the prototype.

  • like to read sth just related to topic
  • the repetition makes a mantra/ neurolinguistic is interesting
  • the key press the flow can be more clear
  • looped cacophony sound / reversed sound are both interesting
  • how the environment can influence the work
  • the setup matters for my piece inn what types of listening
  • is the prompt accessible for those who doesn’t have an adversarial relationship to their voice?
  • statement or reconciliation?
  • can the prompt be one’s choice to bare a meaning toward the journey?
  • Gibberish, fun and interesting expression? in a group of people?
  • option in menu of phrase to allow different attitude and possibilities
  • it can be also rewarding to soften a bit the implicit assumption of self aggression

 

Mid prototype_ no rain drop but the visual references of speed, volume and panning are implemented

Wenye & Ivy

  • entering to a strange world and it feels unfamiliar
  • examine your voice from different angles
  • can you save your voice?

 

The new prototype on 6/10 where I show thesis group 

Notice the previous experiment #3 of voice changes are so different from each iterations in the journey. The rhythm seems to shift fast with the effect of perceiving voice change, what is the right speed to achieve the right expression the work becomes a critical part of my work. I would still want to focus on a single person experience and the dedicate the sound experience for participant to create their own meaning of their voiced sound.

Kat mentioned that the way participant engage the sound is something to think about whether they are sitting, standing or sitting on the floor. Overall it still feels glitchy for me in terms of user experience and I am hoping to streamline it as much as possible. I would say at this point, to make it focus can be great to get the point of my topic. If there is something I can bring to more it more accessible and open to possibility can be my next step to think beyond the thesis framework in the future.

The visual reference of the voiced sound is a nice touch in getting into the work. It makes one connect to the sound. It’s kind an experience of in the moment of talking to oneself. That reinforce one’s identity for sure. Also, repetition of message is a way to experience the work for sure. On top of this future progression is two feedback givers imagine this piece to be a sarcastic about oneself in some way (you are your own worse critic), which I thought is a very different expression to pursue. Or a meditative experience possibly?