Looking back on the performance evening I’d say we got the results we were after. Even without the digital manipulation and live editing, we managed to produce a sound scape that developed as the piece progressed.

It was good to finally hear the sound of them performing in the environment the group had been picturing for the last week, we had doubts that the performance would sound developed, and only come across to the audience as a bunch clangy rumbling noises.

I think the plans we put in place really did help the show. If they were all played simultaneously I’m certain the audience would have been left rather confused as to what they were trying to hear amongst the barrage of noises.

Overall I’d say we presented a well established piece, and managed to maintain the rustic raw sound and sculpt it into the dark rich sound scape we’d planned.

Our finished Thunder Drums in all their glory. For the performance we have 2 to play each. They way we thought we’d structure it would be to have, one person focusing on the lower more bass notes, which are the drums with the larger tubes, be it wide or long. Then two others focusing on the mid tones and the higher notes. This way we have control over the different ranges and can get a more cleaner sound. Because the instruments them selves are fairly random in the sound they produce, we thought in order to try create something specific we should have some order in how we play them

Getting ready for our performance, we started to put together the Thunder Drums. Making the springs was an interesting process. It took a long time to source the proper wire we needed, but eventually we found the right type. In order to make the spring, we drilled a hole through a small rod and put it into a hand drill. Then the wire had to be held down and so it wouldn’t double over itself. The drill had to be set to a slow speed so we could keep the spacing of the wire consistent enough, so when it was stretched out there would be no large gaps.

To me, the fact that the instruments are crafted by hand adds to the rawness of the sound and the overall rustic theme of the instruments. We had thought of painting them matte black so they were more subtle in the performance, and people would concentrate more on the sound than the actions used in making them. But changing their appearance would subtract from the idea of rustic home made instruments.

Presenting our idea to Zoe, the lecturer running this paper, the feedback we got was something of a surprise. Her opinion was that the Thunder Drums by them selves didn’t need to be digitally altered to create a rich sound-scape. So to alter the idea for the final time, it was decided that we’d make a series of thunder drums, to maintain the rich ‘full’ sound produced. 

Looking at the design of the Thunder Drum, its easy to note which parts vary the sound the is produced. Like any kind of drum, the size of the body controls the tone. So to mimic this with the Thunder Drums we’d be using various sizes of cardboard tubing.

Found a lot of different shapes and sizes of Thunder Drums on the net. One thing I hadn’t thought about was the length of the spring.  It makes sense now that the longer it is the more sound produced. A short spring may produce an interesting noise but not quite the deep dark sound scape we are after. 

Still in the conceptual stages of our performance/installation, I decided to take some alternative instruments into uni to show to the group.

Trying to keep with the mysterious sound idea, we decided that the ‘Thunder Tube’ (bottom picture) made the more deep, rich and mysterious sound. We put forward our idea of incorporating a series of these instrument and manipulating them in a way like the digital didge video. But instead of using controls built into the instrument, we’d have them playing into a mic, and then one of the group manipulating the noise via a custom software environment i.e. an audio based max patch, which is actually what the creator of the digital didgeridoo used. 

So ideally we would be playing these instruments and manipulating the noise at the same time. The reason behind this was because we wanted to create a unique live soundscape. The space we were playing in (The foyer in the gallery on St Paul st) offered a lot of reverb and echo so it fitted in with trying to create a deep rich sound. So while playing the instruments in this space, one member of the group would be taking the live recordings and developing the sound scape being produced, so it may start sounding very raw and straight from the instrument but as we play add more character and atmosphere to the sound, trying to create a evolving sound, with the end result being an sound landscape that has been developed from the raw sound and the nature on the location being played in.

For the next project, we have been told we are going to involved in a public performance of some kind. Utilizing a sound installation or performance of some kind, we have to demonstrate exploration with sound environments. While trying to come up with ideas, I have explored the idea of noises that are created from the contact of water. For example having a contact mic or some kind of sensitive mic being connected to different containers that had different materials in them, and the noise that is amplified of the noise of the water coming into contact with these different noises.

A variation of this idea is having a container filled with water that is tilted and again has sensitive mics on the walls picking up the noise of the materials banging against each other under water.

The whole idea is to explore the subtle sounds that aren’t commonly heard, generally any noise made under water is not familiar to humans, but when man made materials come into contact with each other in an environment where sound is generally muffled there should be an interesting selection of sounds being heard.