Analysis:

 

The demo at the Children’s Museum was, if anything, humbling.  Nothing seemed to function as planned and we became very frustrated with not only the physical project but began questioning the idea of it itself.  The PVC pipes were not nearly as resonant as expected, we had wiring issues with the solenoid, and the drum pedal was unable to effectively produce sound by hitting the pipes.  Despite the technical failures, we were able to learn a lot about how people approached the project and what they expected from it. It appears that the tube configuration was intriguing to people, as many approached the project and attempted to interact with it.  Children would step on the drum pedal just for the fun of it, trying to figure out how it connected to the rest of the functionality, and a few people banged on the box. Having moving, functional parts would definitely add more magic to the project, as well as aesthetic adjustments (such as colorful paint), and a second functionality that would create more pleasant feedback than simple acoustic elements (we were thinking of adding colored lights).  The visit really helped put our project into perspective; we now know the limitations of the materials we are working with, our own skill limitations, as well as how people approach the project and what expectations from the user we have to rise to meet.

 

Revision Plan:

 

We know that our main barrier in the successful completion of this project will be simple trial and error of the form of acoustic elements and the tectonics of the project as a whole (how elements will be coupled to the base).   Based on the museum demo we are revising the experience to include reactive lights and the use of drumsticks to produce sound as opposed to the drum pedal, not only because they are more effective at producing sound (at least with our particular material palette), but also because they allow the user more agency in where and how they can hit the various elements of the acoustic configuration.