rss

BLOG WARS!!!!! ZOMGBBQ!

From the original Analog Industries archive. Some links and images from that era no longer resolve.

[I Eat Beats](http://www.vimeo.com/625464/l:embed_625464) from [Kyle McDonald](http://www.vimeo.com/kylemcdonald/l:embed_625464) on [Vimeo](http://vimeo.com/l:embed_625464).

Peter Kirn got all up in our grill with a bubblegum sequencer over on CDM. Well, Peter. I’ll see your bubblegum sequencer, and raise you one done with Skittles. If candy-based sequencers were “Shane,” this one would be Jack Palance. I think making electronic music with little balls of sugar is a curiously unexplored area that merits more consideration. Somewhere in here, we’ll find the next John Cage.

10 comments

  1. vae

    That's like a nerdy, less healthy version of the vegetable orchestra ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hpfYt7vRHuY ) ... Once the performance is finished (or maybe a bit before that if you're impatient), the performers and the audience can have a snack.

  2. wquoyle

    not as cool as the one that uses steel ball bearings.

    after the performance you can grab your slingshot and take someones eye out.

  3. inteliko

    Name it the Skittle Fucker!

  4. quantize

    Deep Fried Mars Bar Controller anyone?

  5. Gibbon

    kind of problematic if you start eating your hardware.

  6. Heretic_D™

    Wouldn't the candy melt?

    I would definitely market M&Ms that way: "Melts in your mouth, not on your sequencer."

  7. BirdFLU

    I'm the next John Cage because I have an empty Skittles box.

  8. psylux

    Wake me up when they make one that works by inserting freshly cooked bacon and sausages into a grid of 16 holes.

    Yes, that would be one tasty smell to wake up to!

  9. kylemcdonald

    @wquoyle: The ball bearings were the inspiration, I just thought "this can be prototyped in a cheaper/more expandable way".

    @gibbon: I first performed it at an open mic -- it's actually really fun to distribute the candy to the audience after using it for performance. Oh, and eating on stage :)

  10. Chris Randall

    Hey, Kyle:

    It's obvious to me that your method is far better than the gumball method, just from watching the video. Although the gumball one has 16 steps, so there's that.

    In any event, how did you get the samples to fire in time with Processing? I've not had any luck in that department.

    -CR

Comments are closed on this post.