skip to main content
10.1145/3493612.3520462acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication Pagesw4aConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

SoundCells: designing a browser-based music technology for braille and print notation

Published:27 April 2022Publication History

ABSTRACT

Technologies for notating music pose usage barriers to blind and visually impaired musicians requiring many to overcome a significant learning curve and/or rely on complicated tool chains with limited screen reader support. To address a need for accessible music notation software, we present SoundCells, a browser-based system designed to make music notation easy, intuitive, and accessible to screen reader users, and output music in audio, print, and braille formats. We share findings from a co-design process, in which two experienced musicians used SoundCells for two months guided by four remote meetings, and from a Design Probe, in which five other musicians tried SoundCells with a screen reader and reflected on its usability and accessibility in the context of their current practices. Finally, we discuss design recommendations relevant to a broader ecosystem of creative technologies, including how text-editing and multi-modal output capabilities could be extended and improved, how SoundCells' current design facilitated remote collaboration between sighted researchers and blind musicians, and future opportunities for learning and sharing music on the web.

References

  1. Samuel Aaron. 2020. Sonic Pi v3.2 Released! https://www.patreon.com/posts/sonic-pi-v3-2-34414152Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Samuel Aaron, Alan F Blackwell, and Pamela Burnard. 2016. The development of Sonic Pi and its use in educational partnerships: Co-creating pedagogies for learning computer programming. Journal of Music, Technology & Education 9, 1 (2016), 75--94.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. Joseph Michael Abramo and Amy Elizabeth Pierce. 2013. An ethnographic case study of music learning at a school for the blind. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education 195, 195 (2013), 9--24. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. Fabiha Ahmed, Dennis Kuzminer, Michael Zachor, Lisa Ye, Rachel Josepho, William Christopher Payne, and Amy Hurst. 2021. Sound Cells: Rendering Visual and Braille Music in the Browser. In The 23rd International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility (Virtual Event, USA) (ASSETS '21). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 89, 4 pages. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Ameer Armaly, Paige Rodeghero, and Collin McMillan. 2018. AudioHighlight: Code Skimming for Blind Programmers. In 2018 IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance and Evolution (ICSME) (Madrid, Spain). IEEE, 206--216. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Safa Arooj, Shaban Zulfiqar, Muhammad Qasim Hunain, Suleman Shahid, and Asim Karim. 2020. Web-ALAP: A Web-based LaTeX Editor for Blind Individuals. In The 22nd International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility. 1--6.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Catherine M. Baker, Lauren R. Milne, and Richard E. Ladner. 2015. Struct Jumper: A Tool to Help Blind Programmers Navigate and Understand the Structure of Code. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 3043--3052. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Jeanne Shapiro Bamberger and Armando Hernandez. 2000. Developing musical intuitions: A project-based introduction to making and understanding music. Oxford University Press. https://web.mit.edu/jbamb/www/dmi.htmlGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Bootstrap. 2021. Accessibility: A brief overview of Bootstrap's features and limitations for the creation of accessible content. Retrieved May 1, 2021 from https://getbootstrap.com/docs/5.1/getting-started/accessibility/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Wes Bos. 2022. Keycode.info. Retrieved May 1, 2021 from https://keycode.infoGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Chambers, John. 2021. JC's ABC Tune Finder. Retrieved May 1, 2021 from http://trillian.mit.edu/~jc/cgi/abc/tunefindGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Katie Chan. 2021. p5 Showcase. Retrieved Dec 1, 2021 from https://showcase.p5js.org/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Chi Kim and Rocco Fiorentino. 2020. Flo Tools: Enhanced Workflow for Pro Tools Users With Visual Impairments. Retrieved May 1, 2021 from http://flotools.orgGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Michael Scott Cuthbert and Christopher Ariza. 2010. music21: A toolkit for computer-aided musicology and symbolic music data. Proceedings of the 11th International Society for Music Information Retrieval Conference (ISMIR 2010) (2010), 637--642.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Cuthbert, Michael Scott. 2021. music21 Braille Translate. Retrieved May 1, 2021 from https://web.mit.edu/music21/doc/moduleReference/moduleBrailleTranslate.htmlGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Dancing Dots. 2020. Dancing Dots: Accessible Music Technology for Blind and Low Vision Performers since 1992. https://www.dancingdots.com/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Maitraye Das, Darren Gergle, and Anne Marie Piper. 2019. "It Doesn't Win You Friends": Understanding Accessibility in Collaborative Writing for People with Vision Impairments. Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact. 3, CSCW, Article 191 (Nov. 2019), 26 pages. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Brian Dorn and Mark Guzdial. 2006. Graphic Designers Who Program as Informal Computer Science Learners. In Proceedings of the Second International Workshop on Computing Education Research (Canterbury, United Kingdom) (ICER '06). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 127--134. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Duxbury Systems. 2021. Duxbury DBT: Braille Translation Software. Retrieved May 1, 2021 from https://www.duxburysystems.comGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Alistair D. N. Edwards. 2011. Auditory display in assistive technology. In The Sonification Handbook, Thomas Hermann, Andy Hunt, and John G. Neuhoff (Eds.). Logos Publishing House, Berlin, Germany, Chapter 17, 431--453.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Associazione Giuseppe Paccini ETS. 2021. Braille Music Editor. Retrieved May 1, 2021 from https://braillemusiceditor.com/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Michael Fairchild. 2022. Accessibility Support: aria-live attribute. Retrieved Dec 1, 2022 from https://a11ysupport.io/tech/aria/aria-live_attributeGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Filomen M. D'Agostino Greenberg Music School. 2021. FMDG School: Fostering education, access, and inclusion for people of all ages with vision loss. Retrieved May 1, 2021 from https://fmdgmusicschool.orgGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Jason Freeman, Brian Magerko, Tom McKlin, Mike Reilly, Justin Permar, Cameron Summers, and Eric Fruchter. 2014. Engaging underrepresented groups in high school introductory computing through computational remixing with EarSketch. In Proceedings of the 45th ACM technical symposium on Computer science education. 85--90.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Emma Frid. 2019. Accessible digital musical instruments---A review of musical interfaces in inclusive music practice. Multimodal Technologies and Interaction 3, 3 (2019). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. Emma Frid and Alon Ilsar. 2021. Reimagining (Accessible) Digital Musical Instruments: A Survey on Electronic Music-Making Tools. In Proceedings of the International Conference on New Interfaces for Musical Expression. Shanghai, China, Article 28. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  27. Bill Gaver, Tony Dunne, and Elena Pacenti. 1999. Design: Cultural Probes. Interactions 6, 1 (Jan. 1999), 21--29. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. GNU Project. 2021. LilyPond. Retrieved May 1, 2021 from https://lilypond.orgGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. David Goldstein. 2000. Music pedagogy for the blind. International Journal of Music Education 35, 1 (5 2000), 35--39. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  30. D. Goto, T. Gotoh, R. Minamikawa-Tachino, and N. Tamura. 2007. A Transcription System from MusicXML Format to Braille Music Notation. Eurasip Journal on Advances in Signal Processing 2007, 1 (Jan. 2007), 152. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. Toshiyuki Gotoh, Reiko Minamikawa-Tachino, and Naoyoshi Tamura. 2008. A Web-Based Braille Translation for Digital Music Scores. In Proceedings of the 10th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility (Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada) (Assets '08). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 259--260. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. Lucy Green and David Baker. 2017. Digital Music Technologies: The Changing Landscape. In Insights in Sound: Visually Impaired Musicians' Lives and Learning. Routledge, Chapter 9, 158--173. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  33. Thomas Haenselmann, Hendrik Lemelson, Kerstin Adam, and Wolfgang Effelsberg. 2009. A tangible MIDI sequencer for visually impaired people. In Proceedings of the seventeen ACM international conference on Multimedia - MM '09. ACM Press, New York, New York, USA, 993. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. Marijn Haverbeke. 2018. Code editor screen reader accessiblity survey. Retrieved May 1, 2021 from https://discuss.codemirror.net/t/code-editor-screen-reader-accessiblity-survey/1790Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. Marijn Haverbeke. 2021. Screen reader response for backspace is flaky. Retrieved Dec 1, 2021 from https://github.com/codemirror/codemirror.next/issues/563Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. Marijn Haverbeke. 2022. Code Mirror 6. Retrieved May 1, 2021 from https://codemirror.net/6Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. Marijn Haverbeke. 2022. Lezer Parser System. Retrieved May 1, 2021 from https://lezer.codemirror.netGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. Marijn Haverbeke. 2022. Screen Reader Demo. Retrieved May 1, 2021 from https://codemirror.net/6/screenreaderdemo/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. Jordie Howell. 2020. Innovation in braille music translation: Processes and transcription practices to produce more music. In 7th General Assembly of the International Council on English Braille (ICEB '20). International Council on English Braille. http://www.iceb.org/GA20.htmlGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. Nadine Jessel. 2015. Access to musical information for Blind People. In International Conference on Technologies for Music Notation and Representation. Institut de Recherche en Musicologie (IReMus), 232--237.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  41. Aaron Karp and Bryan Pardo. 2017. HaptEQ. In Proceedings of the 12th International Audio Mostly Conference on Augmented and Participatory Sound and Music Experiences. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1--4. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  42. Lang, Mario. 2009. FreeDots: MusicXML to Braille Music translation. Retrieved May 1, 2021 from https://delysid.org/freedots.htmlGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  43. Matthias Leopold. 2006. HODDER-a fully automatic braille note production system. In International Conference on Computers for Handicapped Persons. Springer, 6--11.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  44. Alex Michael Lucas, Miguel Ortiz, and Dr. Franziska Schroeder. 2019. Bespoke Design for Inclusive Music: The Challenges of Evaluation. Proceedings of the International Conference on New Interfaces for Musical Expression (2019), 105-109. https://novationmusic.com/keys/launchkey%0Ahttp://www.nime.org/proceedings/2019/nime2019_021.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  45. Stephanie Ludi and Mary Spencer. 2017. Design Considerations to Increase Block-based Language Accessibility for Blind Programmers Via Blockly. 3, 1 (July 2017), 119--124. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  46. Kelly Mack, Maitraye Das, Dhruv Jain, Danielle Bragg, John Tang, Andrew Begel, Erin Beneteau, Josh Urban Davis, Abraham Glasser, Joon Sung Park, and Venkatesh Potluri. 2021. Mixed Abilities and Varied Experiences: A Group Autoethnography of a Virtual Summer Internship. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  47. Yotam Mann. 2015. Interactive Music with Tone.js. In Proceedings of the International Web Audio Conference (WAC '15), Samuel Goldszmidt, Norbert Schnell, Victor Saiz, and Benjamin Matuszewski (Eds.). IRCAM, Paris, France.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  48. Christina Matawa. 2009. Exploring the musical interests and abilities of blind and partially sighted children and young people with Retinopathy of Prematurity. British Journal of Visual Impairment 27, 3 (9 2009), 252--262. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  49. Sean Mealin and Emerson Murphy-Hill. 2012. An exploratory study of blind software developers. In 2012 IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages and Human-Centric Computing (VL/HCC). 71--74. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  50. Lauren R. Milne and Richard E. Ladner. 2018. Blocks4All: Overcoming Accessibility Barriers to Blocks Programming for Children with Visual Impairments. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1--10. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  51. Frederick W Moss, Jr. 2009. Quality of Experience in Mainstreaming and Full Inclusion of Blind and Visually Impaired High School Instrumental Music Students.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  52. Mozilla. 2022. ARIA live regions. Retrieved July 1, 2021 from https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/Accessibility/ARIA/ARIA_Live_RegionsGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  53. National Federation of the Blind. 2021. Braille Music Transcribers. Retrieved May 1, 2021 from https://nfb.org/programs-services/braille-certification/music-braille-transcribingGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  54. National Library Service for the Blind and Print Disabled. 2021. Music Braille Transcribing. Retrieved May 1, 2021 from https://www.loc.gov/nls/braille-audio-reading-materials/music-materials/circular-no-4-braille-music-transcribers/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  55. Uran Oh, Shaun K. Kane, and Leah Findlater. 2013. Follow that sound. In Proceedings of the 15th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility - ASSETS '13. ACM Press, New York, New York, USA, 1--8. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  56. Shotaro Omori and Ikuko Eguchi Yairi. 2013. Collaborative music application for visually impaired people with tangible objects on table. In Proceedings of the 15th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility - ASSETS '13. ACM Press, New York, New York, USA, 1--2. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  57. OpenScore. 2018. OpenScore: One Year On. Retrieved May 1, 2021 from https://openscore.cc/blog/2018/8/20/openscore-one-year-onGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  58. OSMD Team. 2021. Open Sheet Music Display. Retrieved May 1, 2021 from https://opensheetmusicdisplay.orgGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  59. Sharon Oviatt. 2006. Human-centered design meets cognitive load theory. In Proceedings of the 14th annual ACM international conference on Multimedia - MULTIMEDIA '06. ACM Press, New York, New York, USA, 871. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  60. Pallets. 2021. Flask: Web development, one drop at a time. Retrieved May 1, 2021 from https://flask.palletsprojects.com/en/2.0.x/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  61. William Payne, Alex Xu, Amy Hurst, and S. Alex Ruthmann. 2019. Non-visual beats: Redesigning the Groove Pizza. In ASSETS 2019 - 21st International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility. Association for Computing Machinery, Inc, 651--654. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  62. William Christopher Payne, Alex Yixuan Xu, Fabiha Ahmed, Lisa Ye, and Amy Hurst. 2020. How Blind and Visually Impaired Composers, Producers, and Songwriters Leverage and Adapt Music Technology. In The 22nd International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility. 1--12.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  63. Petrucci Music Library. 2021. IMSLP: Sharing the world's public domain music. Retrieved May 1, 2021 from https://imslp.org/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  64. Pickering, Heydon. 2017. Inclusive Components Home. Retrieved Jan 1, 2022 from https://inclusive-components.design/tabbed-interfaces/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  65. Venkatesh Potluri, Priyan Vaithilingam, Suresh Iyengar, Y. Vidya, Manohar Swaminathan, and Gopal Srinivasa. 2018. CodeTalk: Improving Programming Environment Accessibility for Visually Impaired Developers. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Montreal QC, Canada) (CHI '18). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1-11. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  66. NYU Ability Project. 2021. SoundCells. Retrieved Dec 1, 2021 from https://soundcells.herokuapp.com/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  67. NYU Ability Project. 2021. SoundCells GitHub Repository. Retrieved Dec 1, 2021 from https://github.com/Huriphoonado/soundcellsGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  68. Public Forum. 2020. Logic Accessibility Google Group. Retrieved May 1, 2020 from https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/logic-accessibilityGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  69. Public Forum. 2020. Pro Tools Accessibility Google Group. Retrieved May 1, 2020 from https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/ptaccessGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  70. Mitchel Resnick, John Maloney, Andrés Monroy-Hernández, Natalie Rusk, Evelyn Eastmond, Karen Brennan, Amon Millner, Eric Rosenbaum, Jay Silver, Brian Silverman, et al. 2009. Scratch: programming for all. Commun. ACM 52, 11 (2009), 60--67.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  71. Rosen, Paul and Dyke, Gregory. 2021. abcjs: Javascript for rendering abc music notation. Retrieved May 1, 2021 from https://www.abcjs.net/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  72. Toby W Rush. 2019. Braille Music Notator. Retrieved May 1, 2021 from https://tobyrush.com/braillemusic/notator/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  73. Marc Sabatella. 2013. ABC For Blind Musicians. Retrieved May 1, 2021 from https://accessiblemusicnotation.wordpress.com/2013/08/21/abc-for-blind-musicians/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  74. Abir Saha and Anne Marie Piper. 2020. Understanding Audio Production Practices of People with Vision Impairments. In The 22nd International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility. 1--13.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  75. Harini Sampath, Alice Merrick, and Andrew Macvean. 2021. Accessibility of Command Line Interfaces. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 489, 10 pages. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  76. Lawrence R. Smith, Karin Auckenthaler, Gilbert Busch, Karen Gearreald, Dan Geminder, Beverly McKenney, Harvey Miller, and Tom Ridgeway. 2015. Braille Music Code. American Printing House for the Blind, Louisville, Kentucky.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  77. Andreas Stefik, Roger Alexander, Robert Patterson, and Jonathan Brown. 2007. WAD: A Feasibility study using the Wicked Audio Debugger. In 15th IEEE International Conference on Program Comprehension (ICPC '07). 69--80. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  78. Andreas Stefik, Andrew Haywood, Shahzada Mansoor, Brock Dunda, and Daniel Garcia. 2009. SODBeans. In 2009 IEEE 17th International Conference on Program Comprehension. 293--294. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  79. Andreas Stefik, Christopher Hundhausen, and Robert Patterson. 2011. An empirical investigation into the design of auditory cues to enhance computer program comprehension. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 69, 12 (2011), 820--838. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  80. Kevin M Storer, Harini Sampath, and M. Alice Alice Merrick. 2021. "It's Just Everything Outside of the IDE That's the Problem": Information Seeking by Software Developers with Visual Impairments. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  81. Atau Tanaka and Adam Parkinson. 2016. Haptic Wave. (2016), 2150--2161. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  82. W3C Web Accessibility Initiative. 2022. WAI-ARIA Overview. Retrieved Dec 1, 2022 from https://www.w3.org/WAI/standards-guidelines/wcag/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  83. B. N. Walker and L. M. Mauney. 2010. Universal Design of Auditory Graphs. ACM Transactions on Accessible Computing 2, 3 (3 2010), 1--16. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  84. Chris Walshaw. 2021. abc notation. Retrieved May 1, 2021 from https://abcnotation.com/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  85. World Wide Web Consortium. 2021. Web Audio API. Retrieved July 1, 2021 from https://www.w3.org/TR/webaudio/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  86. World Wide Web Consortium. 2021. Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) Overview. Retrieved May 1, 2021 from https://www.w3.org/WAI/standards-guidelines/wcag/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. SoundCells: designing a browser-based music technology for braille and print notation

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in
      • Published in

        cover image ACM Conferences
        W4A '22: Proceedings of the 19th International Web for All Conference
        April 2022
        209 pages
        ISBN:9781450391702
        DOI:10.1145/3493612

        Copyright © 2022 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 27 April 2022

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article

        Acceptance Rates

        W4A '22 Paper Acceptance Rate18of36submissions,50%Overall Acceptance Rate171of371submissions,46%

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader