N. NETWORKS - Musicking as an Entangled Web of Actants

The Networks dimension asks who (or what) is connecting to whom, how much agency each node possesses and how the web of relationships rewires itself during musicking.

Key elements

Participants in the DigiScore corpus described how boundaries between self and other dissolved, for example, a note can be “me”, “the flute” or “a background companion,” highlighting how perceived self-agency can be distributed across body, instrument, algorithm and audience. Actor-Network Theory (Latour 20xx) is explicitly invoked in this dimension and treats AI, robots and Non-Player Characters (NPC’s) as active participants that influence decision-making and emergent meaning. Feedback loops create cooperative agency, for example in the “trialogue” between performer, fellow musician and system presenting the musicians with a web of influences.

On the technical side, examples of networked perception included how the score loaded random elements that became a navigable world, turning visual and sonic stimuli into active nodes. Contact mics and transducers generated feedback that reshaped the acoustic environment, making instruments themselves network hubs. Animated symbols, colour shifts and shape morphs acted as semantic anchors that cue specific gestures or timbral choices. Looping and harmonic re-contextualisation’s bind past and present material, allowing the network to re-configure structure on the fly. Remote collaborators linked via Zoom add virtual nodes and latency became a compositional constraint that reshaped relational texture. Material properties of instruments (e.g. resonance, vibration, surface texture) mediated and transformed signals, while NPCs and AI injected unpredictable pathways and audience-driven lighting and sound intensity close the loop between spectators and performers.

Four interlocking patterns emerged within the network dimension: 1) Fluid agency: any node can lead or follow at any moment 2) Recursive feedback: performer actions elicit system responses that in turn prompt further performer adjustments, generating self-organising loops 3) Temporal emergence: initial chaos resolves into shared rhythmic or harmonic structures as the network stabilises 4) Distributed authorship: the composer supplies the topological rules, while musicians, technologists and audience co-author the unfolding material. Meaning thus arises from continual, situated negotiation across the web of actants.

Sub-field analyses

In this section I outline the main themes that emerged from the DigiScore corpus analysis. Taken together, these ideas reinforce the central claim that musical meaning can emerge from a web of actants (human, technological and environmental) each exerting agency within the network. Additionally, these practices illustrate how the abstract network architecture is instantiated, maintained and renegotiated moment-by-moment during a performance. By turning visual cues, sensors, remote participants, instrument bodies and even the audience into active nodes, the work sustains a fluid, responsive and co-creative network throughout its span. Each theme is introduced briefly and labelled (N1-N16) for reference.

1. Distributed Agency & Actor-Network The corpus shows that many participants treated the whole performance ecology as a single, evolving web rather than a hierarchy of composer -> score -> performer. For example, when a performer triggered a visual cue, the cue instantly re-routed the algorithmic decision-tree and the score reacted by spawning new sprites or altering its graphic grammar. Actor-Network Theory (ANT) terminology recurred in interview excerpts, additionally programmers explicitly label AI agents and robotic avatars as “actants” that negotiated with human musicians. This relational framing dissolved the notion of a singular authorial voice; agency was distributed across every node and meaning emerged from the pattern of interconnections rather than from any pre-written notation.

Key sub-themes • N1 – Musicking as a relational web. The network of score, visuals, electronics, audience and performers were treated as the primary artistic material. • N2 – Actor-Network Theory (ANT) in practice. Non-human actants (AI, robots, NPCs) were regarded as active participants that shape decision-making. • N3 – Cooperative agency & mutual responsiveness. Feedback loops between live electronics, musicians and the system generated new material in real time. • N4 – Score as environment/actor. The score itself behaved as a living node that emits visual and sonic stimuli, prompting other nodes to react.

1. Human–Non-Human Hybridity & Materiality Interview data revealed that musicians no longer located their identity solely inside the body; instead, identity was distributed across bodily gestures, algorithmic parameters and the physical properties of their instruments. The robotic arm described in Jess+ was not a decorative prop but a social actor whose timing and timbral output were negotiated in the same way as a human partner’s phrase. Sensors and transducers were repeatedly reported as dual-purpose actants that both detected movement and emit sound, turning the instrument into a hub of the feedback network. Finally, detailed field notes on resonance curves and surface textures showed that the material character of the instrument actively shaped how signals travelled through the network, confirming its status as an agency-bearing node.

Key sub-themes • N5 – Porous self/ other boundary. A single note can be both an extension of the performer and of the instrument. • N6 – Hybrid non-human collaborators. Robotic arms or other embodied machines acted as co-performers and social actors. • N7 – Cooperative interaction with technology. Contact microphones, transducers and other sensors generated feedback loops that reshape the acoustic environment. • N8 – Materiality of instruments as actants. Resonance, vibration and surface texture mediated and transformed network signals.

1. Temporal Emergence & Structural Fluidity Across some of the rehearsal logs, participants described a clear trajectory of initial chaos giving way to a self-organising rhythm as loops were repeated and layered. One composer’s comment on “re-contextualising earlier material” illustrated how temporal layers can bind past and present nodes, allowing the network to re-wire its structure on the fly. In hybrid Zoom rehearsals, latency was not merely a technical problem but a material that introduced a distinctive “relational texture” which composers deliberately framed as a parameter to be exploited. Audience interaction closed the feedback loop in some scores as motion-capture or simple gesture recognition altered spatialisation and lighting, turning the crowd into a real-time co-composer and reinforcing the fluid, emergent character of the work.

Key sub-themes • N9 – Temporal dynamics & emergent structure. Rehearsal progressed from uncertainty to synchronized, loop-driven harmonic relationships. • N10 – Temporal emergence & structural re-configuration. Loops and harmonic dimensions re-contextualised earlier material, producing non-linear communication. • N11 – Distributed presence (remote collaborators). Latency became a compositional constraint that textures relational dynamics. • N12 – Audience-driven parameters. Gestures from the crowd modulated lighting and sound intensity in real time.

1. Audience as Co-Creator & Participatory Feedback The data revealed a shift from passive spectatorship to active participation. Musicians reported that the audience’s movement directly triggered visual and sonic changes, effectively becoming a node in the network. A lighting designer’s observation confirms that crowd gestures fed into control parameters in real time, shaping both acoustic and visual dimensions. Visual elements (colour shifts, animated symbols) were repeatedly coded as semantic anchors that guided performers toward gestures and timbral decisions. Moreover, the emergence of synchronized structures during rehearsals was often precipitated by audience-generated loops, demonstrating that participatory feedback not only enriches the aesthetic but also drives the system’s self-organisation.

Key sub-themes • N13 – Audience as co-performer. The audience’s actions constituted part of the performance. • N14 – Audience-driven parameters. Crowd gestures controlled volume, lighting and spatialisation. • N15 – Dual colour schemes & animated symbols. Visual cues act as semantic anchors that invited specific gestures or timbral choices. • N16 (as a supporting sub-theme). Audience-triggered loops accelerated synchronization and harmonic development.

Take-aways

In contemporary digital practices the musicking ecosystem is best understood as a living network of actants, be that performers, sensors, visual cues, audience members or the venue itself. Treating these elements as mutually influencing nodes invites performers, leaders and scholars to re-think agency, feedback and authorship across stages of a work. The following recommendations translate this network perspective into concrete habits for three groups of participants. Together, these practices enable many participants to navigate, shape and co-author the network dimension that underlies digital musicking.