# Methods for studying music-related body motion

In this video we will look at some of the methods we use to study music-related body motion.

Let us briefly recall that when we say music-related body motion, we mean all types of motion carried out by performers andby musicians. 

- Performers include musicians, conductors and dancers
- Perceivers include audience members during concerts, people dancing at clubs, or people’s spontaneous motion to music in everyday life

As such, music-related body motion is a diverse category, ranging from being purely instrumental (such as hitting a piano key) to being purely communicative (such as gesticulating in the air). To add to the complexity, music-related motion may occur in any type of location, for example a concert hall (x), at home, in the street or in a club setting (x). 

So the challenge for music researchers interested in studying motion is to choose methods that allow for studying such motion in a systematic manner. It is also necessary to study the motion in relation to for example a musical score, sound recordings and contextual data.

In this and future videos we will look more into *how* we do this, but let me first start by introducing some more challenges we need to think of:   

1.	Aim: why is music-related motion interesting in this study? What kind of study will this be part of? What kind of interaction is planned, such as sound–human, human–sound, human–human? 
2.	Subjects: how many subjects will be studied? What is their demography (gender, age, music/motor abilities) and personal context (familiar/unfamiliar with the task)? Will they move individually or in groups? What is the social context of the study? 
3.	Motion: what type of motion is expected, and in which parts of the body? Are they large or small? Are they slow or fast? Will the subjects be stationary, or will they move about? Is it necessary to find the absolute position in space, or is relative motion information (such as acceleration) sufficient? 
4.	Environment: will the study be carried out in a “controlled” environment (such as a lab) or in an “ecological” setting (such as a concert hall)? Is power available? How much time is there to set up equipment? What are the lighting conditions? 
5.	Artefacts: will there be any instruments, tools or other types of technologies used in the setup, and how will they be captured and synchronised? 
6.	Audio: what type of sound recording is needed? How many channels, sampling frequency and bit rate? What is the necessary level of synchronisation between motion and sound data? 
7.	Video: what type of video recording is needed? How many cameras? What resolution and frame rate? 
8.	Data handling: how will the different types of data be synchronised? What software and data formats will be used? What type of storage, backup, and sharing solutions are planned? 

Finally, it is also useful to think of the type analysis being planned? There are numerous analytical approaches to choose from here, but they can be broadly categorised into two main categories: 

-	Descriptive analysis: the motion is described through kinematics (such as velocity or acceleration), spatial features (such as size and position in the room) or temporal features (such as frequency) components. 
-	Functional analysis: the motion is described through functional properties, such as whether the actions are sound-producing or sound-accompanying (see 21 () for an overview of functional categories). 

Descriptive analysis methods may often be associated with *quantitative* analysis approaches. That is, working with numbers and using statistical methods. 

Functional analysis, on the other hand, may be based on *qualitative* analysis approaches, for example using text-based reasoning and interpretation. 

In most cases, however, most real research today is carried out using both descriptive and functional analyses, and utilising both qualitative and quantitative methods. As such, the methods should be seen as complimentary rather than competing. 


## Qualitative movement analysis

There exist numerous systems for systematic notation, analysis and exploration of body motion from a qualitative and observational point of view, including the Alexander technique, Rolfing, Expressive motion and Dalcroze. Several of these systems were developed in parallel to, or influenced by, the work of Rudolf Laban. Here I will briefly introduce two of Laban’s methods: the Labanotation and the Laban Movement Analysis (LMA). 

### Labanotation

Rudolf Laban worked as a dancer and choreographer before he became interested in the description and analysis of human motion at large, with the aim of developing a universal system for motion analysis. For that reason he spent time studying all sorts of human motion, including that of factory workers. In 1928 he presented a system called Schrifttanz a method for the notation of motion as symbols along a vertical axis. This system was later to become what is today called Labanotation. 
 
Here we see an example of Labanotation, with time running vertically, from bottom to top. The vertical line in the centre of each notation system marks the centre of the body, and motion is notated through symbols on the left and right sides of the center line. Each of the body parts have their own symbols, and the duration of motion and position are given through different types of symbols inside the shapes of the body parts. 

Labanotation is still in active use today, particularly in larger ballet and dance companies. Some movement researchers also use Labanotation. However, the system is complex so few people really master Labanotation at a level in which they can read and write scores fluently. So as opposed to music notation, which one can easily assume that most musicians and music researchers master well, it is hard to find people that can comfortably read and write Labanotation.

### Laban Movement Analysis

Let us now move on to Laban Movement Analysis. 

As opposed to Labanonation’s focus on writing motion structures in time, the LMA system is based on describing motion qualities. One important point here is that the analysis should always start from the observer’s point of view. One could for example start by asking the question “how does this motion feel from my own body?”. 

The LMA system is based on four main categories: body, space, shape and effort, and each of these are subdivided into categories describing different motion qualities. 

The effort subcategory can be further subdivided into four subcategories, each with a descriptive axis: 

•	Space (direct—indirect). Space describes how one moves through the physical space, and how one relates to the body’s kinesphere, the maximal volume we can reach around our body when standing fixed on the floor. 
•	Time: quick—sustained. Time is used to describe the rhythmic character of motion. Laban was concerned that time and rhythm should not be split. We experience rhythmical patterns all the time, and we have our own bodily rhythms defined by our pulse and breathing. 
•	Weight: strong—light. Weight is related to gravity, and the fact that we need to use muscular activity to work against gravity when moving upwards. We also use gravity to help us when moving downwards, and it is this constant interplay between our body and the earth’s gravitational pull that help shape our motion. 
•	Flow: bound—free. Flow describes how motion unfold in time and space. What Laban calls free flow is when our motion is both relaxed and continuous at the same time, while bound flow is when the motion is hindered. 

Even though the four effort parameters are but one small part of the full LMA system, they give us a tool for talking about movement in a more systematic manner.