Lsl.
lpsr: applying contemporary compositional processes
into an electro-acoustic improvisation tool
Vincent Caers
LUCA School of Arts, KU Leuven
vincent.caers@luca-arts.be
ABSTRACT
Lsl.lpsr is an electro-acoustic improvisation tool inspired
by Philippe Hurel’s Loops-compositions. The composi-
tional process in these works results out of a synthesis be-
tween spectral music’s continuous transformation and
classical variation techniques. It defines a specific process
for gradually transforming different musical parameters in
repeated cells in order to create multi-layered ‘loops’-
structures. This paper explains how lsl.lpsr implements
these processes in a generative sequencer, thus allowing
similar transformations and structures being created in
real-time improvisation. Up to 8 independently running
and self-transforming patterns generate the system’s out-
put, while the performer can influence the direction of the
transformations on different levels in the structural hier-
archy. Using musical notation allows for displaying highly
complex time relations and rhythmical structures in and
between the patterns, but also enables operations such as
metric modulations and phase-shifting. Lsl.lpsr can be
used as both a MIDI sequencer and a live sampler.
1. INTRODUCTION
As a percussionist I highly enjoyed performing the mu-
sic of French composer Philippe Hurel (°1955). His style
is described as ‘Gérer l’Héterogène’ [1], creating a synthe-
sis between spectral music’s continuous transformation
and classical variation techniques. Hurel explicitly ex-
plores this ‘loops’-process in his five ‘Loops’ composi-
tionsi, and he inserts it regularly in his other compositions.
Fascinating as it is to perform the loops-process in
composed music, it appears to be unsuited for convinc-
ingly integrating it into acoustical improvisation. This is in
line with theory of cognitive load: our long-term memory
is capable of storing processed material, but working
memory can only hold information from the sensory input
for a short time span and only processes a few pieces of
material at any one time [2, 3], making it impossible to re-
tain and recall a stack of improvised transformations on the
fly.
Copyright: © 2018 Vincent Caers. This is an open-access article distribu-
ted under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License 3.0
Unported, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction
in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
This paper explains how lsl.lpsr uses the loops-process
in a generative sequencer, making it available for improv-
isation. First, the loops process is introduced. Next, the pa-
per describes the implementation of this process in the
Max-patch. Specific attention will be drawn to the per-
former’s role in creating ‘loops’-structures by manipulat-
ing the transformations on different hierarchical levels. It
will be clear that the use of musical notation not only clar-
ifies displaying complex time relations and rhythmical
structures, but also guides the system’s decisions and ena-
bles operations such as metric modulations and rhythmical
phase-shifting. Finally, the paper will illustrate a flexible
way to use the system’s output simultaneously for gener-
ating MIDI and for manipulating live-audio and samples
in combination with M4L-devices.
2. THE LOOPS PROCESS
Parameter Constructive Regressive
Melody Addition Diminution
Curve Fluent Capricious
Rhythm Diminution Augmentation
Tempo Fast / accelerando Slow / ritardando
Dynamics Loud / crescendo Soft / decrescendo
Range Ascending Descending
Register Larger Smaller
Phrasing Legato staccato
Table 1: transformations in the loops-process
The loops-process defines a specific way in which differ-
ent musical parameters gradually transform during the rep-
etition of musical cells. A motif - or its residue - launches
a succession of transformations acting on each parameter
differently. Their evolutionary direction marks them as
constructive or regressive. These transformations are grad-
ual and fragmented, thus always referring to the former
motif within a constantly changing musical evolution. This
creates a tension between fast and quasi-repetitive move-
ment on the micro-level and slow continuous transfor-
mations on the meso-level. Connecting these transfor-
mations creates overall ‘loop’-structures on the macro-
level [4, 5]. Table 1 provides an overview of these trans-
formations for different musical parameters.
3. IMPLEMENTATION IN LSL.LPSR
Lsl.lpsr contains 8 independently running and self-trans-
forming patterns, which produce output and capture
changes. The performer influences how each pattern
should transform itself on different structural levels.
Changing settings for a parameter in a single pattern cor-
responds to transformations on the micro-level, which
guide the evolution of general characteristics rhythmic
density, dynamic content, pitch content and curve. But the
performer can also decide on the constructive or regressive
direction for these general characteristics for a (selection
of) pattern(s) or for the whole system. This puts his deci-
sions on the meso-level, while the system will take care of
the micro-level. Finally, the performer can rewind the
transformation in each pattern, which applies all generated
transformations in reversed polarity, thus creating a typical
‘loops’-structure by returning the pattern to its initial state.
At each moment, the performer can also manually apply
direct changes to the micro-level. These interventions will
influence how ongoing transformations might evolve.
3.1 Micro-level patterns and alterations
Figure 1: single pattern with beats 3-11 selected. Se-
lected beats are colored differently.
A single pattern, such as displayed in figure 1, contains 16
beats with independent step-length, pitch, velocity and
subdivision for each beatii . Pitch and velocity are MIDI
values, with velocity – visualized as color intensity –
scaled by an overall gain value. A rest indicates a muted
beat. Each beat’s step-length is displayed as a rhythmic
value with up to 16 subdivisions. A float and a rhythmic
value represent the pattern’s tempoiii.
Standard -n, -nd and -nt suffixes indicate rhythmic val-
ues, extended with -nq, -ndq, -ns and -nds for respectively
quintuplets (5:4 and 5:6) and septuplets (7:4 and 7:6).
Combined with numeric values (1, 2, 4, 8 … 128) they
generate the beat’s multiplier. This multiplier is applied to
the pattern’s tempo, which is the product of the tempo-
float and its own rhythmic multiplier. The product of beat
and tempo results in the beat’s frequency for the pattern’s
internal timing-signal. The beat’s frequency is multiplied
with the subdivision number for generating ramps which
produce lists with the beat-number, length, pitch, velocity
and mute information. It is important to note that pitch and
velocity are tied to the beat; each subdivision of that beat
will have the same information, but with reduced length.
Although manual changes to a (selection of) beat(s) or
to a pattern’s range, tempo and gain are always possible, a
pattern may also alter its own values generatively accord-
ing to the performer’s restrictions, which are set with the
alter-section as shown in figure 2. These restrictions are
specified for each beat separately and contain:
- Outer limits of absolute parameter values
- Alteration method (random or gradual)
- Alteration speed (12-1)
- Alteration direction (up/down/both) and type
- Steps allowed in a single alteration (1-16)
The gradual method is specified to end or to restart after
all beats have changed once. Speed selects a list-valueiv,
indicating after which number of beats an alteration should
be triggered. Steps limits the possible leaps. If both direc-
tions are selected, type optionally specifies if alterations
should proceed centrifugal or centripetal. These re-
strictions are available for each individual parameter.
The restrictions are determinant in simulating the
loops-process. For example, in pitch changes, direction up
or down corresponds to constructive or regressive melodic
range alterations, while convergent or divergent types cor-
respond to altering the register and the melodic curve. Re-
stricting steps provides strong coherence in the alteration
process. By carefully choosing the alteration’s speed and
method, the performer can simulate the quasi-repetitive
character of transformations and retain the reference to the
previous ‘situation musicale’ [1] in each repetition of the
pattern.
Figure 2: Alter section for pitch. Steps here are re-
stricted to 1, 2, 3 or 12 semitones, parallel to ‘Loops II’
3.2 Rhythmical notation
For centuries, traditional occidental musical symbols
mainly focused on binary or ternary time-divisions. As
from the 20th century, composers focused on the emanci-
pation of rhythm and meter. They introduced more com-
plex time-relations, including expanded polyrhythm and -
meter, irrational meters, metric modulationsv or simultane-
ous tempo-independent parts [6]. The use of rhythmic no-
tation creates interesting opportunities for applying these
and other time-operations within a sequencer.
It is important to note that the -q and -s suffixes only
indicate a single note in a tuplet, in contrast with a subdi-
vision, which plays a specified number of attacks. How-
ever, a combination of both systems allows to create for
example a quadruplet on a beat with the length of a single
quarter-note-triplet, as is the case on beat 13 in figure 1.
When this beat alters to a quarter note, the quadruplet be-
comes spread over a slightly longer timespan. Addition-
ally, one can also spread a complete tuplet over individual
beats. This not only allows for assigning individual
pitches, velocities or rests to each element, but also makes
them available for altering their length separately. A six-
teenth-note-quintuplet could for example evolve over a
number of repetitions into a combination of thirty-second
and dotted-sixteenth notes. The performer can select which
type of rhythms are available as steps. When a note-alter-
ation is triggered, the system steps recursively through the
rhythm-list until it reaches the next available note or limit.
Splitting the tempo into a float and a note-component
allows for both fine-grained and metrically related tempo-
changes. Assigning individual tempi to the patterns origi-
nates in interesting ways for connecting them. Assuming
two identical patterns, using the float component with
slightly different tempi results in slow phase-shifting as
made famous in Steve Reich’s early worksvi. Equal float
numbers with different rhythmical values construct poly-
meters, while altering the rhythm-value for a pattern will
result in a metrical modulation. When altering the rhythm
of a single beat in one pattern momentarily, immediate
phase-shifting of two patterns will occurvii . Altering the
range of a pattern, creates additive and subtractive rhyth-
mical operationsviii.
When using non-identical patterns, the same operations
might happen. Simultaneously running patterns will often
be perceived as – strongly or weakly – related [7]. When
altering time-related parameters, the pattern’s mutual rela-
tion will change and might lead to one of the temporal con-
nections described above. Although these timing opera-
tions are not new to contemporary nor electronic music, it
is worth noting that using musical notation in lsl.lpsr
makes them easily available in real-time for electro-acous-
tic improvisation.
3.3 Meso-level characteristic transformations
Automatically transforming musical parameters liberates
the performer from manually enforcing each discrete alter-
ation in a single pattern. However, the combination of mul-
tiple simultaneously transforming patterns then still re-
quires a large amount of attention to the micro-level. While
amid a performance, it could be more rewarding to shift
one’s attention to the meso-level and make decisions on
the direction of more general concepts. For that reason,
lsl.lpsr combines multiple parameters in four general char-
acteristics: density, pitch content, dynamic content and
curve. Each characteristic is observed on a scale between
0 to 1.
Density represents the frequency of individual attacks.
It combines the beat-length (rhythmic value and pattern
tempo), subdivision and rest-state of all active beats. As
changes in very short beat-lengths are less perceptible,
density value is measured on a logarithmic scale. Pitch
content takes pitch and rest-state of active beats into con-
sideration on a linear scale. Similarly, dynamic content
uses all active beat’s velocity and rest-states in combina-
tion with the gain value. Curve calculates the capricious-
ness of a pattern by evaluating the jumps from one active
beat to the next. Obviously, muted beats are not taken into
consideration.
The performer has the choice to guide these character-
istics in a constructive or regressive direction by providing
a target value for a characteristic. The system evaluates the
current state and enables the proper alter-settings for the
parameters involved. Once the target value has been
reached or crossed, it will respectively disable or invert the
alter states. The speed settings for the individual parame-
ters will decide on the frequency for a certain alteration to
happen, thus representing its weight in the overall proceed-
ing of the transformation.
At this point, it becomes interesting to note how micro-
and meso-level intertwine. When the performer launches
the transformation for a characteristic, he might at any time
intervene and change a certain parameter manually. The
characteristic’s value will adapt accordingly and influ-
ences the ongoing transformation. For example, manually
muting beats in a pattern, changes the value for each
characteristic. If dynamic content is transforming, this
might cause previously diminishing beats to start increas-
ing in loudness, because the target value is suddenly higher
instead of lower. On the level of density, this could force
remaining beats to get smaller in length and to adopt more
subdivisions in order to reach the target value. But also
without manual interventions the transformations are in-
fluencing each other: a change in pitch content will influ-
ence the curve, or the alteration of the pattern’s range by
the curve characteristic will cause all other parameters to
re-evaluate their current actions.
3.4 Macro-level decisions
Lsl.lpsr also evaluates the characteristics of the patterns on
the level of the whole system. Here again the performer
can decide to let the entire system evolve towards a certain
state. All currently running patterns are taken into consid-
eration for calculating the main value, but only specifically
selected patterns can be controlled to evolve in a certain
direction. When a certain (un)selected pattern is manually
changed or alters its own content, all selected patterns will
be forced to respond to the new overall context.
All alterations in an individual pattern are stored con-
secutively. The performer has the opportunity at each mo-
ment to reverse the transformations. The pattern will then
loop backwards through the list of alterations and reverse
their polarity. If the individual settings of the pattern nor
the overall settings of the system have changed, this will
eventually result in a return to the pattern’s initial state,
thus creating a circular macro-structure as is found in the
separate movements in the ‘Loops’-compositions. How-
ever, if the available rhythms have changed or the pattern’s
limits have been adjusted, previously valid changes could
be clipped differently or be evaluated as invalid, causing
the pattern to arrive at an alternative state.
4. MIDI AND LIVE SAMPLING
Lsl.lpsr outputs the generated data as MIDI or as a speci-
fied list for dedicated audio players. In case of the latter,
two M4L-devices are required: the recording device (fig-
ure 3) operates autonomous to write audio into a specified
buffer. It can record or overdub a single take or continu-
ously rewrite its content. The player device (figure 4) op-
erates in combination with lsl.lpsr and reads audio from
the selected buffer based on the data received.
The recorder holds similar tempo- and beat-rhythm se-
lectors as a pattern, but in this case, they are multiplied
with Live’s tempo to calculate the size of the buffer. The
player divides the buffer in 16 equal steps and plays the
step which corresponds to the current beat-number. The
performer can select an envelope for the step and set the
direction: forward, backward, alternating or random. The
velocity value decides on the playback volume, while the
pitch value will produce a pitch-shift. The latter can be re-
duced to less than 100% for micro-tonal results. Corre-
spondence with lsl.lpsr happens via UDP. The ID-dial sets
the port number where it will receive its notes. If an iden-
tical note in the same tempo is received, the step will be
played in its original length. When a non-identical note
and/or a different tempo is received, the step will be
stretched or compressed accordingly. Each of the 16 steps
can be manipulated independently.
Figure 3: M4L recorder Figure 4: M4L player
It is important to note that a pattern in lsl.lpsr is not
connected to a fixed output. The pattern produces beat-lists
and note-lists which contain data on length, subdivision
(only beat), pitch, velocity and rest-state. The performer
can route the output of each pattern to the 16 available
MIDI-channels and 16 UDP-ports. This implies that one
pattern can feed multiple virtual instruments and/or differ-
ent player-devices, but also that one instrument or player
can accept notes from multiple patterns simultaneously. In
other words, a pattern functions just as a score for human
players: multiple players can read from the same score, or
the player can – theoretically – read a score with up to 8
independent voices. The performer then acts as an instant
orchestrator, assigning musical material to different instru-
ments in real-time. Similarly, the recording- and player-
devices can switch buffers at each moment, allowing a
flexible way of changing the content of the sampler and
creating new sounds with the already constructed musical
material. Figure 5 provides an overview of lsl.lpsr’s graph-
ical user interface, including 8 patterns and their alter sec-
tions, router windows and general controls.
5. CONCLUSION
In this paper I introduced the Loops-process and discussed
its implementation in a flexible and powerful improvisa-
tion tool. I illustrated how this allows a performer to im-
provise with the loops-process on different structural lev-
els, and along the way I showed the importance of using
contemporary rhythmic notation. It is worth noting that
this decision also extended the system’s possibilities with
other contemporary compositional processes, such as
phase-shifting or metric modulation. I concluded with an
overview of the routing options which allow the performer
to apply the outcome of the generative patterns in a flexible
way to multiple virtual instruments or live samplers in real
time. Future development for the system includes improv-
ing the analyzing capacities of the system and extending
its possibilities to include manipulating visual input.
Although lsl.lpsr does not introduce new compositional
processes, it makes them easily available in an electro-
acoustic improvisational context. In this way, it forms a
natural extension of my practice as a percussionist and
helps to preserve this knowledge in future performances.
In my own artistic work, lsl.lpsr has become a powerful
instrument, whether for completely electronic perfor-
mance or in combination with acoustic instruments. Espe-
cially the latter provides surprising results on stage: as an
acoustic improviser responds naturally to his environment,
using his sound as input for lsl.lpsr creates an interesting
feedback cycle. For example in the improvising collective
‘Worp’ I perform with lsl.lpsr on virtual instruments and
samplers, but I also manipulate the sound of the double
bass player, the tuba player, the chant of the instrumental-
ists and/or dancers and my own percussion playing. In a
collaboration with percussionist Nueny Herreno Villa, I
used Colombian musical patterns as presets in lsl.lpsr for
manipulating sound of the live performance of those pat-
terns on traditional Colombian percussion instruments.
Lsl.lpsr has also been used to create electronic tracks for
the exhibition ‘Let Yourself Fall’ix, performing on virtual
instruments and manipulating spoken texts.
6. REFERENCES
[1] G. Lelong, “Entretien avec Philippe Hurel,” in Les
cahiers de l’Ircam - Compositeurs d’aujourd’hui:
Philippe Hurel, G. Lelong, Ed. Paris: Editions
Ircam - Centre Georges-Pompidou, 1994, p. 93.
[2] S. D. Sorden, “The cognitive theory of multimedia
learning,” in Handbook of Educational Theories,
2012, pp. 1–31.
[3] R. E. Mayer and R. Moreno, “Nine Ways to
Reduce Cognitive Load in Multimedia Learning,”
Educ. Psychol., vol. 38, no. 1, pp. 43–52, 2003.
[4] T. De Cock, V. Caers, and K. Van Den Buys, “An
Examination of Philippe Hurel’s ‘Loops II,’”
Percussive Notes, vol. 3, no. May, pp. 44–48,
2015.
[5] V. Caers, “Het loops-proces in het werk van
Philippe Hurel,” Adem, vol. 4, no. Oktober, pp.
176–187, 2012.
[6] S. Weytjens, M. Delaere, and L. Van Hove, Tempo
en tijd in de hedendaagse muziek, First edit.
Leuven: Acco, 2007.
[7] S.-L. Tan, P. Pfordresher, and R. Harré,
Psychology of Music: from sound to significance.
Routledge, 2010. (especially chapter six on
perception of musical time)
 Figure 5: lsl.lpsr full patch. The top window shows the GUI of the sequencer, with pattern and alter sections. The bottom
left window contains the main patch. The other two windows present the MIDI-router (left) and UDP-router (middle).

i vi
‘Loops I’ for flute solo, ‘Loops II’ for vibraphone solo, ‘Loops III’ for The early tape works ‘Come Out’ and ‘It’s gonna rain’ up to ‘Drum-
flute duo, ‘Loops IV’ for marimba solo, ‘Loops V’ for carillon. ming’ specifically explore this process
ii vii
Limiting at 16 beats is related to the hardware used for performing. As for example clearly present in ‘Clapping Music’
Theoretically the system can handle any number of beats. e viii
A rhythmical operation which is often encountered in non-occidental
iii
Cf. tempo indications in musical scores music, but is also particularly present in the music by Philip Glass
iv ix
Speed lists are chance, linear, exponential or Fibonacci See http://www.vincentcaers.be/projects
v
Metric modulations relate two tempi by equation of two independent
rhythms, e.g. one sixteenth-triplet note equals a quarter in the next
measure. Elliot Carter among others is especially known for using them.