VR Education Application

Parts 1 and 2

Topic: Music Composition

Persona:
Age: adolescent to adult
Occupation: school to professional
Name: Harry, Sally
Quote: I like to compose music.
Motivations: they are smart, thoughtful and creative. 
they are curious about how to make good music.
Experience level with VR: varies. mostly limited.

How accessible would each VR platform be to your target student in terms of price? Take into account location, age, and income.
- Adolescents would probably have limited funds. 
- Motivated adults might be willing to spend from “some” to “a lot.”

How interactive does your lesson need to be? 
For example, do I need to pick things up or 
could I get away with just looking at objects?
- Must be very interactive.
- Must be able to manipulate scores and instrument sounds and sounds in general.

How realistic do your visuals need to be in order to teach? 
For example, could I use 2D images and videos in a 3D Environment or do you need high poly 3D models.
- Users would be expecting a familiar environment.
- That means a realistic looking score and easily manipulated notes and sounds. 
- 2D would seem appropriate. 3D might offer some unexpected options.

Does my student need to feel like a participant in the experience or 
can they be a passive viewer? Could they be both?
- Students must be participants.

Given the answers above, what are potential platforms you could use 
for your experience?
- Good to excellent rendering is essential. 
- Poor rendering would be a deal killer for someone who is concerned about the process of composition. 
- Sound synthesis would be critical. 
- A phone would have too-limited ways for interaction.
- 3DOF might work with a conventional “hand and menu” arrangement. virtual desktop and filesystem, etc.

So, Daydream might be enough with its 3DOF controller. Some discussion of particulars are necessary to decide if a more expensive platform is required.

If application growth is expected, Daydream would probably be the bare minimum platform for this application.

Part 2

  • How would Augmented Reality better help teach your experience?

Augmented Reality might allow for easier modifications of a work-in-progress without changing the appearance of an existing score. For instance, the existing score and the score with the proposed changes could be viewed side-by-side.

  • How could eye tracking help you better tailor your experience to your students?

I’m not sure eye tracking would be all that helpful in this application. Maybe with menu selection “by glance.”

  • How would better Haptics better teach your experience?

Again, haptics might not be all that necessary. Nice touch, so to speak, but not necessary. If the state-of-the-art for haptics were to become much improved over today, then maybe we could simulate the look AND the feel of the paper.

  • How important is graphical fidelity to your experience? (Yes this is the same as last time, but important to consider as students could potentially get better technology)

Graphic fidelity is very important (see “Reality” discussion in Part 1, above). A composer probably would not want to feel like he is working inside a cartoon.

  • How critical is it that your target student receives this training within the next two years?

Not extremely critical. Nice but not necessary. Whereas improvisation can be a fast process (and we have good recording tools to save our work), music composition can be a slow process and require a lot of modifications over time.