"No delay" - about teaching at a distance

The aim of the project was to investigate questions concerning the possibilities and limitations of online instrumental teaching using "low latency" technology. Distance learning in music presents many challenges, the most obvious of which is that the sound delays we experience on Zoom, Skype or Teams really make it pointless to play music together. So-called "low latency" technology has been available for a few years, but is not widely used among musicians, probably for several reasons. Among other things, available software (for example LoLa or Ultragrid) is still expensive and requires technicians present to carry out qualitatively good musical meetings. Thus, price, availability and the need for technical support mean that distance education still does not constitute an ideal teaching situation in music. In order to achieve minimal delay, we need a setup and hardware that works optimally for the purpose. Geir Davidsen's concept largely addresses the problem of the user threshold for musicians who use such technology. The concept includes affordable hardware and software that makes connectivity very easy, so students and teachers can concentrate on teaching and interaction.

The work has taken place in the form of three workshops with students at the Conservatory of Music in Tromsø, and a third workshop where the technology and teaching methods have been tested together with two students from the Norwegian Academy of Music in collaboration with students and teachers at UiT. There has been collaboration and dialogue with the students about which elements of the teaching that worked well digitally, and which require physical presence. In addition, various didactic issues have been a central part of the discussions.

The biggest challenges with digital teaching that were discussed during the project, were in line with previous experiences and studies; that the lack of physical and visual presence is greater in musical interaction than in normal online meetings. Physical presence is more important in interaction and teaching than you might notice in live teaching. It was also the first thing the students talked about in the discussion about what is the difference between live teaching and online playing lessons. Teaching music is more like dancing together, i.e. moving together, than we may be aware of on a daily basis.

Another experience was that the technical set-up takes time, even after the classes have started, with adjustments to sound and equipment. This is mostly not a problem if the layout is fixed in the premises used. The students came up with proposals for further development of the gear and the technical aspects in several areas. An obvious disadvantage of this type of setup is that an experienced computer person/technician is often required to be present, and ease of use is central to the further development of the "No Delay" project.

What obstructs, is mainly connected to the concerns of musical expression. Students responds, for example, that they feel they are "limiting themselves" dynamically. They must not play too strongly or too weakly, because that could affect the total sound of both teacher and student. They also say that there is naturally less work to do with intonation and timbre when you are not in the same room.

The students repeated several times that it was sometimes a better listening experience online than live, because they could hear all the voices equally well (better balance), and that they heard the other voices better in the headphones: "the sound right in the ear" This is reinforced by the fact that they could not rely on visual cues and disturbances in the room, and thus had to trust a more active listening.

The students also emphasized that the verbal dialogue is different without delay, and that this is surprisingly important in teaching for the conversation to be experienced as natural and equal: "The conversation flows much better than on Zoom".

The obvious advantage of the possibility of good sound and little delay online is that you can practice/rehearse together regardless of where you live/are located (in the whole world) and you can have the opportunity to hire any of the heroes from all over the world to listen, discuss subjects and receive instruction. There is still a lot of unplowed land here.

New questions and ideas for testing emerged. For example, about acoustics: what type of room might it be wise to explore in, and what about trying in different concert halls etc.? Or: how about using the boxes when the musicians are actuallt sitting in the same room - to get each other "right in the ear" there too? On the technical side, it was particulary how the set-up can be made even more user-friendly, where the dream scenario might be to have the playing teacher on an app on the phone with the possibility of good sound and minimal delay.

The musical benefit of the workshops came through the increasing quality of the interaction of the students during the project period, probably due to the practice online (right in the ear) in combination with analogue interaction situations and the discussions we had about interaction in the project. In addition, of course, there is the time spent practicing together on the workshop days.

A solid dose of ideas came up during the workshops as a result of the dialogue between the students and the researchers/project managers, both technically and pedagogically, which is very promising and inspiring.