MAG MAG Issue 3 December 2013 Contents Editorial 2 MAG News 3 2013 Membership Survey: The Preliminary Results ............... 3 Industry News 11 Events 12 MAG Events ...................................... 12 Other Events and Calls for Papers ......................... 14 Featured Article 15 Musical Acoustics at Cardiff ............................. 15 Letters 18 LinkedIn Roundup .................................. 21 Resources 22 Picture on the Cover 23 EDITORIAL Editorial Hello everybody and welcome to the third issue of MAG MAG, the newsletter of the Institute of Acoustics Musical Acoustics Group. My name is Owen Woods and I am the editor of this publication. The most exciting news in this edition is the announcement of five MAG events taking place in 2014-15. These range from evening branch meetings to full blown conferences and include work on Soundscapes, Recorded Music and Musical Instruments. I hope to see many people there supporting the work that we are doing to get this group as dynamic and stimulating as it should be. This issue’s Featured Article on page 15 is by Bernard Richardson of Cardiff University and is the fascinating story of his group’s research into stringed musical instrument acoustics. I find it fascinating anyway, although I might be considered to be biased on this one. We also have the results of the MAG Questionnaire on the next page this month. I am sure that this is news of great joy to everybody, so please do take a peek and see what you the group have told us to do. If you disagree, why not tell us about it on our LinkedIn group or by email? Mike Wright, our Chair, is still seeking information on the history of the MAG. Anec- dotes, clippings, publications, photographs, all are welcome. Please see his letter to the group on page 20. I note from the previous publication that I described this as “The Christmas Issue”. To that end: I wish all MAG Members a very Merry Christmas (or non-Christian equivalent) and a Happy New Year (wherever your New Year happens to fall)! If you have anything which you think would be of interest to your fellow members then please email me on [email protected]. I would welcome any contribution, however small. This newsletter will only be as good as its content and that will be decided by you, the readers. This newsletter will be published quarterly, in March, June, September and December. The deadline for submissions for the March 2014 Issue will be the 9th March 2014. Views expressed in MAG MAG are not necessarily the official view of the Institute of Acoustics or of the Musical Acoustics Group, nor do individual contributions reflect the opinions of the Editor. Whilst every care has been taken in the preparation of the newsletter, the publishers cannot be held responsible for the accuracy of the informa- tion herein, or any consequence arising from them. The Institute of Acoustics, MAG and Editor do not necessarily endorse the products or claims made by any contributor to this newsletter. 2 MAG NEWS MAG News This section is devoted to what we in the group are up to. If you have any MAG related news that you would like to share with us then please contact the editor. 2013 Membership Survey: The Preliminary Results Introduction It is now more than 21 years since members of the Musical Acoustics Group were asked to give their views to enable its future development. Back in the days before John Major lost the General Election, Peter Dobbins sent out a questionnaire to all MAG members using the long tried and tested method of paper forms and hoping for a response. The group membership was 116 in 1991 and about 20% responded. Nevertheless, as reported in ‘Notes’, April 1992 (the MAG newsletter of the time) the survey still provided some key points which helped the group to steer a path for the future. In the following years, membership slowly increased to 138 in 1993 but slowly declined to 79 by 2002. However, there were signs of a revival following the efforts of Peter Dobbins and Murray Campbell in 2003 with some activities taking place, in particular one on the ‘New Violin Octet’ which was well reported and IOA Spring conferences at Southampton in 2006 and Reading in 2008. There were also efforts to collaborate with the UK Musical Acoustics Network. Indeed, there was a revival in membership numbers reaching 286 in 2011, dropping slightly to 280 in 2012. Revival After a successful (free weekend) picked up clearly showed that costs to branch meeting which I chaired attend were a major factor along with featuring an organ builder the timing of the meeting. This event demonstrating his techniques on two would have been rather close to organs in Truro, I was motivated to Acoustics 2012 at Nantes which also press on and revitalise the group. had a good programme of interest to However, an attempt to hold a full MAG members. However, things for one-day meeting at Cardiff in 2012 2013 have improved with a full session failed due to the lack of support. of musical acoustics papers at the Whilst there was a good programme of Spring Conference and the first full presentations, holding the meeting one-day meeting of the Group this would have meant costs far millennium with more ‘on the cards’. outstripping the revenue from We now have a fully operational MAG attendance fees. The feedback I management committee. However, in 3 2013 Membership Survey: The Preliminary Results MAG NEWS the process, it has become became support from members of the IOA abundantly clear that we need to know (both within and outside the MAG) and what members want. This is needed the music industry generally, as well for the MAG to survive and develop so as instrument makers and academia, that it is much more than just an would be unlikely unless changes were ‘interest group’. Whilst ‘interest made quickly. This survey was groups’ might be seen as ‘desirable’ by essential. some, the harsh reality is that getting This Survey The 2013 survey was very much based also account for some non-responses upon the questions in the 1992 survey to old e-mail addresses. However, but using 21st century methods. This please accept my apologies if you are was done using ‘Survey Monkey’, the a member of the MAG and have not method used in the IOA Members been invited to take part in this Survey last year. There were 71 survey. The above has led to some responses representing around 25% of slight discrepancies in some numbers the total of invitations that went out. shown below. In this report, I am It is my view that the number of concentrating on hard fact rather than responses was a bit disappointing, detailed interpretation as I reiterate considering the small amount of time Peter Dobbins words in the 1992 and effort members needed to take survey: “This is not a random survey – part. There are a few IOA members it is limited to those with sufficient who have elected not to receive motivation to reply”. However, the circular e-mails with just a handful in 2013 survey has shown that 71 keen the MAG. I also found out later that a members were motivated to respond few of the members who received the and this has provided some very invitation to this survey were not helpful information. We must therefore presently members of the MAG. This be in with a good chance of having a may be due to members not updating strong group on that basis alone! their details with the Institute. It may What other specialist groups do members of the MAG belong to? Many MAG members belong to other memberships of the Building and groups and almost 6% of the total Physical Acoustics Groups responded, membership of the Speech and giving more scope for collaborations Hearing Group and over 5% of the between groups. Hopefully too, there Electroacoustics Group responded to is a future ahead for the MAG with over this survey. This is not surprising as 10% of the total number of the Young there is considerable synergy between Members Group responding. However their activities and those of the MAG disappointingly, only I and one other and efforts are well underway to person in the Senior Members Group encourage joint activities. responded, representing less than 3% Encouragingly, around 3% of the total of its current membership! 4 2013 Membership Survey: The Preliminary Results MAG NEWS Why do IOA members belong to the MAG? It was encouraging to know that there was an overwhelming majority (almost 80%) who simply wanted to ‘Gain Knowledge’ and an encouraging interest in MAG MAG which of course helps in that direction! Where are the members of the MAG? The geography of the Members members showed the largest locations were considered to be contingent was from the London important. The 1992 survey showed ‘a Branch with 25 responding, just over loose concentration in the south-east’ 3% of its total membership. However, a tighter cluster around Bristol and the in terms of the overall branch remainder spread over the rest of membership, both the Eastern (over England with a few in Wales and 5%) and Central Branches (just under Scotland. I have not yet analysed the 4%) had a greater proportion with an 2013 geographic locations in detail but almost 3% response from the Welsh have instead looked at member’s and North-West branches. The lack of branches. This is very important for response from the Irish and overseas considering the general target branches and comments from certain audience.