Category: S2026 – Mang

This reading relates to a class I am currently taking called disability in musical contexts where we talk about disabilities studies and this “medical model” where disabilities are treated as problems to be solved negatively affect individuals. They will most likely try to hide their disabilities. They will prefer a design of accommodation that speaks about their disabilites the least. But in this text, we realise that a good design can acutally make someone confident about that  impairment they have and I makes me wonder how a good design for something meant to disabled people can seep into mainstream media.

Take for instance the Apple AirPods. Apple has focused so much on their design and the product that they can be used as hearing aids for people with mild or little hearing loss, and in this case, you cannot distinguish who is using the airpods as support or just for entertainment. This is an example of good design that can boost the confidence of a person with hearing loss and it combines functionality and style.

Late Hour Steer

Concept

I adore music, and I truly think that the art of making and producing music is something magical. I always listen to different kinds of music, and when I listen to jazz specifically, I think about how cool it would be if I could make music like that.
I don’t know how to play instruments, but sometimes the desire to make, adjust, produce something sounding so beautiful strikes me.
Looking at different animations, cinematics, and paintings makes me feel exactly the same.
This is how my idea emerged: I want to make an Arduino hardware controller pad paired with a generative audio-visual system in p5, where physical input through knobs and buttons shape a particle world that produces atmospheric jazz sound in real time.

Some of the core traits I want to maintain in this work are:

• • The user isn’t playing note by note, and they neither record anything. What they do is steer the autonomous system that can exist and work on its own by always producing sound and image
  • Rather than “performing” type of interaction, this is closer to “conducting”: the user shapes conditions, and the system acts within them
  • The overall vibe and aesthetic I want to maintain is moody, slow, noir-jazz, dark-tech style. Music references to Bohren & der Club of Gore or something close, and visual references to Y2K Sony industrial design, and physical instruments like the OP-1
  • The core of the idea is that both generative parts (audio and visuals) are controlled by physical tactile control, neither of them is most important. One of my main goals is to build system where both parts are equally important and depend on each other but can be autonomous at the same time

Interaction

The way I see the interaction is the following:
As user approaches the small panel, laptop screen can still show a dark, moving visual world that produces sound and visuals. The audio playing should be some slow, almost ambient, jazz that stays neutral if nothing is happening in the hardware. As the user turns the knob or presses a button, both the visuals and the sound will shift accordingly: is the “tension” knob raised, the sound becomes more dissonant and the the visuals become tighter.

Some technical parts of the interaction are the following:

• • Arduino reads knobs and buttons states somewhere around ~30 times per second
  • p5 receives this data via p5.serialport library (most probably), updates a shared state object, and then runs both audio and visual engine based on this state
  • Audio will play via laptop speakers, and visuals will render on screen. Some LEDs integration right in the panel to show the state of the knobs/buttons can be implemented, but I’m not fully sure about it yet

In terms of design, I want to maintain the following:

• • Macro controls and not direct micro controls: each knob and button affects multiple parts of the system and not just one minor thing
  • Both audio and visuals will depend on one state, so the system will have one “brain” every other “organ” will refer to in order to act
  • The system is autonomous, so even with no input, it will run on its own, idle behavior will be implemented as part of the design

Technical Implementation

Arduino:

• • Microcontroller: Arduino UNO
  • Components on panel:
    • 3-4 potentiometers: continuous parameters (density, tension, register/tone, etc.)
    • 4-6 buttons: discrete actions (mode change, reset, accent triggers, acceleration)
    • **1-2 indicator LEDs: mode/state feedback on the panel (up to consider)
  • Components hidden under the panel:
    • Breadboard with all wiring
    • Wires running from panel components to breadboard
  • The panel: cardboard (or wood if possible) as the surface, and breadboard mounted underneath
  • The design aesthetic: clear tech, dev-kit with labeled controls, clean layout, visible&intentional construction

p5.js:

• • Architecture: a single shared state object holds all current parameters: both the audio engine and the visual engine read from it
  • Serial communication: p5.serialport library (?) receives strings from Arduino, parses them, smooths the values, updates state
  • Generative engine: particle system
    • Particles drift in 2D space
    • Particles have properties (size, speed, color) influenced by state (impacted via physical input)
    • Collisions, threshold crossings, or other particle events trigger audio events
    • Behavior parameters (count, attraction/repulsion, speed) controlled by state
  • Audio engine: using p5.sound
    • Multiple voices: a sustained drone layer, a triggered note layer, possibly a percussive layer
    • All notes constrained to a single scale (Dorian or natural minor) to allow randomness only within this constraint
    • Regulated timing: events trigger on a slow tempo grid (~60-80 BPM) so rhythm feels intentional
    • Sound design: detuned sine/triangle oscillators, lowpass filter, reverb to maintain the dark jazz aesthetic
    • I need to research more on the sound design and p5 sound library

References

• • Sound: Brian Eno (Music for Airports), Tim Hecker, William Basinski, Bohren & der Club of Gore
  • Visual: Lacuna’s interface aesthetic, Signalis, Y2K-era Sony industrial design, OP-1
    

    

    

• • Hardware: Teenage Engineering Pocket Operators, Monome Norns
    

    

Risks

There are quite a lot of risks I need to mitigate in order for this project to not sound like random sounds but a cohesive melody with the intendent mood

• • Serial latency or audio glitches
    • Prototype the serial connection and audio engine first and then move to the design
  • Generative system feels random rather than intentional
    • Scale constraints, quantized rhythm, careful voice design — needs additional research on music design, p5 sound and overall music rules I might not be familiar with + a lot of tuning and testing needed
  • Knob mappings feel unintuitive
    • Spend some time on parameter tuning and intentional design of the panel: first sketch it, prototype the best and ask family/friends for feedback to choose the final version
  • Physical build looks rough
    • Design the panel layout on paper first, source proper knob caps and clean labels, hide the breadboard; Maybe consider painting some materials, asking dad for some wood-cutting help or consider using ready for implementation materials (old plastic boxes as a panel) — needs some brainstorm

Overall Review

I believe this project can become a really cool one if I spend enough time on music tuning and design prototyping, as well as on doing some proper research both on the aesthetic and how to maintain it with the available materials for now.
I will start off with some simple pseudo-code algorithms to structure the code I will need to write, and sketching the visual generative system and the physical panel. Then, I’ll move onto the coding, and finally, when everything will work properly (hopefully) I will build the design of the panel itself and try to organize everything so it looks good.

What caught my eye in this reading was the idea that disability design should not always be about hiding disability or making products invisible. I found the discussion about glasses especially interesting. I never thought of glasses as something that used to be seen mainly as a medical device and later became a fashion item. It made me think about how design can change the way people feel about using assistive products. Instead of making people feel embarrassed, good design can make people feel confident. That idea stood out to me because it shows design is not only about function, but also about identity.

Also I found it really interesting that the reading’s challenge to the belief that discreet is always the best approach for disability-related products. I used to assume the best design would make these products as hidden as possible, but the reading made me question that. Sometimes trying to hide disability can actually reinforce stigma. I liked how the author connects fashion and disability, because at first those seem like unrelated topics, but the reading shows they can influence each other. Overall, the reading made me think of design as something more social and cultural, not just practical. It made me realize inclusive design can help change attitudes, not just solve problems.

For my final project, I would like to build on my midterm and make substantial changes/extensions to the game I created. I would build on the experience of “Day in the Life of a Cat” by producing more interactive scenarios and adding more sounds to immerse the user in the game.

I still need to start working on the project so the documentation of that will be updated below.

Finalized concept for the project

My idea for the final project is inspired by a game I used to play a lot as a kid, Virus vs Virus. It’s not a very popular game and can only be played on iPad, so I’ll include some images & videos below of the gameplay to give an idea of my inspiration. To summarize, Virus vs Virus is a multi-player game that consists of many mini-games, the mini-games range from memory games, mazes games, and speed games. It has over 10 mini-games that are all pretty straightforward.

I want to reimagine the game in a physical way and integrate at least three mini-games into my final project. The general idea is still the same, it would be a multiplayer game and the winner is whoever wins the most mini-games.  I plan on re-creating 3-4 mini-games and probably edit them to match a physical implementation. I anticipate needing to order more components, such as a joystick controller. I also want to use different characters (not viruses!), and so far, the main idea I have in mind is inspired by an Instagram creator who creates mugs inspired by people’s faces. However, my game would probably not have customizable features but rather just 2-4 static characters to choose from.

The specific games I’m thinking of implementing are below. I would love to implement additional games, however, for now, I’m trying to narrow it down to keep it more achievable and less overwhelming. For each one, I’ve included a short description of what this would look like:

The first game consists of the users tapping as fast as they can on their virus for it grow to the largest size. The virus that fills up the full screen first is the winner. I hope to redesign this game using the Arduino by using either buttons or possibly, the ultrasonic sensor. 

The next game is a memory game. The players are shown number cards in a random order for a short amount of time, then, they are all flipped and the players must click on them in the right order. Everytime both players get it right, the number of cards increase. If either players get it wrong, the other player wins. And if both players get it wrong, that same level is just repeated again. I plan to simulate this using Arduino by using LEDs and buttons.

Finally, the last game is a maze. The players just have to get their virus to the other side in the fastest time and without touching the spiky black viruses. I hope to implement this in Arduino by using joystick controllers (which I would need to order).

The p5.js sketch would support the Arduino by showing the visuals for the players. Simply giving users the Arduino board would most likely be confusing, hence, I would use the p5.js screen to display instructions, as well as portray the movements the users are making using the Ardunio components. I’m planning to create a few prototypes on Canva to visualize my ideas and choose a style to go with for my final project.

At the moment, the most challenging part is the serial communication between the Arduino and the p5.js sketch. To overcome this, I’m planning to go through the notes on GitHub and complete the assignment that’s on WordPress to become more familiar with how it works.

A thing that really stuck with me in this reading was the whole “trickle-up” idea, basically the argument that innovation doesn’t just flow from mainstream design down into accessibility products, but can actually go the other way around. The example that opens the text is kind of wild when you think about it – the Eameses didn’t design sleek furniture and then adapt it for disabled people. They designed a leg splint for injured Navy sailors, and the techniques they figured out through that problem ended up shaping some of the most iconic furniture of the 20th century.

That framing hit differently for me because of something my professor, Noel Joyce, who taught Innovation Lab to me in my freshman year, brought up in class. He designed an accessible mountain bike called Project Mjolnir, built for people who’d normally be shut out of the sport. But the thing he mentioned that I keep thinking about is that anyone can ride it, not just disabled users.

I think that’s exactly what the reading is trying to show: when you design for people with real, specific needs, you’re forced to think harder and more creatively than you would designing for some “average” user. It makes me wonder how many better products we’re missing out on simply because accessibility was never part of the brief to begin with.

For my final project, I am inspired by early 2000s technology designs like the PSP, Game Boy Advance, Nintendo DS, and Tamagotchi.

Plan A: My idea is to create a simple Tamagotchi game that represents my cats, each with a specific feeding amount that is recognized by computer vision using p5.js. The automatic feeder would use an Arduino Uno, an LCD display, servos, and an ESP32-CAM.

Plan B: I will mainly rely on the buttons on the feeder/p5.js to interact with the feeder and the game.

There are two unknown parts: the 3D printing and the ESP32-CAM, which is why I came up with a backup plan.

I am also looking at 3D printing the feeder at a public library or a local maker lab. If I am unable to do so, I will recreate it using cardboard, which I will paint to fit this aesthetic.

These are AI-generated images of what I want to build. I chose to build this not only because it has a nice aesthetic and design, but also because it will be useful for my cats when we are away from home for a long time. If possible, I will also create versions for stray cats.

The P5.js:

It is a Tamagotchi-style game with buttons that control the feeder, including feeding time, the amount per cat, and other settings. The interface will visually represent each cat, showing their hunger levels, mood, and feeding history. It will also allow users to customize schedules, adjust portion sizes, and possibly receive alerts when a cat needs feeding. Additionally, the game can simulate interactions (such as animations or status changes) based on whether the cat has been fed, making it both functional and engaging.

The Arduino:

Its function is to control the physical components of the feeder. The servo motor will open and close the feeder based on input either from the camera (detecting which cat is present) or from commands sent by the p5.js system. The Arduino will process signals from the ESP32-CAM to identify the cat and match it with its assigned feeding amount. It will also control the LCD display to show real-time information such as feeding status, the detected cat, or errors. Overall, it acts as the bridge between the digital game and the physical feeding mechanism, ensuring accurate and timed food dispensing.

The reading is essentially asking why design for disability has historically been so focused on making things disappear rather than making them good. The author uses the Eames leg splint as his opening example, something designed for injured navy personnel that also happens to be genuinely beautiful, and I think that object does a lot of work in setting up his argument. If a leg splint can be that considered and elegant, why are hearing aids still being molded in pink plastic and engineered to hide? The glasses section is the one I kept thinking about after I finished reading. I found it interesting how spectacles were once classified as medical appliances and their wearers as patients, and that the goal was explicitly for them to not be styled. And now, they’ve become a sort of fashion accessory. I think about my own experience being short and how much of my early relationship with my appearance was about minimizing rather than owning it, avoiding certain things because I did not want to draw attention to something I felt self-conscious about. I recognize now that instinct is exactly what the author is critiquing. Trying to make something invisible does not make it go away, it just communicates that you think it should be hidden, and I think that says more than the thing itself ever would. I kept thinking that somewhere along the way, the priority shifted from helping someone hear to helping them hide the fact that they need help hearing, and those are very different design briefs with very different outcomes for the person wearing it.

This reading honestly made me rethink a lot about how design and disability are connected, because I always saw design for disability as something more functional, like just solving a problem, but it’s actually way more about perception and culture. What I found really interesting is how a lot of mainstream design actually comes from disability, like the Eames leg splint   influencing modern furniture, which shows that when designers work with real constraints they come up with better ideas. I also liked the idea of “trickle-up” design because it’s so true today, like voice assistants or accessibility tools that everyone uses now. At the same time, the reading made me question the idea of designing for everyone, because when things try to do too much they end up being confusing instead of inclusive. The part about hiding vs showing disability stood out a lot too, because design often tries to make disability invisible, but that can actually reinforce stigma, while things like glasses became something people want to wear. I do agree that simplicity is important, but not just visually, more in terms of making things actually understandable and usable. But I also think the reading pushes a bit too much toward making disability expressive through design, because not everyone wants that, some people just want something that works and doesn’t draw attention. So for me the main idea is that design isn’t neutral, it shapes how we see people, and instead of choosing one approach, it should give people the option to either hide or express their disability depending on what they want.

The first thing that came to mind from this reading is the designer, Destiny Pinto. She was diagnosed with rheumatoid arthritis which required her to wear compression gloves to manage the pain and swelling. However, this gloves looked too “medical” and implied that it should be hidden or that one should be ashamed to wore it. She decided to break this sterotype and redesign the gloves to make them look more stylish and personal. Eventually, she expanded this idea to other assistive devices and launched her label, By Destiny Pinto. She redesigned and reimagined widely used assistive devices such as compression gloves, ostomy bags, and hearing aids through a more fashion-oriented perspective.

The reading made me rethink her label and its purpose, is she trying to hide the disability through redesigning them? Or is she empowering people to be proud of their disabilities? In my opinion, I think her line allows people to feel more empowered and removes that restriction of having a medical devices that doesn’t match your style, but rather, that adds to your outfit. Instead of trying to hide your medical device, it becomes your unique statement piece.

Another discussion that I found interesting in the reading are glasses, and them being considered a disability device. Of course, as the reading states, this is not a disability device that stigmatised or honestly, even referred to as a disability device. Eyewear has also slowly become more and more of fashion piece and an accessory, even people who don’t need glasses wear them. Personally, I’m someone who does wear glasses and has been for almost my whole life. I still vividly remember being really excited about wearing glasses and then also getting mocked and called a nerd for wearing them. However, luckily as I’ve grown up, I’ve become more confident with my glasses and I really enjoy purchasing a new pair every few months. I have also recently started wearing contact lenses but I still find myself missing my glasses!