Thoughts on the 1st GLTI.CH Karaoke event
My thoughts on our first GLTI.CH Karaoke event. What went right/wrong and where to go next:
3G network issues: connectivity and data plan limitations: this for me comes down to two things.a. How do we stabilise our connection in future better or dedicated 3g hubs? It might for instance be possible to have a setup where if the skype goes down, at least the karaoke stays running. In fact, why not go back to the two computer model simply for this purpose? If each computer had its own dedicated 3g dongle, then a single failure might not always mean a double failure. Whatever the method, we should think about ways to build in a fail-safe INTO the technical setup.
How do we prepare better for the ‘worst to happen’ – lots of backup videos on the computer, ready to run regardless of the internet.
Restricting certain components of the setup: It might have been nice to have a free floating laptop, to add a dynamism to what the people in Japan saw. Of course this would be completely different with a free webcam. Then it comes down to equipment; the main point of this being not to limit what is possible. Our choices should try to keep options open at as many levels as possible.
Meanwhile: I love that Meanwhile Space is dynamic, organic, free flowing: this was part of our original proposal for the event. One way to look at their ‘difference’ to a more traditional, rooted, location would be to focus the downsides. i.e. no steady internet, no established audience. We chose to see their dynamism as a strength. For the 3g problem, we embraced it, and went all glitchy, for the lack of audience problem, we were less considered. I suppose that a major strength in our approach is that as we keep repeating the events WITH Meanwhile, so our audience and their audience merge. It is obvious that events, whether they be in dynamic or rooted places, help both parties (the event organisers and the people who run the space where the event is run) but I think it’s worth really focussing on that relationship, more as symbiosis, rather than parasitic.
One event for one particular space: trying to really streamline the technical setup for the future so that we can, ideally, just drop down a computer/projector/webcam/audio/3G setup ANYWHERE and in 2 minutes have a working karaoke marathon. I do like this, but it made me think about the opposite of this i.e. what we had at meanwhile. A wooden structure built for ONE purpose for our event to succeed. We were so dedicated to that space. The second example, although it seems less dynamic and therefore less commited to the “GLTI.CH philosophy”, what it has going for it is considering the particulars of ONE space. I think it would be a shame if, after we acheive the perfect ‘drop it in 5 minutes’ setup, we forgot to tune each particular GLTI.CH event to the particular space/place/time etc. Particulars are valuable.
Non-localised methodology: We’ve so far gone really deep into the distributed model for this. i.e. multiple locations, dynamic spaces, embracing the glitch in the tech etc. I’d also like to go further with this when it comes to dissemination. So, things like asking participants to bring smart phones or their own webcam laptops, so that multiple streams of the event can be broadcast online at once. Or really pushing the twitter/flickr model in post-event processing. The GLTI.CH Karaoke is but 3 hours of singing in a whole weeklong binge of GLTI.CHy internet activity, photos, video, chat, streaming, glitchglitchglitch.
