and their semantics, and to code the usability and software ergonomics in a user-centralized model. The work done on the interface is spread out between a subjective, aesthetic decision and a coordinative execution of the implemented functions. This is why a statement with software is not only addressed on principle, but already mapped out in the function imperatives of the software. One inevitably becomes the user or beta tester of the customary productivity software used for saving, coding and copying MP3 files and editing tracks. The authors’ perspective always remains problematic, but when interactively related to the software, it becomes expanded by a few decisive aspects. My music is a model for music in the sense that it’s not really made or generated, but rather assembled from existing music, namely from files, which I developed during a specific phase, thus making it very personal. In each case, I could have burned a CD; only I chose not to do so. I preferred having the people make the music themselves.

As an installation «Oval Process» requires a public space. Within this installation the «Oval Process» software is the engine. This is a simple computer inside a box, a prototype, built according to specific

principles. The collected installation objects, software, interfaces, public situation, and spatial context are not meant to decisively expand electronic music. The intention here is to put my approach at one’s disposal and make it accessible, so that one can decide whether or not it functions at all – that being the most important criterium from the user’s perspective: the ability to decide whether or not something functions. «Oval Process» is an intermediary result. What’s needed now is to develop the new distinctions that can be suggested in this context, or introduced into it, since the discourse on electronic music – in the way that I would prefer it – has been overlooked so far.

Discussion

DD: I read in an interview that the Oval Process software isn’t what you used to produce your music with, but rather a software which didactically shows how music is made. It’s not the equipment that you produce music with yourself. Did I understand that correctly?

MP: The question of whether I use it myself, or whether everyone could write a CD with it, is