LIVEJACKET: Wearable Music Experience
Device with Multiple Speakers
Satoshi Hashizume⋆ , Shinji Sakamoto⋆ , Kenta Suzuki, and Yoichi Ochiai
University of Tsukuba
pota1401@hotmail.co.jp

Abstract. There are two conventional methods to experience music:
listening physically (Live) and listening through digital media. However,there are diﬀerences in the quality of the music experience between theselistening methods. To improve the quality of music experience and entertainment when listening through digital media, we developed LIVEJACKET, a jacket capable of vibrotactile presentation and music playback. By simultaneously presenting vibration and sound from 22 multiple speakers attached to a jacket, we created the sensation of being
enveloped in sound. Wearers feel like they are singing, whitch can improve the quality of the music experience. We set five music listening
methods, completed experiments, and conducted a questionnaire survey
on the music experience. Based on the results, we found that the system
we proposed can provide a music experience that cannot be obtained bylistening to music through traditional digital methods.

Keywords: Embodied interaction, wearable, audio, haptics.

1

Introduction

There are two conventional methods to experience music: listening physically(live) and listening through digital media. The method to listen to music physically is to go to a live venue or concert hall and listen to live performances bybands and orchestras. The method of listening through digital media is to listen
to digitized sound through a medium such as a CD or a television. Typically,
there are more opportunities to listen to music through digital media.
Live performance not only transmit sounds to the audience, but vibrations
and sound pressure are also simultaneously transmitted. Conversely, when listening audio through digital media, it is diﬃcult to feel vibrations and soundpressure on the body through general speakers or headphones. Therefore, thequality of the music experience greatly diﬀers between these two methods. Furthermore, due to the diﬀerence in the quality of the music experience, it is hard
to convey the music’s excellence through a digital medium. This makes it difficult to utilize digital method in entertainment such as music promotion andperformance. Therefore, we thought that we could improve the quality of the⋆Both authors contributed equally to the work.

2

Hashizume and Sakamoto et al.

music experience and use it for entertainment while listening to music throughdigital media.
It is believed that vibration that is felt by the body along with sound greatly
aﬀects the quality of the music experience. Since sound is air vibrations, especially large sounds and low frequency sounds can not only be heard by the ear
but resonate through the body as vibrations. At live venues and concert halls,
there are loud sounds and low frequency sounds, so the body feels vibrations
strongly. However, general speakers and headphones cannot transmit strong vibrations. Furthermore, to improve entertainment, the listener need to feel as if
he or she is enveloped in music, as if he or she was singing. This cannot be
experienced by simply listening to music.
We attached speakers to the jacket, thereby creating a LIVEJACKET that
presented a vibratory tactile sensation throughout the body, while one could hear
the music. It is possible to play high band sounds and feel vibration by using multiple speakers including piezo speakers, full range speakers, and subwoofers. The
listener can become more immersed into the music by mixing sounds exclusively
for each body part.
This study’s contributions are as follows.
– We experimented on methods to listen to music and found that emotions do
not change significantly depending on how one listens.
– We found that using the proposed method, LIVEJACKET, improves themusic experience compared to other music listening methods.
– The method of listening to music with headphones while vibrating the bodyalso contributed to improving the music experience.

2

Related Work

Vibration tactile technology has already been used for the purpose of improving
the quality of music experience. In addition, vibrotactile technology is also usedin the field of entertainment such as games and movies. However, there arefew studies on tactile presentation technology aimed at both improving musicexperience and utilizing it in the field of entertainment.
2.1

Improve Music Experience

There has been much research on the relationship between vibration tactile andmusic experiences [3]. Most of music playing devices that reproduce vibration
are chair type devices. A chair-type device presents vibration by attaching transducers to a chair. The Emoti-Chair [7] converted acoustic signals directly into
vibration by attaching eight voice coils to a chair. Merchel and Altinsoy [12]vibrated the entire chair and examined the change in the music experience. By
individually controlling the sound and vibration to be played back, they clarified
that vibration aﬀects the music experience. Nanayakkara et al. [13] developed
a chair-type vibratory sensation device for the hearing impaired. Experiments

LIVEJACKET: Wearable Music Experience Device with Multiple Speakers

3with hearing impaired individuals indicated that the music experience improved.
Karam et al. [6] developed a jacket type vibration presentation device. Although
no change in emotion was seen, it was observed that changing the vibrationaccording to the music frequency improved the music experience better thanadding a certain vibration.
Rovan [14] developed a haptic presentation system as an interface for playing
virtual instruments. When playing a virtual musical instrument, vibrations are
feedback, so that it feels as though the user is manipulating real instruments. In
the research to improve the music experience using vibration tactile, music wasplayed from the external speaker as before, and only vibration was presented
from the haptic presentation device. To further improve the music experience,
we played not only the vibration but also the music from the tactile presentation
device. By playing music from the device as well, it sounds as if wearer is generating sound himself. Wearner feel as if he or she are being enveloped in sound,which leads to an improvement in the music experience.

2.2

Utilization in the Entertainment Field

Vibration tactile presentation devices are used not only in the music field but
also in the entertainment field. As observed from the widespread use of 4DX1 , achair-type vibration presentation system, vibration presentation is an important
technique in movie viewing. Lemmens et al. [9] developed a jacket-type upper
body vibration tactile presentation device for movie viewing. Dijk [4] has developed a blanket type vibrotactile presentation device for movie viewing with176 vibrating motors. Mood Glove [11] is a globe type vibration tactile presentation device for viewing movies. It was determined that vibrotactile stimuli at
low intensity and low frequency induced a sense of calmness in users, whereas
vibrotactile stimuli at low intensity but higher frequency increased excitement.
Rahman et al. [1] developed a wearable device that presents vibrations to correspond with movies published on YouTube.
Vibration tactile sense is also an important technology in gaming. Lindeman
et al. [10] developed a vibrotactile presentation device for VR games. Synesthesia
Suit [8] has developed a suits-type vibrotactile presentation device specializing in
Rez Infinite games. It was used to promote of Rez Infinite. Surround Haptics [5]is a device that creates a sensation as if the vibrating part is moving between thetransducers by arranging a plurality of transducers in an array in a chair; thisis used to represent movement in the game. Emojacket [2], a jacket type haptic
sense presentation device, presented not only vibrotactile presentation but also
haptic sense by using air and temperature.
In the entertainment field there are few cases of using vibration tactile formusic listening. We consider that this research will increase the entertainment
aspect of the music experience.
1

http://www.cj4dx.com/ (last accessed March 2, 2018)

4

Hashizume and Sakamoto et al.

(a) Flont of the jacket
PE7

PE8

SP1
PE11

PE5

PE6

SP3
PE12

PE13

PE14

PE1

SP2

PE2

PE15

SP4
PE16

(b) Back of the jacket
PE10
Not usedPE9

Not used

SB1

PE3

PE4

SB2

Fig. 1. Layout drawing of the speakers to be attached to the jacket.

3

Implementation

LIVEJACKET consists of a jacket and 22 multiple types of speakers. Since thefrequency band that can be played back is diﬀerent depending on the speaker
type, it is possible to reproduce broadband sound and vibration by using multiple

LIVEJACKET: Wearable Music Experience Device with Multiple Speakers

MacBook Pro

USB Type B cable

Logic Pro X

5

Audio interface(MOTU 16A)

Audio cables
SB1
SB2

Amplifierfor SUBPAC M2
AmplifierAmplifierAmplifier(FOSTEX AP05)

AmplifierAmplifierSP4

AmplifierSP3

Amplifier(FOSTEX AP05)

AmplifierAmplifierSP2

Amplifier

SP1

PE1
PE2
PE14

PE16

PE13
PE12
PE11
PE10
PE9
PE8
PE7
PE6
PE5
PE4
PE3

PE15

Fig. 2. Block diagram of speakers and amplifiers used for LIVEJACKET.

speakers. We used 16 piezo speakers “pzBASS B26C” (PE1 ∼ 16), four fullrange speakers “NSW 1-205-8A”2 (SP1 ∼ 4), and two subwoofers “SUBPAC
M2”3 (SB1 and SB2). We attached six piezo speakers in front of the jacket,
three piezo speakers and two full range speakers in the right arm, three piezo
speakers and two full range speakers in the left arm, and four piezo speakers andtwo subwoofers on the back (Fig. 1.). Each speaker is connected to the audio
interface MOTU 16A4 that can output 16 channels via an amplifier. The piezo
speakers are connected to a compact amplifier, full range speakers are connected
to two 5W amplifiers FOSTEX AP 05, and the subwoofers are connected to theattached dedicated amplifier (Fig. 3.). The audio interface is connected to thelaptop by a USB cable. Some speakers (PE1 and SB1; PE2 and SB2; PE15, SP1,and SP2; and PE15, SP1, and SP2) are connected to the same channel.
The vibration and sound presented by LIVEJACKET needs to be dedicated.
We split music for each part such as an instrument or a vocal and assigned thedivided sound part to each channel of the audio interface using Logic Pro X.
Since it is possible to play diﬀerent sounds from each speaker, various sounddesigns are possible. It is possible to change the gain of each channel or to send
the same sound from a plurality of speakers.
2

http://www.ari-web.com/aurasound/NSW1-205-8A/index.htm(lastaccessed
March 2, 2018. In Japanese)3
http://thehand.co.jp/subpac/ (last accessed March 2, 2018. In Japanese)4
http://motu.com/products/avb/16a (last accessed March 2, 2018)6

Hashizume and Sakamoto et al.

Headphone

Speaker

LIVEJACKET

Fig. 3. Experiment setup. Subjects wore the LIVEJACKET and listened to music
while standing.

4

Evaluation

We experimented and evaluated how the quality of the music experience changed
between five music listening methods.
4.1

Participants

Twelve participants (five females, seven males, eight of whom were members of
our laboratory) between the age of 19 and 38 (M = 23.08, SD = 4.82) participatedin the experiment. None of the participants were deaf. The average height of theparticipants was 168.5 cm (SD = 8.54).
4.2

Experimental Design

We prepared five music listening methods and two experimental music methods and compared the quality of the music experience. A questionnaire survey
was conducted for each music listening method. Five kinds of music listening
methods were prepared as follows. In all listening methods, subjects wore the
LIVEJACKET and listened to music while standing (Fig. 3.).
Speaker method: A method of listening to music using an external speaker.
Subjects listened to music while standing 1.5 meters in front of the stereo’s

LIVEJACKET: Wearable Music Experience Device with Multiple Speakers

7external speaker. We played the original, unprocessed sound source on theexternal speaker.
Headphone method: A method of listening to music using headphones. Subjects wore headphones. We played the original, unprocessed sound source on
the headphones.
Speaker with vibration method: A method of listening to music using LIVEJACKET, which was set to present only vibration, and extarnal speakers.
We played the original, unprocessed sound source, on the extarnal speakers.
We mixed 100 Hz or 200 Hz low pass filtered sound source to each LIVEJACKET speaker and played. We played the sound source for LIVEJACKET
and the external speaker simultaneously.
Headphone with vibration method: A method of listening to music using
LIVEJACKET, which was set to present only vibration, and headphones.
Subjects wore headphones. We played the original, unprocessed sound sourceon the headphones. We mixed 100 Hz or 200 Hz low pass filtered sound source
to each LIVEJACKET speaker and played. We played the sound source for
LIVEJACKET and the headphones simultaneously.
LIVEJACKET method: A method of listening to music wearing LIVEJACKET.
We mixed each part of the original sound source for each speaker of LIVEJACKET and played.
Two kinds of songs were used in this experiment. To evaluate LIVEJACKET
from the entertainment perspective, we selected rock and orchestra, as thesemusic genres are often played at live venues. The song details and the mixing
settings are listed below.
M1 - We are (ONE OK ROCK): For rock music, we selected “We are”5
from ONE OK ROCK, a Japanese band, as rock music. We trimmed M1
from the original to 1 minute 18 seconds. M1 is divided into 12 parts: bass,
drums, percussion, rhythm, lead guitar, rhythm guitar, acoustic guitar, synth
bass, synthesizer, string, chorus, and lead vocal. Bass and synth bass were
output from PE1, PE2, SB1, and SB2. Vocals were output from SP1, SP2,
SP3, SP4, PE15, and PE16, which are about the tip of the arm. By being
able to hear vocals from the arms, it feels as though wearer are singing. The
other parts were mixed so that the sound was reproduced from the wholebody. In the experiment, subjects held their arm in front of his or her face
like he or she had a microphone so that vocals reproduced from their arms
could be heard from the face.
M2 - Symphony No.5, Op.67 (Ludwig van Beethoven): We selected
Beethoven’s Symphony No.5, Op. 67 for orchestra music. We trimmed M2from the original song to 58 seconds. M2 is divided into 12 parts: trombone,
trumpet, viola, violin, bassoon, clarinet, oboe, flute, cello, contrabass, horn,
and timpani. Each part was associated with each speaker.
5https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nU307tV32B0 (last accessed March 2, 2018)

8

Hashizume and Sakamoto et al.

4.3

Procedure

Each participant was briefly informed of the study’s purpose and advised thatthey could abort the study and take a break at any time. Further, they were
provided with a consent form to sign and a demographics questionnaire to complete.
Subjects listened to first to M1 then to M2 through the five types of listening
methods. The order of five music listening methods was randomly presented toeach subject. Both music selections were played once for each listening method.
We used Rousse’s circumplex model of emotion [15], a Multidimensional Scaling (MDS) model with two-dimensional interpreted parameters, arousal (weakto strong) and valence (positive to negative), to examine the subjects’ emotions
after listening to music. Subjects responded to the MDS after listening to musicwith each listening method. They were asked the following questions, which werebased on 7 scale likert scale. At the conclusion, we provided a free description
field.
Q1. Did the music feel comfortable? (comfortable - not aﬀected - uncomfortable)
Q2. Did the vibration feel comfortable? (comfortable - not aﬀected - uncomfortable)
Q3. How did you feel the music volume? (big - small)Q4. Did you feel the music to whole body? (overall - moderate - locally)Q5. Did you feel as if you were in a live concert venue? (I felt - I did not feel)Q6. Did you feel wrapped in sound? (wrapped - not wrapped)
Q7. Did you enjoy it? (fun - not fun)Q8. Did you feel as if you became a singer / conductor? (I felt - I did not feel)Q9. Did you feel like you were in an audience? (I felt - I did not feel)Q10. Did you feel the sound pressure? (I felt - I did not feel)Q11. Were your emotions shaken? (shaken - not shaken)
Q12. Did you want to move your body? (I wanted to move it - I did not)Q13. Did you want to sing along? Would you like to play in instrument? (I did I did not)Q14. Did you want to go to a live venue? (I wanted - I did not)Q15. Would you recommend this to someone? (I would like to recommend - I did
not want to)
4.4

ResultWe conducted a statistical test on the questionnaire result using mauchly’s
sphericity test and sidak for the multiple comparison. We used the SPSS Statistics version 24.
MDS results are shown in the Fig. 4. Significant diﬀerences were observed inarousal in M1 (F(4, 44) = 3.540, p < 0.05). As a result of multiple comparison,
the LIVEJACKET method showed higher awareness than the speaker method(p < 0.05). Conversely, the valence in M1 did not show any significant diﬀerence(F(4, 44) = 1.286, n.s.). In M2, there was no significant diﬀerence between arousal
and valence (arousal: F(4, 44) = 3.508, n.s.; valence: F(4, 44) = 1.999, n.s.).

LIVEJACKET: Wearable Music Experience Device with Multiple Speakers

9

Table 1. Result of statistical test on the questionnaire result using multiple comparisonin M1.
Question
Q4
Q5
Q6
Q7
Q8
Q10
Q11
Q13
Q14
Q15

Test statistic
F(4, 44) = 10.767
F(4, 44) = 5.872
F(4, 44) = 11.614
F(4, 44) = 6.311
F(4, 44) = 7.153
F(4, 44) = 3.979
F(4, 44) = 5.550
F(4, 44) = 2.693
F(4, 44) = 4.005
F(4, 44) = 6.070

P-valuep < 0.01
p < 0.01
p < 0.01
p < 0.01
p < 0.01
p < 0.01
p < 0.01
p < 0.05
p < 0.01
p < 0.01

Table 2. Result of statistical test on the questionnaire result using multiple comparisonin M2.
Question
Q4
Q5

Test statistic
F(4, 44) = 7.410
F(4, 44) = 7.002

P-valuep < 0.01
p < 0.01

We conducted a statistical test on 15 questions as well as MDS. Only the
results on the question items with significant diﬀerences are shown in the Fig. 4.
Significant diﬀerences were found in Q4, Q5, Q6, Q7, Q8, Q10, Q11, Q13, Q14,
and Q15 in M1 (Table 1). Significant diﬀerences were found in Q4 and Q10 in
M2 (Table 2).
The results of the multiple comparison are as shown in the Fig. 4. Characteristic results indicated the following. From the result for Q4 in M1 and M2,
we proved that the LIVEJACKET method can create the sensation of music
being felt throughout the body. However, the headphone with vibration method
also proved to be eﬀective to some extent. According to the result of Q8 in M1,
we found that subject could feel as if he or she became a singer by using the
LIVEJACKET method, speaker with vibration method and headphone with vibration method more than the speaker method. In Q4, Q5, Q6, Q7, Q8, and Q11
of M1 and Q4 and Q10 of M2, not only the LIVEJACKET method but also theheadphone with vibration method showed significant diﬀerences.
P1 answered that jacket was heavy and tiring. P3, P4, P5, P10, and P11
answered that it would be better to strengthen the front vibration, not theback. P8 answered that he felt music playing in the back. P2 and P4 answeredthat the sound quality of LIVEJACKET was bad.

10Hashizume and Sakamoto et al.
M1 - Arousal

M1 - Valence

Speaker

M=3.8
SD=1.5

Speaker

M=3.5
SD=1.2

Headphone

M=3.3
SD=1.0

Headphone

M=3.1
SD=1.7

Speakerwith vibration

M=3.3 *
SD=1.4

Speakerwith vibration

M=3.3
SD=1.5

Headphonewith vibration

M=2.6
SD=1.2

Headphonewith vibration

M=2.8
SD=1.6LIVEJACKET

M=2.5
SD=1.2LIVEJACKET

M=2.4
SD=1.2StrongWeak

Positive

M2 - Arousal
Speaker

M=4.1
SD=1.7

Speaker

M=3.6
SD=1.7

Headphone

M=3.9
SD=1.5

Headphone

M=3.6
SD=1.6

Speakerwith vibration

M=3.5
SD=1.6

Speakerwith vibration

M=3.3
SD=1.8Headphonewith vibration

M=2.7
SD=1.0

Headphonewith vibration

M=2.7
SD=1.2LIVEJACKET

M=3.2
SD=1.0LIVEJACKET

M=3.0
SD=1.2StrongWeak

M1 - Q4. Did you feel the music to whole body?
M=5.4
SD=1.5

Headphone

M=5.4
SD=1.5

Speakerwith vibration

M=4.2
SD=1.9 *Headphonewith vibration

M=2.7
SD=1.5LIVEJACKET

M=2.1
SD=1.7Overall

Positive

Negative

M1 - Q5. Did you feel as if you were in a live concert venue?

Speaker*****

Speaker

M=5.4
SD=1.5

Headphone

M=5.4
SD=1.5

Speakerwith vibration

M=4.2
SD=1.9Headphonewith vibration
LIVEJACKET

I feltLocally

M1 - Q7. Did you enjoy it?

M1 - Q6. Did you feel wrapped in sound?
Speaker

M=5.8
SD=1.5

Headphone

M=3.9
SD=2.1

Speakerwith vibration

M=4.3
SD=1.7M=2.7
SD=1.5

Headphonewith vibration

M=2.8
SD=1.6

M=2.1
SD=1.7LIVEJACKET

M=2.4
SD=1.4**

I did not feel

Wrapped

M=4.5
SD=1.4

Headphone

M=3.6
SD=1.6

Speakerwith vibration

M=3.4
SD=1.4

Headphonewith vibration

M=2.3
SD=1.2

Headphonewith vibration

LIVEJACKET

M=2.3
SD=1.5LIVEJACKET

M=6.4
SD=1.0Speaker****

Headphone

M=6.0*
SD=1.5

Speakerwith vibration

M=5.3
SD=1.6

I did not enjoy

I feltM1 - Q11. Were your emotions shaken?

***

Not wrapped

Speaker

M=5.0
SD=1.9Headphone

M=4.6
SD=2.0M=3.4 *
SD=1.8Speaker* with vibration

M=4.3
SD=1.8Headphonewith vibration

M=3.5
SD=2.1

M=3.7
SD=2.2LIVEJACKET

M=2.3
SD=1.7
I feltI did not feelM1 - Q13. Did you want to sing along?

I did not feelM1 - Q14. Did you want to go to a live venue?

Speaker

M=5.8
SD=1.5

Speaker

M=5.2
SD=1.3

Speaker

M=5.1
SD=1.8Headphone

M=4.1
SD=2.1

Headphone

M=3.8
SD=2.0

Headphone

M=5.0
SD=1.8Speakerwith vibration

M=3.9
SD=2.0Speakerwith vibration

M=4.4 *
SD=1.8Speakerwith vibration

M=3.9 *
SD=2.1

Headphonewith vibration

M=3.3
SD=1.6

Headphonewith vibration

M=3.5
SD=2.2

Headphonewith vibration

M=3.7
SD=2.2LIVEJACKET

M=3.2
SD=2.0LIVEJACKET

M=3.4
SD=2.5LIVEJACKET

M=3.7
SD=2.0Shaken***Not shaken

I did

M1 - Q15. Would you recommend this to someone?

I wanted

I did notI did notM2 - Q10. Did you feel the sound pressure?

M2 - Q4. Did you feel the music to whole body?

Speaker

M=4.6
SD=1.7

Speaker

M=4.7
SD=1.4

Speaker

M=5.2
SD=1.8Headphone

M=4.3
SD=1.6

Headphone

M=5.3
SD=1.7

Headphone

M=5.3
SD=1.6

Speakerwith vibration

M=3.0 *
SD=1.5 *Speakerwith vibration

M=3.5 *
SD=2.1

Speakerwith vibration

M=3.1*
SD=2.0

Headphonewith vibration

M=3.0
SD=1.8Headphonewith vibration

M=3.1
SD=1.8Headphonewith vibration

M=3.1
SD=1.9LIVEJACKET

M=2.3
SD=1.1LIVEJACKET

M=2.7
SD=1.5LIVEJACKET

M3.3
SD=.9

I would like to recommend

I did not want toOverall***

M1 - Q10. Did you feel the sound pressure?

M1 - Q8. Did you feel as if you became a singer?

Speaker

I enjoyed

Negative

M2 - Valence

Locally**

I felt**I did not feel

* : p < 0.05, ** : p< 0.01

Fig. 4. The result of MDS model of emotion and questions about emotion. Only the
result on the questions with significant diﬃerence are shown.

LIVEJACKET: Wearable Music Experience Device with Multiple Speakers

511Discussion

We conducted a questionnaire survey on MDS and music experience in subject
experiments. In the MDS evaluation, it was suggested that there was no significant diﬀerence in emotions with each music listening method. This indicates thatthe diﬀerences in listening methods do not aﬀect emotions. It is thought thatthe tune of the song itself subject’s aﬀects. The rock music in M1 had higher
arousal and valence than M2, which is an orchestral piece.
In the questionnaire survey on the music experience, there were significant
diﬀerences in many questions. From M1, there were significant diﬀerences with
10 questions, however with M2, there were significant diﬀerences with only twoquestions. This is thought to be due to the diﬀerence in songs. As P2 and P4
answered, LIVEJACKET has poor sound quality compared to external speakers
and headphones. As for an orchestra, which has many kinds of musical instruments and high resolution, sound quality changes greatly depending on the device
to be reproduced. Therefore, when playing the orchestra with LIVEJACKET,
it is thought that the sound quality decreased more than with external speakers
and headphones, which aﬀected the music experience. However, since M1 is akind of rock music with fewer musical instruments, the influence of diﬀerencein sound quality is considered to be small. In the seven questions, significant
diﬀerences also appeared in the headphone with vibration method in addition
to the LIVEJACKET method. This is also considered to be related to soundquality. Compared to the LIVEJACKET speakers, the headphone sound quality
is better. Furthermore, the position of the LIVEJACKET loudspeaker is closer
to the subject than the external speaker, but similarly the sound source fromthe headphone is closer to the subject. According to these points, it is considered that the music experience also improved in the headphone with vibration
method in which the sound quality was good and the sound source was close to
the subject.
A questionnaire survey about the music experience indicated that LIVEJACKET can provide a new music experience. By wearing the LIVEJACKET,
subjects were able to experience music as it would be originally felt in a live
venue, such as feeling music throughout the whole body and feeling sound pressure. Furthermore, subjects felt like they became singers. Subjects felt that theywanted to go to a live venue. These experiences were hard to feel when listening
to music through conventional digital mediums. From these results, we can consider about how to use LIVE JACKET. For example, we can use LIVEJACKET
for entertainment so that wearer can feel the experience of being a singer. The
jacket can also be used to promote live participation.
According to the subjects, it would be better to strengthen the vibration in
the front side, not just the back side. Because the current system has a subwoofer
on the back, the vibration felt in the rear side is strong. However, subjects mostly
go to the live venue as an audience, so speakers and musical instruments thatgenerate sound exist in front of the subjects. For that reason, we feel intense
vibration on the front body in a live venue. LIVEJACKET vibrates strongly atthe back, so they feel the diﬀerence between being in a live venue and wearing the12Hashizume and Sakamoto et al.

LIVEJACKET. This is why they suggested that the front vibration be stronger.
To bridge this experience gap, it is necessary to install a speaker that generates
intense vibration such as a subwoofer in the front as well as on the back.

6

Conclusion

We developed LIVEJACKET, a jacket capable of vibrotactile presentation andplaying music. In this paper, we conducted experiments with five music listening methods to investigate the quality of the music experience. We found thatLIVEJACKET creates a higher quality music experience than other listening
methods. LIVEJACKET is suitable for music which has fewer instruments. In
the discussion, we examined how to utilize LIVEJACKET in promotion andentertainment. To convey more of the music’s excellence, we need to raise thequality of the music experience. We believe that LIVE JACKET can fulfill thisobjective.

Acknowledgement
We would like to thank University of Tsukuba and HAKUHODO Inc. for supporting this work. We are also thankful to all the members of the Digital NatureGroup at University of Tsukuba for their discussions and feedback.

References
1. Abdur Rahman, M., Alkhaldi, A., Cha, J., El Saddik, A.: Adding haptic feature to youtube. In: Proceedings of the 18th ACM International Conference on
Multimedia. MM ’10, New York, NY, USA, ACM (2010) 1643–1646
2. Arafsha, F., Alam, K.M., Saddik, A.E.: Emojacket: Consumer centric wearable
aﬀective jacket to enhance emotional immersion. In: 2012 International Conferenceon Innovations in Information Technology (IIT). (March 2012) 350–355
3. Danieau, F., Lecuyer, A., Guillotel, P., Fleureau, J., Mollet, N., Christie, M.: Enhancing audiovisual experience with haptic feedback: A survey on hav. IEEE
Transactions on Haptics 6(2) (April 2013) 193–205
4. Dijk, E., Weﬀers, A., De Zeeuw, T.: A tactile actuation blanket to intensify movie
experiences with personalised tactile eﬀects. (02 2018)
5. Israr, A., Kim, S.C., Stec, J., Poupyrev, I.: Surround haptics: Tactile feedback for
immersive gaming experiences. In: CHI ’12 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors
in Computing Systems. CHI EA ’12, New York, NY, USA, ACM (2012) 1087–1090
6. Karam, M., Russo, F.A., Fels, D.I.: Designing the model human cochlea: Anambient crossmodal audio-tactile display. IEEE Transactions on Haptics 2(3) (July
2009) 160–169
7. Karam, M., Branje, C., Nespoli, G., Thompson, N., Russo, F.A., Fels, D.I.: The
emoti-chair: An interactive tactile music exhibit. In: CHI ’10 Extended Abstracts
on Human Factors in Computing Systems. CHI EA ’10, New York, NY, USA,ACM (2010) 3069–3074

LIVEJACKET: Wearable Music Experience Device with Multiple Speakers

13

8. Konishi, Y., Hanamitsu, N., Minamizawa, K., Outram, B., Mizuguchi, T., Sato,A.: Synesthesia suit: The full body immersive experience. In: ACM SIGGRAPH
2016 VR Village. SIGGRAPH ’16, New York, NY, USA, ACM (2016) 20:1–20:1
9. Lemmens, P., Crompvoets, F., Brokken, D., van den Eerenbeemd, J., de Vries,
G.J.: A body-conforming tactile jacket to enrich movie viewing. In: World Haptics
2009 - Third Joint EuroHaptics conference and Symposium on Haptic Interfaces
for Virtual Environment and Teleoperator Systems. (March 2009) 7–12
10. Lindeman, R.W., Yanagida, Y., Noma, H., Hosaka, K.: Wearable vibrotactile
systems for virtual contact and information display. Virtual Reality 9(2) (Mar2006) 203–213
11. Mazzoni, A., Bryan-Kinns, N.: Mood glove: A haptic wearable prototype system
to enhance mood music in film. Entertainment Computing 17 (2016) 9 – 17
12. Merchel, S., Altinsoy, M.E.: The influence of vibrations on musical experience. J.
Audio Eng. Soc 62(4) (2014) 220–234
13. Nanayakkara, S., Taylor, E., Wyse, L., Ong, S.H.: An enhanced musical experience
for the deaf: Design and evaluation of a music display and a haptic chair. In:
Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems.
CHI ’09, New York, NY, USA, ACM (2009) 337–346
14. Rovan, J., Hayward, V.: Typology of tactile sounds and their synthesis in gesturedriven computer music performance. Trends in gestural control of music (2000)
297–320
15. Russell, J.A.: A circumplex model of aﬀect. Journal of personality and social
psychology 39(6) (1980) 1161