Main Path
INTRODUCTION
Gazing at the outlandish curves of a contemporary building by architect Frank Gehry, one is immediately struck by the strong impact of his computer-driven models on physical form. In similar fashion, recent advances in music technology have allowed composers to work with a vastly expanded palette of sonic possibilities that would have been unimaginable only a short time ago. This transformation can largely be attributed to the rapid proliferation of computer software over the past thirty years, a trend that has profoundly influenced the direction of contemporary music by actively shaping musical form and content. Western music is no longer bound to the conventions of staff notation, and the digital domain has engendered many new ways of both making and visually representing sound. This paradigm shift poses tremendous implications for how we think about the construction of musical identity, and in what follows I will explore some of the affordances and limitations associated with two of the most ubiquitous music software environments on the market—digital audio workstations (aka DAWs, such as Ableton, ProTools, and Logic Pro), and modular patchwork programming languages (Max/MSP and OpenMusic).
Traditional modes of musical inquiry are ill equipped for understanding the distributed nature of composition that characterizes the technological dimension of electronic music. Therefore, it is necessary to expand current approaches to music research through the adoption of conceptual models from related disciplines that are similarly engaged in the study of technological mediation. In this regard, Bruno Latour’s development of Actor-Network-Theory within the domain of science and technology studies provides a productive framework for examining the intermingled creative capacities exhibited by man and machine during the genesis of a mixed musical work. For Latour, every technical artifact possesses its own script, and thus exercises its own agency within a given program of action. Considered from this perspective, the composer and computer (plus any other participants in the network) fuse together into a “hybrid actor” working towards the attainment of co-created goals through a process Latour describes as “translation… displacement, drift, invention, mediation, the creation of a link that did not exist before and that to some degree modifies two elements or agents.” (Latour, 32) It is precisely this translation process, this melding together of subjects and objects into a composite entity, that I intend to focus on in this paper.
Within any given composition, the vast network underlying the musical surface contains many potential actors, both human (composers, technical assistants, performers) and nonhuman (written sketches, notated scores, acoustic instruments, recording equipment, computers, and an array of music software programs). In turn, each of these elements is predicated on its own assemblage of actors through a procedure Latour calls "blackboxing," in which the functionality of a technical artifact’s internal parts is hidden from the user. This process is similar to the concept of encapsulation in programming parlance, and the multi-layered opacity it produces in music software raises an onslaught of questions that quickly proliferate across multiple disciplinary boundaries. As Andy Clark and David Chalmers have argued, a person’s engagement with technical objects in their environment constitutes a sort of active externalism. Hence, epistemic tools are shown to be an extension of the composer’s own thought; or put another way, “cognitive processes ain’t (all) in the head!” (Clark and Chalmers, 8)
So, precisely what role do these external technological actors play in extending the composer’s cognition during the creative process? What is the nature of the performative relationships that exist between such actors? And how do the affordances offered by the embedded functionality of visual representations in music software differ from those in traditional staff notation?
To approach these lines of inquiry, I conducted interviews with two composers who have considerable experience using these software programs—James O’Callaghan, a recent graduate from McGill’s doctoral program in composition, and Marlon Schumacher, a PhD student who currently teaches in McGill's digital composition department. Woven throughout this site, there are many audio excerpts from the interviews, as well as musical examples taken from the composers' œuvres. I'm grateful for their participation in this project, and in case it's not already assumed, I should clarify that their willingness to sit down for an interview does not translate into an endorsement of my views expressed during the course of the following argument.
There are a few different paths available through the material. The main path presents some context for the current project and then guides the reader through a series of interleaved interview excerpts from both composers; this path forms a linear trajectory and most closely mimics the design of a traditional academic paper. It's also the most complete path, as it works its way through every page on the site. But for those readers wishing to bypass the main route, I've provided the option of jumping straight to the interview material by choosing one of two separate paths for O'Callaghan and Schumacher.
Within the limited scope of this website, there is no way to adequately address the questions I've posed in this introduction; but hopefully, the issues raised during the interview process will provide ample food for thought. This site was conceived as a kind of reconnaissance mission for a much larger ongoing project, and indeed, I ended up with well over five hours of interview material. The excerpts contained on this site represent only a small sampling of moments from our discussions, meaning many interesting clips were sidelined and I may continue to add new excerpts at a later date. Given the interactive potential of a website, please feel free to post comments... this project is in its preliminary stages and I welcome any feedback.
NOTES:
Latour, Bruno. "On Technical Mediation: Philosophy, Sociology, Genealogy," in Common Knowledge 3.2 (Fall 1994): 29-64.
Clark, Andy and Chalmers, David. "The Extended Mind," in Analysis 58.1 (January 1998): 7-19
Gazing at the outlandish curves of a contemporary building by architect Frank Gehry, one is immediately struck by the strong impact of his computer-driven models on physical form. In similar fashion, recent advances in music technology have allowed composers to work with a vastly expanded palette of sonic possibilities that would have been unimaginable only a short time ago. This transformation can largely be attributed to the rapid proliferation of computer software over the past thirty years, a trend that has profoundly influenced the direction of contemporary music by actively shaping musical form and content. Western music is no longer bound to the conventions of staff notation, and the digital domain has engendered many new ways of both making and visually representing sound. This paradigm shift poses tremendous implications for how we think about the construction of musical identity, and in what follows I will explore some of the affordances and limitations associated with two of the most ubiquitous music software environments on the market—digital audio workstations (aka DAWs, such as Ableton, ProTools, and Logic Pro), and modular patchwork programming languages (Max/MSP and OpenMusic).
Traditional modes of musical inquiry are ill equipped for understanding the distributed nature of composition that characterizes the technological dimension of electronic music. Therefore, it is necessary to expand current approaches to music research through the adoption of conceptual models from related disciplines that are similarly engaged in the study of technological mediation. In this regard, Bruno Latour’s development of Actor-Network-Theory within the domain of science and technology studies provides a productive framework for examining the intermingled creative capacities exhibited by man and machine during the genesis of a mixed musical work. For Latour, every technical artifact possesses its own script, and thus exercises its own agency within a given program of action. Considered from this perspective, the composer and computer (plus any other participants in the network) fuse together into a “hybrid actor” working towards the attainment of co-created goals through a process Latour describes as “translation… displacement, drift, invention, mediation, the creation of a link that did not exist before and that to some degree modifies two elements or agents.” (Latour, 32) It is precisely this translation process, this melding together of subjects and objects into a composite entity, that I intend to focus on in this paper.
Within any given composition, the vast network underlying the musical surface contains many potential actors, both human (composers, technical assistants, performers) and nonhuman (written sketches, notated scores, acoustic instruments, recording equipment, computers, and an array of music software programs). In turn, each of these elements is predicated on its own assemblage of actors through a procedure Latour calls "blackboxing," in which the functionality of a technical artifact’s internal parts is hidden from the user. This process is similar to the concept of encapsulation in programming parlance, and the multi-layered opacity it produces in music software raises an onslaught of questions that quickly proliferate across multiple disciplinary boundaries. As Andy Clark and David Chalmers have argued, a person’s engagement with technical objects in their environment constitutes a sort of active externalism. Hence, epistemic tools are shown to be an extension of the composer’s own thought; or put another way, “cognitive processes ain’t (all) in the head!” (Clark and Chalmers, 8)
So, precisely what role do these external technological actors play in extending the composer’s cognition during the creative process? What is the nature of the performative relationships that exist between such actors? And how do the affordances offered by the embedded functionality of visual representations in music software differ from those in traditional staff notation?
To approach these lines of inquiry, I conducted interviews with two composers who have considerable experience using these software programs—James O’Callaghan, a recent graduate from McGill’s doctoral program in composition, and Marlon Schumacher, a PhD student who currently teaches in McGill's digital composition department. Woven throughout this site, there are many audio excerpts from the interviews, as well as musical examples taken from the composers' œuvres. I'm grateful for their participation in this project, and in case it's not already assumed, I should clarify that their willingness to sit down for an interview does not translate into an endorsement of my views expressed during the course of the following argument.
There are a few different paths available through the material. The main path presents some context for the current project and then guides the reader through a series of interleaved interview excerpts from both composers; this path forms a linear trajectory and most closely mimics the design of a traditional academic paper. It's also the most complete path, as it works its way through every page on the site. But for those readers wishing to bypass the main route, I've provided the option of jumping straight to the interview material by choosing one of two separate paths for O'Callaghan and Schumacher.
Within the limited scope of this website, there is no way to adequately address the questions I've posed in this introduction; but hopefully, the issues raised during the interview process will provide ample food for thought. This site was conceived as a kind of reconnaissance mission for a much larger ongoing project, and indeed, I ended up with well over five hours of interview material. The excerpts contained on this site represent only a small sampling of moments from our discussions, meaning many interesting clips were sidelined and I may continue to add new excerpts at a later date. Given the interactive potential of a website, please feel free to post comments... this project is in its preliminary stages and I welcome any feedback.
NOTES:
Latour, Bruno. "On Technical Mediation: Philosophy, Sociology, Genealogy," in Common Knowledge 3.2 (Fall 1994): 29-64.
Clark, Andy and Chalmers, David. "The Extended Mind," in Analysis 58.1 (January 1998): 7-19
Begin this path: Main Path
- (Counter)Historical Context for Music Notation
- The Rise of New Sound Technologies
- Schumacher on Music Notation
- O'Callaghan on conventional music notation
- Schumacher on Mediation
- O'Callaghan on Technological Neutrality
- O'Callaghan on Music Software
- Schumacher on Materiality of Sound
- O'Callaghan on the Materiality of Musical Form
- Schumacher on "Riding the Groove"
- O'Callaghan on "Isomorphia"
- Bibliography
Discussion of "Main Path"
Add your voice to this discussion.
Checking your signed in status ...