Following on from my last post which discussed the differences between real space and cyberspace, I would now like to consider the implications and influences of technological developments on music. Identifying how technological changes have enhanced the ability of music to communicate enables an evaluation of the current conditions offered by the digital music environment and ways in which their potential can be maximised. Socio economic conditions influence technological conditions and vice versa throughout history.
Evolution not Revolution
In the last post I referred to the conception of three worlds by Sir Karl Popper. Another of his theories is that of refutation – here he suggest that knowledge of the world is produced through a process of problem solving iterations. His model for scientific testing starts with a problem solving situation, applies tentative theories which identify false results enabling a determination of the most probable answer(s), leading inturn to more complex and interesting problem solving situations. The identification of false results in one sense is said to emulate the process of natural selection in the biological environment by identifying the most suitable or fit result.
In a similar way to Popper’s theory of knowledge and the theory of evolution, the movement of culture from an analogue environment to a hybrid analogue/digital environment with an ever increasing emphasis on the digital, takes place through a sequence of problem solving, theorising, error elimination and more problem solving.
This theory can be applied in a number of macro and micro extrapolations. The internet itself arguably follows much the same pattern, but for these purposes the focus will be on the narrower conception of the digital music environment as well as music itself.
In the digital music environment, the difficulties creating artificial scarcity led to major content owners, and in turn governments, theorising that increased protections are the most suitable response to the control of intangibles in an intangible environment. Others contend that the problem is not one of recreating scarcity but rather recognition of the impossibility of achieving this and adapting to take advantage of the new environment.
Content owners, motivated by self preservation and money rather than artist, artistic or public benefit, in misidentifying the nature of the problem entered into a cycle which has not solved the true problem and arguably has made the conditions worse for themselves and everyone else. From this perspective strategies such as DRM, file sharing lawsuits against individuals and software developers which inturn impact on overall technological development, the development of closed architectures for music distribution on the internet and the attempt to keep independent artists marginalised by refusing to adopt alternative business models, are the result of addressing the wrong problem in the first place. In contrast, identifying the problem as a need maximise the opportunities for creativity and free expression by applying a theory of positive inclusive community would lead to more interesting and productive problems to resolve such as the detail, application and subsequent revisions of an alternative compensation scheme.
In one sense the content owners have characterised the digital music environment as a context inciting revolution rather than evolution.
Culture also undergoes a constant evolution. Music provides an obvious illustration as a form of expression subjected to differing conditions which favour the existence of certain form, content, styles, accessibility, ability to communicate and in turn the production of social progress.
From its most primitive form of personal, tribal and then public performance, communication through music was, and to a relative extent remains, limited by skill, time and space. Public performances require mastery of instruments, exist for a very finite period of time and are only available to a specific and limited audience. Historically public performance represented the analogue manifestation of music and since this time there has been an ongoing evolution to the form of expression brought about by changes in technology.
The advent of radio saw the removal of space limitations enabling much larger and remote audiences to access music of live performers. This was followed by recording technology which then removed the limitations of time and space enabling audiences to access music at their convenience. Digital technologies also contributed to the production of music with the advent of instruments such as the synthesiser removing many of the barriers for the average person to compose and perform.
The advent of the internet was another major technological development which itself is dynamic and subject to constant change. Here we see the convergence of all the previous adaptations of the production and reception of culture to technology with skill, time and space being further supplemented by enabling instant, low cost and global distribution of works. In some respects for music, this is the ultimate iteration of technology with the potential for the most number of errors inhibiting communication to be eliminated. However the true potential has not yet been properly realised.
As the technological evolution has taken place so too has the content of culture evolved. The content of music has moved from anthropological and community applications to global issues. There have been detectable historical trends with respect to the prevalence of messages within music, one particular notable example being the status of protest music in the United States in the 1960s. This occurred at a time when FM radio was open and commercially ambivalent and there had been technological advances in recording equipment and techniques. Subsequent convergence of record labels and the increased influence of capitalism on the music environment ultimately led to the prevalence of emotive and dance music. If the digital music environment is able to realise its full potential there would inevitably be greater opportunity for the diversity of culture and the ability to support political music and other nonmainstream content.
At various moments in history the technological conditions have combined with the socio economic conditions to favour certain styles over others. In medieval times for example, minstrels and street performers were took on the role of illustrating current events in the commons for those largely illiterate and removed from the immediacy of royalty. Similarly the technical and socio economic conditions in the classical era saw the highest quality of music performed before limited and exclusive audiences. In contrast church music has more generally been performed in a more open environment. Over time and largely in line with changes to technology there has been an exponential growth in the number and diversity of musical styles. While there are many different conceptions to the evolution of musical styles, milestones following the dilution of the classical era include blues, jazz and folk. Rock music marks the start of a dramatic expansion of musical styles which continues unabated today.
The internet and digital technology in particular have created unique musical styles through the use of sampling techniques, mashing and remixing. Enabling limitless reproduction and variation this technology again offers the ultimate iteration by removing barriers to production of music. Similarly with the promise of open and limitless access, this context offers the opportunity to maximise receptive mediation. However the continued determination of major content owners to control music by misinterpreting the problems created by the digital music environment poses an ongoing threat to the realisation of the benefits of this technology.
By enabling or restricting expression, differing modes of communication and architectures in turn influence the effectiveness, style and content of music and therefore the ability to transfer and receive messages. The ultimate conditions for digital culture offer the maximum opportunity for expression to create social progress and without a constant review of the problem solving sequence invoked there will be delays and the possibility that the full potential of the environment will not be realised.
Further Reading
Ed. Michael Benedikt, Cyberspace First Steps (1993)
Wikipedia, Karl Popper (9 May 2008) <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sir_Karl_Popper> at
12 May 2008
Evolution not Revolution
In the last post I referred to the conception of three worlds by Sir Karl Popper. Another of his theories is that of refutation – here he suggest that knowledge of the world is produced through a process of problem solving iterations. His model for scientific testing starts with a problem solving situation, applies tentative theories which identify false results enabling a determination of the most probable answer(s), leading inturn to more complex and interesting problem solving situations. The identification of false results in one sense is said to emulate the process of natural selection in the biological environment by identifying the most suitable or fit result.
In a similar way to Popper’s theory of knowledge and the theory of evolution, the movement of culture from an analogue environment to a hybrid analogue/digital environment with an ever increasing emphasis on the digital, takes place through a sequence of problem solving, theorising, error elimination and more problem solving.
This theory can be applied in a number of macro and micro extrapolations. The internet itself arguably follows much the same pattern, but for these purposes the focus will be on the narrower conception of the digital music environment as well as music itself.
In the digital music environment, the difficulties creating artificial scarcity led to major content owners, and in turn governments, theorising that increased protections are the most suitable response to the control of intangibles in an intangible environment. Others contend that the problem is not one of recreating scarcity but rather recognition of the impossibility of achieving this and adapting to take advantage of the new environment.
Content owners, motivated by self preservation and money rather than artist, artistic or public benefit, in misidentifying the nature of the problem entered into a cycle which has not solved the true problem and arguably has made the conditions worse for themselves and everyone else. From this perspective strategies such as DRM, file sharing lawsuits against individuals and software developers which inturn impact on overall technological development, the development of closed architectures for music distribution on the internet and the attempt to keep independent artists marginalised by refusing to adopt alternative business models, are the result of addressing the wrong problem in the first place. In contrast, identifying the problem as a need maximise the opportunities for creativity and free expression by applying a theory of positive inclusive community would lead to more interesting and productive problems to resolve such as the detail, application and subsequent revisions of an alternative compensation scheme.
In one sense the content owners have characterised the digital music environment as a context inciting revolution rather than evolution.
Culture also undergoes a constant evolution. Music provides an obvious illustration as a form of expression subjected to differing conditions which favour the existence of certain form, content, styles, accessibility, ability to communicate and in turn the production of social progress.
From its most primitive form of personal, tribal and then public performance, communication through music was, and to a relative extent remains, limited by skill, time and space. Public performances require mastery of instruments, exist for a very finite period of time and are only available to a specific and limited audience. Historically public performance represented the analogue manifestation of music and since this time there has been an ongoing evolution to the form of expression brought about by changes in technology.
The advent of radio saw the removal of space limitations enabling much larger and remote audiences to access music of live performers. This was followed by recording technology which then removed the limitations of time and space enabling audiences to access music at their convenience. Digital technologies also contributed to the production of music with the advent of instruments such as the synthesiser removing many of the barriers for the average person to compose and perform.
The advent of the internet was another major technological development which itself is dynamic and subject to constant change. Here we see the convergence of all the previous adaptations of the production and reception of culture to technology with skill, time and space being further supplemented by enabling instant, low cost and global distribution of works. In some respects for music, this is the ultimate iteration of technology with the potential for the most number of errors inhibiting communication to be eliminated. However the true potential has not yet been properly realised.
As the technological evolution has taken place so too has the content of culture evolved. The content of music has moved from anthropological and community applications to global issues. There have been detectable historical trends with respect to the prevalence of messages within music, one particular notable example being the status of protest music in the United States in the 1960s. This occurred at a time when FM radio was open and commercially ambivalent and there had been technological advances in recording equipment and techniques. Subsequent convergence of record labels and the increased influence of capitalism on the music environment ultimately led to the prevalence of emotive and dance music. If the digital music environment is able to realise its full potential there would inevitably be greater opportunity for the diversity of culture and the ability to support political music and other nonmainstream content.
At various moments in history the technological conditions have combined with the socio economic conditions to favour certain styles over others. In medieval times for example, minstrels and street performers were took on the role of illustrating current events in the commons for those largely illiterate and removed from the immediacy of royalty. Similarly the technical and socio economic conditions in the classical era saw the highest quality of music performed before limited and exclusive audiences. In contrast church music has more generally been performed in a more open environment. Over time and largely in line with changes to technology there has been an exponential growth in the number and diversity of musical styles. While there are many different conceptions to the evolution of musical styles, milestones following the dilution of the classical era include blues, jazz and folk. Rock music marks the start of a dramatic expansion of musical styles which continues unabated today.
The internet and digital technology in particular have created unique musical styles through the use of sampling techniques, mashing and remixing. Enabling limitless reproduction and variation this technology again offers the ultimate iteration by removing barriers to production of music. Similarly with the promise of open and limitless access, this context offers the opportunity to maximise receptive mediation. However the continued determination of major content owners to control music by misinterpreting the problems created by the digital music environment poses an ongoing threat to the realisation of the benefits of this technology.
By enabling or restricting expression, differing modes of communication and architectures in turn influence the effectiveness, style and content of music and therefore the ability to transfer and receive messages. The ultimate conditions for digital culture offer the maximum opportunity for expression to create social progress and without a constant review of the problem solving sequence invoked there will be delays and the possibility that the full potential of the environment will not be realised.
Further Reading
Ed. Michael Benedikt, Cyberspace First Steps (1993)
Wikipedia, Karl Popper (9 May 2008) <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sir_Karl_Popper> at
12 May 2008
No comments:
Post a Comment