Click on any link below to read all the articles in the four-part August 2008 MUSIC DESIGN 2015 series exploring the similarities between Modern Audio Production and Graphic Design, due in no small part to the influence of the Graphical User Interface in both industries (and art forms):
Part 1: Defining the Music Designer of 2015
Part 2: Six Trends Shaping the Music Designer of 2015
Part 3: Music By Design
Part 4: 10 Rules for Branded Audio Logo Design
* * *
Like this topic? Related Articles from the Critical Noise Archive:
It's a Cut and Paste World (October 07, 2007)
Six Requirements for Sonic Logos (August 10, 2007)
When Marketers HEAR Double (December 01, 2006)
Monday, August 25, 2008
Sunday, August 24, 2008
10 Rules for Branded Audio Logo Design
Back in 1986, I was a big fan of popular performance artists, such as Laurie Anderson and Pina Bausch. In like fashion I tried creating a multidisciplinary performance piece.
In the work I created I instructed a group of professionally trained dancers to improvise dance movement inspired by Brand Logos. Just how does one leverage kinesiology to communicate iconography? Can shapes be imbued with meaning? And isn't that essentially our intention whenever we create something we identify as 'branded'?
How would you, for instance, assimilate the following designs into your own body and then attempt to express them with abstract gesture and movement?
The dancers not only attempted the task, they results were both informative and spectacularly entertaining, and the process certainly contributed to my understanding of non-verbal messaging.
In like fashion, it occurred to me that it would also be a fun exercise if I applied a set of Graphic Design rules towards the creation of a musical or otherwise sonic work.
I suggest you try this yourself: schedule some 'playtime' and then experiment designing an audio logo using these tried and true suggestions for composing a Logo Design.
A cursory search online turned up these recommendations:
1. Avoid going overboard in attempting uniqueness
2. Use few colors, limited colors, spot colors
3. Avoid gradients (smooth color transitions) as a distinguishing feature
4. Produce alternatives for different contexts
5. Design using vector graphics, so the logo can be resized without loss of fidelity
6. Be aware of design or trademark infringements
7. Include guidelines on the position on a page and white space around the logo for consistent application across a variety of media (a.k.a. brand standard manual)
8. Do not use a specific choice clip-art as a distinguishing feature
9. Do not use the face of a (living) person
10. Do not use photography or complex imagery as it reduces the instant recognition a logo demands
Below, I've modified the above rules so that they directly apply to sound artists:
When designing (or commissioning) a music or sound design logo:
1. Avoid going overboard in attempting uniqueness
2. Use few harmonic colors.
3. Avoid smooth transitions as a distinguishing feature
4. Produce alternatives for different contexts
5. Design for scalability, using melody, so the logo can be rearranged in various genres
6. Be aware of copyright infringements
7. Include guidelines on the placement of the audio logo if it is to be incorporated into other musical works, for consistent application across a variety of media (a.k.a. create an audio brand standard manual)
8. Do not use naked samples as a distinguishing feature (i.e., don't use stock sounds: create your own. Or modify samples so that they uniquely identify the product, service or experience –and/or brand attributes– you've chosen to translate into sound)
9. Do not quote the musical/sonic work of another (living) person (Be original)
10. Do not use lengthy phrases or complex harmonies as it reduces the instant recognition a logo demands (you're designing logo, not composing a song cycle, so keep it under five seconds long)
* * *
OK, you don't want to make this your audio bible, but I think there's something to be learned from this little exercise.
* * *
Like this topic? Related Articles from the Critical Noise Archive:
It's a Cut and Paste World (October 07, 2007)
Six Requirements for Sonic Logos (August 10, 2007)
When Marketers HEAR Double (December 01, 2006)
In the work I created I instructed a group of professionally trained dancers to improvise dance movement inspired by Brand Logos. Just how does one leverage kinesiology to communicate iconography? Can shapes be imbued with meaning? And isn't that essentially our intention whenever we create something we identify as 'branded'?
How would you, for instance, assimilate the following designs into your own body and then attempt to express them with abstract gesture and movement?
The dancers not only attempted the task, they results were both informative and spectacularly entertaining, and the process certainly contributed to my understanding of non-verbal messaging.
In like fashion, it occurred to me that it would also be a fun exercise if I applied a set of Graphic Design rules towards the creation of a musical or otherwise sonic work.
I suggest you try this yourself: schedule some 'playtime' and then experiment designing an audio logo using these tried and true suggestions for composing a Logo Design.
A cursory search online turned up these recommendations:
1. Avoid going overboard in attempting uniqueness
2. Use few colors, limited colors, spot colors
3. Avoid gradients (smooth color transitions) as a distinguishing feature
4. Produce alternatives for different contexts
5. Design using vector graphics, so the logo can be resized without loss of fidelity
6. Be aware of design or trademark infringements
7. Include guidelines on the position on a page and white space around the logo for consistent application across a variety of media (a.k.a. brand standard manual)
8. Do not use a specific choice clip-art as a distinguishing feature
9. Do not use the face of a (living) person
10. Do not use photography or complex imagery as it reduces the instant recognition a logo demands
Below, I've modified the above rules so that they directly apply to sound artists:
When designing (or commissioning) a music or sound design logo:
1. Avoid going overboard in attempting uniqueness
2. Use few harmonic colors.
3. Avoid smooth transitions as a distinguishing feature
4. Produce alternatives for different contexts
5. Design for scalability, using melody, so the logo can be rearranged in various genres
6. Be aware of copyright infringements
7. Include guidelines on the placement of the audio logo if it is to be incorporated into other musical works, for consistent application across a variety of media (a.k.a. create an audio brand standard manual)
8. Do not use naked samples as a distinguishing feature (i.e., don't use stock sounds: create your own. Or modify samples so that they uniquely identify the product, service or experience –and/or brand attributes– you've chosen to translate into sound)
9. Do not quote the musical/sonic work of another (living) person (Be original)
10. Do not use lengthy phrases or complex harmonies as it reduces the instant recognition a logo demands (you're designing logo, not composing a song cycle, so keep it under five seconds long)
* * *
OK, you don't want to make this your audio bible, but I think there's something to be learned from this little exercise.
* * *
Like this topic? Related Articles from the Critical Noise Archive:
It's a Cut and Paste World (October 07, 2007)
Six Requirements for Sonic Logos (August 10, 2007)
When Marketers HEAR Double (December 01, 2006)
Saturday, August 23, 2008
Music By Design
In several previous posts to the Critical Noise Aural Intelligence Blog, I suggested that previously disparate if related skill sets respectively belonging to composers, engineers, musicians and sound designers were merging –had merged in many instances, especially in commercial audio production– producing a new kind of unified creative professional I labeled a Music Designer.
More recently I suggested that Music Designers consider trends and recommendations identified by AIGA, 'the oldest and largest membership association for design professionals', with the purpose that such information is applicable to our own craft.
Commercial music production and commercial design have always shared similarities, but perhaps more so now than ever.
In the past separate artistic pursuits (illustrator, painter, pianist, engineer, et al) required widely diverse tools and skill sets. Today all parties increasingly share the common method of applying mouse clicks to a similarly conceived Graphical User Interface (GUI) canvas.
The medium, be it light or sound, has become almost incidental. Meanwhile, Art and Artist, bound by a common digital ancestor, and sharing the same design language, have evolved into a single medium.
It may even be an error to continue to think of a GUI as only an interface, when it too may have evolved, from a mere desktop metaphor into a medium itself (GUM).
Certainly there are still illustrators and there are still composers, but others from both groups –sharing the same or similarly conceived tool kits– increasingly identify themselves as simply Digital Artisans without necessarily feeling it too important to distinguish or limit the exact nature their craft, lest they imply any self imposed sensory boundary to the array of communication abilities they potentially wield.
So of course the process has changed the way I think about music. For one, when discussing a modern score I think I probably use the word 'construction' now, more often than I do the word 'composition'.
It sounds a bit like a B-Horror flick, but it's really not too far from the truth when I claim Computers Have Changed My Brain!!!
Ha.
Whether or not it's because I myself come from a design oriented family (both parents were photographers and painters, my father an engineer, and my sister a commercial artist), or because I began using computers for my own creative pursuits back in the early eighties, I have long applied graphic design protocols to music as a regular matter of course. Even limited use of digital tools, let alone mastery, give one with the feeling that the difference between sound and light (as application mediums) is minimal.
Thirty years after first programming my first musical scores and twenty since I first began experimenting with digital imagery, I experience little difference using a Digital Audio Workstation to manipulate audio –and a graphic program, such as the Adobe Photoshop, to process images. And I'm not alone in this experience. In recent years, say, in the last decade or so, I've met more and more musicians and composers who share my perspective.
It's not simply that all the music programs warrant the use of a graphic interface, but rather that they force us to think about about making music as at least a partly visual experience –changing the way we think– even in comparison to the notation of scores by hand with pencil and paper. So, that even when we do compose with pencil and paper, our experience with GUI enabled composition continues to influence our perspective, our methodology, the way we see and hear things.
Creating images and creating music has never been so much alike as it is today. No, I don't (yet) use my ears when modifying images, but (especially when I sit down in front of a computer) I certainly use my eyes in support of design projects, whether visual or sonic in nature.
* * *
Click on any link below to read all the articles in the six-part series detailing the changing relationship between Traditional Music Composition and Modern Music Production:
EVOLUTION OF THE MUSIC DESIGNER
Part 1: Top Down, Center Out and Bottoms Up
Part 2: Top Down Music Composition
Part 3: Bottom Up Audio Production
Part 4: Film Composer, Sound Maker or Music Designer?
Part 5: Songwriter Vs. Song Designer
Part 6: Music By Design
Like this topic? Related Articles from the Critical Noise Archive:
It's a Cut and Paste World (October 07, 2007)
Six Requirements for Sonic Logos (August 10, 2007)
When Marketers HEAR Double (December 01, 2006)
More recently I suggested that Music Designers consider trends and recommendations identified by AIGA, 'the oldest and largest membership association for design professionals', with the purpose that such information is applicable to our own craft.
Commercial music production and commercial design have always shared similarities, but perhaps more so now than ever.
In the past separate artistic pursuits (illustrator, painter, pianist, engineer, et al) required widely diverse tools and skill sets. Today all parties increasingly share the common method of applying mouse clicks to a similarly conceived Graphical User Interface (GUI) canvas.
The medium, be it light or sound, has become almost incidental. Meanwhile, Art and Artist, bound by a common digital ancestor, and sharing the same design language, have evolved into a single medium.
It may even be an error to continue to think of a GUI as only an interface, when it too may have evolved, from a mere desktop metaphor into a medium itself (GUM).
Certainly there are still illustrators and there are still composers, but others from both groups –sharing the same or similarly conceived tool kits– increasingly identify themselves as simply Digital Artisans without necessarily feeling it too important to distinguish or limit the exact nature their craft, lest they imply any self imposed sensory boundary to the array of communication abilities they potentially wield.
So of course the process has changed the way I think about music. For one, when discussing a modern score I think I probably use the word 'construction' now, more often than I do the word 'composition'.
It sounds a bit like a B-Horror flick, but it's really not too far from the truth when I claim Computers Have Changed My Brain!!!
Ha.
Whether or not it's because I myself come from a design oriented family (both parents were photographers and painters, my father an engineer, and my sister a commercial artist), or because I began using computers for my own creative pursuits back in the early eighties, I have long applied graphic design protocols to music as a regular matter of course. Even limited use of digital tools, let alone mastery, give one with the feeling that the difference between sound and light (as application mediums) is minimal.
Thirty years after first programming my first musical scores and twenty since I first began experimenting with digital imagery, I experience little difference using a Digital Audio Workstation to manipulate audio –and a graphic program, such as the Adobe Photoshop, to process images. And I'm not alone in this experience. In recent years, say, in the last decade or so, I've met more and more musicians and composers who share my perspective.
It's not simply that all the music programs warrant the use of a graphic interface, but rather that they force us to think about about making music as at least a partly visual experience –changing the way we think– even in comparison to the notation of scores by hand with pencil and paper. So, that even when we do compose with pencil and paper, our experience with GUI enabled composition continues to influence our perspective, our methodology, the way we see and hear things.
Creating images and creating music has never been so much alike as it is today. No, I don't (yet) use my ears when modifying images, but (especially when I sit down in front of a computer) I certainly use my eyes in support of design projects, whether visual or sonic in nature.
* * *
Click on any link below to read all the articles in the six-part series detailing the changing relationship between Traditional Music Composition and Modern Music Production:
EVOLUTION OF THE MUSIC DESIGNER
Part 1: Top Down, Center Out and Bottoms Up
Part 2: Top Down Music Composition
Part 3: Bottom Up Audio Production
Part 4: Film Composer, Sound Maker or Music Designer?
Part 5: Songwriter Vs. Song Designer
Part 6: Music By Design
Like this topic? Related Articles from the Critical Noise Archive:
It's a Cut and Paste World (October 07, 2007)
Six Requirements for Sonic Logos (August 10, 2007)
When Marketers HEAR Double (December 01, 2006)
Thursday, August 21, 2008
Six Trends Shaping the Music Designer of 2015
As noted in an earlier post, AIGA, 'the oldest and largest membership association for design professionals', in partnership with ADOBE, conducted a broad Industry survey among 2,500 of its members, in order to anticipate future demands on the profession.
Among the results of this exercise, an enhanced redefinition of the design profession was presented, taking into account current trends, with one purpose in mind being to inform design education professionals of possible additions to the syllabus. Designer of 2015 Competencies presented thirteen 'essential competencies' for consideration by the profession.
If you landed on this post via a search engine result, I presented those thirteen core competencies here on a previous Critical Noise Aural Intelligence Blog entry for consideration by readers, arguing such competencies are applicable to our own profession, on the premise that whether they be producers, composers or beat makers, Commercial Sound Artists are designers with but a degree of difference.
You can read that post here: Music Designer of 2015
Or
Visit AIGA's original article here: AIGA Designer of 2015 Competencies
* * *
How did AIGA arrive at these core competencies? One thing they did was examine six trends currently influencing the design profession, and which its members anticipate will continue to do so over the next seven or eight years.
As I did with AIGA's recommendations, I'm reproducing (a condensed version of) the six trends here, for consideration by Critical Noise readers, as such trends undoubtedly also have a bearing on our industry.
AIGA's analysts note:
"These trends define design’s role in a much broader, strategic context than its roots: the making of things and beautiful things. Although that remains an important contribution, they will be a manifestation of a solution that may involve many different forms, including intangibles such as strategy and experiences."
As you read through the six trends, be sure to replace the word 'designer' with 'music designer' or 'composer' –or with whatever sound related professional title you present your self with, although regular readers to this blog already know I've previously suggested another trend, suggesting a subtle shift from the current Music and EFX model (i.e. composer or sound designer) towards a unified Music Designer paradigm (Evolution of the Music Designer).
Without further ado–
(MUSIC) DESIGNER OF 2015 TRENDS
1. Wide and deep: meta-disciplinary study and practice
Designers must be able to draw on experience and knowledge from a broad range of disciplines, including the social sciences and humanities, in order to solve problems in a global, competitive market of products and ideas.
2. Expanded scope: scale and complexity of design problems
Designers must address scale and complexity at the systems level, even when designing individual components, and meet the growing need for anticipation of problem and solution rather than solving known problems.
3. Targeted messages: a narrow definition of audiences
Messaging will shift from mass communication to more narrow definitions of audiences (special interest design), requiring designers to understand both differences and likenesses in audiences and the growing need for reconciliation of tension between globalization and cultural identity.
4. Break through: an attention economy
Attention is the scarce resource in the information age, and the attention economy involves communication design, information design, experience design and service design.
The trend toward an “attention economy” encourages discussion of what is currently driving clients’ conception of form, the attraction of business to design and the problems of designing for a market that values the short term “grab”.
5. Sharing experiences: a co-creation model
Designers must change their idea of customers/users to co-creators (mass customization) to coincide with the rise in transparency of personal and professional lives (social networking, blogging, etc.).
6. Responsible outcomes: focusing on sustainability
Designers must recognize that the pursuit of excellence involves focusing clearly on human-centered design in an era of increasingly limited resources, in which appropriateness is defined by careful and necessary use of resources, simplicity, avoidance of the extraneous and sensitivity to human conditions.
* * *
To read the AIGA article in its full, original form, visit: Designer of 2015 Trends
* * *
Click on any link below to read all the articles in the four-part August 2008 MUSIC DESIGN 2015 series exploring the similarities between Modern Audio Production and Graphic Design:
Part 1: Defining the Music Designer of 2015
Part 2: Six Trends Shaping the Music Designer of 2015
Part 3: Music By Design
Part 4: 10 Rules for Branded Audio Logo Design
Like this topic? Related Articles from the Critical Noise Archive:
It's a Cut and Paste World (October 07, 2007)
Six Requirements for Sonic Logos (August 10, 2007)
When Marketers HEAR Double (December 01, 2006)
Among the results of this exercise, an enhanced redefinition of the design profession was presented, taking into account current trends, with one purpose in mind being to inform design education professionals of possible additions to the syllabus. Designer of 2015 Competencies presented thirteen 'essential competencies' for consideration by the profession.
If you landed on this post via a search engine result, I presented those thirteen core competencies here on a previous Critical Noise Aural Intelligence Blog entry for consideration by readers, arguing such competencies are applicable to our own profession, on the premise that whether they be producers, composers or beat makers, Commercial Sound Artists are designers with but a degree of difference.
You can read that post here: Music Designer of 2015
Or
Visit AIGA's original article here: AIGA Designer of 2015 Competencies
* * *
How did AIGA arrive at these core competencies? One thing they did was examine six trends currently influencing the design profession, and which its members anticipate will continue to do so over the next seven or eight years.
As I did with AIGA's recommendations, I'm reproducing (a condensed version of) the six trends here, for consideration by Critical Noise readers, as such trends undoubtedly also have a bearing on our industry.
AIGA's analysts note:
"These trends define design’s role in a much broader, strategic context than its roots: the making of things and beautiful things. Although that remains an important contribution, they will be a manifestation of a solution that may involve many different forms, including intangibles such as strategy and experiences."
As you read through the six trends, be sure to replace the word 'designer' with 'music designer' or 'composer' –or with whatever sound related professional title you present your self with, although regular readers to this blog already know I've previously suggested another trend, suggesting a subtle shift from the current Music and EFX model (i.e. composer or sound designer) towards a unified Music Designer paradigm (Evolution of the Music Designer).
Without further ado–
(MUSIC) DESIGNER OF 2015 TRENDS
1. Wide and deep: meta-disciplinary study and practice
Designers must be able to draw on experience and knowledge from a broad range of disciplines, including the social sciences and humanities, in order to solve problems in a global, competitive market of products and ideas.
2. Expanded scope: scale and complexity of design problems
Designers must address scale and complexity at the systems level, even when designing individual components, and meet the growing need for anticipation of problem and solution rather than solving known problems.
3. Targeted messages: a narrow definition of audiences
Messaging will shift from mass communication to more narrow definitions of audiences (special interest design), requiring designers to understand both differences and likenesses in audiences and the growing need for reconciliation of tension between globalization and cultural identity.
4. Break through: an attention economy
Attention is the scarce resource in the information age, and the attention economy involves communication design, information design, experience design and service design.
The trend toward an “attention economy” encourages discussion of what is currently driving clients’ conception of form, the attraction of business to design and the problems of designing for a market that values the short term “grab”.
5. Sharing experiences: a co-creation model
Designers must change their idea of customers/users to co-creators (mass customization) to coincide with the rise in transparency of personal and professional lives (social networking, blogging, etc.).
6. Responsible outcomes: focusing on sustainability
Designers must recognize that the pursuit of excellence involves focusing clearly on human-centered design in an era of increasingly limited resources, in which appropriateness is defined by careful and necessary use of resources, simplicity, avoidance of the extraneous and sensitivity to human conditions.
* * *
To read the AIGA article in its full, original form, visit: Designer of 2015 Trends
* * *
Click on any link below to read all the articles in the four-part August 2008 MUSIC DESIGN 2015 series exploring the similarities between Modern Audio Production and Graphic Design:
Part 1: Defining the Music Designer of 2015
Part 2: Six Trends Shaping the Music Designer of 2015
Part 3: Music By Design
Part 4: 10 Rules for Branded Audio Logo Design
Like this topic? Related Articles from the Critical Noise Archive:
It's a Cut and Paste World (October 07, 2007)
Six Requirements for Sonic Logos (August 10, 2007)
When Marketers HEAR Double (December 01, 2006)
Wednesday, August 20, 2008
Defining the Music Designer of 2015
Earlier in 2008, AIGA, 'the oldest and largest membership association for design professionals', in partnership with ADOBE, presented the results of a broad Industry survey. In the preamble representatives of the organization note:
"For several years it has been apparent that design studios and corporate departments have been looking for a new kind of designer, one that has traditional skills and yet a much broader perspective on problem solving."
Richard Grefé, Executive Director of AIGA, writes (in a related article: 2015: A Design Odyssey):
"Although no one can predict the future, we must prepare for it. Knowing that there are tectonic shifts occurring in the sociological, technological and geographical environments in which designers create their paths, we can begin to formulate a picture. In even the near term, just eight years from now, what will the profession look like—and how do we equip the next protégés and ourselves for this experience? More specifically, who will be the designers of 2015?"
The initial results of this exercise, represents the distilled opinion of 2,500 selected AIGA members. What follows is thirteen core competencies "that will be needed, in various combinations, by tomorrow’s designer".
Of course, Commercial Sound Artists are designers, too.
Absolutely.
Therefore, I thought it would be interesting to reproduce the AIGA/ADOBE recommendations here on the Critical Noise Aural Intelligence Blog. As you read the quoted text below, consider how these recommendations might be applied to our own craft as Audio Designers (be it producer, composer, sound designer, DJ, guitar god with stomp box, etc).
DEFINING THE (MUSIC) DESIGNER OF 2015
1. Ability to create and develop visual response to communication problems, including understanding of hierarchy, typography, aesthetics, composition and construction of meaningful images†
2. Ability to solve communication problems including identifying the problem, researching, analysis, solution generating, prototyping, user testing and outcome evaluation
3. Broad understanding of issues related to the cognitive, social, cultural, technological and economic contexts for design
4. Ability to respond to audience contexts recognizing physical, cognitive, cultural and social human factors that shape design decisions
5. Understanding of and ability to utilize tools and technology
6. Ability to be flexible, nimble and dynamic in practice
7. Management and communication skills necessary to function productively in large interdisciplinary teams and “flat” organizational structures
8. Understanding of how systems behave and aspects that contribute to sustainable products, strategies and practices
9. Ability to construct verbal arguments for solutions that address diverse users/audiences; lifespan issues; and business/organizational operations
10. Ability to work in a global environment with understanding of cultural preservation
11. Ability to collaborate productively in large interdisciplinary teams
12. Understanding of ethics in practice
13. Understanding of nested items including cause and effect; ability to develop project evaluation criteria that account for audience and context
* * *
In the comments to the original AIGA post, a Zach Bruno replies via the comments (Wed Aug 13, 2008) with this interesting offering:
"...To me, a true 'Designer' with a capital D is quite simply, a director of change, since that is what we do. We /alter/clarify/define things."
How might composers, producers and other 'Music Designers' present ourselves as directors (or agents) of change?
No doubt it is often in our domain to "alter/clarify/define things".
* * *
† Also, regarding recommendation #1, I might change three words (to suit the purposes of a Music Designer). Instead of 'visual', I would of course say 'aural'. Instead of 'typography' I might substitute 'memes'. And instead of 'images' I might suggest 'soundscapes', so that the final version reads:
1. Ability to create and develop aural response to communication problems, including understanding of hierarchy, memes, aesthetics, composition and construction of meaningful soundscapes.
What do you think? Comments welcome!
* * *
To read the article in its original form, visit: AIGA Designer of 2015 Competencies
* * *
Click on any link below to read all the articles in the four-part August 2008 MUSIC DESIGN 2015 series exploring the similarities between Modern Audio Production and Graphic Design:
Part 1: Defining the Music Designer of 2015
Part 2: Six Trends Shaping the Music Designer of 2015
Part 3: Music By Design
Part 4: 10 Rules for Branded Audio Logo Design
Like this topic? Related Articles from the Critical Noise Archive:
It's a Cut and Paste World (October 07, 2007)
Six Requirements for Sonic Logos (August 10, 2007)
When Marketers HEAR Double (December 01, 2006)
"For several years it has been apparent that design studios and corporate departments have been looking for a new kind of designer, one that has traditional skills and yet a much broader perspective on problem solving."
Richard Grefé, Executive Director of AIGA, writes (in a related article: 2015: A Design Odyssey):
"Although no one can predict the future, we must prepare for it. Knowing that there are tectonic shifts occurring in the sociological, technological and geographical environments in which designers create their paths, we can begin to formulate a picture. In even the near term, just eight years from now, what will the profession look like—and how do we equip the next protégés and ourselves for this experience? More specifically, who will be the designers of 2015?"
The initial results of this exercise, represents the distilled opinion of 2,500 selected AIGA members. What follows is thirteen core competencies "that will be needed, in various combinations, by tomorrow’s designer".
Of course, Commercial Sound Artists are designers, too.
Absolutely.
Therefore, I thought it would be interesting to reproduce the AIGA/ADOBE recommendations here on the Critical Noise Aural Intelligence Blog. As you read the quoted text below, consider how these recommendations might be applied to our own craft as Audio Designers (be it producer, composer, sound designer, DJ, guitar god with stomp box, etc).
DEFINING THE (MUSIC) DESIGNER OF 2015
1. Ability to create and develop visual response to communication problems, including understanding of hierarchy, typography, aesthetics, composition and construction of meaningful images†
2. Ability to solve communication problems including identifying the problem, researching, analysis, solution generating, prototyping, user testing and outcome evaluation
3. Broad understanding of issues related to the cognitive, social, cultural, technological and economic contexts for design
4. Ability to respond to audience contexts recognizing physical, cognitive, cultural and social human factors that shape design decisions
5. Understanding of and ability to utilize tools and technology
6. Ability to be flexible, nimble and dynamic in practice
7. Management and communication skills necessary to function productively in large interdisciplinary teams and “flat” organizational structures
8. Understanding of how systems behave and aspects that contribute to sustainable products, strategies and practices
9. Ability to construct verbal arguments for solutions that address diverse users/audiences; lifespan issues; and business/organizational operations
10. Ability to work in a global environment with understanding of cultural preservation
11. Ability to collaborate productively in large interdisciplinary teams
12. Understanding of ethics in practice
13. Understanding of nested items including cause and effect; ability to develop project evaluation criteria that account for audience and context
* * *
In the comments to the original AIGA post, a Zach Bruno replies via the comments (Wed Aug 13, 2008) with this interesting offering:
"...To me, a true 'Designer' with a capital D is quite simply, a director of change, since that is what we do. We /alter/clarify/define things."
How might composers, producers and other 'Music Designers' present ourselves as directors (or agents) of change?
No doubt it is often in our domain to "alter/clarify/define things".
* * *
† Also, regarding recommendation #1, I might change three words (to suit the purposes of a Music Designer). Instead of 'visual', I would of course say 'aural'. Instead of 'typography' I might substitute 'memes'. And instead of 'images' I might suggest 'soundscapes', so that the final version reads:
1. Ability to create and develop aural response to communication problems, including understanding of hierarchy, memes, aesthetics, composition and construction of meaningful soundscapes.
What do you think? Comments welcome!
* * *
To read the article in its original form, visit: AIGA Designer of 2015 Competencies
* * *
Click on any link below to read all the articles in the four-part August 2008 MUSIC DESIGN 2015 series exploring the similarities between Modern Audio Production and Graphic Design:
Part 1: Defining the Music Designer of 2015
Part 2: Six Trends Shaping the Music Designer of 2015
Part 3: Music By Design
Part 4: 10 Rules for Branded Audio Logo Design
Like this topic? Related Articles from the Critical Noise Archive:
It's a Cut and Paste World (October 07, 2007)
Six Requirements for Sonic Logos (August 10, 2007)
When Marketers HEAR Double (December 01, 2006)
Sunday, August 10, 2008
New Music Deals, No Record Label needed
On a well known music industry forum, one member asked for advice on how to structure a deal between an upcoming band and a potential sponsor. I thought I would post my own suggestion, as well as that of others, for the benefit of readers to this blog, who like me have long considered the future of ROCK BRANDS.
Without further ado:
'Cicada' posted the following scenario on The Velvet Rope:
"There was previous discussion here of the benefits of seeking out marketers to underwrite bands. Look at the Bacardi deal with Groove Armada. The company pays a fee that covers all costs associated with extensive use of the band's music in their advertising campaign and uses the band to play live events and in many other ways to promote their product. It's a great alternative for the band. They get paid, lots of promotion, don't have to worry about sales and it's a non-exclusive agreement so the band benefits from all of the promotion.
But what if you're not dealing with Bacardi, Red Bull, Nike or some other huge corporation with very deep pockets? What would you expect to get paid for a similar deal that is on a much smaller scale? How much do you think this deal is worth?
Scenario:
An 'up and coming' COMPANY, with corporate sponsors coming on board soon, wants to use XBAND's music for an all-in promotion deal. Their promotional area is online and in the Midwest. Keep in mind, it's a sort of "get in on the ground floor" type of deal, where they don't have the mega-funding yet that they expect to have over the next few years. So the pricing should reflect XBAND's desire to build a relationship with COMPANY. The COMPANY deals with sports marketing, the deal will likely include...
• Covering costs for XBAND to play at several events
• Pressing and distribution of 5K copies/ 3 song Promotional CD
Those 3 songs used extensively in...
• Online / Web advertising with COMPANY's website
• Promotional videos for COMPANY
• Free downloads and give-aways offered to promote COMPANY
• Ringtones
• Other promotional use of XBAND's name and likeness
• It's a non-exclusive use
ALSO:
The company is gathering corporate sponsors, building a website, doing a soft launch this year with continued and greater promotions into 2009 culminating in events that are projected to have 40,000 attendees (by 2010). But that's all projected, right now they are limited in what they can spend to develop a relationship with the band. They approached the band, they like the idea of building a sponsorship relationship. Band's name and image, 3 songs, used in website, internet promotions, company videos, cable TV productions, Free downloads, CD give-aways, ring-tones, the band will piggy-back and be included in their promotions as well as perform at several events.
The band has some small recognition in this region with a very big top 10 commercial radio hit last year in one of the major cities in their market and a distribution deal with a major retailer that covers their market and included LOTS promotion (band blurb/photo featured in 7 million circular ads, TV appearances with local FOX affiliate). The band does well in the club circuit here, has headlined a festival (4,000 people) and has had guarantees with colleges of $1000-$1,600 and corporate events for $2,000.
How much is that deal worth? What should the band be looking for? How about a dollar figure range? Remember, this isn't HUGE money yet. But it's not small potatoes either. More like almost medium potatoes. Your thoughts?"
A member logged on as MusicMBA suggested:
"Depending on the regional popularity of the artist (maybe measured by their guarantees in local clubs?) I would look for something in the $50,000 - $100,000 range".
Another contributor, QueenSheDevilCow, cautioned:
"I cannot think of a single case where a corporate sponsorship did not make a band seem cheapened, with the possible exception of sponsorships by companies that produce quality music gear. But, it's not the band's image that I am worried about, it's the chilling effect that this would have on music itself.
Record labels are filled with the reprobate of the Earth, but they are primarily MUSIC companies who live and die based on the success of their music, not the success of their bar soaps, cell phones, apparel, beverages, etc".
Okay, my own reply:
"On the other hand, advertising creatives these days appear to demonstrate greater acceptance for a wider variety of music than their major label brethren.
I can't speak to the variety of corporate sponsorship packages out there, but anyone who has turned on the TV at least once in the last decade can see any number of marketing campaigns that appear mutually positive for both musical artist and advertiser (Sting & Jaguar, for one early example).
As we move into the future, the best active sponsorships will resemble collaborative development deals. Ideally, sponsors won't make you be or do anything you're not. Rather, you'll choose each other because the relationship makes sense. Athletes seem to make it work, why can't artists?
Personally, I would start to arrive at a fee by beginning to think in terms of what the contract is going to look like.
Maybe something like this:
EVENTS:
a) If XCORP books XBAND for specific events delineated at the time of execution of contract: XCORP Provides XBAND $1,500 + Hotel, Air, Ground, Meals & backline requirements per event. (NUMBER OF EVENTS x 1.5K)
b) For XCORP sponsored events beyond the limit of the contract: XCORP Provides XBAND $2,000 + Hotel, Air, Ground, Meals & backline requirements per event.
c) In lieu of sponsoring specific dates, XCORP instead only options to display XCORP signage at TBD number of dates independently booked by XBAND (except for private dates):
FEE: $500 per event.
Additionally, XCORP will be responsible for securing signage and installing its display at each such event, at no cost to XBAND.
Artist's presence at promotional events or live performances of any kind is not guaranteed without the prior written consent of the ARTIST or ARTIST’S Manager.
Signage is not guaranteed for dates already booked by XBAND. XBAND will provide option to XCORP on a gig-by-gig basis as new dates are considered.
In any event, all arrangements shall be made through ARTIST’S Manager TBD weeks/months in advance.
* * *
2. PROMOTIONAL CD – OPTION A: CO-BRANDED CD
a) XBAND grants XCORP the right to produce 5000 units of a CO-BRANDED promotional CD containing 3 songs provided by XBAND (and only these three songs) and selected by mutual agreement by XBAND and XCORP. No other artists to be represented on CD.
XCORP provides at no cost to XBAND: mastering, design, production, manufacture and distribution of Promotional CD.
XBAND grants XCORP the right to design CD to reflect goals of XCORP marketing strategy.
XCORP provides that final approval of design and copy of said product shall be by mutual agreement of all signatories to the contract.
Song selection subject to mutual agreement.
MASTERING:
Songs to be pre-recorded and delivered by XBAND.
Mastering must be provided by XCORP at no cost to XBAND.
XBAND retains option of having representative present at mastering session.
OR
Mastering to be provided by XBAND, for a fee to be determined by both XBAND and XCORP, and reimbursed by XCORP,with any costs above said fee to be responsibility of XBAND.
XBAND grants XCORP option of having representative present at mastering session.
FEE: $9,000 – $15,000 (not including mastering)
PROMOTIONAL CD – OPTION B: XBAND CD w/GUARANTEED SALES
b) Alternately, XBAND produces 3-song promo CD at no cost to XCORP. XCORP guarantees to purchase 5000 copies of XBAND CD at a reduced rate of $3 per unit.
Additionally, XBAND grants XCORP right to apply stickers to CD for the purposes of co-branding (at no cost to XBAND).
Cost of design and application of Stickers during manufacture process to be provided to XBAND at time of production.
FEE: $0
SALES GUARANTEE: $15,000
In either case, regardless of FEE or GUARANTEE, XCORP agrees to return undistributed copies to XBAND at end of term, and at no cost to XBAND.
* * *
3. Use of Band Name, Image and Association:
If applicable: FEE: $TBD
* * *
4. MUSIC LICENSE: 3 songs (same 3 songs as on CD. Original usage)
Usage as follows:
– Unlimited streaming on XCORP website.
– Unlimited usage in non-broadcast promotional videos for XCORP.
TERM: 12 mos.
FEE: $3,000–$6,000
5. MUSIC LICENSE: 3 songs (same 3 songs/additional usage)
Usage as follows:
– Unlimited use in XCORP advertising campaigns, worldwide, in all media.
– Unlimited usage in cable TV productions
TERM: 12 mos.
FEE: $6,000–12,000
6. FREE DOWNLOADS: 3 songs (same 3 songs/additional usage)
CHOOSE ONE:
XBAND grants XCORP right to distribute up to 1500 total downloads –in any combination– of the same three songs covered elsewhere in this agreement, after which XCORP will have the option to renew.
TERM: 12 mos.
FEE: $375–$1,500
OR
XBAND grants XCORP right to distribute unlimited downloads of the same three songs covered elsewhere in this agreement, for a term of 12 months.
TERM: 12 mos.
FEE: $1,500–$3,000
OR
$1 per download
7. RINGTONES
Ringtones to be produced under the supervision of XBAND by vendor of XBAND's choosing, at no cost to XBAND for non-exclusive distribution by XCORP. Vendor to be paid directly by XCORP, or by XBAND and reimbursed by XCORP pending approval of estimate provided by vendor.
FEE: 0$
* * *
The above is for illustrative purposes only. Not a lawyer, don't pretend to play one either, so I would hesitate to use the preceding as a boilerplate. Nevertheless, I've worn the Head of Production hat for three notable music production companies, and therefore possess considerable experience engaging in my own fair share of contract negotiation (with legal teams representing Fortune 400 advertisers and behemoth entertainment companies). More recently, I've gained experience as consultant to artist/talent management on a variety of similar matters. I hope this post provides at least food for thought for any aspiring Rock Brand new to such matters, but only use the language submitted here at your own discretion.
Without further ado:
'Cicada' posted the following scenario on The Velvet Rope:
"There was previous discussion here of the benefits of seeking out marketers to underwrite bands. Look at the Bacardi deal with Groove Armada. The company pays a fee that covers all costs associated with extensive use of the band's music in their advertising campaign and uses the band to play live events and in many other ways to promote their product. It's a great alternative for the band. They get paid, lots of promotion, don't have to worry about sales and it's a non-exclusive agreement so the band benefits from all of the promotion.
But what if you're not dealing with Bacardi, Red Bull, Nike or some other huge corporation with very deep pockets? What would you expect to get paid for a similar deal that is on a much smaller scale? How much do you think this deal is worth?
Scenario:
An 'up and coming' COMPANY, with corporate sponsors coming on board soon, wants to use XBAND's music for an all-in promotion deal. Their promotional area is online and in the Midwest. Keep in mind, it's a sort of "get in on the ground floor" type of deal, where they don't have the mega-funding yet that they expect to have over the next few years. So the pricing should reflect XBAND's desire to build a relationship with COMPANY. The COMPANY deals with sports marketing, the deal will likely include...
• Covering costs for XBAND to play at several events
• Pressing and distribution of 5K copies/ 3 song Promotional CD
Those 3 songs used extensively in...
• Online / Web advertising with COMPANY's website
• Promotional videos for COMPANY
• Free downloads and give-aways offered to promote COMPANY
• Ringtones
• Other promotional use of XBAND's name and likeness
• It's a non-exclusive use
ALSO:
The company is gathering corporate sponsors, building a website, doing a soft launch this year with continued and greater promotions into 2009 culminating in events that are projected to have 40,000 attendees (by 2010). But that's all projected, right now they are limited in what they can spend to develop a relationship with the band. They approached the band, they like the idea of building a sponsorship relationship. Band's name and image, 3 songs, used in website, internet promotions, company videos, cable TV productions, Free downloads, CD give-aways, ring-tones, the band will piggy-back and be included in their promotions as well as perform at several events.
The band has some small recognition in this region with a very big top 10 commercial radio hit last year in one of the major cities in their market and a distribution deal with a major retailer that covers their market and included LOTS promotion (band blurb/photo featured in 7 million circular ads, TV appearances with local FOX affiliate). The band does well in the club circuit here, has headlined a festival (4,000 people) and has had guarantees with colleges of $1000-$1,600 and corporate events for $2,000.
How much is that deal worth? What should the band be looking for? How about a dollar figure range? Remember, this isn't HUGE money yet. But it's not small potatoes either. More like almost medium potatoes. Your thoughts?"
A member logged on as MusicMBA suggested:
"Depending on the regional popularity of the artist (maybe measured by their guarantees in local clubs?) I would look for something in the $50,000 - $100,000 range".
Another contributor, QueenSheDevilCow, cautioned:
"I cannot think of a single case where a corporate sponsorship did not make a band seem cheapened, with the possible exception of sponsorships by companies that produce quality music gear. But, it's not the band's image that I am worried about, it's the chilling effect that this would have on music itself.
Record labels are filled with the reprobate of the Earth, but they are primarily MUSIC companies who live and die based on the success of their music, not the success of their bar soaps, cell phones, apparel, beverages, etc".
Okay, my own reply:
"On the other hand, advertising creatives these days appear to demonstrate greater acceptance for a wider variety of music than their major label brethren.
I can't speak to the variety of corporate sponsorship packages out there, but anyone who has turned on the TV at least once in the last decade can see any number of marketing campaigns that appear mutually positive for both musical artist and advertiser (Sting & Jaguar, for one early example).
As we move into the future, the best active sponsorships will resemble collaborative development deals. Ideally, sponsors won't make you be or do anything you're not. Rather, you'll choose each other because the relationship makes sense. Athletes seem to make it work, why can't artists?
Personally, I would start to arrive at a fee by beginning to think in terms of what the contract is going to look like.
Maybe something like this:
EVENTS:
a) If XCORP books XBAND for specific events delineated at the time of execution of contract: XCORP Provides XBAND $1,500 + Hotel, Air, Ground, Meals & backline requirements per event. (NUMBER OF EVENTS x 1.5K)
b) For XCORP sponsored events beyond the limit of the contract: XCORP Provides XBAND $2,000 + Hotel, Air, Ground, Meals & backline requirements per event.
c) In lieu of sponsoring specific dates, XCORP instead only options to display XCORP signage at TBD number of dates independently booked by XBAND (except for private dates):
FEE: $500 per event.
Additionally, XCORP will be responsible for securing signage and installing its display at each such event, at no cost to XBAND.
Artist's presence at promotional events or live performances of any kind is not guaranteed without the prior written consent of the ARTIST or ARTIST’S Manager.
Signage is not guaranteed for dates already booked by XBAND. XBAND will provide option to XCORP on a gig-by-gig basis as new dates are considered.
In any event, all arrangements shall be made through ARTIST’S Manager TBD weeks/months in advance.
* * *
2. PROMOTIONAL CD – OPTION A: CO-BRANDED CD
a) XBAND grants XCORP the right to produce 5000 units of a CO-BRANDED promotional CD containing 3 songs provided by XBAND (and only these three songs) and selected by mutual agreement by XBAND and XCORP. No other artists to be represented on CD.
XCORP provides at no cost to XBAND: mastering, design, production, manufacture and distribution of Promotional CD.
XBAND grants XCORP the right to design CD to reflect goals of XCORP marketing strategy.
XCORP provides that final approval of design and copy of said product shall be by mutual agreement of all signatories to the contract.
Song selection subject to mutual agreement.
MASTERING:
Songs to be pre-recorded and delivered by XBAND.
Mastering must be provided by XCORP at no cost to XBAND.
XBAND retains option of having representative present at mastering session.
OR
Mastering to be provided by XBAND, for a fee to be determined by both XBAND and XCORP, and reimbursed by XCORP,with any costs above said fee to be responsibility of XBAND.
XBAND grants XCORP option of having representative present at mastering session.
FEE: $9,000 – $15,000 (not including mastering)
PROMOTIONAL CD – OPTION B: XBAND CD w/GUARANTEED SALES
b) Alternately, XBAND produces 3-song promo CD at no cost to XCORP. XCORP guarantees to purchase 5000 copies of XBAND CD at a reduced rate of $3 per unit.
Additionally, XBAND grants XCORP right to apply stickers to CD for the purposes of co-branding (at no cost to XBAND).
Cost of design and application of Stickers during manufacture process to be provided to XBAND at time of production.
FEE: $0
SALES GUARANTEE: $15,000
In either case, regardless of FEE or GUARANTEE, XCORP agrees to return undistributed copies to XBAND at end of term, and at no cost to XBAND.
* * *
3. Use of Band Name, Image and Association:
If applicable: FEE: $TBD
* * *
4. MUSIC LICENSE: 3 songs (same 3 songs as on CD. Original usage)
Usage as follows:
– Unlimited streaming on XCORP website.
– Unlimited usage in non-broadcast promotional videos for XCORP.
TERM: 12 mos.
FEE: $3,000–$6,000
5. MUSIC LICENSE: 3 songs (same 3 songs/additional usage)
Usage as follows:
– Unlimited use in XCORP advertising campaigns, worldwide, in all media.
– Unlimited usage in cable TV productions
TERM: 12 mos.
FEE: $6,000–12,000
6. FREE DOWNLOADS: 3 songs (same 3 songs/additional usage)
CHOOSE ONE:
XBAND grants XCORP right to distribute up to 1500 total downloads –in any combination– of the same three songs covered elsewhere in this agreement, after which XCORP will have the option to renew.
TERM: 12 mos.
FEE: $375–$1,500
OR
XBAND grants XCORP right to distribute unlimited downloads of the same three songs covered elsewhere in this agreement, for a term of 12 months.
TERM: 12 mos.
FEE: $1,500–$3,000
OR
$1 per download
7. RINGTONES
Ringtones to be produced under the supervision of XBAND by vendor of XBAND's choosing, at no cost to XBAND for non-exclusive distribution by XCORP. Vendor to be paid directly by XCORP, or by XBAND and reimbursed by XCORP pending approval of estimate provided by vendor.
FEE: 0$
* * *
The above is for illustrative purposes only. Not a lawyer, don't pretend to play one either, so I would hesitate to use the preceding as a boilerplate. Nevertheless, I've worn the Head of Production hat for three notable music production companies, and therefore possess considerable experience engaging in my own fair share of contract negotiation (with legal teams representing Fortune 400 advertisers and behemoth entertainment companies). More recently, I've gained experience as consultant to artist/talent management on a variety of similar matters. I hope this post provides at least food for thought for any aspiring Rock Brand new to such matters, but only use the language submitted here at your own discretion.
Sunday, August 03, 2008
Do Jingles Work?
Do Jingles Work?
In July's Business-Standard, Seema Sindhu asked Indian advertisers if Jingles work (Do signature tunes for brands work?)
The power of the jingle is not just immediate aural stimulation –ear candy– but it's ability to continue stimulating the inner workings of our minds long after the commercial has ended and even after we've turned the television or radio off. In this respect, a good jingle can be measured by it's potential to work as Ear Worm, i.e. little tunes that get stuck in your mind.
The Wikipedia definition of Ear Worm provides us with this amusing example:
A Calvin And Hobbes strip had Calvin's dad getting up from an armchair and pausing vacantly, before asking his wife, "Why is it that I can recall a cigarette ad jingle from 25 years ago, but I can't remember what I just got up to do?"
Good jingles have such infectious melodies that they bounce around our brain and even drive us a bit mad. Even when we think we've finally purged them from memory, they emerge as we stroll down the supermarket aisle or whenever we consider a purchase.
I for one can't buy a 7-Up without thinking that "It's an Up thing".
Kudos to Mary Wood of Frisbie Music and Clifford Lane for managing to make the same indelible impression on my brain (with that 1996 jingle) as Bach and the Beatles.
Sindhu writes that jingles are making a comeback with South Asian companies like Bajaj, Titan, Kingfisher, Nirma and Airtel –all of whom he notes are using their old jingles in new campaigns.
The difference between today, and say, the mid twentieth century –arguably the golden age for jingles (and pop music in general)– is as Prasoon Joshi, executive chairman (India) and regional executive creative director (Asia Pacific), McCann-Erickson, says:
"Today, the entertainment quotient in life has gone up. TV, films, online, ringtones, the options are endless. The shelf life of a campaign or an ad has gone down. The ‘melodious' tune, be it in films or ads, which takes its time to gently make way to your heart is a rarity for these reasons."
When jingles do make an impression though, it's not simply because their melodies are memorable, but because they serve to deliver products and services which we actually find useful in our lives.
Bobby Pawar, chief creative officer, Mudra group, says:
"Audio signatures, such as Titan's Mozart score or Airtel's tune composed by AR Rahman..." don't just sing the virtues of their respective products, but are "...also driven by a strong idea..."
Whatever you think of jingles –and some people write them off as cheesy artifacts that have no place in contemporary advertising– jingles continue to have enormous potential as tools to cultivate relationships between brands and consumers.
–Not to mention between Bands and Fans: What's a ringtone anyway, but a jingle for a recording artist's hit single, or even their entire catalog?
It may seem we hear little of jingles these days, but the truth is they never went away. More often than not, advertisers get them ready made from pop stars, in the way of licensed tracks, instead of commissioning wholly new tunes from composers.
A lot of creative people on both sides of the arrangement think this trend is mutually beneficial, and it can be. There's nothing wrong with providing new revenue streams for bands –or brands.
The downside is strictly for those who compartmentalize the arts as either Fine or Commercial. Any marriage of media diminishes the power of its component parts, often transforming any isolated visual into a 'frame' and any song into, quite simply, well, a jingle.
In July's Business-Standard, Seema Sindhu asked Indian advertisers if Jingles work (Do signature tunes for brands work?)
The power of the jingle is not just immediate aural stimulation –ear candy– but it's ability to continue stimulating the inner workings of our minds long after the commercial has ended and even after we've turned the television or radio off. In this respect, a good jingle can be measured by it's potential to work as Ear Worm, i.e. little tunes that get stuck in your mind.
The Wikipedia definition of Ear Worm provides us with this amusing example:
A Calvin And Hobbes strip had Calvin's dad getting up from an armchair and pausing vacantly, before asking his wife, "Why is it that I can recall a cigarette ad jingle from 25 years ago, but I can't remember what I just got up to do?"
Good jingles have such infectious melodies that they bounce around our brain and even drive us a bit mad. Even when we think we've finally purged them from memory, they emerge as we stroll down the supermarket aisle or whenever we consider a purchase.
I for one can't buy a 7-Up without thinking that "It's an Up thing".
Kudos to Mary Wood of Frisbie Music and Clifford Lane for managing to make the same indelible impression on my brain (with that 1996 jingle) as Bach and the Beatles.
Sindhu writes that jingles are making a comeback with South Asian companies like Bajaj, Titan, Kingfisher, Nirma and Airtel –all of whom he notes are using their old jingles in new campaigns.
The difference between today, and say, the mid twentieth century –arguably the golden age for jingles (and pop music in general)– is as Prasoon Joshi, executive chairman (India) and regional executive creative director (Asia Pacific), McCann-Erickson, says:
"Today, the entertainment quotient in life has gone up. TV, films, online, ringtones, the options are endless. The shelf life of a campaign or an ad has gone down. The ‘melodious' tune, be it in films or ads, which takes its time to gently make way to your heart is a rarity for these reasons."
When jingles do make an impression though, it's not simply because their melodies are memorable, but because they serve to deliver products and services which we actually find useful in our lives.
Bobby Pawar, chief creative officer, Mudra group, says:
"Audio signatures, such as Titan's Mozart score or Airtel's tune composed by AR Rahman..." don't just sing the virtues of their respective products, but are "...also driven by a strong idea..."
Whatever you think of jingles –and some people write them off as cheesy artifacts that have no place in contemporary advertising– jingles continue to have enormous potential as tools to cultivate relationships between brands and consumers.
–Not to mention between Bands and Fans: What's a ringtone anyway, but a jingle for a recording artist's hit single, or even their entire catalog?
It may seem we hear little of jingles these days, but the truth is they never went away. More often than not, advertisers get them ready made from pop stars, in the way of licensed tracks, instead of commissioning wholly new tunes from composers.
A lot of creative people on both sides of the arrangement think this trend is mutually beneficial, and it can be. There's nothing wrong with providing new revenue streams for bands –or brands.
The downside is strictly for those who compartmentalize the arts as either Fine or Commercial. Any marriage of media diminishes the power of its component parts, often transforming any isolated visual into a 'frame' and any song into, quite simply, well, a jingle.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)