Showing posts with label Music Design 2015. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Music Design 2015. Show all posts

Monday, August 25, 2008

Computers Have Changed My Brain

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

Thursday, May 01, 2008

Film Composer, Sound Maker or Music Designer?

Some musical creators will naturally identify themselves as either Top Down composers or Bottom Up constructionists –both are terms I've introduced in previous posts (Click on the links at the bottom of this entry if you require background). The latter, it seems to me, must think more like sound designers than traditional composers.

In fact, the more I think about it, the fewer differences I notice between the modern compositional process and Sound Design (or sound EFX work).

I would like to suggest that this points to an as of yet unidentified trend:

A new kind of sonic artisan has evolved among us. It's as though the lizard has sprouted wings, and its scales turned to beautiful feathers, and we have only now realized that a transformation has taken place because instead of crawling in the muck, something new soars above us along the horizon, and the thing has taken flight.

So what is this new creature, anyway?

This newly emerged commercial sound artist is neither music composer nor EFX artist, but both those things and much more.

There is but a shade of difference here, nevertheless I think important to take note of it: I do not mean that he or she simply possesses a combined skill set, or that they are adept at mixing music and noise together in mix. That in and of itself would be unremarkable.

What I mean is that this newly formed modern audio professional approaches music and noise (and speech for that matter) as equally available sound sources and viable tonal information colors for any given audio work. There is no differentiation in kinds of sound, simply a palette whose spectrum extends to ranges of human hearing.

Sure, there have been composers before, and tape manipulators, and location recordists, and sound EFX artists, and beat makers, and engineers –but we've been looking at those respective skill sets as separate from one another. Fast Forward to the present and we noticed that these unique specialties, have become combined into a more or less unified, well informed, competent, new breed of audio professional.

I call this person by the hybrid label: 'MUSIC DESIGNER'.

A cursory web search will turn up several individuals who already embrace this nomenclature. For instance: Brian Williams, Robert Rich and Dhrubajit Gogoi.

I believe the term itself, 'Music Design', must have been coined sometime in the first part of the twentieth century, and from someone within the film community. In his book 'Film Music: A Neglected Art', first published in 1972, and with a 2nd edition in 1991, Roy M. Prendergast mentions technological advances in sound production initiated by music editing company that called itself 'The Music Design Group'. And then there is, of course, Soundelux Design Music Group, founded in 1985, meaning the appellation is at the very least now a quarter century old.

But today, as of this writing, the term 'AUDIO DESIGNER' appears to be much more common, especially as a designation in the Game industry.

I understand how 'Audio' might be chosen instead of 'Music'. It suggests a neutral term which embraces both music and sound design. However, there's nothing in the label Audio Designer to suggest musicianship. A job description listed on the THQ job site even assures applicants: "Understanding of Music and composition is an advantage but is not required".

Personally I think 'Audio Designer' is a fancy name for 'engineer', and otherwise misses the evolutionary mark. That's why I prefer the Music Designer designation over Audio Designer, given the context which I use it: My intent is to define a multifaceted musician who composes musical experiences using all sound, not describe an engineer who assembles the disparate sonic elements of a media production into a final mix.

You're welcome to come up with a niftier name, or to argue the practice is old hat in Hollywood. My point is not to create a new job title for you, but simply to identify and codify elements of an emerging trend. And this trend may be defined as the acceptance of a range of post production skills and techniques by even the conventional composer.

You already know people like this. Perhaps you are one of them. I'm inclined to think that if you read this blog with any regularity, you probably are. If you produce sound using raw code, MAX, soft synths and a Digital Audio Workstation, consider yourself enlisted. If you think of an electric guitar as less a musical instrument and more of a sound design tool, you absolutely fall into this category. Likewise, if you're one of those sound explorers who run a traditional instrument through a series of dynamic software filters –the way Robin Eubanks often does using Native Instruments Guitar Rig– in order expand tonal range well beyond the natural limitations of his trombone.

For a Music Designer, the actual instrument of tonal or sonic manipulation is considered incidental. That's because any instrument may be transformed by the addition of technology into an interface capable of sonic colors beyond its traditional or intended use, with the result being that any instrument can sound like any other instrument (and a whole lot more).

The distinction between musician and sound designer is blurring –has blurred–, while at the same time the distinction between composer and engineer, not to mention Graphic designer (which I'll discuss in a future article (MUSIC BY DESIGN)), also appears to be merging.

The final result of a Music Designer's work maybe but doesn't have to be described as audio collage or merely an interesting organization of sound. Rather, it works in such a way that it begs an informed audience to simply accept what they hear as MUSIC, whatever its components or sonic origins.

* * *

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