The Light of Day

Brave new alternate world (version 1.0)
KeithHandy posted in Uncategorized on December 13th, 2007

I have to come at this post from two separate introductions, and then merge them together. So bear with me.

Introduction #1:

(Cue theremin and other 1950s sci-fi sounds.)

The future! What will it be like? Will we have flying cars? Robotic dogs? Vacation spots on Mars? A tub of French onion dip that runs empty at the same time as the bag of chips we bought with it?

Nobody knows. But one thing we do know for sure, fixed media will die. There will no longer be such a thing as notable artists, or well-known works of art; just “art stuff” that hovers in a constantly evolving cloud-like state in the collective human consciousness, never defined, and never owned by anybody. Everyone who observes it will interact with it, and everyone who interacts with it will change it.

Oh, and if you happen to like working independently, or creating fixed pieces, forget it, kid; you’re yesterday’s news.

Introduction #2:

First, I showed you my whiteboard system.

Its purpose: to be a tactile, visible, easily updated reminder of what needs to be done next on each of my recordings. Simple, low tech.

Secondly, I talked about backup. In my case I’m using Amazon’s S3 service, although there are many options available. Because this is via the internet, and I don’t have infinite time to be uploading zillions of .wav files, I only back up mixdowns.

Which brings me to the third thing I talked about… actually running off listenable, decent-quality mixes of my work in progress on an ongoing basis, instead of leaving any song in a “guts hanging out” state. Beta mixes, in other words — a term I’ve used before, and want you to keep in mind.

So back to introduction #1, a loose parody of the common theme in today’s music futurism. We all want to be cutting edge, and I’m no exception. In fact, if there is a collective cloud like the one I described, I’d probably have fun playing with it now and then. But like any cutting edge tech, seeing it as a replacement for something, or the death of something, is where futurists traditionally overshoot their collective wads.

The meme of late is about how the internet has widened avenues for musical collaboration across the world. That’s wonderful — but what if collaboration is only a secondary interest for some of us? Collaboration isn’t the whole answer to music. As much as it can add to a piece to have a complete stranger have their way with it, it can also take quite a bit away from it, if someone doesn’t know what they are doing. If you’re inspired to collaborate with someone that you feel a kinship to and chemistry with, great. If you’re doing it just to try to get more exposure, not so great.

I would like to see a future in which a composer can continue to be a composer, maintaining control over his/her work, yet still take advantage of the interactivity of modern technology. The answer?

Look back at intro #2 again. Whiteboard, rough mix, backup.

Whiteboard… rough mix… backup… beta release?

Back to #1 again. The trends. The new ways of thinking. Where is some of the most groundbreaking innovation happening today, at least outside of research and development laboratories? In software. The “new way” of thinking in software isn’t that new anymore. Proprietary software still exists, but so does programming as a community effort, which has been around for a while now, and can be incredibly effective. Even under closed-source operating systems, and within closed-source frameworks, there are open, communal projects. The natural leap that people are making is, ideas that emerge in software can be applied to other things, so let’s make music and art more communal.

But what else is happening in software? What are some of the quiet trends, the ones that don’t evoke passion, don’t inspire news stories… but just plain make sense?

Here’s one: SOFTWARE THAT UPDATES ITSELF. Or at least informs you when it can be updated.

Think. Think. Think. Think. Think.

Have you come up with the same idea that I have yet?

Okay, try this on: self-updating music.

A listener’s audio player would routinely scan the associated download sites for newer versions of whatever songs that he has already downloaded. He could set his preferences to download updates automatically, or to be prompted first. There could also be a user preference to always keep older versions when downloading the newer versions, always replace (delete) the older file, or only keep the old file if the new version is radically different.

Incomplete mixes could be released as version “zero point something” — beta mixes, as I said previously. The first time an artist deems a mix to be “officially done”, he could say it’s version 1.0. The first minor tweak after that could be called 1.01. The next major overhaul could be called 2.0, and so on. Just like software.

The site hosting the music could also host text information about the changes, just like with software, outlining any new overdubs, edits, etc., which could automatically show up in a display on the user’s media software, so he could choose not to accept a version with, say, added cowbell. Or, if he has it set to download new versions automatically, he can see whether the changes look interesting enough to merit listening right away, or minor enough to wait until it the next time it comes up randomly.

This system would probably be less useful for big name acts who only release one official version of a song. But I’m sure there are other low profile recording artists like myself who would love to dynamically share a song’s ongoing transformation with their faithful listeners, without needing to send out mass emails to the effect of, “hey everybody, please download my song again, because I tweaked the EQ on the hi hat!”.

The technology already exists for software updates. It’s a matter of incorporating it into media players, and providing artists with the tools to create a public database where they can continually upload their revised mixes.

Question: isn’t this sort of like a podcast?

I don’t know that much about podcasts. All I know is they reside in a totally different place within iTunes, and don’t show up alongside songs in the library playlist. Whenever I back up a newer mix, I wish I was updating it for everyone that’s already downloaded an older version. Instead of just having a song, people would be subscribing to it (I suppose this could be either paid or free), so in that sense, yes, like a podcast. If there’s a logical way to set up each song as its own individual podcast, and a convenient way for people to take advantage of that without completely messing up their listening routines, somebody let me know. My guess is that the podcasting paradigm would only partially provide the means, and that ultimately, new code would have to be written.

This could work for other media besides music, too. It would probably take a long time to generate enough interest in it (because media players would have to facilitate it), but it’s worth thinking about as a possible future model for releasing creative work without the pressure of committing to a “final version”.

Please, let me know any thoughts or ideas you have about this, because I’ll admit I have little actual practical knowledge about these things.