AWA: Academic Writing at Auckland

The use of technology within the music industry has been controversial from its very conception. Even technologies now entrenched into popular music culture, such as the microphone, were initially regarded with suspicion and were often considered emotionally dishonest (Frith 1986). Using technology to make music has been criticised as inauthentic, alienating to audiences, and opposed to art and nature (Frith 1986). It is essentially viewed as a corrupting force on an authentic art form. However, many do not consider the positive effects technology can have on the creation and experience of music. Points that are commonly overlooked are how accessible music is made through technology, the knowledge required to use this technology, and the innovative uses and explorations that can be made through technology. Far from being corrupted, art can be enhanced and explored in different ways, as well made more accessible.

            A commonly raised argument concerning technology is that it is an inauthentic form of music; that technologies such as synthesizers and drum machines don't require any skill to use. There is a discourse around music which dictates that only if you know how to play a 'real' instrument are you a 'real' artist, and technology corrupts this idea of music as real, authentic art (Théberge 1999). This viewpoint overlooks the fact that instruments themselves are a form of technology. Instruments such as electric guitars require amplifiers to be plugged into, and even singers require microphones so that they can reach their entire audience. It could be argued here, though, that despite the fact technology is used as an aid for these things, a certain degree of skill is still required to be able to master them. The artist must learn to play the instrument, and only once they have done this can they use it to create their music. Of course, what is often not considered is the skill needed to create or enhance music using technologies such as synthesizers. Indeed, as Timothy Warner points out, “gaining intimate, practical knowledge of specific pieces of equipment is highly time consuming” (Warner 2003, p.33). It is not as easy to produce music using these technologies as is often perceived. Pushing a few buttons here and there isn't going to magically produce the next pop hit; knowledge of how to use the equipment – as well as understanding of the basic components to music such as rhythm, arrangement, pitch, tone, and other features – is required to be able to create music (2003). A different set of skills is required – but so is a different set of skills required for each different 'authentic' instrument.

            Technologies such as synthesizers and samplers are simply different ways of creating sound to express a certain feeling or mood within a musical track. Rather than corrupting art, then, technology could be considered a form of art in itself. Just because it is a different means of musical expression than instruments which are considered more traditional doesn't mean that technology will destroy art as we know it – only allow musicians to further explore different ways of creative expression. As Théberge notes, he once witnessed a rock musician refer to his electric guitar as a 'real instrument' – as opposed to a synthesizer – and although this might be a common conception now, Frith gives an example of how Bob Dylan was rejected by the folk movement for 'going electric' in the 1960s (Théberge, 1999; Frith, 1986). Technology and people's opinions on it are always going to grow and change; the fact that the way art is produced evolves over time doesn't mean it is any less authentic or emotionally honest than that which came before it.

            Part of the negativity around music technology is the idea that it alienates audiences. The musicians are no longer pouring their heart and soul into the music they create; they are substituting it with cold, unfeeling technologies that contain no emotion for audiences to relate to and connect with (Frith 1986). This viewpoint does not consider the wide range of uses technology has in music production and consumption today, or even the part it plays in so-called authentic live music. As Théberge points out, “too often technology is thought about in terms of machines rather than in terms of practice,” (1999, p.216-217). Technology is often used to refer to a select few things as opposed to its use in a general sense, which undermines the importance of technology in the music industry (Théberge, 1999). For instance, the use of the microphone in live performances allows artists to create the feeling of intimacy, even though the audience may be fairly large. Allowing audiences to experience live music in such a large group is a way to bring people together, not alienate them. Similarly, the wide distribution of music through CDs, and MP3s on the internet, makes more music more accessible to more people (Bishop, 2005). Through services such as iTunes, music listeners can gain access to almost any type of music, meaning that musical artists are able to get their art and message out to a much wider variety of people than would have been otherwise possible.

            The issue of using technology such as synthesizers in musical tracks as 'alienating' because they are unnatural and not 'legitimate' forms of music can also be contested (Frith 1986). Consider popular dance music, for example. Although dance music often uses a wide variety of technologies within songs, there is still a dance music culture within society today, especially in the club scene. The artist Lady Gaga's recently released song 'Born This Way' – a dance music track – became the fastest selling musical track in iTunes history (Reisinger 2011). Lady Gaga is well known for pushing the boundaries of pop music with her controversial themes, and she herself has said numerous times that she creates her music to be 'thought-provoking,' and that she is here to 'make great music and inspire people' (Collins 2008). This is an example of the fact that simply because music uses certain technologies does not mean it cannot be authentic, or that it is in any way alienating. It is possible to put thought, emotion, and feeling into music as well as be a pop artist who uses synthetic music technologies.

            Music technology is often considered inauthentic and a corrupting force on art because it means singers do not have to do any work. Rather than putting any effort into singing, they will just assume the song will be put through something like autotune to fix any imperfections (Tyrangiel, 2009). However, technologies such as autotune are not automatically bad and can, in fact, have the opposite effect on artists. In his article on autotune, Tyrangiel (2009) discusses the artist T-Pain. While autotune was already prevalent throughout the music industry, T-Pain found a novel use for it. By changing the parameters on the autotune machine, T-Pain was able to find a unique voice effect that was not commonly being used in pop music at that time. It was this use of autotune in his music that made him famous, and his songs instantly recognizable (Tyrangiel, 2009). With technology, artists are able to explore different means of expression and artistic production, to create things that would not have been created without the use of a particular technology. It pushes artists to 'think outside the box.' Even artists who are already well known for their musical talent can make use of technology to explore new means of expression. In Kate Bush's song 'The Red Shoes,' she uses 'technologically produced music and sounds that highlight the rhythmic repetition and the peculiarities of her voice' (Gordon, 2005, p.38). Kate Bush has often been quoted talking about how she considers her music 'serious' music, that it is about art and creativity (Gordon, 2005). She is not simply using technology out of laziness or cheap gimmickry. The potential that technology has to help artists take their music to new heights, to explore new effects and emotions, to push boundaries, means that it cannot simply be written off as opposed to and corrupting art.

            Moreover, there is an expectation that even if autotune is used on records, artists should still be able to perform live. This can be seen this through the public outrage at Britney Spears lip syncing on her Circus tour (Grenblatt, 2009). Although it is common for records to be more polished, audiences still make a division between live performances and studio recordings. Part of the attraction of live shows is being able to listen to that music sung by the artist and connect with their music on a more intimate level. Technology, then, cannot be a stand in for everything; artists are still pushed to use their natural abilities. Technology is not the all corrupting force that it is sometimes considered to be.

            Technology has a wide variety of uses within the music industry. Whether it be distribution and consumption of music, aid in live performance, or simply experimenting with new sounds, it is fair to say that technology and the music industry are inextricably linked. The development of new technologies means new ways for artists to express themselves; it means new ways to connect with audiences and to create art. Considering these things, I disagree with the statement that art is corrupted by technology. Technology is merely a new platform for artistic growth and exploration.

Reference list

Bishop, Jack. 2005. Building International Empires of Sound: Concentrations of Power and Property in the 'Global' Music Market. Popular Music and Society 28 (4):443-471.

Collins, Hattie. The Sunday Times [Web Site]. Lady GaGa: the future of pop? 14 December 2008. Accessed 11 May 2011 at: http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/music/article5325327.ece

Frith, Simon. 1986. Art versus technology: the strange case of popular music. Media, Culture, and Society 8 (3): 263-279.

Gordon, Bonnie. 2005. Kate Bush's Subversive Shoes. Women and Music: A Journal of Gender and Culture, 9: 37-50.

Grenblatt, Leah. Music Mix [Web Site]. Britney Spears lip-synching controversy: (not) shock of the decade? 9 November 2009. Accessed 11 May 2011 at: http://music-mix.ew.com/2009/11/09/britney-spears-lip-synching-controversy-australia/

Reisinger, Don. cnet News [Web Site]. Lady Gaga is now the queen of iTunes. 18 February 2011. Accessed 11 May 2011 at: http://news.cnet.com/8301-13506_3-20033396-17.html

Théberge, Paul. 1999. Technology. In Key Terms in Popular Music and Culture, edited by B. Horner and T. Swiss, 209-224. Oxford: Blackwell.

Tyrangiel, Josh.  2009. Singer's Little Helper. Time International (South Pacific Edition) 173 (6): 41-43.

Warner, Timothy. 2003. Pop music: technology and creativity: Trevor Horn and the digital revolution. Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing Limited.