RESEARCH PROJECT | Prolific Sounds

THIS REPORT HAS EXCLUDED ANY GRAPHS AND CHARTS, IT HAS ALSO BEEN FORMATTED AS TEXT ONLY SO IT MAY NOT APPEAR CORRECTLY ON THE WEBPAGE. THIS IS COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY, ANY COPYING OF THE ORIGINAL MATERIAL DISPLAYED ON THIS PAGE MUST BE REFERENCED APPROPRIATELY.

The Academy of Contemporary Music

BA (Hons) Music Industry Practice

Contemporary Music Production

21st July 2020

MIP-603, Research Project

Are The Developments In Music Technology Resulting In Limitations To The Jobs In The Music Industry, Whilst Also Leading To A Lack Of Human Input Into The Creative Process?

I. Abstract

Music technology and jobs connect as artificial intelligence and accessible software pave the way for the future of how we are creating and distributing music. Consumers listening habits are changing too, this study will demonstrate the ways in which technology has resulted in limitations to certain music industry jobs. The human input to the creative process has also taken a hit, as discussed in this study, the whole creative process has been streamlined and shrunken with some original points for creative input becoming completely obsolete. The literature review discusses the rise of the digital audio workstation and other technological advancements and how they affect jobs. Additionally, the literature review analyses if there is a lack of human input to the creative process. In order to establish any gaps in existing data, the best way to fill these information gaps in was a questionnaire. This allowed the respondents to state their opinions as well as select multiple choice answers to present quantitative data on graphs.

VI. Acronyms

DAW - Digital Audio Workstation

OSL - Orchestra Sample Libraries

LOR - Live Orchestra Recording

Introduction

In recent music technology there have been extremely fast paced developments including music consumption and all aspects of music production. Even the way artists get their music listened to has changed, with record labels and lengthy contracts being left in the dust, the music industry is changing. Almost every sector, especially after the industrial revolution, saw developments in ‘mechanized manufacturing, and the factory system. New machines, new power sources, and new ways of organising work made existing industries more productive and efficient’ (Duignan, 2019). The music industry is starting to demonstrate this trend as developments in technology have started to bypass some of the need for expensive services offered by professionals, when an algorithm can perform these tasks for a fraction of the cost, or even for free. The invention of the digital audio workstation (DAW) has allowed endless retakes and overdubs of tracks and editing to be done with ‘microscopic precision’ (Prior, N. (2018), when compared to recordings done 40 years ago. Although creativity can flourish like never before, there is opportunity for a flood of congruent music to saturate the music charts. This report aims to evaluate the safety of specific music industry jobs and if the human input into the creative process is diminishing. The creative process can be defined as any number of steps or tasks that are completed from the beginning to the end of a creative project. Whilst the job limitations discussed in the research paper can relate to anything that hinders a person's, or entire sectors, job prospects. The inspiration behind this study came from the recognition of artificial intelligence sites, such as Landr that will master music through a complex series of algorithms. Another inspiration for the research in this project is the use of sample libraries and their effect on the job prospects of creative producers and live performers.

Aims and Objectives

The aim of this paper is to research job limitations and human input to the creative process and find as much relevant literature as possible, then fill in any gaps that appear with primary research. The objective of the research is to determine whether or not developing music industry technology is resulting in job limitations and if these developments also lead to a lack of human input to the creative process.

In order to establish any links between technology job limitations and diminishing human input to creativity, the dissertation will show relevant literature and discuss this. Then a survey has also been conducted to gain qualitative and quantitative primary research to gain in-depth insight into the research area.

Literature Review

There has been extensive research into the effect of streaming on music. However, there are still gaps in the research as to how technology is affecting music industry jobs and musicians’ intellectual property and creativity. ‘Music technology is the application of technology, such as computers and software, to the musical arts’ (Beam, 2020’. Theoretically, any technology that directly affects music can be considered music technology. This includes the potential to share files over the internet and the resulting issue that continues to plague the industry, which is music piracy- the illegal downloading and sharing of music. With almost three billion more people using the internet since 2005 (National Statistical Offices, 2020), proves to be one of the flaws of the industry's development. The literature review is split into two sections. The first section mainly discusses jobs and technology, whilst the second section discusses jobs and human input to the creative process.

The Rise of the Digital Audio Workstation

Music technology is a broad spectrum and there are constant changes and improvements to music technology that have allowed the high costs of studio time to become a thing of the past for many new artists. For instance, Billie Eilish recorded her album with her brother ‘In a small studio in his bedroom at his parents' house’ (Tingen, 2019), which led to her appearing on the charts and winning multiple awards.

With time in a small studio costing ‘a few thousand dollars’ (Camp, n.d.) and large studios costing ‘10, 15, $20,000’ (Camp, n.d.), it used to be desirable to get a record deal to have access to these facilities. Renowned producer Steve Foggin stated that ‘Back in the day, it would cost you $2,000 just for recording quality tapes to get you in the front door.’ (Foggin, n.d.). Now, with the rise of affordable music technology such as the digital audio workstation, artists and producers can thrive and create music at their own leisure without spending thousands for the privilege. The basic version of Ableton Live, with ‘23.14%’ (Sethi, 2015) of producers using all versions of the software, costs around £300 and is compatible with all computer operating systems. The possibility of recording and editing your own music wherever you choose without the time constraints of studio time can be seen as a huge advantage to modern artists. However, this does also mean that doing everything ‘in the box’, which means doing everything on the computer software, makes it incredibly easy to have every note perfectly in pitch and everything landing precisely on the beat. Ultimately, the actual human input to the creativity of making music can be seen as something that is depleting. This is supported by 23 time Grammy Award winning producer Al Schmitt, about the 1970’s, stating ‘In those days you could not edit or fix things, and so you had to do the take when things were emotionally right and you chose the take that had the feel on it. This is why so many records from back then are so much more emotional and touch you so much more deeply. Today everything is perfect, and in many places we have taken the emotions out of records’ (Tingen, 2015).

Contrarily, with independent artists choosing to do everything for themselves they miss out on the marketing, promotion, recording, video recording and tour support that a label can offer them. An independent artist would also miss out on an advance from a record label when ‘a typical advance from a major record company to a new pop act in a significant market is estimated to be between US$50,000 and US$350,000’ (IFPI, 2020).

Regardless of this, a Rolling Stone article by Amy Wang who covered business and culture for Quartz, The Atlantic, Slate, and The Economist, backs the financial choices of an independent artist by saying that ‘Some of the artists using Ditto are repped by themselves and getting a million pounds a year, and they’re building up sales and not signed to a deal’ (Wang, 2018). Wang also writes that ‘with a label, you’re only getting very little back of what you actually earn’ (Wang, 2018). Relating this research to the question means analysing whether or not this has impacted the jobs in the music industry. Considering that ‘Independent artists now make up nearly 40 percent of the global music industry’ (All Things Considered, 2020), this would mean that record label jobs would be damaged by having less artists on their roster and would need structural changes to adapt. EMI were affected by the shift in power to independent artists and online piracy as ‘In an industry that was unable to move quickly enough and adapt to a new rhythm punched out by the internet and digital technologies’ (Forde, 2011), it is understandable why EMI, who were once the ‘biggest music publisher in the world’ (Forde, 2011) closed their operations in 2007.

The demise of EMI led to the closure of the infamous ‘Olympic Studios’ in 2009. This was when the ‘industry lost one of its most important and historically significant recording spaces’ (Frost, 2020). The job losses created from the discontinuance of both EMI and Olympic Studios show the correlation between music technology, limited job prospects and creating structural unemployment. Another significant event to support this is the closure of Tower Records in ‘2006 (Tsioulcas, 2015)’. Tower records were a chain of record stores regarded as ‘a pilgrimage place for music fanatics — even for the world's biggest stars’ (Tsioulcas, 2015). Unfortunately due to the shift from physical music consumption to digital, Tower just couldn't keep up. This is supported by Tsioulcas: ‘By then, music fans had already started turning to other options, from file-sharing sites like Napster to download stores like iTunes’ (Tsioulcas, 2015’. The music technology development of the MP3 player in 1997 allowed music consumers to pay for singles rather than paying for a whole album and with music piracy on the rise it is evident why in 2006 the music publishing giant, Tower Records, went insolvent.

II. Human Input To The Creative Process

Firstly, there did appear to be a gap in research into this subject area and it was challenging to find correlations between music technology and it leading to a lack of human input to the creative process. Therefore, primary research was required to bridge this gap in the methodology. It can be established that music production as an art form is as creative as any other. Referencing the acknowledgement from Paul Mcartney that George Martin was in fact, the ‘fifth beatle’ (Chester, 2016), it has been established that production and mastering is as much a creative art as the composition of the music. If mastering is an art form in itself then websites such as Landr will be directly responsible for diminishing the creative input into the records we hear and will result directly in job limitations to mastering engineers. For contextual purposes, Landr is a website that was developed in 2014 and it aimed to ‘level the playing field for musicians’ (Press and media, n.d.) by mastering songs to a professional standard from eight years of developments. Landr even has the capital to employ their own ‘resident astrophysicist’ (Hazard, 2014) whereas low-level mastering engineers would not have the means to do so. Landr’s algorithm makes it a first of its kind, as its algorithm can be replicated and built upon, it is perfect ‘For every musician who’s ever wanted their SoundCloud track to sound like it was produced by Timbaland’ (Magee, 2015). In the literature review it was previously discussed that independent musicians can save money and potentially generate a greater income from doing everything themselves and this is becoming more of a reality, as Landr will even master the tracks for free as mp3 files. The medium paid subscription for £108/yr offers unlimited mp3 files and wav files costing £6.99; it also offers volume matching capabilities, genre specific mastering and mastering preferences, which can cost thousands of dollars per track’ (Magee, 2015). To demonstrate their influence so far, Landr states that they work with ‘1.8 million creators from 100+ countries as well as major labels, such as Warner Music Group, Disney and Atlantic Records, renowned songwriters like Diane Warren, and musicians like MachineDrum, Caleb Groh and many others’ (Landr.com. n.d.).

This is relevant until it is taken into account that a human mastering engineer can hear the track and add a creative input and say whether they think changes should be made. The producer and author Ari Herstand wrote ‘How To Make It In The Music Business’ as a guide to musicians wanting to join the industry and he makes some very strong points surrounding human influence into artists' music and Landr itself. He wrote that ‘when I hear a problem best addressed in the mix, I ask the client for change’ (Herstand, 2017, p.168). This is a capability that Landr will never have and Herstand also states that his ‘clients' mixes tend to get better with every release' (Herstand, 2017, p.168). Landr also ‘can't know whether occasional high frequency bursts are vocal siblilants...cymbal crashes...or vocal mud that needs to be cut’ (Herstand, 2017, p.168). All of this supports the idea that it is important to have human input at every stage of the creative process to maximise a song's potential. Although this is heavily contradicted by Metallica's album, ‘Death Magnetic’, where unfortunately the human input to the mastering stage delivered wholly disappointing, overcompressed and digitally clipped material that led to ‘almost 13,000 fans...calling for Death Magnetic to be remastered (Michaels, 2008’. It is not a fact that the album would have been mastered on Landr, but at least Landr would have mastered the album to be dynamic and not digitally clipped.

Another way to look at the lack of human input to the creative process is that music used to record on tape and everything would have to be done at once or overdubbed. There are now multiple ways that this can be done on a laptop. For example using royalty free sample packs, construction kits and using artificial musicians such as Logic Pro’s ‘Drummer’ function. This has the capability to generate the rhythm of a previously made track, excluding some of the human input to the creative process as it squanders the creativity, creative input and overall human feel of a live drummer. It also means session musicians will be limited to job opportunities as ‘each drummer comes with its own acoustic kit or electronic drum kit and a distinct playing style’ (Logic Pro X: Drummer overview, 2019). With regard to sample packs and their history, the first ever sampler was ‘invented in the late 1940s, and involved a piano keyboard controlling a series of small tape decks, each holding eight seconds of recorded sound’ (McNamee, 2009). In 2016, Reinhard Kopiez et al. wrote ‘Replacing the Orchestra? – The Discernibility of Sample Library and Live Orchestra Sounds’. This journal presents fascinating findings from creating formulas to determining whether an audience can hear the difference between orchestra sample libraries and real life human performance. Reinhard Kopiez et al. stated that ‘Findings from this study suggest that in the near future, the increasing expertise of audio engineers in creating OSL arrangements and the application of computer algorithms in the generation of musical expression will help to improve the quality of digital orchestras. Given financial constraints in production, it is likely that high quality sound libraries will become more common in the production of music’. In relation to the research question, Reinhard Kopiez et al. believe that the use of OSL over LOR will become more of a mainstay in modern productions, furthering the theory that sample libraries will reduce the human input to the creative process and limit the jobs of live studio performers. The journal is also corrected and peer reviewed so the information found from this is extremely reputable and a good source of opinion to validate any conclusions that can be drawn from it. An unconventional example of artificial instrumentation is in Porter Robinson's song, ‘Sad Machine’. In ‘Sad Machine’, ‘He used Vocaloid, a synth that recreates the human singing voice, for the female part’ (Wiser, n.d.). Porter Robinson used technology to his advantage to create the robotic sounding voice without a need for any human input, furthering the argument of artificial performers replacing human performers.

Sampling can be creative as it has inspired so many new genres of music. One of the most famous examples is the drum break from ‘Amen, Brother’, by The Winstons, which ‘featured heavily in jungle music’ (Otzen, 2015) and Hip-Hop. However, this view was not shared by Richard L Spencer, the lead singer of the band, who said ‘It felt like plagiarism and I felt ripped off and raped’ (Otzen, 2015). Spencer also said ‘I come from an era where you did not steal people's ideas’ (Otzen, 2015). So although the development of sampling can be seen as creative, this view is not always shared by the artists who create the music in the first place. The creativity behind some uses of sampling is questionable with the availability of royalty free melody loops and over-sampled drum machines, it asks the question whether developing sampler technology is resulting in a lack of human input to the creative process. This is because skill and creativity can become less of a necessity as creating music can become more of a practical assembly process than the composition of new musical ideas. There are some gaps in the research into sample packs and the impact on creativity so this will be implemented into the primary research.

This literature review has shown some significant ways that developments in music technology have resulted in limitations to the jobs in the music industry, whilst also leading to a lack of human input into the creative process.

The findings can be summarised briefly below:

The shift from physical to digital music consumption has resulted in the closure of the label EMI, the insolvency of Tower Records and in 2022 the predicted ‘net job losses will be between 4.2 to 5.4 million (Frontier Economics, 2016)’ in relation to film and music.
The rise of the independent artist, what being an independent artist entails and how this will affect the jobs of record labels, producers and mastering engineers.
The ways in which music technology developments will affect certain aspects of the music industry.
There are some gaps in research that show how new developments in music result in limitations to the jobs in the music industry, whilst also leading to a lack of human input into the creative process.

4. Methodology

The methodology of this dissertation set out to gather both qualitative and quantitative data which meant that numerical measurement and detailed explanations could be analysed. In order to conduct primary research, a survey and face-to face interview were conducted. This covered the bases of both qualitative and quantitative data. This was the most suitable approach to answer the research question, as the survey gathered multiple opinions on the subject matter, whilst creating quantitative data that could be placed on a graph to show correlations between the answers.

To collect the survey data it was sent out to music producers and music industry professionals. The receivers of the survey were also invited to share it with any other professionals they knew to gather as much data as possible. Due to the specific nature of the survey it meant that the participant size was fairly limited.

The questions were designed to fill in knowledge gaps that appeared from the secondary research in the literature review. The questions were set out in a positive to negative opinion multiple choice format, which meant they did not encourage the participants to bias into giving a particular view. There was an option on questions one and four to write in the comments box that helped to understand why they gave that opinion. Question five was a mandatory comments box to give qualitative data and a deeper exploration of the subject area.

An important aspect of the results was that they were reliable and representative of the views of both long standing industry professionals and amatuer music producers. This was important so that the opinions were not just that of people who are experienced only in new music technologies. The participants of the survey arose from contacts within the music industry. These included professionals that have worked in the industry for many years and students who will have worked mostly on a DAW as opposed to studio sessions with big artists. This allowed for a vertiginous scope of opinions that could be gathered, from a wide age bracket, from contributors who will have different but important opinions.

The survey was sent out on surveymonkey as a web link as this was the easiest way for participants to share it if they felt like they knew someone who could help answer the questions too. The sample size was small, with twenty-five respondents, nonetheless it still provided specific and relevant data.

Utilising both the primary and secondary research together strengthened any existing arguments and added new knowledge to the topic area that did not exist before the completion of this research project.

To pre-empt the obstacle that was presented, which was the limitation of study participants for the survey, a face-to-face interview was conducted with Louis Howes (appendix 3), who has mixed and produced for; Dua Lipa, X Factor UK 2017, Niall Horan, Jonas Blue, Pablo Nouvelle, Louis Tomlinson. At the age of twenty-four and with his experience, he was an extremely reputable source of information to include in the research. The lack of study participants did ultimately mean the primary research cannot fully justify the thesis, but it means that the responses given are extremely relevant to the topic and in themselves, are highly pertinent.

In preparation for the presentation of the data, all the data was collated and checked for any missing information that could skew the data.

5. Results

The results section of this dissertation will present the survey questions and responses.

Figure 1. Survey Questionnaire, Question 1

When looking at the trend in responses to question one, the majority of respondents selected the option that ‘the workload of a mastering engineer could decline slightly. With equal numbers of respondents selecting the ‘Not at all’ and ‘Completely Agree’ options. One respondent selected the ‘Any other opinion’ option as they stated that they didn’t know Landr. So far, this is particularly relevant to the research question and the points made in the literature review.

Figure 2. Survey Questionnaire, Question 2

Question 2 delved into the gaps in existing research by asking respondents what they thought about the presets for mixing supplied by their DAW. Again, a strong trend was shown in answers that support the research question as most respondents agreed that the mixing presets in their DAW were good enough to use with only slight adjustments. This presents new data and research in the subject area.

Figure 3. Survey Questionnaire, Question 3

Question 3 was written in order to establish any link between sample packs and creativity as there was not much research into this. The findings show that the majority of respondents thought that sample packs do help increase the creativity of a producer. A sample pack can be made by just one person and used by an infinite amount of people, meaning that the job of many people can be done by a single person, whilst any number of people can reap the benefits of their work by using the royalty free samples. This begs the question, can all these people using the same sample packs mean that a lot of music can end up sounding the same and lower the creativity of music, which links to the research questions part regarding ‘human input into the creative process’. To establish any links or opinions on this, which could not be found from secondary research, the next question in the survey covered this.

Figure 4. Survey Questionnaire, Question 4

The results from this question clearly show that the vast majority of respondents agreed that sample packs can lead to a lot of music sounding the same in a genre. The individual responses are included in appendix number one and discussed in the main body section.

Figure 5. Survey Questionnaire, Question 5

Question five presented only qualitative data, included in appendix number two. This question relates to the research found in the literature review to do with artificial intelligence and if it will lead to a restriction to jobs and a lack of human input to the creative process.

The face to face interview that was conducted with Louis Howes is discussed in the key findings and conclusions section (section 6).

6. Key Findings and Conclusions From The Methodology Results

Question one read, ‘Would you consider it feasible that the free and paid mastering services offered by Landr and Artificial Intelligence algorithms could overtake the workload of a mastering engineer?’. Out of all the participants, 63% selected the option ‘No, but the workload of a mastering engineer could decline slightly’, which was an important addition to the secondary research in the literature review that covered Landr as an option for musicians to choose over conventional mixing and mastering engineers and the prices they charge.

To cover the missing research into opinions on the mixing and mastering presets supplied with DAW software the second question was designed to fill the gap in research. The question asked the participants, ‘If you have used presets when mixing instruments on your DAW do you think the quality of the plugin choices and effects are good enough to use with only slight adjustments?’. The rationale behind this question was to try and discover if the DAW presets could reduce the need for an engineer to produce the track as the presets are good sufficient to use as they are. Interestingly, 33% of the participants strongly agreed with this question, which adds a new scope of opinion to the existing research. This suggests that there could be limitations to the jobs of producers and mixing engineers as the development of DAW technology and digital software has allowed the software creators to give creative artists good enough tools, in their opinion, to produce and mix music by themselves.

Question three aimed to gather opinions on the use of sample packs and if they enhance creativity by asking ‘Do you think the use of sample packs increases the productivity and creativity of a music producer?’. 50% of the respondents agreed with this and 20% of the respondents strongly agreed, showing that in the opinion of various music producers, sample packs do in fact increase productivity and creativity of a music producer. This goes against some of the research in the literature review that suggests sample packs are taking other people's ideas and not coming up with new ones. However, 8% of respondents disagreed or strongly disagreed with the statement which links to the previous research that sample packs do not wholly contribute to the creative process.

This is further supported by the responses to question four which asked, ‘Do you think sample packs can lead to a lot of music sounding the same if popular sample packs feature on multiple tracks of the same genre?’. The majority of respondents agreed with this and the questionnaire gave the option to add examples, which are discussed in the main body and included in appendix number one. To support and justify the research on music technology developments and limitations to the jobs in the industry, question five asked the following; ‘Do you think that some of the developments in the broad spectrum of music technology pose a threat to the job sustainability of producers, mixing and mastering engineers?’. This question relates to the present day and future developments associated with the rate that technology is developing now. Most of the respondents agreed with this statement, but others had a different opinion about the degree to which jobs will be affected by technology. The responses to this are shown in appendix number two, with a discussion of the responses and how they link to the research questions and any previous research discussed in section 7.

7. Main Body

The development of technology and internet services technology is a development that has affected the way that we work, interact and communicate with one another. Whilst there are many positive attributes arising from these developments, there have been negative impacts on particular music industry livelihoods and the constantly changing landscape of the music industry results in jobs needing to adapt quickly to stay relevant. The research undertaken prior to this main body has investigated technological developments and how this has affected jobs and creativity within the music industry and the entirety of the creative process.

The interview that was conducted with Louis Howes supported a lot of the themes and trends that have arisen so far from primary and secondary data. Whilst Louis stated that he did not know what Landr was, he mentioned it was similar to Ozone as an alternative to using a mastering engineer and he said it was good for ‘small artists that cannot afford mastering’. This adds to the statement in the literature review from Landr, that they aim to ‘level the playing field for musicians’ (Press and media, n.d.). However, Louis believed that with big labels they always want ‘tweaks and changes’, sharing the opinion that the security of work for higher level mixing and mastering engineers is always going to be there.

The interview then moved to a discussion on the use of sample packs as this required more primary research to make any justifiable statements to support the research question. Louis also stated that he would typically only use sample pack loops ‘to reference from’ and not to form an actual basis for his productions. The interview validated some points and themes that arose from the methodology and literature review and authenticated most of the findings as Louis’ discography makes him a well founded source of information.

Discussion Of The Quantitative Survey Data

The findings from the quantitative data in question five supported every aspect of the research question as well as adding new information and findings to the missing areas of research found in the literature review. With participants stating that modern hip-hop producers are ‘lazy’ due to the inundation of the heavily sample ‘Roland TR-808’ and that ‘disposable pop is supposed to sound the same’, it is fair to say that a lack of human input to the creative process is becoming more apparent to a large percentage of people.

Another interesting point raised from question five is that ‘engineers who operate in a purely systematic and logical manner won’t stand the test of time’, with this particular respondent also saying that producers must ‘strive to be creative over simply pragmatic’. The most overtly pragmatic approach to mastering is how mastering was started in the first place: ‘record labels discovered that if they boosted 3kHz on their records, it would sound better on radio’ (How Loud Should My Mix Be? — Sage Audio, 2020).

This suggests that there could be more human input to the creative process as mixing and mastering engineers strive to be more creative to give them an edge over artificial intelligence. The results indicate that many producers believe websites such as Landr have the potential to limit the workload of a mastering engineer, with the general theme of the qualitative data being that developing music technology does pose a threat to the job sustainability of producers, mixing and mastering engineers. This study also adds a new perspective on the creative process with the idea of sample packs resulting in less human input to the creative process, as music technology has allowed instruments to be sampled and then repurposed in a digital format. The vast majority agreed that the use of sample packs can lead to music with a lot of similar sounding parts, which suggests that sample packs lead to a decline in creativity. This is supported by various comments, with one respondent stating that the creative process becomes ‘an assembly process rather than a creation from scratch’ (appendix 1). This is further supported by another respondent giving the example that ‘1996- On a Jazz Tip sample CD was used on 70% of all initial Jazzy Liquid D&B from 1996-1998’ (appendix 1). However, this does not mean sample packs should be discarded from a creative standpoint as another respondent stated that ‘I believe that three producers given the same samples could create three completely different tracks as long as they treat the samples purely as a source to manipulate’ (appendix 1). A lot of music features sampled parts from other songs, this was inherently how jungle and drum and bass came into fruition, from sampling the drum break from ‘Amen, Brother’. So sampling is definitely creative as long as it is not a drag and drop process, so the samples should be used creatively.

Question five of the survey offered a lot of useful information as it was solely qualitative information on the form of a text box. ‘Production jobs may well be automated in the near future’, this supports findings in the literature review from the large number of people already using Landr and 60% of survey respondents stating that the mixing presets in their DAW are good enough to use with minor adjustments. One of the unexpected results was the responses to question three about the use of sample packs, as the majority of respondents fully agreed that they enhance creativity and production. A limitation to this is that creativity and productivity are two different things and this could have perhaps been separated into different questions or a text box option could have been offered in order to gather opinions too.

The results and findings build upon the existing research, however, a drawback to the survey was the size of the participants that answer it, as there is a limitation to any conclusions that can be drawn from the survey. However, the impact that this had on the validity and reliability of the results is minimal and it was ensured that each participant had a strong involvement and close connection to the music industry so their contribution was entirely relevant to the research. For further information to be added to this research area, a larger survey should take place with more respondents.

8. Conclusion

To conclude, whilst the mixing and mastering industry has traditionally been dominated by professionals that know how to use specialist equipment, it has been made evident that these specialist jobs are going to become more limited in terms of how many artists require them. It has also been stated that in order to keep a lot of these jobs, being creative over being pragmatic will benefit the human aspect of the creative process. Record label jobs have also been discussed as independent artists and a change in consumers' music consumption habits have resulted in the closures of EMI records and the insolvency of Tower Records.

The technological developments behind the music we hear today have resulted in an easier creative process and sonically better sounding music, but it has also been discussed that some of the technological developments have led to less human input to the entirety of the creative process. With the use of sample packs being scrutinized and evidence has been shown that they can lead to a lot of music sounding similar in the same genre, the idea of sampling is one that can limit the jobs of live performers as music becomes an assembly process of downloaded audio. This was furthered by the findings from Reinhard Kopiez et al.stating that orchestra sample libraries will become more common in modern productions, henceforth reducing the need for a live studio performer.

In light of the collected information, this research project has shown how developments in music technology have directly affected music industry jobs and the human input to the creative process. With Landr already working with ‘Warner Music Group, Disney and Atlantic Records’ (Landr.com. n.d.) and the survey responses, the potential of more artists using that sort of algorithm limiting mastering engineers jobs is comprehensible. To further understand the extent of the job limitations caused by music technology, studies conducted in the future could present better statistics regarding the number of jobs lost and more opinions from industry professionals on whether or not their job has been limited. However, with a lot of technological developments being recent, a similar study would have to be conducted over several years to present statistical analysis.

9. Reference List

All Things Considered, 2020. [TV programme] channel 122: NPR.

Beam, J., 2020. What Is Music Technology? (With Pictures). [online] wiseGEEK. Available at: <https://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-music-technology.htm#comments> [Accessed 29 May 2020].

Camp, R., n.d. How Much Does A Good Music Studio Cost To Use? | Recording Connection. [online] Recording Connection Audio Institute. Available at: <https://www.recordingconnection.com/reference-library/recording-entrepreneurs/how-much-do-music-studios-cost/> [Accessed 19 June 2020].

Chester, T., 2016. Paul Mccartney Settles It: George Martin Was The Fifth Beatle. [online] Mashable. Available at: <https://mashable.com/2016/03/09/paul-mccartney-george-martin-fifth-beatle/?europe=true> [Accessed 20 June 2020].

Dictionary, o., 2020. Slight Meaning In The Cambridge English Dictionary. [online] Dictionary.cambridge.org. Available at: <http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/occupation> [Accessed 21 February 2016].

Duignan, B., 2019. Industrial Revolution | Definition, Facts, & Summary. [online] Encyclopedia Britannica. Available at: <https://www.britannica.com/event/Industrial-Revolution> [Accessed 28 April 2020].

Frontier Economics, 2016. The Economic Impacts Of Counterfeiting And Piracy. [online] frontier economics, pp.53-55. Available at: <https://iccwbo.org/content/uploads/sites/3/2017/02/ICC-BASCAP-Frontier-report-2016.pdf> [Accessed 22 May 2020].

Foggin, S., n.d. How Much Does A Good Music Studio Cost To Use? | Recording Connection. [online] Recording Connection Audio Institute. Available at: <https://www.recordingconnection.com/reference-library/recording-entrepreneurs/how-much-do-music-studios-cost/> [Accessed 19 June 2020].

Forde, E., 2011. EMI: the sad demise of a very British company. [Blog] Music Blog, Available at: <https://www.theguardian.com/music/musicblog/2011/nov/11/emi-demise-british-music-company> [Accessed 3 June 2020].

Frost, M., 2020. Keith Grant: The Story Of Olympic Studios. [online] Soundonsound.com. Available at: <https://www.soundonsound.com/people/keith-grant-story-olympic-studios> [Accessed 2 June 2020].

Hazard, B., 2014. Can LANDR Replace Your Mastering Engineer?. [online] Passive Promotion. Available at: <https://passivepromotion.com/can-landr-replace-your-mastering-engineer> [Accessed 20 June 2020].

Herstand, A., 2017. How To Make It In The New Music Business. 2nd ed. WW Norton & Co, p.168.

Ifpi.org. 2020. How Record Labels Invest — IFPI — Representing The Recording Industry Worldwide. [online] Available at: <https://www.ifpi.org/how-record-labels-invest.php#:~:text=These%20are%20the%20payment%20of,a%20major%20recorded%20music%20market.> [Accessed 19 June 2020].

Landr.com. n.d. Press And Media. [online] Available at: <https://www.landr.com/press> [Accessed 20 June 2020].

Magee, C., 2015. Techcrunch Is Now A Part Of Verizon Media. [online] Techcrunch.com. Available at: <https://techcrunch.com/2015/07/07/landr-drums-up-6-2-million-to-master-music-with-big-data/?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAABNaBisiggzLNpIjViFsCv9EMfce6PIwSGlbXYZvJTxHgMl_dFycinEAUM1W0TfsrIdp7nWkxiu2ZILhKXTn7mWOmV3MgrNMYuH4xB2BzDOv9z5W3i5RTSpF-ntl8t91DGj5dWBics8l8EqTmZasC6MzpPryFoy-AxuCnHHNSGR9> [Accessed 20 June 2020].

McNamee, D., 2009. Hey, What's That Sound: Sampler. [online] the Guardian. Available at: <https://www.theguardian.com/music/2009/sep/28/whats-that-sound-sampler#:~:text=The%20first%20of%20these%2C%20the,digital%20sampler%2C%20the%20EMS%20Musys.> [Accessed 1 July 2020].

Michaels, S., 2008. Death Magnetic 'loudness war' rages on. The Guardian, [online] Available at: <https://www.theguardian.com/music/2008/oct/01/metallica.popandrock> [Accessed 20 June 2020].

Music, C., 2014. A Brief History Of Sampling. [online] MusicRadar. Available at: <https://www.musicradar.com/tuition/tech/a-brief-history-of-sampling-604868> [Accessed 3 July 2020].

National Statistical Offices, 2020. Short Questionnaire On ICT Access And Use By Households And Individuals. [online] National Statistical Offices. Available at: <https://www.itu.int/en/ITU-D/Statistics/Pages/stat/default.aspx> [Accessed 15 May 2020].

Otzen, E., 2015. Six Seconds That Shaped 1,500 Songs. [online] BBC News. Available at: <https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-32087287> [Accessed 2 July 2020].

Prior, N. (2018) Popular Music, Digital Technology and Society. London: SAGE Publications Ltd. Available at: http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=nlebk&AN=1717735&site=ehost-live (Accessed: 20 May 2020).

Scrimgeour, H., 2018. How Technology Is Changing The Music Business. [online] The Telegraph. Available at: <https://www.telegraph.co.uk/connect/small-business/business-solutions/how-technology-is-changing-music-business/> [Accessed 15 June 2020].

Sethi, R., 2015. The Top 11 Most Popular Daws (You Voted For). [online] Macprovideo.com. Available at: <https://www.macprovideo.com/article/news/the-top-11-most-popular-daws-you-voted-for> [Accessed 19 June 2020].

Sageaudio.com. 2020. How Loud Should My Mix Be? — Sage Audio. [online] Available at: <https://www.sageaudio.com/blog/pre-mastering-tips/how-loud-should-my-mix-be.php> [Accessed 3 July 2020].

Support.apple.com. 2019. Logic Pro X: Drummer Overview. [online] Available at: <https://support.apple.com/kb/ph13070?locale=en_US> [Accessed 22 June 2020].

Tingen, P., 2019. Billie Eilish. [online] Soundonsound.com. Available at: <https://www.soundonsound.com/people/billie-eilish#:~:text=Almost%20the%20entire%20album%20was,for%20their%20own%20musical%20voices.> [Accessed 16 June 2020].

Tingen, P., 2015. Al Schmitt: Recording Bob Dylan's Shadows In The Night. [online] Soundonsound.com. Available at: <https://www.soundonsound.com/techniques/al-schmitt-recording-bob-dylans-shadows-night> [Accessed 16 July 2020].

Tsioulcas, A., 2015. NPR Choice Page. [online] Npr.org. Available at: <https://www.npr.org/sections/therecord/2015/10/20/450038047/the-life-and-death-of-tower-records-revisited?t=1594822073321> [Accessed 18 June 2020].

Wang, A., 2018. An Indie Music Expert Explains Why Artists Are Turning Away From Record Deals. [online] Rolling Stone. Available at: <https://www.rollingstone.com/pro/news/ditto-music-lee-parsons-interview-749510/> [Accessed 10 June 2020].

Wiser, C., n.d. Shieldsquare Captcha. [online] Songfacts.com. Available at: <https://www.songfacts.com/facts/porter-robinson/sad-machine> [Accessed 7 May 2020].

10. Bibliography