Emilie Wapnick - Synthesis Essay

In recent years, live concerts as well as the licencing of music for use in films, television and video games, have grown into significant sources of revenue for artists. This development might support the hypothesis that music is transforming from something that was formerly enjoyed alone, mainly through audio devices like CDs, audio cassettes and vinyl to something with a greater visual component. However, it is not music itself that has transformed, but the means through which music is packaged, commodified and sold. First, there is no indication that non-visually-accompanied music has decreased in popularity. This can be seen through the prevalence of peer-to-peer file sharing. Furthermore, profit from music that is distinct from any visual elements may once again jump as people come up with new ways to monetize musical recordings. Examples of the increased coupling of music and visual elements are troubled by new developments such as the growth of digital music applications and the emergence of the Cloud.

The popularity of peer-to-peer file sharing is indicative of the ongoing demand for musical recordings that are distinct and not coupled with visual elements. If it were true that music was transforming into something that always accompanies a visual element, there would presumably be a decrease in the consumption of musical recordings. Yet this is not the case, as the practice of file sharing is still perceived as a serious problem by copyright lobbyists and the recording industry. During his presentation, John Gomery, spoke of the need to monetize file sharing through the implementation of a levy system. He even referred to file sharing specifically as a “euphemism for piracy”. This attitude toward file sharing is not uncommon among those who rely on the old model of music distribution or view music as a commodity.

In contrast, those whose business models do not rely on the productization of musical recordings unaccompanied by visual elements are less troubled by filesharing. Donald K Donald and Dan Seligman both spoke about the thriving live music scene. Concert producers are making money by coupling music with a visual element, assuming “visual element” is defined broadly to include live spectacles. Karen Collins spoke about the increasing importance of music to the gaming industry. When used in video games, music plays a supporting role by complementing the visuals and enhancing the player’s emotional responses. Along with film scoring, video games offer perhaps the best example of music’s “transformation” into something that accompanies a visual element. However, this seems to be at odds with the continued prevalence of filesharing. The coupling of music with visuals, although having become a greater source of revenue, has not replaced the consumption of music on its own. It would be incorrect to assume that music itself is transforming, but rather, it is the way that money is made off of music that is transforming.

Technological advances over the last decade have allowed people to consume media at an unprecedented rate. The recording industry has been slow to respond and has reacted in counterproductive ways, such as bringing legal action against individual downloaders. Meanwhile, policy makers have fought over copyright reform and a lot of noise has been made about how “a solution is coming” (a mantra that, ten years later, is still being thrown around.) There has been moderate success with subscription models and applications like iTunes. Yet as Sandy Pearlman explained, these models have not been economically viable and have failed to deal with the monetization of filesharing on a significant level. It is out of this economic and cultural reality that businesses combining musical and visual elements have begun to expand.

The decrease in album sales over the last decade has resulted in the pursuit of avenues for revenue and might lead one to believe that music is transforming into something that accompanies a visual element. Even if one were to accept this as a starting point, there are strong indications that music absent a visual component will be profitable again in the future. There are those who, instead of gripping to old business models or abandoning them altogether, are coming up with new innovative ways to monetize the growth of musical culture. Brian Whitman, for example, has a company that powers intelligent music applications, analyzes songs and sells musical data to companies. The Echo Nest demonstrates both that recorded music is alive and well and that there are creative ways to profit from music without resorting to visual media. Music applications and recordings that allow the user to engage with music interactively, are other ways in which visual components may be unnecessary in the future.

Finally, the possibility of streaming music off an external server, or “the Cloud” is another example of a potential future for music that exists absent any visual element. This could redirect the gate keeper power from being in the hands of users, to potentially larger entities like record labels or collective rights organizations. According to Sandy Pearlman, the future of music may likely move in this direction, as influential actors such as Google are already experimenting with Cloud technology.
Music will always exist both alone and as an accompaniment to visual elements. It would be mistaken to assume that market interests mean that music itself has transformed or that fewer people are listening to musical recordings. Peer-to-peer filesharing, which is more prevalent than ever, illustrates the extent to which music is alive and well. The trend in music involving the coupling of music with visual elements is merely a reaction to the current economic and technological situation. The industry may just as easily shift back to a purely music-based approach as new innovations and business models are adopted.