UNMUTED

The Pop Music Dream: Death of the Electric Guitar

2009-09-11T11:32:00.004-04:00

Yesterday morning, my alarm clock awoke me to a radio station playing a song which, until today, I would have considered “just another” typical, droll, uselessly cookie-cutter track punched through a hip hot artist's thousand-dollar digi-synth. It was a track by a new “artist” named Kevin Rudolf, featuring a hilariously pathetic guest line by Lil' Wayne. What piqued my interest of this track, and what later compelled me to do further research on it, was the song title. “Let it Rock,” a song you would naturally expect to be riddled with that classic electric guitar flavor, sounded like any ordinary hit one would find across radio stations in this era. The irony of this particular title, however, stretched all leaps and bounds imaginable: I could hardly make out a single instance of an electric guitar in this song. This may seem trivial, even when considering this problem in the context of the track name. However, examining this instance of reproach compelled further thought out of me, and I began to notice an incredible aspect of contemporary pop music: the guitars are gone!

When Lil' Wayne endorses a song, it becomes a strong possibility that the main message of the tune has likely been lost somewhere between the man's lockjaw mumbling he calls “rapping” and his 5'6'' of scrawny rap-star protoplasm. It is ironically fitting that Lil' Wayne would situate himself in a song, in which he can babble on about rocking out with guitars, without actually requiring the effort of having to play one, much less perform behind one. If this isn't the sign of the demise of the guitar, and the beginning of the guitar's purely symbolic purpose in pop music, then it may require the bombing of the Fender factory to seal the deal.

A similar trend recently completed with the saxophone. Like the blues/folk guitar, the sax had its humble beginnings, but then blazed its own trail and gathered intelligent, innovative connoisseurs of the instrument in its own right. The saxophone became an instrument beautifully-utilized by incredible thinkers and philosophers of music. Its users evolved from the very early blues and big-band practitioners, to the Charlie Parkers, to the John Coltranes, to the Eric Dolphys and Anthony Braxtons, to its present state of Kenny G and David Koz. It made a complete 180-degree reversal in the talent, brilliance, and aesthetic, of those who chose to utilize it as their musical tool. Today, the saxophone is never brought into the slick production of contemporary pop music, unless for a very illegitimate placement of image or nostalgia. Fans of jazz music hear it occasionally in pop music and shudder – it just sounds bad when combined with pop music production, because the saxophone has always embodied an aesthetic of raw (i.e. lacking in digital production aesthetic) emotion, power, and narrative. Fans of pop music hear it and give its musical premise hardly any thought whatsoever – what's the point when the listener has already diluted their minds to the point of accepting this type of music into their daily repertoires? Both camps, however, can easily pick up the purpose of its use; for what other reason, than the implication of a soulful mood, an obvious stamp of “multiculturalism,” or an attempt to allude to the structures and styles of bebop, would a producer wish to put such garbage into a pop track? What's worse, is that the saxophone has garnered a strange reputation over the past two decades or so. Anybody who is able to achieve a pop-sized audience, and even get a single note out of the instrument, is immediately considered a god of the instrument. (Think, again: Kenny G and Dave Koz).

The guitar has begun to draw a similar path for itself. Long gone are the days of blues musicians like Lightnin' Hopkins, or even the guitar wizards of the 60s and 70s, providing further grammar and language for the guitar to speak with. You can forget about classical guitar, as that is nothing more than a figment of the past. And the beautiful folk musics of various countries that helped establish the instrument as such an enormous staple of those cultures? Artists that are doing anything new or innovative in that field are downsized to a painfully small and insignificant audience. It's nearly impossible to learn of anybody engaging in those types of practices. And who is the most “talented” and popular guitar player of today's standards? John Mayer.

Looking back at this Kevin Rudolf song, and its subsequent music video in particular, allows for my points to be backed up in full. Rudolf can be seen a few times having the guitar strapped to his body, but you only see a chord or two being played. I even have a hard time believing that he was playing chords relevant to the song. Lil' Wayne is seen holding a guitar as well, but we never see him place a finger on the fret board. All the while, the listener is not able to distinguish a clear guitar passage in the song, though I do believe that I heard the timbres of a heavily-distorted, late-70s style of electric guitar placed a few times randomly throughout the tune. Whether these sounds were synthesized, or actually did result from the producer paying some kid to play a few guitar lines here and there, will likely remain a mystery.

Many listeners will likely approach the contexts posed by this song with a few big questions. For example: what was the purpose of having this guitar image in the music video, when it was pretty much absent from the song itself? The only logical conclusion I can derive is that the intended purpose was merely superficial, in that the guitar added no real musical value to the piece. It was merely used to induce a certain subconscious feeling derived from the “rock n' roll” image, without having to sacrifice the time and talent to actually produce this feeling legitimately (through musical performance and composition). If the music industry was making some sort of an attempt at glorifying this image for the purpose of exploiting a trend is to be determined if and when more songs of this type get released. Note that this would not be a shameful act on the part of the music industry, but rather on the part of the listeners who indulge themselves in this garbage the industry releases all too often.

Furthermore, if the usefulness of the electric guitar has been reduced to imagery, then what is the electric guitar's standing in commercial, pop music? The simple answer to this is: pretty poor. The electric guitar, if this is indeed the beginning of a trend, will be reduced to a nostalgic remembrance, just like the saxophone. There is no doubt in my mind that once the electric guitar is through as the stand-out instrument in pop singles, it will have no further useful history in contemporary pop music. Could you realistically imagine the next big pop star 30 years from now being a saxophonist?

What is an even more important question to ask oneself, however, is what problems this may pose for the pop music industry. Frankly, I look at this more as a blessing, and less as a curse. For many decades now, electric guitar players have always been distinguished from synthesizer musicians in the pop music field because, while both were able to achieve a large degree of sonic modification through pedal-boards and electronics, both encouraged different playing styles. In other words, even if the timbres ended up sounding similar enough, different techniques were employed during performance, giving radically different musical output. However, with almost all production of pop music entering the computerized domain, and the mechanics of electronic music performance becoming almost entirely digital, the typical pop musician has an enormously greater palette of sonic tools at his disposal than before. The electric guitar, having only a performance differential over a synth at best, cannot provide the most pure sense of electronic modification possible. With digital performance, the aesthetic characteristics of electric guitar performance can be purely and faithfully replicated through algorithmic processes.

What's better, is that no longer must an electronically-modified sound be derived from modulation of a source signal (a sonic wave, in the case of the analog synth; a string resonation, in the case of the electric guitar). With computer technology, digital music is 100% synthesized, from the very beginning. It need not go through a player's fingers, nor a synthesizer's circuitry, to be completely musically valuated. Its synthesis derives from a non-musical value, which allows for both greater interfacing among other components, and a purer signal overall. Musical values derived from an infinitely-valuable source (machine code) leave the timbrel, aesthetic, and musical values of audio in the hands of the composers and performers.

So, with the electric guitar steadily leaving the pop scene, it poses certain positive possibilities for the future of commercialized music. Indeed, there will exist a large majority of “purists” (as they would likely wish to be called) who will claim that with the destruction of the guitar in pop music comes the inevitable downfall of pop music. While they wear their twenty-five year old Motley Cru t-shirts and drive their Chevy pickup trucks, cursing the day that drinking cheap beer and dressing in makeup left the typical rock n' roll aesthetic, a small number of musical visionaries will be blazing a new trail in contemporary pop music. They will be bringing the industry to newer levels of metaphysical composition. They will make more out of less, which will allow for more unique sonic palettes and individualized aesthetics. Pop music producers may even be seen as “composers” in the eyes of the musical elite once that trend continues. And undoubtedly, composers are the future of pop music. We already witness a number of new composition-based groups forming each passing year, gaining the stardom and fame that they deserve. Witness the overwhelming successes of Daft Punk, Justice, Daedelus, and Ratatat, as evidence for the computer-music compositional frameworks taking hold in the pop music industry.

The fact that profit motives still exist in the music industry means that there are many distinct directions record labels can take in the next couple of decades. One direction would be to continue their current trend of simplifying music to such a degree that its only redeemable quality is its “danceability.” While they could continue doing this, they run the risk of not having a coincidental meeting of paths, where the technological trends of music technology were able to coincide nicely with the newest trends in pop music, for a long time. And indeed, this meeting of paths was nothing more than a coincidence – surely, the removal of the electric guitar from pop music was a response to some demographic survey – and now would be the best time to recognize the advantages to changing course immediately. That is the second possible direction: to leave the creative control of music in the hands of those who are making it. If the logical trend of music has been becoming more and more computerized, it would be an absolute shame to see its nearly infinite powers being regulated by the same talking heads, who allowed music facilities to collapse on themselves – with everyone from Tower Records to Circuit City suffering this wrath – due to their inability to recognize the severe flaws of not allowing pop trends to establish themselves.

After all, what is the worst that could happen if music was left in the hands of the creative people? Would consumers stop buying new music? If we assumed that only the lowest common denominator even purchased music these days, then we could be assured that the number of people purchasing new music would not drop. They would be necessarily following trends, instead of picking them out on their own; the music industry could put out anything with a catchy groove, and people would utilize their purchasing power to hear it again and again, as they always have. However, this would be a worst-case scenario to detail, as it is more likely than not that a new pop music Renaissance would increase profit margins for record companies, rather than deplete them. It would cost companies less time and money to regulate the music being put out, while allowing more personal touches to be added to music by those who are composing it.

So far, the trends being witnesses in 2009's pop music world are mostly positive. We see more and more computer-based pop musicians becoming famous for their innovative, yet pop-compatible, compositions, and record labels like Ed Banger, Warp Records, Ninja Tune, and Planet Mu, are becoming more and more common in pop music circles. If seeing this pop music dream to fruition means we need to bear with a few more superficial tracks from the likes of Kevin Rudolf and Lil' Wayne, then I am more than willing to make the sacrifice.

Generative Music: 21st Century Production Utilizing Non-Linear Logic

2009-08-16T15:47:00.005-04:00

I wrote the following research paper about generative and algorithmic processes in digital music and production for Konrad Strauss' A201 course. This course occurred during the Fall of 2008, during my sophomore year at the Indiana University Jacobs School of Music.

In a culture defined by preciseness, conciseness, and perfection, the concept of non-linearity is a radical one. As electronic hardware becomes increasingly more computer-centralized, the ability to calculate dense operations under severe multitasking environments has taken priority over previous technological focuses. In the music world, this factor has become increasingly impactful in the spectra of composition and production. These days, it seems that a great piece of music, whether it be a standalone musical work, or a soundtrack to go along with the latest blockbuster film, video game, or television program, must conform to a range of precise production requirements. While this has undoubtedly produced a countless number of musical compositions that have perfectly fit the needs of both the producer and the consumer, it has also led many musicians, connoisseurs, producers, and executives alike to feel artistically alienated from the commercial music world. Indeed, organic process is a difficult characteristic to preserve in music so dedicated to linearity.

One such problem emerging from the issue of overly linear production via cutting-edge technology is that it can cause the resultant music to feel exceedingly bland. As legendary musician/composer/producer Brian Eno put it in the October 2001 issue of Wired Magazine, one cannot “do anything interesting with cutting-edge technology except not make it cutting-edge.” Like Mr. Eno, many have grown disdainful of commercialized musical establishments, which promote composition and production through the use of software like Acid, Logic, and Cubase – applications that allow the user to focus on an infinitely fine and detailed level. Because of the growing perfectionist trend in the commercial music world, a new musical philosophy is emerging, which in fact borrows concepts from a rather ancient technique. Generative music, which is more contemporarily known as non-linear audio, is a term popularized by Mr. Eno, used to describe music that is created by a system. (2) A technique expanding in popularity astronomically, it is a method being used by all ends of the musical spectrum to counter the perceived lacking in organic quality of contemporary music.

Musicians who implement non-linear audio into their works typically do so through the use of computer technology. (2) Instead of composing a work of electronic music that sounds exactly the same each time it is played, non-linear composers will establish a musical system defined by musical rules. These systems will usually be made up of a series of complex algorithms, which will produce similar – but not the same – results each time it is performed, as the algorithms can easily be modified by randomization or other nonrecurring data. As an analogy, imagine a door entrance to a shop with chimes hung from it. As one enters the shop, the chimes will move as the door moves, causing the chimes to strike one another. The resultant sound will be similar in character each time the door is opened and closed. However, the effect can be altered to a certain extent if one opens the door more lightly or powerfully than normal, as the chimes are directly connected, and reactant to, the door’s movement. Opened more lightly, the door will cause the chimes to be affected less, and more powerfully, the chimes will be affected more.

Similarly, non-linear musicians and composers strive to create their own musical systems for their works. Contemporary examples include video game soundtrack scorers, whose compositions change characteristics as certain user inputs occur; DSP patch programmers, whose applications affect audio based on algorithmic specifications instead of user-input; and the thriving community of algorithmic composers, whose works often include a combination of algorithmic computer code with generative properties and user input that alters those algorithms. They all share common ground, however: they modify and compose music by creating contexts, frameworks, and limitations.

Among the first truly generative contemporary pieces was Brian Eno’s 1975 magnum opus, Discreet Music. For this piece, Eno provides four instrumental passages recorded at a very slow tracking speed, and leaves it up to the performer to decide what the playback speed ought to be, and how to spool the tape reels (which measure many yards in length). The generative property comes from how these tracks are played back; the phasing and tonal properties of the piece will widely vary depending upon the decisions the performer must make. (3)

In the seventies, Eno prided himself most on the fact that works like Discreet Music are never performed the same way twice. However, as his works gained more and more notoriety in the music world, other artists began to incorporate their own ideas into this radical composition method, causing non-linear composition and production to provide an even larger range of possibilities than just mere differences in meter and phasing. In the early 2000s, a time where limitless editing potential was being provided by Pro Tools digital audio workstations, many were beginning to realize the dynamic power generative composition possessed. As engineers and entrepreneurs began innovating in the areas of real-time input and user interaction, composers and producers began naturally incorporating non-linear properties into everything from DSP plugins to video game scores. This new use of non-linear audio is most frequently given the title, adaptive music/production, in order to distinguish it from standalone works of generative music. (4)

The real significance behind adaptive production is the way it has allowed both producers and end users to merge the artistic depth of non-linearity with the recursive and interactive properties of user input. Before, composers like Eno were limited in that the composer and/or performers were the only people able to influence the way that their generative pieces grew and progressed. With the invention of adaptive music came the potential for the audience – the end user – to have just as much impact on the music as the composer. In the most practical of implementations, this spells out greatly expanded potential for dynamic interaction between user input and systemic output.

In the video game industry, non-linear techniques such as adaptive music have been used to highly diversify musical output during gameplay. Bungie Studios, which is responsible for the hit game series Halo, was among the first video game producers to implement horizontal re-sequencing and vertical re-orchestration in their products. Horizontal re-sequencing involves re-shuffling a series of composed loops depending upon user interaction within the game, while vertical re-orchestration involves literally changing the mix of a given loop in real-time depending upon the player’s movement within the game world. (6) Both processes require extravagant coding techniques, derived from complex mathematical algorithms, in order to most fully obtain a realistic-yet-immersive effect. Since Bungie utilized this technique, it has become nearly commonplace among all major game developing studios. By taking advantage of the latest that computational power has to offer, game developers have been able to further legitimize the in-game experience, by immersing players in a sound world all their own that they helped create.
Another rather unique example of non-linear audio in the video game industry comes from Nintendo’s Electroplankton, designed by media artist Toshio Iwai for the Nintendo DS portable game system. The game allows players to interact with animated plankton (each, a different “instrument”) and create music through one of ten “plankton interfaces” (types of score environments). By combining different types of plankton, and utilizing them in various patterns, users can create multi-hierarchal pieces of music. (6) There’s even an ingenious “audience mode” which algorithmically generates musical performances for the player to watch evolve, without even having to interact with the game system. Iwai claims that applications like Electroplankton are the future of adaptive music in video games. (6) Granted, the idea is quite provocative; his creation is perhaps the first entertainment product to ever be marketed as a generative music tool. To echo Mr. Iwai's assertions, the public and media reception of his product have been mostly positive. Nintendo Power magazine found the game so unique, that they classified it under a genre all its own: “touchable media art.” (6)

As can be seen by the sudden and powerful effect that the video game industry has had on non-linear music and production, the world of generative music is comprised of many various areas of interest. As commercial innovators like Bungie Studios and Toshio Iwai push ahead in the interactive gaming field, there at the same time exists a continuing interest in algorithmic composition and performance in the realm of contemporary art music. The fastest-growing collection of composers who pursue such interests reside, surprisingly, more in the field of software design. Computer music programming languages have quickly boomed in population among classical music composers, game soundtrack designers, and even neuroscientists who utilize generative music to study the sensory effects such works have on the human brain. (8) The most widely-used applications are SuperCollider and ChucK – both, interestingly, open source applications. SuperCollider is maintained by the Computer Music department at Wesleyan University in Middletown, CT, while ChucK is maintained by the Computer Science department at Princeton University; both share an abundance of enthusiastic contributing developers. (7) The reasoning behind throwing so much monetary and intellectual support behind these applications and developers becomes readily apparent when one observes the unique characteristics of these languages. Both languages are designed specifically for generating, calculating, and performing algorithmic processes, while at the same time serving demanding audio synthesis functions. Unlike applications like Reason and Acid, SuperCollider and ChucK do not contain a user interface unless the user wishes to build one himself. So, the obvious shortcoming to these languages is the initial learning curve. However, with none of the work done for the user, the user in fact can perform, control, and specify an infinitely broader range of tasks. (7)

While these programs are rarely known to the typical music listener, they are actually quite popular among many music and production circles, and have indeed been used by the most well-known and gifted of electronic musicians – everybody from Peter Gabriel to Aphex Twin and beyond. Their use is prevalent in the classical realm as well, as many of Iannis Xenakis's stochastic synthesis pieces have been created posthumously by means of SuperCollider and ChucK. During his time, analog audio devices limited Xenakis greatly due to their inability to deal with sounds of radically short durations. (7)

The list of contemporary innovators in the field of computer music programming languages is growing rapidly. One of the most prevalent individuals advancing the study of this ripe field is Nick Collins, who wrote the notorious BBCut library for the SuperCollider language. BBCut took music producers by storm with its non-linear methods of generating and cutting beat-driven samples. Instead of having to cut up drum beats manually, producers can use the BBCut syntax in SuperCollider to automatically render a beat map of the given sample, and then cut up the sample in real-time to give a consistent beat - containing specified characteristics, but lacking in linearity. His work has been immensely useful in live performance settings as well, since the BBCut syntax allows performers to produce these same drum beats in real time during performances, adding a heightened sense of organicism which used to consistently lack in live electronic music events. Because of his library's popularity, BBCut has been ported to many other platforms, including Max/MSP and pD, Csound, and even standalone VST plugins. The introduction of BBCut2, which came with a VST version upon release, catapulted its popularity to nearly mainstream levels, as many Pro Tools producers were introduced to the library for the first time. Presently, the BBCut2 library can be heard utilized by a number of popular musical outfits, including Battles, Radiohead, and Sigur Ros. Only in the last two to three years has the music world begun to witness generative properties featured in popular music lacking film or video game utilizations. The rapid spike in this particular library's popularity has certainly come to signify the impact generative plugins and applications are beginning to have on the commercial music world. (1)

In addition to the compositional non-linear adaptivity being witnessed in commercial music circles, generative properties are now becoming rather commonplace among recording engineers as well. The non-linear aspects of today's cutting edge VST plugins for popular audio editing programs such as Pro Tools have greatly broadened the realm of possibilities for engineers to tweak and improve their recordings. Similar to the dilemma composers face, recording engineers have to utilize electronic improvements tastefully, lest their work seem dull or overproduced. The latest VST plugins coded with non-linear properties aim to give engineers the ability to more precisely define their sound, while also maintaining an organic quality.

The desired effects that non-linear VST applications aim to achieve are particularly visible among the selection of equipment simulator programs currently available. These plugins are designed to simulate a wide variety of audio devices such as vintage tube amplifiers, preamplifiers, and delays, with the intent of recreating the actual hardware's behavior, instead of merely trying to imitate the desired sonic qualities such hardware possessed. Older plugins, which do not utilize this newly-adapted design technique, do not obtain nearly the same level of quality and clarity that non-linear simulators do, mostly due to the philosophy applied to its intended usage. Linear simulation applications indeed suffered many undesirable flaws because of their inability to actually replicate the physical properties of the intended audio hardware. Non-linear plugin designers remedied this problem by intending for their software to be used in a much different way; instead of simply devising a series of frequency, dynamic, and timing modifications which were meant to simulate the sound of the equipment, non-linear plugins are meant to simulate the actual device's circuitry. (10) This means that these simulation plugins take into account the variable properties circuits naturally possess, such as how the frequency and amplitude of an incoming signal affects the way which the internal components will operate. While non-linear and adaptive VST plugins are still priced at the higher end of the market, it has recently become much more feasible for the typical recording engineer to utilize the beautiful and natural processes that non-linear audio can achieve. (11)

Ironically, non-linear DSP has been just as helpful in removing the signs of vintage audio equipment as it has been at replicating them. As a continually growing number of analog audio recordings are being restored for digital formats, the need for more accurate and efficient noise removal has risen as well. Before non-linear techniques became typically utilized in remastering studios, the act of noise removal was an utterly painstaking process. Many engineers understood the implications of using non-linear filtering as a noise removal technique, but computer hardware simply could not deliver the processing power required to do so. With the rapid increases in computing power witnessed over the past 15 years, however, the ability to utilize numerous non-linear filtering theories has become progressively more possible. There are two techniques most often used today. The first method is called deconvolution – the act of removing undesirable convolution in recordings, such as tape hiss and analog floor noise. Deconvolution involves implementing mathematically-randomized chance through an algorithm that will ultimately deliver the equation

f * g = h

where f is the convoluted signal, g is the signal convoluting f, and h is the recovered signal. It is the object of deconvolution applications to determine the g signal, in order to remove it and ultimately make f = h. (10) The difficulty with utilizing this technique was that computers were unable to separate noise signals from musical signals, since often times the frequencies of both overlapped. However, when computing power caught up to human innovation in the mid 1990s, computer engineers were able to devise a method to separate the two signals by having applications calculate the amplitude differentials between them in real time. When this became possible, computers could then remove noise signals from musical signals with a relative amount of accuracy. (11)

Though deconvolution is still the most often-utilized method of noise removal in remastering studios, homomorphic filtering is a new technique becoming widely popular. While it was originally conceived at MIT in the 1960s, the technique has just recently been championed by computer engineers for a variety of applications. The method involves implementing the same scanning algorithm used by deconvolution programs, but instead of removing the detected noise signals, homomorphic filters actually largely increase the gain of the noise before using a reverse logarithm to remove it altogether. (10) Because the noise is much louder than the rest of the signal, homomorphic software can much easier detect noise that will interfere with the musical recording if removed. It is for this reason that many engineers have praised the technique for its ability to better preserve the original signal's fidelity. Whichever technique is ultimately deployed, though, it is undeniable that non-linear applications have immensely increased the power audio engineers have over recordings today.

The fact that music outfits worldwide, both compositionally and commercially, have begun to embrace the concept of non-linearity to a noteworthy degree, is quite revealing of its contemporary progression. Most fundamentally, it shows that the original reasons behind the development of generative music have become rather moot. While it was at first a way for composers to supersede the musical mainstream, it has now expanded and developed into an artistic language all its own, which has indeed intercepted much attention from more common performance and production methods. However, to claim that generative techniques have become outdated, or something to rebel against in its own respect, would be improperly short-cited. The ways that the sub-genre of adaptive music and production, for example, have impacted the music world are nothing short of spectacular – both in a sense of artistic merit and production value. Furthermore, the community of algorithmic composers is a strong and maturing organization (5), which will be seen in history as one of the prevalent musical processes of this era and beyond. The fact that their ideas have pervaded more commercial musical bodies so successfully demonstrates the inherent variety of obstacles that non-linear audio can overcome. More importantly, however, the success of non-linearity in the mainstream means that the perpetual notion of organicism in music is all but dead; in fact, quite the opposite is true. With the further continuation of non-linear DSP techniques, and the nearly universal implementation of adaptivity in interactive media, musicians, producers, and end-users alike will all be treated to a much brighter artistic future. It is indeed wonderful to see that the computing power of the 21st century will be utilized in such a humanistic manner.

Bibliography

(1) Collins/McLean/Rohruber/Ward. 2003. Live Coding in Laptop Performance. MIT Press.
(2) Dorin, A. 2001. Generative processes and the electronic arts. Organised Sound, 6 (1): 47-53.
(3) Eno, B. 1996. Generative Music. http://www.inmotionmagazine.com/eno1.html.
(4) Essl, K. 2002. Generative Music. http://www.essl.at/bibliogr/generative-music.html.
(5) Levitin, D. 2007. This is Your Brain on Music: The Science of a Human Obsession. Dutton Adult.
(6) Lieberman, David 2006. Game Enhanced Music Manuscript. In GRAPHITE '06: Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques in Australasia and South East Asia, ACM Press, Melbourne, Australia, 245 - 250. http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1174472
(7) McCartney, J. 2002. Rethinking the Computer Music Language: SuperCollider. MIT Press.
(8) Sacks, O. 2007. Musicophilia: Tales of Music and the Brain. Knopf.
(9) Shachtman, N. 2001. New Eno Music Gets 'Generative'. Wired Magazine, 10 (2001).
(10) Smith, W. 2007. The Scientist's and Engineer's Guide to Digital Signal Processing: Chapter 22: Audio Processing. http://www.dspguide.com/ch22/7.htm
(11) Winkler, T. 1998. Composing Interactive Music. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.

It's All Our Fault

2009-07-12T16:55:00.005-04:00

With an economic depression pending upon the near future of the United States, a lot of blame has been thrown around. Anybody partial to unadulterated, non-sensationalized economic study already knows what actions have caused these issues. Indeed, the false premise that a nation can consume more than it produces was the fundamental causation. This premise was carried out through the Federal Reserve system, whose no-strings-attached production of fiat currency - resulting in policies of central economic planning involving the manipulation of the macro US markets - allowed for far too much money to be borrowed and spent on unproductive and useless assets. What's worse is that these assets were severely over-valued, and risk was artificially low due to the necessary low interest rates set by the Federal Reserve Bank.

Though most Americans will never truly comprehend the concept of total economic freedom espoused by Austrian, laissez-faire capitalism, it is worse yet that most citizens do not possess a fruitful knowledge of our Constitution. That, in fact, is the true evil of the American people: ignorance. It brings me great sadness to conclude that the only group to blame for this economic collapse is the American people themselves. It's all our fault.

Before immediately writing off this claim as evil or unsympathetic, let me go over a couple of basic principles the Constitution teaches. Of course, all who truly understand this economic disaster should already understand Article I, Section 10 of the Constitution, which states that the government only has the right to coin money and that only gold and silver constitute legal tender. But even more generally, Americans have the right to vote politicians in and out of office. And so if there doesn't exist a single representative or senator who understands the Constitution (Ron Paul only meets true practitioners of liberty half way), it is the People's job to vote them out of office. Terms are implemented into our political system in order to determine whether or not the person elected is truly fit to run the country. If the People found their representatives were acting contrary to their oath of office (the one that demands the upholding of the Constitution), is it not their duty to make sure they do not step foot into their office again for the next political term?

The same politicians, and the same political “ideologies”, never seem to leave Washington DC. The reason is because not only do the citizens not know what their congress is doing – they don't even care. For over 90 years, we've had an illegal central bank, and we've had a fraudulently-implemented forced income tax for nearly as long. We've gotten into over five unnecessary wars resulting from the altruistic and self-destructive foreign policy of the US; completely undermined the competitive medical industry; put almost 15% of all citizens on restrictive and manipulative welfare systems that entrap the most vulnerable of our population; and lost a severe amount of our Constitutional liberties since those undertakings. These issues all stem from politicians responding to the grumblings of the American sheep, while promising to never raise taxes. If we just print the money and use the income tax to pay the interest to the bank that handles that printing press, we can just put all those services on the government credit card. At least, that's been the mentality for multiple generations of American citizens.

Well, that financial system is coming to an end. And it is unsurprising to see hardly anyone stepping up and calling for the resignation of all representatives, executives, and judges, who allowed these travesties to continue for so long. Now, the US will suffer the reversal of nearly 100 years of phony fiscal extravagance. What almost all people who vote Republican or Democrat fail to realize is that our Constitution gives us the power to elect representatives that can correct these mistakes! But look what the Congress and the President did during the beginnings of the financial crisis: they spent more money and drew up more of a deficit than ever before; they looted more money from the American people to pay for the poor business strategies of failing US corporations; and they re-elected the same sickening collection of political and economic dweebs that continue to forgo learning from both our rule of law, or their previous mistakes.

So if anybody complains about the sudden change in their standard of living, chances are their blunders can be directly blamed on themselves. Ask them which Republicrat or Dempublican they voted for this time, and ask them why they chose to simply ignore the Constitution, the rule of law, and the warning signs that all so obviously pointed to the current crisis. As Montesquieu said, the People only get a government that they deserve. If we want a better government, we need to have a better People.

In order to achieve a populous of "better People," there needs to be a complete revision of the American code of morality. This country is the closest mankind has ever gotten to a fully capitalist, free-market economy, rooted in the protection of individual rights. However, neither the founding fathers nor the overwhelming majority of modern Americans were able to abandon the immoral ethic of Judeo-Christian values: altruism. The disgusting premise that a man must live to sacrifice for the sake of another man - that we are our brother's keeper - is the root evil perpetuated upon modern American society.

Witness the foreign policy of the United States, which offers troop and food subsidies to over 130 countries world-wide, and gets involved in unconstitutional conflicts not out of interest of self-defense, but of wishing to spread "democracy" - a form of governance which enables the tyranny of the majority - to savage countries around the world. Not only is it purely irrational to expect a successful forced transition from tyranny to so-called "freedom" - as freedom can only be obtained through an honest desire for change - but more importantly, it puts the economic and foreign policy interests of the United States in further danger. It causes foolish actions to be carried out, and results in countless examples of blowback. The desire to want to do good for others not out of a genuine interest in doing so, but rather to satisfy some deeply-rooted lie that it is moral to sacrifice your life for the sake of some other undeserving life, is an evil moral code, which causes evil to be perpetrated upon those who practice it.

Witness the altruistic "war on poverty" and the welfare state the United States operates. Through the end of a gun, or through the force of tears, the government loots productive citizens' incomes to distribute amongst those who offer no productive value to this country's infrastructure. By rewarding the looters of labor with such subsidies, they are encouraged to continue looting and living off the handouts provided. They call for populist legislation to be drafted, with the intent of forcing companies to operate more altruistically. When such legislation is passed, it further hinders their ability to produce the very items which the unproductive clamor for. They grumble that corporations are selfish, that they aren't spreading the wealth. Is wealth not created? Should wealth not be earned? Is it not achieved by producing something of value, through a collection of acquired skills and specialties? Why, then, should one not be free to produce at full capacity, so long as they are not infringing upon the individual rights of another? The consequences of these irrational actions are inexplicably obvious to any observer: corporations do business where they are not hindered by the minimum wage and corporate income tax. How does one force companies to provide more jobs amid 10% unemployment rates, when regulations based off the same evil moral code caused the unemployment rate to be that high in the first place?

Such ironic and circular logic is precisely what is behind the American downfall. Such logic is embodied by two forms of mysticism: one form is mysticism of the body, and the other is mysticism of the spirit. The former is most akin to Soviet Russia. They claim that the body is nothing more than a collection of atoms, and that the human being should live not for himself, but rather for the vested interests of "the state." The latter - the most evil institution on this planet - is embodied by religion. Religion preaches the hatred of the body, of the mind, and of individualism, in order to appease a higher power which, conveniently, followers of said religion are not able to see manifested in any objective fashion. Religious institutions say you must sacrifice yourself for somebody you value less. (They disguise this as being somebody less "fortunate" than you).

No matter if altruism is perpetrated by socialists or religion - or by both, as is the case in the United States - the terrifying result is the same. The life you are to live is an immoral life, where ultimately, A is not A. In order to have a better life, they say, you must make your life worse.

If the American citizens are to have better results in the future - they want to make their own lives as valuable and fruitful as possible - then they need to reject the notion that an unhappy life is a moral life. They need to know that the government has a complete monopoly on retaliatory force. They need to understand that the government's only true purpose is to protect individual liberty, and that anything else the government involves itself in reduces individual liberty. Only then can we get a better People, and once we get a better People, we will get a better government. It will still be all our fault.