Working for a New Generation of Composers

I noticed that I never explained why I want to found a company in the first place, and rather prefer to write articles about development progress and statistics, while assuming that the reasons are obvious. This might also explain the little interest that people put into this blog. Well, that, and the lack of pictures.

So, here it is, a reason why the world would be worse off without my organization, and what kind of meaning I want to bring to it.

The starting question is: if both computers and music were meant to be for everybody, why is making computer music still seen as a profession for enthusiasts, and why is there no change in that situation?

Computer music is hard. Interfaces are overly technical and complex, because application designers use old-fashioned recording studio metaphors. Barely anyone is familiar with these concepts. Coming to persuading results in a reasonable time is impossible. As a result, mastering a music making program takes literally ages.

Computer music is rotting. Almost all music technology used today is based on ideas that have been formulated and realized twenty to thirty years ago. The ways how people can interact with music making programs are constrained by these ideas. Developers focus on rephrasing rather than rethinking these concepts, and resort to keeping interface design close to limitations of the underlying system.

Computer music is boring. Rarely can we enjoy a symphony made on a computer. Excessively technical editing interfaces slow down users and break their flow. Song setups have a static feel to them. Changing song structure requires a big count of work steps. It is easier to work on a small loop endlessly than to roll out an entire track that changes shape and structure over time, featuring entertaining variations and breaks. Therefore tracks sound conceptual and repetitive.

Computer music sounds like computer music. It is usually easy to tell when a computer was involved in making a track. Synthesized sounds often carry an uncanny feeling when meant to sound like real instruments. Engineering new interesting sounds takes an awful lot of time. Computer music therefore often sounds thin and unconvincing. Artists often resort to natural sound sources to add a feeling of authenticity or warmth to their tracks.

Within my organization, I want to change what sucks about computer music. I want to enable you to do what you expected when you first became interested in composing music: write excellent music on your computer that persuades through richness and entertains through variation.

The solution is a new set of applications that make this goal possible, crafted with steady feedback from our customers. With our commitment, computers will be the fuel of tomorrows music scores, no expensive orchestra required. With our dedication, everyone with a good idea for a song has a chance to reach for the stars - and beyond.

We are going to change the meaning of "computer music". Who is with me?