Intentional | Audio Identity Blog

Great stuff on the power of music and sound in today’s Portland Oregonian:

As music-thanatologists, they have devoted their lives to those who are dying, ensuring that the end of life is filled with as much peace and beauty as possible. They have played at countless bedsides, using the harp and their voices to…help ease the transition between life and death…

Although music-thanatology has gained a steady following through the years in the medical community, with some hospitals going so far as to create staff positions for music-thanatologists, many people remain unaware of the field and its possibilities…

When playing for a patient who is dying, music-thanatologists offer music “prescriptively.” By that they mean that they do not come in with a set idea of what they will play — they do not perform — but instead, they discern, in each individual situation, what the patient needs — Is the patient having trouble breathing? Anxious? In desperate need of sleep? Processing difficult news? — and then offer music that seems to best alleviate those situations…

They watch the patient. They adjust their playing moment by moment, if necessary. They typically do not play familiar music. When they sing, you can’t always make out the words — sometimes it might simply be a series of syllables — and yet you can still understand the intent.

Amazing. Since these performers will host a public concert this weekend, it sounds like a few busy days, what with this, the March Fourth Marching Band and Joanna Newsom coming to town. (Fortunately not all at once: Trombones, meet my friends the Harps! Hmm.)

Getting back to the heady stuff, or at least pretending to: I’m intrigued by the strategy behind the work of some of these musicians; they adapt to each person’s need accordingly, rather than provide a one-size-fits-all approach, adjusting on the fly and ensuring that they’re effective. Talk about intentional audio.

Makes me wonder why music as therapy is traditionally seen as something for the critically ill. Why save outcome-oriented music for just when we’re sick or dying? That’s like saving all the bottled water only for the dehydrated, isn’t it?

So, the next natural item in this line of reasoning is a challenge: if music is therapy for the living as well (and I’m pretty sure we’d all agree on that), then what can you do for your brand to better leverage music, sound or voice in its communications, services, products or experiences?

I’ll get the brainstorm started in the comments section…see you over there.

Click “play” on each video, first to last, as quickly as you can. Then sit back and watch. The result is a very creative use of Google, Youtube and Revver all rolled into one. It’s about time.

What a refreshing break. It’s been raining and snowing (!) here in Portland, Oregon, and we enjoyed a few days off, sitting before the fireplace, chomping on grilled cheese sandwiches and sipping from the soup bowl. We’re exceptionally lucky to live in a world where carefree coziness is an option, and for that I’m grateful. (I’m also grateful that my three-year-old daughter seems to enjoy “watching the fire” more than she does watching the tube, but that’s another story.)

In addition, I’m grateful to be doing what I do for a living: audio as an extension of brand strategy. It’s fascinating and relevant, and although it’s a decades-old practice (thank you NBC, Coke, etc.), it’s still in the early stages of its evolution, which is exciting.

Unfortunately one of the pitfalls of any new practice is managing perceptions. And I’m concerned that a quick web search on “audio branding” reveals that the majority of service providers listed offer audio as a marketing or experiential gimmick, rather than sound as a strategic brand asset. Perhaps now would be a good time to clear up some of these growing misconceptions.

Audio branding is not about your music, sound or voice. It’s about your business and your brand. Everything else follows.

Just as a brand is not an advertisement or a logo, audio branding is not a song, a podcast or an audio logo. In fact, any vendor that offers a soundtrack, a ringtone or commercial audio production as a form of “audio branding” isn’t concerned about communicating who you are, what you do and why you matter in the most useful way; they’re interested in selling prescriptive outputs, rather than strategic solutions. You want a hole in the wall, and they have lots of pretty nails. Commodities sold by the dozen. And commodities are produced by people who have zero contact with a strategic brief.

Successful audio strategy vendors must adopt a this value-add approach; don’t tell me how you’ll provide sounds that will make me sound exactly like your other clients — tell me how you’ll develop a more passionate customer base. Tell me how you’ll help me provide new ways of reaching new and existing customers. Show me the numbers. Define the production savings associated with a useful audio brand. Make me care. Clearly there’s not enough of this happening right now, and I think it’s time this industry took a stronger lead in defining the dollars-and-sense value of a useful audio identity.

Audio is but one piece in a larger system that is your overall brand offering.

Despite what you may be reading or hearing about audio branding, it’s not a simple solution to a simple problem. It must be integrated with discretion, or it’s a wasted opportunity.

Let’s consider, for example, the last three times I ate out for brunch on some recent Sundays: while each of the three restaurants in urban locales sported a unique interior, qualified wait staff and eclectic menu, each restaurant featured the exact same lite jazz/soft rock in the environment, which felt completely out of synch — and drove me out of the restaurant as soon as I finished my meal.

I’m sure the managers at these restaurants have what they think of as a solution — the problem is dead air, the solution is music. Right? But unless that music adequately integrates into all other sensory elements of the meal, then it’s simply noise. And a wasteful investment at that.

(On the other hand, useful music can achieve the opposite. I can’t help but imagine 30 more customers per day sticking around a little longer [rather than leaving ASAP] in each restaurant because they felt good due in part to the role of the right music. If those people spend just $7 more per person on drinks or dessert, that’s $210 more coming in per day. Or $6,300 per month. Or $75,600 per year. All because music was thoughtfully infused with the rest of the dining experience.)

Sound can only enhance a good brand. It can’t compensate for a bad one.

On the other side of the coin, the “greatest” music, sound and voice on earth can’t compensate for a horrible product.

There are countless qualified composers, musicians and sound engineers who capably produce wonderful songs for television commercials, film trailers and the like — things we hear every day. But bad beer is bad still beer and cheap cars still need to go to the shop. Consumers know that — they’re not fooled for long by a cool commercial. And thus, while it’s wonderful that the world may be exposed to more interesting music and the people making the music get paid, at the end of the day it’s a just lot of money changing hands. The world is not any better off just because Random Company has a megaphone. And brands are not viable unless they make the world a better place.

I often see this approach in websites that sport music for visitors to listen to while they browse — it’s almost always clear that the website managers have vaguely understood that we’re emotional beings who respond well to audio, but have no idea what to do with it. And thus, we wind up with the equivalent of radio with pictures: it’s just web with music. Sound has a bigger role in building relationships between people and brands; online, sound can and should increase functionality, build trust, and enhance meaningful experiences.

Ultimately, great sound can make a good brand better. But it can’t fool anyone into thinking that the business itself is any better than its plain-truth strategy and execution.

Dimensional brands will lead the charge

Ultimately it’s the progressive brands, firms and agencies that will lead rather than follow. Dimensional brands will pioneer the path of strategic sound, and the service providers that push the envelope for them will drive the audio-branding conversation for years to come.

Intentionally crafted audio will become a smart part of incredible user experiences, whether it be in your car, in your house, your mobiles or in the larger public. It will be linked to all other parts of a company’s auditory communications. It will save millions in branding campaigns and creative development. And it will open up opportunities for forward-thinking companies to become the next Apple, Starbucks or Google.

Those who view audio branding as a mere sonic logo are just scratching the surface. I’m thankful we all have an opportunity to think beyond that.

Let’s continue the conversation. Add your comments below or ping me at noel at intentionalaudio dot com. — Noel Franus

Stephen wrapped up last week’s Portland coffee jam session far better than I could. Next up: Friday 12/1, Stumptown Coffee, 8:30 a.m. See you there. — NF

Yes, you’ve heard about Pandora, Last.fm, and all the other music-discovery sites. Musicovery won’t replace any of these, but it does offer a compelling way of browsing music — by mood, by genre, or (and this is where it gets interesting) any combination of the two.

It’s especially helpful if you, too, think the genre of “Soundtracks” can be overly misleading, or often find yourself scratching your head wondering why your bands were put in that! category in the record shop.

Give it a shot. Personally I’m looking forward to starting my week with something guaranteed to be energetic and positive, be it world, soul, funk, blues, gospel or otherwise. Those of you scheduled for a morning meeting with me, apologies in advance for an obvious overdose of plus-vibes.

“Sonic fabric emits sound when you run a tape head (the little thingy inside the tape deck that touches the tape) over it. Because the tape retains its magnetic quality through the weaving process, it acts as a big wide band of tape.”

Love the novelty in this: clothing you could (theoretically) listen to. Is it a problem solver? No. Is it a market-maker? No. Is this one way to strectch the boundaries of what’s doable with music and sound? Why certainly.

Question: How would you run/create/design new sources of value if you hadn’t always been doing things the way you currently are? When you consider sound as one possible filter for answering that question, you may just get a bit closer to creating that holy grail product or service that sets the world abuzz. Sonic Fabric may be halfway there.

Interesting music controller over at YouTube. You can’t help considering the what-ifs, when you consider that 70% of your own body is made of water.

Wake up, smell the coffee, and fix your highbrow-lowdown/lowbrow-Stumptown morning-conversation jones. Tomorrow (Friday) at 8:30 a.m in Portland, Oregon at the Stumptown Coffee house, 128 SW 3rd. Bonus: Stephen will be drinking a fancy coffee.

I recently came across the Bio Mapping project — a sensor which allows people to “record their Galvanic Skin Response (GSR)…which is a simple indicator of emotional arousal in conjunction with their geographical location.” It then transmits that data to a network, which is where things really get interesting: “This can be used to plot a map that highlights point of high and low arousal. By sharing this data we can construct maps that visualise where we as a community feel stressed and excited.” Fascinating!

Possible implications? Let’s say that over time, results showed that high-stress points existed in places such as crowded sidewalks, busy intersections, shopping malls, etc. I’d then be curious to know what the negative consequences of severe public stress are, and, naturally, what can any of us do about that?

Consider a few semi-predictable outcomes of localized public stress: higher crime; traffic/pedestrian congestion; traffic accidents; and a general distaste among locals who, in avoiding such “stressful spaces,” also no longer shop in those areas (though young people and tourists may feel the opposite about this — the buzz is where they want to be. Times Square, for instance.).

What’s the negative impact of localized stress? Well, cities may find them both a blessing and a curse; they love the taxes that come with tourist dollars, and as locals have other options, then everyone may win. On the other hand, social interaction in public “civil” spaces — open plazas, parks, etc. — (theoretically) declines in unsafe or overcrowded spaces. And on the road, traffic congestion is very costly for cities/states to manage and contain. Auto insurance companies probably feel the same way (and are willing to fund better solutions).

After cities and transportation hubs, the other major public spaces are in the semi-public realm. Hospitals. Colleges. And then the obvious: shopping mall or retail-heavy areas, where more stress is simply bad for business. People don’t shop if they’re not happy. Feeling unsafe. Overcrowded. Or otherwise stressed.

To put it briefly, collective social stress is a problem that’s not only bothersome, but expensive.

So. Naturally, I’m inclined to consider the role of sound in solving those problems. How can the intentional use of sound relieve communal stress? Brainstorm with me:

• Sound can soothe. Soothing sounds can come from structural, environmental sources; these may include acoustic engineering to lessen the noise-pollution factor. Alternatively, natural waterfalls or other like features can achieve the same effect. Beyond engineering options, music can always be piped in to create a sense of calm, but extreme care should be given in matching music with the function of the space. And I’m sure the list goes on: got ideas?
• Next, the smart use of sound can effectively distract. I’m pretty sure this is what many retail store owners think when they blast loud music and drop plasma video screens in their spaces. Unfortunately, few of them acknowledge the role of music and sound in the larger choreography that is their guest experience. That only adds more stress. On the other hand, I can imagine a not-too-distant future when retail developers will take a cue from museums/ipods and offer headphone-driven “audio guides” to their spaces, with content varying from actual “guide” services to broadcast/satellite radio to customized audio playlists. Less social, yes. But less stressful if done well. How else can sound effectively distract?
• Sound can also enhance the civilian experience. You’re shopping, you’re hurried, you’re busy. But hey — are those Christmas carolers? Wow, that’s nice. Nothing beats certain kinds of live music to actually improve your mood when you’re otherwise uninterruptable. Got any more recommendations?
• Finally, sound can direct and guide. Ding. Beep beep. Mind the gap. Caution, sweeper approaching. Prepare for takeoff. Smart use of audio can move us in the right direction — creating clarity from an otherwise cluttered world. If you’ve been to downtown Oakland, you’re familiar with the audio-directional walk/don’t walk sounds that were intended for the visually impaired. I see that as barely scratching the surface. What about GPS for the blind? Or audio-based wayfinding cues in airports or other task-heavy spaces? Or perhaps a highway warning system that relies exclusively on different groove patterns in the pavement to inform drivers of dangers or traffic jams ahead?

Phew. Lots to consider. Some architects and planners obviously take these considerations into mind (think Chicago O’Hare’s underground United terminal connection). Others clearly don’t. The good news is that there’s a lot of room for improvement here, and much of it is uncharted, which makes for an interesting way to make this a better world. What do you recommend?

Go ahead, call me a dreamer. This area just feels ripe for innovation to me. The business implications for problem-solvers in these areas are rather attractive, too.

Hot links for breakfast today:

• “LEMUR is a Brooklyn-based group of artists and technologists developing robotic musical instruments.” Be sure to visit the video section.
• Sonic Postcards “enables pupils from across the UK to explore and compare their local sound environments through the composition and exchange - via the internet - of sound postcards with other schools.” Don’t forget to try the toys.
• And, riffing off Sonic Postcards, we bring you the Sonic Arts Network, also in the UK: “a national organisation working exclusively with sound and technology in creative, innovative and experimental ways.” I’m particularly intrigued by their A Call For Silence CD, which is focused on those subtle sounds that sometimes affect us in ways larger than we typically acknowledge: “breaths, rests, guitar hum, audience anticipation, room tones, the calm before a storm.”

Paul Anthony has a novel approach to making music licensing easy. He’s speaking on Tuesday November 14th at an AMA luncheon. Hotel Lucia, Portland. Catch him if you can!

Windows has yet another new startup sound. (Audio.) NPR briefly explores the role of sonic branding and their creative process for its startup sound.

My take: though it’s nice to hear Microsoft come up with nifty sounds every few years, I’m disappointed that Microsoft hasn’t leveraged any of their existing startup sounds or other functional audio in any strategic sense. Most are one-off creations.

Translation: as a company, Microsoft has probably spent millions in the last few years on all their sounds (advertising, products, etc.). And it appears that absolutely zero of that has been applied strategically across the board to create an intentional brand impression. While I wouldn’t call that outright wasteful, I would say the money could do far more for the company than it is today.

Update on 10/13: Stephen points me to a nice breakdown of the entire process over at Gaping Void. A few more clicks leads to MSNBC’s story on the subject, and MS project leader Steve Ball’s own site.

As the leader for the Sun and Java audio brands, having been through something very similar at another large tech company, I think the most compelling story in all this is that of the corporate gymnastics required to see this through from start to completion:

“There are many other things that happened during that 18 months: a few dozen people across Microsoft received a first-class education in how to listen and how to speak to each other about sound using the same language.”

I can’t stress how challenging, fascinating, frustrating and rewarding this aspect of brand work is. More later. — N

Since we spent some time earlier this week talkin’ corporate anthems, it’s only fitting on a Friday that we follow up with Bank of America making’ it real. (Via Spare Room) My thoughts: eager and actually talented, but unfortunately misdirected. And not a net positive for the brand.

Had a great get-together with Pop Art in Portland today. (Thanks Ben!) I love small-group discussions, because there’s room for more bidirectional interaction than in a formal environment. Sleeves get rolled up. Ideas germinate. Dirty little secrets are shared. And banter ensues.

I wanted to share some of the audio-branding follow-up q’s that arose today because a) they’re good; and b) I plan to dig deeper on some of these here at ye olde blogge in the very near future:

• How can audio identities stay fresh/avoid being stale?
• Is it smart for a brand to spin off new audio logos as the flavor of the day — should Intel release a new audio logo with each new chip?
• What role will or should psychoacoustics play as audio branding evolves; will it be based on a series of universal principles, similar to, let’s say, color theory?
• How do you manage dissent or dissatisfaction during the creative review process in a large organization?

Great stuff. I’ll touch on these soon. Meanwhile, you’re encouraged to share your own responses or even add to the list of questions.

Friday: came across these bright comments on “brand polyphony” from Russell Davies over at YouTube. Saturday: breakfast at the Byways in Portland with Russell Davies. And Sudeep from Wieden+Kennedy. And Steve and Dave from Opus Creative. Great conversation at an otherwise ungodly hour on a Saturday. And above all, a very likeable bunch, which makes all the difference in the world when you’re tossing ideas and opinions around the table like a bag of fresh donuts.

Many of us will be chatting on a weekly basis, most likely Fridays, and the door’s wide open if you’re in town. Watch the Opus blog for more details. UPDATE 11/8: we have a place, we have a time. Friday, 9 a.m. at Coffee Time, 712 NW 21st in Portland. Join us.

(Photo, taken on a much sunnier day than the real-life experience, is blogged via Life on the Edge @ Flickr.)

(Alternate title: When Covers Attack!)

A few weeks back, I played you a song and asked a simple question: does it suit the brand that it represents? You gave feedback. Today, we discuss.

You’ll find most the conversation over at my other site. But I’ll save you a click…here’s the main takeaway, eloquently stated by reader Tag:

It’s a very obvious example of how a known song can completely obscure a brand. The message even if it is on brand is never heard and a conection between brand and consumer is never made because of that initial visceral reaction. I would argue that this is also true of songs where the reaction is positive. Isn’t the brand message obscured then as well?

Brands communicate in sound all the time. Each time they do, they either reinforce their brand value or they damage it — it depends on how well the sound suits the brand. That’s your call.

Take our little pop quiz to see if you know these 10 brand sounds. And determine for yourself if the sounds match the brand.

Your choices in random order: Windows, Subaru, CBS, Palm, London Underground (train system), AOL, Toyota, Nokia, NBC, and the French TGV (train system).

Answers are in the “comments” section. Looking forward to hearing your thoughts.