Transient soundscape production

Creative and pedagogical significance for educators and practitioners




Over the past decade, there has been a steady increase of scholarly output examining the multidisciplinary, creative, and theoretical aspects of sound and music production in the recording studio and beyond (Zagorski-Thomas & Bourbon, 2020; Bennett & Bates, 2019; Hepworth- Sawyer, Hodgson, & Marrington, 2019; Thompson, 2019; Zagorski-Thomas, 2014; Frith & Zagorski-Thomas, 2012). Accordingly, a broad range of literature examines sound as a widespread cultural phenomenon (Papenburg & Schulze, 2016) and an essential source for pedagogical and ethnographic modeling in music technology education (Bell, 2018). Advances in technology make the “studio,” long viewed as a site of artistic and commercial production, available to a broader group of composers, musicians, and artists. Similarly, portable digital recorders afford sound artists and fi eld recordists an expansive range of choices to conduct soundscape research and creative practice. What emerges is a hybrid “composer- producer” identity and a studio’s function in the artistic process. This growth is the rise of an independent and transient practice in soundscape production among multidisciplinary composers and musicians. This article advocates for an updated notion of soundscape composition that integrates fi eld recordings, studio production, and collaboration from musicians representing a broad range of stylistic infl uences. Positioning the studio as a site of cultural production and creativity has implications for how soundscape production is taught to young composers. The author argues for a more inclusive, process-oriented view on both creativity and the places where musicians, composers, and producers work. The article includes a case study from the author’s recent album project, narrative analysis, concluding with a discussion on the pedagogical implications of independent soundscape production in education.


Bell, A. (2018). The Dawn of the DAW: The Studio as Musical Instrument. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Bennett, S., & Bates, E. (2019). Critical Approaches to the Production of Music and Sound. New York, NY: Bloomsbury Academic.
Candy, L., & Edmonds, E. (2018). Practice-Based Research in the Creative Arts: Foundations and Futures from the Front Line. Leonardo, 51(1), 63-69.
Casanelles, S. (2016). Mixing as a Hyperorchestration Tool. In: Greene, L., & Julezic-Wilson, D. (Eds.), The Palgrave Handbook of Sound Design and Music in Screen Media: Integrated Sountracks. London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
Cortazzi, M. (1993). Narrative Analysis. London, UK: The Falmer Press, Taylor and Francis.
Frith, S., & Zagorski-Thomas, S. (2012). The Art of Record Production: An Introductory Reader for a New Academic Field. New York, NY: Ashgate.
Hepworth-Sawyer, R., Hodgson, J., & Marrington, M. (Eds.). (2019). Producing Music. New York, NY: Routledge.
Lomax, A. (2003). Alan Lomax: Selected Writings, 1934-1997 (R. Cohen, Ed.). London, UK: Routledge.
Moorefi eld, V. (2010). The Producer as Composer: Shaping the Sounds of Popular Music. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Papenburg, J., & Schulze, H. (Eds.). (2016). Sound as Popular Culture: A Research Companion. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Powell, J. (2010). How Music Works: The Science and Psychology of Beautiful Sounds, from Beethoven to the Beatles and Beyond. New York, NY: Little, Brown and Company Publishers.
Sawyer, R.K. (2006). Explaining Creativity: The Science of Human Innovation. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Schafer, R.M. (1994 [1977]). The Soundscape: Our Sonic Environment and the Tuning of the World. Rochester, VT: Destiny Books.
Smith, G., Moir, Z., Ferguson, P., & Davies, G. (2020). Low-latency Networked Music Collaborations: Does “Good Enough” Do Enough Good? Journal of Network Music and Arts, 2(1).
Stefani, E., & Lauke, K. (2010). Music, Space and Theatre: Site-Specifi c Approaches to Multichannel Spatialisation. Organised Sound, 15(3), 251-259.
Sterne, J. (2003). The Audible Past: Cultural Origins of Sound Production. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Storr, A. (1972). The Dynamics of Creation. Middlesex, UK: Penguin Books.
Théberge, P. (2004). The Network Studio: Historical and Technological Paths to a New Ideal in Music Making. Social Studies of Science, 34(5), 759-781.
Théberge, P. (1997). Any Sound You Can Imagine: Making Music/Consuming Technology. Middletown, CT: Wesleyan University Press.
Thompson, P. (2019). Creativity in the Recording Studio: Alternative Takes. Cham, Switzerland: Palgrave Macmillan.
Truax, B. (1996). Soundscape, Acoustic Communication and Environmental Sound Composition. Contemporary Music Review, 15(1-2), 49-65.
Walzer, D. (2020). Sound Narrative: Honing a Deeper Understanding of Soundscapes. Vortex Music Journal, 8(1), 1-10.
Walzer, D. (2019). The Loom Machines of Boott Mill (Lowell): A Composition from the New England Soundscape Project. Leonardo Music Journal (29), 50-54.
Walzer, D. (2016). Refl ective Sound Gathering via the New England Soundscape Project. Sounding Out! The Sound Studies Blog. ective-sound-gathering-through-the-new-england-soundscape-project/.
Watson, A. (2017). Cultural Production in and Beyond the Recording Studio. New York, NY: Routledge.
Western, T. (2019). Field Recording and the Production of Place. In: Bennett, S., & Bates, E. (Eds.), Critical Approaches to the Production of Music and Sound. New York, NY: Bloomsbury Academic.
Wolff, J. (1984). The Social Production of Art. New York, NY: NYU Press.
Zagorski-Thomas, S. (2014). The Musicology of Record Production. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Zagorski-Thomas, S., & Bourbon, A. (Eds.). (2020). The Bloomsbury Handbook of Music Production. New York, NY: Bloomsbury Academic.




How to Cite

Walzer, D. (2021). Transient soundscape production: Creative and pedagogical significance for educators and practitioners. SoundEffects - An Interdisciplinary Journal of Sound and Sound Experience, 10(1), 142–157.