Dylan Richards: music of internet algorithms
Dylan Richards is a composer who works in the fields of new conceptual and multimedia music. He is a composer, performer and new music event organiser. He is rediscovering algorithms of internet culture (Google Search, YouTube, and Tinder) in the language of multimedia music. The interview is co-created by Laura Švītiņa who created text version of video interview.
What is a good musical composition?
The criteria for what I might personally feel as a good musical composition can come from so many different angles that may be highlighted in a particular work. It could be the sensual experience of the work, it’s meta play in a conversation with the community, social relevance as well, or some kind of combination of all of these.
What is your musical signature?
For a number of years the signature of some of my work was trying to use various internet culture elements to outline the form of a work that are combined with multimedia aesthetics. For example, I’ve used things like the YouTube Up next algorithm in the piece called Up next or the anthems that people have on their Tinder profiles in the piece called Love songs. Recently I’ve been trying to orient multimedia techniques towards purely sound work to see what they might yield.
Watch full interview with Dylan Richards.
What is your way of composing?
My creative process almost always starts with a general concept. It is usually ruminated over for quite a while first to tease out how it might be approached from different angles and then try out different ways of realizing it. Depending on the concept, further work can be really different. Sometimes it might be a kind of algorithmic process where I try to find the best material to put into a certain process, other times it has a lot more of experimenting with different softwares. The piece Self portrait in the city that I mentioned has more of a workshop or process with performers that changes the work over time.
What is your retrospective view of yourself as a composer?
10 years ago, I didn’t even identify as a composer. I was in high school, playing in various hardcore bands in San Diego and really into math rock and playing bass. I had done a mini score for a shadow puppet play and that was probably the only real thing I had composed. When I entered bachelors, I inadvertently discovered 20th century European modernism. I tried to write that kind of music and realized I could study this thing called composing. I took off in this direction that led to me moving to Berlin, where I could get to work on music that is more multimedia and conceptually oriented. It’s been a wacky process, but probably not that unusual for someone of my age from America.
What were the biggest triggers of your musical taste?
Probably Steve Reich — I remember listening Different trains, later Stravinsky’s work was really important for me. I had a massive phase where I was into what I call favorcore British contemporary music, like Thomas Adès, also Gerald Berry. Then I became interested in more like post-2008 Darmstadt composers music, like Johannes Kreidler, Peter Ablinger. Then I decided to go to Berlin — that was super important just to really see the major new music scene in action and kind of be spongy and go to too many concerts all the time.
What do you as a composer fear the most?
I guess there’s a fear of being forgotten or not being needed. I’m definitely not someone who just makes work for my own pleasure, I think that being part of a community and a kind of ongoing conversation is really important.
How development of technology has influenced your music?
In 2015 I started to work with much more sample-based technology, Three Pieces for Google Search was the first one. Gradually I was working more in video editing software. It was all coming up to the ability to traverse so much material on the internet and see the way the different things were interconnected, for example the ability to download videos and work with it definitely became a huge paradigm shift for me.
What changes do you see in the new music landscape?
I think we saw the culmination of the extended technique based practices when all sounds are possible both in the electronic and instrumental medium. It led to the death of sonic material progress. In response to that there’s been an increased interest in multimedia or so-called relational music where focus is not just about sounds but rather symbolic aspects of material.
What could be the new trends?
We’ll have a massive increase in electronic works and multimedia works, but I wonder if there will be a weird tipping point when it becomes so typical and expected that it becomes indulgent. There’ll be a caution about event oriented large-scale evening concerts. The carbon footprint of concerts is something that’s a sorry to be publicized. Awareness of the impact of what the concert is doing to the world will rise. Maybe before renewable energy takes hold, you could even see these electronic free concerts or even having performers or audience members use bicycles to power the concert. I also envision that there will be a lot of instrument building and people writing for really specific instruments. Performers may become more universal musicians who can play on everything — play a keyboard, bang, and bow things.
Which technologies could be placed as most important, either defining or creating new music in the future?
There will probably be more realistic sample libraries, more detailed ways of realizing acoustic sounds with technology. It will also render the old instruments less desirable and will accelerate the rise of more self-designed ones. There will be a lot more artificial intelligence based music, for example a lot of deep fake audios, generated 3D sounds for virtual reality, as well personalised music or music that is created for users based on user data that has been collected.
How do you see new music audiences?
I’m a little pessimistic about the audience. A utopian desire would be to have a more diverse audience in terms of age, race, gender, people from different cultural backgrounds, and socioeconomic status. I think that’s probably what a lot of us wish would be the case, but for that to happen, you need to be bringing those kinds of creators into the process too.
What is the role of new music in society?
I think that there are different types of new music that fulfill different functions. I can imagine some sort of body-based piece that has a role of healing, for instance, a composer writing for ultrasonic vibrations that do some special massage. That can have a very utilitarian purpose, but also really interesting art. It could also be a work that kind of just sounds nice, whether right now we don’t want to categorize it as new music, but there will definitely be a place for that. Actually the ideas of new music might be very changing, I think some people don’t even like using the term new music. I’m interested in making different kinds of connections. I hope that it ends up having the same function as something like contemporary art, which is charting many possible futures or flexing imaginations.
What would be your definition of 21st century music?
In a way it is a music that could only be made in the 21st century, but if you’re talking about new music then it’s something that has not been done before, or the more unmusical music, music that’s not yet considered music. Music that tries to reflect or embody contemporary subjectivities. A lot more abstract and vaguer, also as ways of feeling and expressing things, ways of organizing time. Some people would say that 21st century music is ultra big data or hyper-informed music, but I think it is also extra small and goes into finer details.
Selection of works created by Dylan Richards
