On June 12th, 2017, a seemingly ordinary Monday marked the beginning of an unexpected journey for me. I was in Silver Lake in the early evening when I noticed a dramatic and sudden change in hearing in my left ear. Temporary hearing issues weren’t new to me, and having recently been sick with a cold, I thought the clogged feeling and distorted sounds might just be another transient hiccup. There was also a strange slight echo, and the pitch at certain frequencies seemed off. As I drove home with music that failed to sound right, these symptoms hinted at a reality I hadn’t considered. That evening, I began to grasp the seriousness of what I was experiencing.

The next day I went to my ENT and was diagnosed with sensorineural hearing loss. The doctors presented a stark reality: a 50–50 chance of improvement within a month, or most likely the hearing loss would be permanent. The treatment was high doses of prednisone, aimed at reducing inflammation and potentially restoring normal hearing within that critical 30-day window.

About six days into the treatment, an incident on the road — a momentary outburst of yelling when someone cut me off — led me to fear that my emotional reaction might have exacerbated my condition. This fear intensified when, the following day, I noticed similar symptoms developing in my right ear. This was a terrifying development; the possibility that my hearing loss was now affecting both ears was overwhelming. Although my doctor reassured me that the yelling incident was unlikely to have caused this, I didn’t find much comfort in it. Additionally, prednisone is notorious for affecting your mental state and emotions, prompting concern about how that might be affecting me as well.

Amidst this, I began to experience an increased sensitivity to sound. Ordinary noises, once easily ignored, became unbearably loud, contributing to a growing sense of panic and vulnerability. My online research introduced me to terms like ‘Diplacusis’ — the perception of altered pitch, and ‘Hyperacusis’ — heightened sensitivity to certain frequencies. These conditions, previously unknown to me, now also defined my daily experiences.

Learning more about the intricacies of inner ear dysfunctions, I came across stories that resonated deeply with my situation. Accounts of classical violinists, whose lives had been inextricably linked to music, succumbing to despair and suicide due to similar conditions, were particularly harrowing. The thought of lifelong confinement to this altered auditory world was not just daunting; it was terrifying. The emotional impact of such a profound change, I realized, could be devastating.

This period marked not just a battle with a physical condition but also an immense psychological struggle. The fear of being permanently trapped in this distorted auditory reality, where music — once a source of joy — could transform into a source of distress, was almost unthinkable to me.

Although initially believed I was tolerating the prednisone well, I began to experience alarming physical symptoms — weakness in my legs and sensitivity that progressed rapidly, making even simple movements like getting up from a seated position increasingly difficult. After a month of treatment, none of it seemed to work, my right ear was now affected too, and I could barely walk. I discontinued the prednisone and with about 70% hearing loss in both ears, I spiraled into severe depression, questioning the value of life itself.

Living With Hearing Loss

In the surreal world of diminished hearing, I navigated daily life with an initial sense of detachment. Oddly enough, while I had lost a significant portion of my hearing, what remained was either distorted in pitch or certain frequencies were overly heightened. It felt like the worst possible combination of symptoms, turning everyday sounds into a bizarre, nightmarish experience.

The adoption of various earplugs from my endless Amazon searches became my new normal, with moldable ones providing the best, yet imperfect, shield. Hyperacusis transformed my auditory landscape into a relentless assault of disproportionately loud disturbances, challenging my ability to function in seemingly benign environments. Pretending to be unaffected became a daily act, a facade maintained amidst social interactions and quiet moments alone. Recovering from the prednisone episode left me physically intact but audibly fractured, inhabiting a world where my experiences felt alien and unshareable. The accidental slip of an earplug or the sudden roar of a motorcycle not only startled but caused actual pain, underscoring the profound isolation brought on by this condition.

Faced with the impossibility of engaging with music, my lifelong passion, I turned to alternative creative outlets to fill the void. A family business I was involved with, previously one of many pursuits, now became my central focus. My gravitation towards art and graphic design intensified, perhaps as a compensatory enhancement of my visual senses in the absence of auditory input. This unexpected shift back to visual arts, accompanied by the tactile memory of a callused middle finger from years of drawing, signified a full-circle return to my artistic roots. Despite the loss of one sensory world, another began to expand, offering a new avenue for expression and connection.

Navigating the complexities of sensorineural hearing loss, I discovered the limitations of medical knowledge, especially regarding the inner ear. Despite Los Angeles’ reputation for having top-tier medical professionals, particularly for those in the music industry, I found a disheartening consensus: once the inner ear is damaged, recovery options are limited, and the path to healing is murky. This realization was driven home by my experiences with hearing tests, which, while systematic, seemed basic and inadequate for capturing or addressing the subtleties of my condition. These tests provided a rudimentary outline of my hearing loss but fell short of offering any real solutions or insights into potential recovery.

I found myself wishing for someone like Hugh Laurie’s character in “House” — a doctor willing to turn over every stone and devote their full attention to uncovering the cause of my condition. Instead, I kind of took on that role myself. As I delved deeper into potential diagnoses, I encountered suggestions of Meniere’s disease, which I met with skepticism. My quest for answers also led me to consider the effects of temporomandibular joint (TMJ) disorders and the possibility that inflammation of nerves, constricted by the confines of the skull, might be affecting my hearing. This journey through various medical theories underscored the intricate interplay between bodily systems and the challenges in diagnosing and managing hearing loss. Though the future of stem cell research and innovative treatments, like those proposed by Frequency TX, offered a glimmer of hope, the present reality was one of coping and seeking temporary measures rather than cure.

Theories of viral infections and inflammation, reinforced the notion that my condition was both a mystery and a challenge — a puzzle where each piece revealed more about the intricate connection between the body’s systems yet left the overall picture incomplete. As I delved deeper, the quest for understanding became as much about navigating the limitations of current medical science as it was about grappling with the personal ramifications of living in a world fundamentally altered by hearing loss.

My hearing loss continued to be an enigma, a puzzle that defied easy solutions and left me navigating a maze of potential causes without a clear path to resolution. Seeking understanding and support, I turned to online communities, where shared experiences with these auditory conditions highlighted their complex interplay. Despite achieving a level of acceptance by mid-2018, the unpredictable nature of my symptoms, particularly as a musician, fueled my determination to delve deeper into the causes of my hearing anomalies.

Exploring Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy

I meticulously examined my lifestyle, searching for any links between my daily habits, diet, or environment and the fluctuations in my hearing, aiming to pinpoint potential triggers. Alongside this personal investigation, I explored alternative treatments, becoming particularly intrigued by hyperbaric oxygen therapy. Known for its wide-ranging medical applications, this therapy’s potential to alleviate some of my hearing issues led me to a facility near Venice Boulevard, where I began to understand the nuances and requirements of this treatment approach.

The pursuit of hyperbaric oxygen therapy introduced significant financial and logistical hurdles, given its high costs and the demanding regimen necessary to achieve any beneficial effects. It became clear that sporadic sessions would be ineffectual; the therapy’s efficacy depended on a series of treatments administered in quick succession. Faced with this reality, I encountered a pivotal decision point, weighing the potential advantages against the considerable demands of this therapeutic path.

Upon consulting with a facility near Venice Boulevard that offered hyperbaric oxygen therapy, I was presented with a package deal that struck a balance between affordability and the intensive nature of the treatment schedule. Opting to proceed, I embarked on this series of sessions, adhering closely to the recommended sequence to optimize their effect. This experience provided not only medical treatment but also a measure of care and support markedly different from my previous experiences with the healthcare system, offering a glimmer of hope in an otherwise daunting journey. Despite the lack of immediate auditory improvement after completing the therapy, I noticed a subtle yet positive shift a few weeks later, hinting at the therapy’s benefits.

Discovering The Salicylate Connection

My investigation into dietary influences on my health deepened as I began to notice certain foods and ingredients seemed to exacerbate my hearing issues. This journey led me to the discovery of “salicylates,” compounds I learned could have a significant impact on auditory sensitivities, especially noted among those with autism. This connection sparked my interest in the potential for a shared sensitivity to salicylates, prompting a broader inquiry into how my diet might be influencing my condition.

I started to scrutinize items in my diet more closely, particularly the presence of MSG and Aspartame in everyday consumables like Diet Coke. The concept of “excitotoxins” — substances that might overstimulate and damage neurons — came to the forefront of my concerns. Considering my auditory system’s heightened sensitivity, I pondered the possibility that these compounds could be contributing to my symptoms. This exploration into the effects of diet on my hearing health encouraged me to delve into the intricate relationships between neurological conditions, dietary components, and sensory well-being, opening up new avenues for understanding and potentially mitigating my auditory condition.

The emergence of salicylate sensitivity as a potential factor in my hearing loss led me to ponder why this issue had become pronounced at this stage in my life. If salicylates were indeed contributing to my condition, what had changed to trigger such a strong reaction now? This unanswered question opened a new avenue in my investigation, suggesting a complex relationship between diet, sensory sensitivity, and neurological factors.

Reflecting on the sudden onset of my hearing loss, I revisited the potential roles of viral infections, antibiotic use, and my consumption of over-the-counter pain relievers like Aleve, aspirin, and Tylenol. This introspection brought a critical realization: many of these pain relievers belong to the category of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), which often contain sodium salicylates, a component linked to auditory issues.
This connection between NSAIDs, salicylates, and my auditory condition steered my research towards the concept of salicylate-induced hearing loss, a recognized medical phenomenon that could potentially explain my symptoms. Intriguingly, unlike the often permanent nature of sensorineural hearing loss, salicylate-induced hearing loss might be reversible, offering a glimmer of hope in my otherwise daunting journey.
This phase represented a pivotal shift in my understanding, suggesting the possibility that commonplace medications might have triggered my hearing loss and raising the prospect, albeit slim, of its temporary nature. This insight provided new directions for potentially mitigating my condition and a renewed sense of hope.

As I delved deeper, I scrutinized not only my diet but also my use of everyday products, uncovering the presence of salicylic acid in items like my dandruff shampoo and a cosmetic product for rosacea. This revelation of long-term exposure led me to eliminate all products containing salicylic acid from my routine, hoping to alleviate my symptoms.

Despite the potential correlation I discovered between salicylic acid and my hearing loss, the medical professionals I consulted were skeptical, dismissing the possibility of a link. This skepticism was disheartening, highlighting a gap between my personal findings and the medical community’s perspective.

In an effort to seek improvement, I returned to hyperbaric oxygen therapy, this time with a more intensive regimen. Simultaneously, I rigorously eliminated all sources of salicylic acid from my environment and continued to avoid known dietary triggers. This dual strategy of eliminating potential aggravators while pursuing therapeutic treatments marked a significant and proactive phase in my journey towards understanding and addressing my hearing loss.

The Turn Around: 2 Years After Diagnosis

During late 2018 and early 2019, I experienced the first real consistent improvement in my hearing, marking a pivotal moment in my journey. A particularly significant change was in my perception of my Audi’s door chimes every time got in the car. The gradual alignment of their tone with the actual pitch was not only a subtle indication of improvement but also deeply meaningful, given my background in music. This minor yet tangible progress provided a much-needed morale boost and encouraged me to continue exploring potential treatments for my hearing loss.

The improvement, suggested that my efforts, including hyperbaric oxygen therapy and eliminating salicylic acid from my routine, might be having a positive effect on my hearing. This realization reignited a spark of hope, the first glimmer since the onset of my hearing issues, prompting me to consider continuing the treatments. However, the financial and logistical challenges of attending regular clinic sessions were daunting, and the idea of owning a personal hyperbaric oxygen chamber, while appealing, seemed financially out of reach.

Despite these obstacles, the thought of having my own chamber lingered, driven by the desire for more control over my treatment. One day, I came across a Craigslist listing for a hyperbaric chamber, along with an oxygen concentrator, at an affordable price. The seller, who had originally purchased the equipment for his daughter’s cancer treatment, was based in Santa Barbara, with the equipment located in a chiropractor’s office in Newport Beach.

After overcoming initial doubts about the listing’s legitimacy, I visited the office to inspect the chamber. It was exactly as advertised, in good condition and operational. This discovery led me to make the significant decision to purchase the chamber, a turning point in my journey towards managing my hearing loss.

The Recovery

By early to mid-2019, my situation began to markedly improve at a noticeably rapid pace, affirming my belief that I had pinpointed the root cause of my hearing loss. The recovery process unfolded in a fascinating way: low frequencies began to return, pitch distortions gradually aligned closer to normal, and the severity of my hyperacusis lessened. This transformation was gradual, evolving to a point where, as a musician, I could discern the pitches realigning through phases of chorusing and flanging, until one day, everything snapped back into place, nearly reaching normalcy. Now in 2024, my hearing has been restored to its former state, a condition that has persistently held since I took decisive action, despite having struggled significantly for about two years.

My intention in sharing this journey is not to suggest my experience as a common solution to hearing loss; the cause of my condition is likely rare. However, I believe there may be individuals experiencing auditory issues, including tinnitus, who could benefit from exploring similar avenues, yet such potential solutions remain largely unrecognized by the medical community. At the conclusion of this article, I plan to provide links to the resources that guided my research and recovery. My journey involved extensive trial and error, and without identifying the true cause, I doubt recovery would have been possible.

Looking ahead, I aim to delve deeper into this narrative through a book, offering a comprehensive exploration of my experiences and insights. My ultimate goal is to raise awareness about this condition and provide guidance that could potentially spare others from the prolonged struggle I faced, facilitating a quicker path to recovery. This belief, rooted in my personal triumph over a daunting challenge, fuels my commitment to help others navigate their way back to auditory health.

chrisarvan.com
https://www.instagram.com/chrisarvan
https://x.com/ChrisArvan

Reference:

Effects of NSAIDs on the Inner Ear: Possible Involvement in Cochlear Protection: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4033980/

Salicylate Ototoxicity, Tinnitus, and Hyperacusis: https://link.springer.com/referenceworkentry/10.1007/978-3-031-15080-7_203

Salicylate toxicity model of tinnitus: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3341117/#idm140566367859552title

Review of salicylate-induced hearing loss, neurotoxicity, tinnitus and neuropathophysiology: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4025186/

Salicylate Sensitivity: Causes, Symptoms, and Foods to Avoid: https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/salicylate-sensitivity

Neurotransmitter Modulation Relates with Tinnitus Signal Generation and Management: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1672293007500164

Salicylate Enables Cochlear Arachidonic-Acid-Sensitive NMDA Receptor Responses: https://www.jneurosci.org/content/28/29/7313

What is Moloch?

Moloch has its origins from the ancient Carthaginian civilizations around 300 BC to 200 AD. Mythology speaks of a grim cult-like society that engaged in sacrifice: offering their children to a deity named Moloch in order to get power to win wars. Moloch represents the extreme lengths to which people go for power or competitive advantage, often involving the sacrifice of something deeply precious.

The concept of Moloch resurfaced in the 1927 film “Metropolis.” In this film, Moloch is depicted not as a deity, but as a colossal, insatiable machine, a behemoth that consumes the labor and lives of workers to fuel the opulence of a futuristic metropolis. This imagery powerfully encapsulates the human toll exacted by the relentless pursuit of societal progress and industrial efficiency. The film’s portrayal of Moloch serves as a vivid allegory for the sacrifices demanded by the machinery of progress hidden beneath the veneer of technological advancement.

This modern incarnation of Moloch also appeared in the 1960s through Allen Ginsberg’s seminal poem “Howl.” Here, Moloch transforms into a symbol of the dehumanizing, soul-crushing forces inherent in capitalist society. Ginsberg’s Moloch is omnipresent, a specter lurking within the mechanisms of economic systems, devouring individuality, creativity, and human connection in the service of profit and power. Through “Howl,” Moloch becomes emblematic of the broader societal mechanisms that prioritize efficiency and growth at the expense of human well-being and compassion.

More recently, Scott Alexander’s “Meditations on Moloch” even further expands this metaphor into the realms of game theory and societal dynamics, illustrating how the pursuit of competitive advantage at the cost of personal or communal values leads to collective detriment.

A simple analogy of this dynamic can be observed in the setting of a football stadium. Picture the scene: one person decides to stand up to catch a better glimpse of the action, obstructing the view for those behind. This single act sets off a chain reaction, with each person behind standing up in turn to regain their view. The end result is a stadium full of standing spectators, each exerting more effort just to maintain the same level of visibility they initially enjoyed while seated. Instead of an improved experience, there’s only added strain and no net gain in perspective or enjoyment of the game.

Expanding on this further, imagine if the trend escalated, with people starting to bring ladders to the stadium to rise above the standing crowd. The initial advantage gained by the first few ladder users would soon be nullified as more and more spectators follow suit, leading to a precarious and laborious situation where everyone is perched on ladders, going through considerable effort and risk, yet no one achieving a better view than what was originally available if everyone just did nothing and stayed seated. This scenario illustrates the futility and inherent flaw in the pursuit of competitive advantage when it leads to collective actions that negate the individual benefits sought, embodying the very essence of a Moloch-driven system. This phenomenon subtly plays out almost everywhere in our modern world today.

The idea of Moloch, as we delve deeper, reveals itself not as a specter wielded by a single entity but as an emergent phenomenon, a collective dance of individual actions and reactions within the vast, interconnected web of our digital society. Not a centralized force but a byproduct of the intricate game of incentives and competition that underpins our social structures and Capitalism. This reflects a broader societal pattern where technological advancements incentivize short-term strategies that don’t benefit us collectively in the long term and may actually lead to our demise. This paradigm is alarmingly evident in the context of climate change, where the relentless pursuit of industrial and economic growth, powered by short-sighted incentives, propels us towards ecological and existential crises.

Moloch embodies the essence of game theory gone awry, where the pursuit of individual advantage within a competitive framework leads to a collective trap — a multi-polar trap.

Each participant, driven by the allure of short-term gains, whether it be likes, shares, or viral fame, becomes a cog in a machine that perpetuates strategies detrimental to the collective well-being. This cycle, self-sustaining and self-perpetuating, ensnares all within a system where the rational pursuit of individual advantage paradoxically undermines the collective good.

Social media provides fertile ground for Moloch to flourish.

Here, the design of algorithms, the currency of engagement, and the metrics of success all converge to create an environment that is Moloch on steroids. In this context, the responsibility for the emergence of Moloch-like dynamics does not lie with a single creator or entity but emerges from the collective actions and decisions of all participants within the system. This is seen in modern phenomena like the pervasive use of beauty filters on social media platforms such as Instagram and the drive for personal advantage in a competitive landscape.

The very fabric of social media, woven with the threads of engagement and virality, incentivizes behaviors that feed into the cycle of competition and comparison, leading to a landscape where sensationalism trumps substance, and the quest for attention overshadows the desire for authentic connection.

It’s optimization, boiling down the richness of human interaction into quantifiable metrics like likes, shares, and retweets. This reductionist approach, while simplifying user engagement into measurable outcomes, unwittingly lays the groundwork for Moloch to thrive, turning social media into a battleground of competition and comparison.

The system is designed to prioritize engagement over substance, becoming a battlefield, not of physical confrontations but of ideological clashes, amplified and accelerated by the very platforms that were meant to connect us. This battleground, shaped by the invisible hand of Moloch, transforms even the most innocuous topics into fissures that divide us, slicing through the fabric of society that maximizes tension and discord. It’s an emergent force, where the collective drive for attention and engagement morphs into a weaponized form of communication, often manifesting as a culture war that leaves little room for middle ground or mutual understanding.

At the heart of this is the attention economy.

It is fueled by engagement metrics that platforms optimize for prioritizing content that triggers strong emotional responses, particularly anger. Anger, an emotion that once served to protect us in more primal times, has been co-opted by the algorithms that govern our digital spaces, becoming the most effective tool to capture and retain user attention. This dynamic creates a feedback loop where content that incites outrage is more likely to be engaged with, shared, and spread, out-competing more nuanced or balanced discourse. It’s a system that, while designed to keep us connected and informed, ends up polarizing and dividing, turning the digital sphere into a theater of conflict where the loudest, most provocative voices drown out the rest. The often toxic nature of interactions that rise to the top of our feeds is not an accident but a direct result of algorithmic choices that prioritize engagement over all else. It is not a bug but a feature.

These choices, while beneficial for driving platform usage and ad revenue, contribute to a digital environment of sensationalism over substance, and controversy is more visible than constructive dialogue. This machine, powered by our engagement, thrives on conflict, turning the digital landscape into an echo chamber of extremes, where the middle ground is lost in the noise.

AI Is Not Neutral

The digital age has ushered in not just new means of communication but also new weapons of influence, with information warfare becoming a tangible reality. The presence of bad actors, leveraging bots and artificial intelligence to manipulate public discourse, introduces a new dimension of complexity to an already dynamic environment, a trend that shows no signs of slowing down. With the continuous advancement of our digital tools and platforms, especially with the integration of AI capable of significant psychological and social impact, we are faced with the critical realization that technology inherently carries values and biases. The designs, algorithms, and user interfaces we create are imbued with the values and intentions of their creators, shaping human behavior and societal norms in profound ways.

Artist Patrick Amadon recently highlighted this in a series of posts on X.

If AI thinks criminals disproportionately look like minorities, AI-enhanced surveillance is going to disproportionately target minorities. If AI thinks the babies with the most potential are white with blue eyes, those babies will get advantages. If AI thinks the most likely to be successful young adults are white and good looking, they’re going to be prioritized. We’re baking this all in now for training future AI models… we’re collectively deciding what our future looks like now. — Patrick Amadon

Centralization Vs Decentralization

Centralization, with its efficiency and ability to coordinate large-scale efforts, offers stability and order but at the risk of descending into authoritarian control. Decentralization, on the other hand, promises freedom and resistance to tyranny but can lead to chaos and a lack of cohesive direction. Striking the right balance between these two poles is crucial in designing systems that can harness the benefits of both without falling prey to the pitfalls of either. Moloch, as an emergent phenomenon of competing interests and incentives, can also insinuate itself into decentralized structures, exploiting the very lack of coordination and oversight that decentralization seeks to address.

All Roads Lead Back To Moloch

It is my belief that ultimately, most of the challenges we face across society can be traced back to systems driven by Molochian values.

The pervasive influence of Moloch, also significantly impacts the music industry, film, the emerging NFT art market, and cryptocurrency. This phenomenon, rooted in our society’s profit-driven frameworks, poses significant challenges for any business or platform striving for growth without sacrificing the integrity of their communities or the quality of interactions.

The pressing need for systemic change and a critical reassessment of the incentives governing our digital and social landscapes is evident. Moloch symbolizes the unintended consequences of our relentless drive for progress. Can we envision a future where progress and profit do not come at the expense of community well-being and authentic human connection? The answer to this question holds the key to reshaping our digital world into one that prioritizes the human experience over just the dynamics of profit and competition.

chrisarvan.com
https://www.instagram.com/chrisarvan
https://x.com/ChrisArvan

Related Articles:

The Current State Of Web3 Music | How We Got Here & What We Can Do To Fix It

References:

Meditations On Moloch By Scott Alexander
https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/07/30/meditations-on-moloch/

Lex Fridman #314
Liv Boeree: Poker, Game Theory, AI, Simulation, Aliens & Existential Risk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eF-E40pxxbI

Daniel Schmachtenberger on The Superorganism and Multipolar Traps
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GKEhPNBR6mU

Win-Win with Liv Boeree
Moloch: The Beauty Wars
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fifVuhgvQQ8

Daniel Schmachtenberger | Misalignment, AI & Moloch
https://civilizationemerging.com/media/misalignment-ai-moloch/

A fundamental reevaluation of how music as an art form is perceived and valued is needed in the new digital era.

The emergence of digital art through NFTs represented a significant, yet fairly natural evolution for those already familiar with blockchain concepts and the art market. For collectors and artists accustomed to high-value physical art, this transition didn’t necessitate a drastic mindset shift. Instead, it offered an expansion of existing appreciation for art’s value into a new, digital form. This new concept particularly resonated with collectors in the crypto space, who were drawn to the potential of creating a new digital art world. It was less about altering perceptions and more about broadening the horizon of what art could be in the digital age.

In contrast to visual art, music’s journey through the digital era, especially via streaming platforms, has taken a different path. The focus on widespread accessibility at minimal cost has led to a devaluation in its perception for over more than two decades.

Fundamentally, both digital visual art and digital music exist as files — a JPEG and a WAV file both are simply digital files. Furthermore, anyone can view visual art online for free, much like listening to a track via streaming services. However, the cultural perception has not aligned music with the uniqueness and ownership associated with digital art, marking a distinct divergence in how these art forms are valued digitally.

Music also faces other unique challenges in the digital art space. Unlike visual art, which can be instantly appreciated on a phone screen or in a digital gallery, music requires an environment conducive to experiencing its sound quality and nuances. The intricacies and craftsmanship in a musical piece cannot be discerned through a simple glance or listening through iphone speakers. This lack of immediate, sensory engagement puts music at a disadvantage compared to visual art on digital platforms. Additionally, unlike most visual artists who create every aspect of their work, many (I would venture to say most) musicians rely on collaborations for key visual elements like album covers and music videos. This reliance on teamwork, involving record labels and various other creative minds, is usually not a singular artistic vision and concept like that of a visual artist. Competing with standalone visual artists, who have solely focused on developing their craft, adds to the difficulty and complexity.

Over the past three years, I’ve witnessed the music NFT scene as a testing arena, yet none of it has resonated with me…at all. The dominant trend seems to be producing more utility-focused tokens and issuing large numbers of music NFTs at minimal costs. This trend, particularly platforms pushing for $1 mints and below, suggests just another race to devalue music as an art form. It’s essentially the Web2 mindset reincarnated in Web3, with just a twist.

Traditionally, music’s value has been tied to its mass appeal and widespread accessibility. This collective understanding has led many to view music primarily as a product for widespread consumption, overshadowing its potential as a high-end collectible art form. But, it could be.

This perception is not an inherent characteristic of music but a consequence of the circumstances under which the music industry has operated. Had the technological landscape, particularly the early days of the internet, included mechanisms like blockchain, the story might have been different. Music might have been perceived and valued more akin to visual art — as individual, collectible works, each with its own unique worth in addition to the mass consumption via streaming. But, it didn’t go that way.

Drawing parallels between music and visual art reveals a striking discrepancy in how their original creations are perceived. Visual art, for instance, also often extends its reach through prints, t-shirts, or other mass-produced items as well. These derivatives, while popular and widely accessible, don’t diminish the value of the original 1 of 1 artwork. The original remains esteemed and valuable, distinct from its more accessible reproductions.

This same principle, just isn’t applied to music, particularly when considering original recordings or masters. The question then arises: why is the original recording or master in music not viewed with the same reverence as a 1 of 1 artwork?

This discrepancy is largely attributed to the business strategies adopted by music platforms and record labels. The approaches of these entities are driven not only by cultural perceptions but also by the practical necessities of their business models. In fact, it’s evident that these strategies have been the root cause of the current perception in the first place. Rather than just reflecting existing cultural views on music, these business models have actively shaped and reinforced the idea that music is less a collectible art form and more a commodity for mass consumption.

Business Models and the Trend Towards Accessibility

Given this foundation, it becomes clear why music NFT and streaming platforms have evolved as they have. Their development and strategies are deeply intertwined with their business models, which prioritize expanding their user base as widely as possible. This focus is rooted in simple business logic: more users lead to more transactions, and consequently, more transactions drive revenue and growth. Such a model is designed to maximize accessibility and participation.

This approach inevitably leads to the prevalent trend of $1 mints and high-volume releases, a pattern mirroring traditional platforms but now replicated in Web3. It’s a model that inherently favors quantity over quality and completely defeats the purpose of it being an NFT. So, you’re just supposed to sell as many as you can at $1? That’s the game? Inevitably, everyone just undercuts everyone else in another race to the bottom. Also, the higher the quantity you sell, the more any sense of provenance and value for the collectors is diluted. There is no way this works. It’s just dumb and a terrible model for the artists. Period.

Sure, it’s fantastic if you’re the company or the brains behind it — inflate the value, sell off the company, and get absorbed by some larger corporation, just feeding into the same consolidation we’ve always seen. But let’s be clear, this isn’t about revolutionizing the game or shifting the paradigm from what we’ve always known. Don’t fall for it.

I address this actually in my other article on the concept of “Moloch” and game theory gone awry, where the pursuit of individual advantage within a competitive framework leads to a collective trap: 𝗠𝗼𝗹𝗼𝗰𝗵, 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗣𝘂𝗽𝗽𝗲𝘁𝗲𝗲𝗿 𝗣𝘂𝗹𝗹𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗦𝘁𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗴𝘀 𝗢𝗳 𝗔 𝗠𝗮𝗰𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗲 𝗙𝘂𝗲𝗹𝗲𝗱 𝗕𝘆 𝗢𝘂𝗿 𝗖𝗼𝗹𝗹𝗲𝗰𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗲 𝗥𝗮𝗴𝗲.

This predominant approach in these business models not only influences the way music is released and consumed but also impacts the industry’s broader view on the value of music in areas like publishing and performing rights. Despite their crucial importance in the traditional music industry, discussions about these key elements are almost nonexistent in Web3.

Music Publishing & Performing Rights Have Largely Been Ignored In Web3

Given the significant role of rights and royalties in the music industry, organizations like BMI and ASCAP have been instrumental. They operate effectively in the traditional music industry, managing and distributing royalties. Their activities highlight the complexities and opportunities in the music business that extend beyond mere streaming revenue. Many talented musicians and composers, who might not even be present on streaming platforms, derive substantial income from these sources in film, video, television, and advertising.

As someone who diverged from the conventional streaming path to explore alternative avenues in the music industry, I’ve witnessed firsthand the vast potential that lies beyond mainstream platforms. This experience has led me to believe that the Web3 space, while promising, still has a lot to uncover and integrate, particularly regarding the complexities of music rights and royalties. Addressing this gap could unlock new possibilities for artists, especially those who operate outside the conventional music industry sphere.

While the traditional music industry has its complexities, especially around publishing rights and royalties, the digital realm introduces new paradigms that challenge these established norms. This brings us to another significant aspect in the evolution of music in the digital era: Creative Commons licensing. How does this concept, which has found a place in digital art, translate to the world of music?

Creative Commons Licensing — CCO and Music

In the digital art world, Creative Commons licensing, specifically the CC0 (“No Rights Reserved”) license, has sparked considerable interest. Digital artists like XCOPY have embraced this model, leveraging the provenance of their original high-value sales while allowing unrestricted use and reproduction of their work. This approach has its merits, fostering a culture of open access and community engagement around an artist’s creations, However, translating this model to music would not be a good idea in my opinion. Unlike visual art, music has a well-established ecosystem of rights management and royalty distribution through organizations like BMI and ASCAP. These entities play a crucial role in ensuring musicians and composers are compensated for the use of their work, especially in public performances and broadcasts. They work extremely well actually and not for profit companies.

The notion of applying a CC0 license to music, allowing unrestricted and uncredited usage, is fraught with implications. It would potentially undermine the existing frameworks that ensure fair compensation for music artists with their publishing and copyright. While the idea of freely available beats or compositions under CC0 licensing might seem appealing for fostering creativity, it disregards the intricate network of rights and royalties that sustain many musicians.

Furthermore, music, by its nature, invites collaborations and iterations. A CC0 approach in music could blur lines of originality and ownership, making it challenging to uphold the rights of original creators, especially in scenarios involving multiple contributors. When someone creates a derivative of an XCOPY piece, it’s visible, but in a music track, identifying who contributed a specific beat, guitar part, or sample is nearly impossible. It’s just basically giving away everything for free in the context of music and nobody would ever know who actually did anything. It’s a terrible idea.

In my view, caution is warranted in adopting CC0 licensing in music. While it’s not to say that selective or one-off CC0 releases couldn’t work, embracing it as a trend or standard practice I believe would be detrimental and devalue the one thing that actually does work well in the traditional music business. The music industry’s strength lies in its unique structures like performance rights organizations — nothing like this even exists on the visual art side. Preserving and adapting these structures in the evolving digital realm is essential. It would be quite ironic if the people championing this as being in favor of somehow reclaiming music’s value end up dismantling the last thing in the music business that truly works in their favor.

As we navigate these complex issues, from the nuances of CC0 licensing to the preservation of traditional music rights, it becomes clear that a deeper reevaluation is needed in how we approach and value music in the digital space.

So Where Does That Leave Us?

To shift the narrative, we need to make a collective statement that just like a 1 of 1 painting or a digital art piece, an original music piece as a digital file can be deserving of recognition and high value as an art form. This doesn’t negate having it also on Spotify or exploring other creative blockchain use cases with it. These can co-exist and compliment the original 1 of 1 creation.

The challenge now extends beyond recognizing music’s potential in the Web3 space to transforming the entrenched cultural mindset that has long defined it. We must envision music as more than a commodity for mass consumption and acknowledge its potential as a singular and valued art form. This paradigm shift in perception invites us to rethink our cultural narrative around music, exploring ways digital platforms can elevate its value rather than diminish it.

chrisarvan.com
https://www.instagram.com/chrisarvan
https://x.com/ChrisArvan