Skip to content
1981
Volume 1, Issue 1
  • ISSN: 3050-2942
  • E-ISSN: 3050-2950

Abstract

This article explores the evolving landscape of recording engineering in response to changing industrial models. As recording engineers encounter challenges in unconventional spaces and diverse formats, particularly those faced by travelling engineers, adapting swiftly to new recording environments becomes crucial. Our investigation delves into the intricate relationship between recording engineers and the facilities they navigate, with a specific focus on the creative engineering process. Employing actor-network theory, we categorize our exploration into place, facility networks, and time to study the reflexive interactions of engineers with recording environments. Our research involves four participants – three experienced engineers doubling as educators and one early-career student engineer. Each scenario sets two engineers against each other in distinct environments, with six recording sessions (two per studio) over a three-day period, imposing a four-hour time limit to gauge their engineering process. Employing both in-session and post-session interviews, we apply our three categories to better understand how recording engineers creatively adapt to diverse scenarios, shedding light on their dynamic relationship with evolving recording landscapes.

Funding
This study was supported by the:
  • Drexel University Provost’s Faculty Summer Research
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1386/jmpr_00003_1
2025-10-29
2026-04-22

Metrics

Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/jmpr/1/1/jmpr.1.1.91_Pratt.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1386/jmpr_00003_1&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Aikin, J. (1981), ‘Brian Eno’, Keyboard, 7, pp. 4245, http://music.hyperreal.org/artists/brian_eno/interviews/keyb81.html. Accessed 1 October 2025.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. American Federation of Musicians (AFM) (2023), Sound Recording Labor Agreement Signatory Packet, New York: AFM, https://www.afm.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/Sound-Recording-Labor-Agreement-Signatory-Packet-10.23.pdf. Accessed 20 December 2024.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Attali, J. (1985), Noise: The Political Economy of Music, Manchester: Manchester University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Bates, E. (2012), ‘What studios do’, Journal on the Art of Record Production, 7, https://www.arpjournal.com/asarpwp/what-studios-do/. Accessed 1 October 2025.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Bates, E. and Bennett, S. (2018), ‘The production of music and sound: A multidisciplinary critique’, Critical Approaches to the Production of Music and Sound, pp. 121, https://doi.org/10.5040/9781501332074.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Bell, A. P. (2018), Dawn of the DAW: The Studio as Musical Instrument, New York: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Bennett, S. (2016), ‘Behind the magical mystery door: History, mythology and the aura of Abbey Road Studios’, Popular Music, 35:3, pp. 396417, https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261143016000556.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Bennett, S. (2019), Modern Records, Maverick Methods: Technology and Process in Popular Music Record Production 1978–2000, New York: Bloomsbury Academic.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Burgess, R. J. (2013), The Art of Music Production: The Theory and Practice, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Candy, L. and Edmonds, E. (2018), ‘Practice-based research in the creative arts: Foundations and futures from the front line’, Leonardo, 51:1, pp. 6369, https://doi.org/10.1162/LEON_a_01471.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2002), Flow: The Classic Work on How to Achieve Happiness, rev. ed., London: Rider.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Dant, T. (2005), Materiality and Society, Maidenhead: McGraw-Hill Education.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Dudhwala, F. (2009), ‘What is actor-network theory?’, https://www.academia.edu/download/2711233/What_is_ANT_2009.pdf. Accessed 1 October 2025.
  14. Eno, B. (2013), ‘The studio as compositional tool’, in C. Cox and D. Warner (eds), Collected Work: Audio Culture: Readings in Modern Music, 2nd ed., London: Bloomsbury, pp. 12730.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Gibson, C. (2005), ‘Recording studios: Relational spaces of creativity in the city’, Built Environment, 31:3 pp. 192207, https://doi.org/10.2148/benv.2005.31.3.192.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Goold, L. (2022), ‘The production of space and the changing character of the recording studio’, Popular Music, 41:2, pp. 23856, https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261143022000150.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Goold, L. and Graham, P. (2019), ‘The uncertain future of the large-format recording studio’, in J. O. Gullö (ed.), Proceedings of the 2017 Art of Record Production Conference, Stockholm: Royal College of Music, pp. 11936.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Gray, C. and Malins, J. (2016), Visualizing Research: A Guide to the Research Process in Art and Design, New York and London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Howlett, M. (2012), ‘The record producer as Nexus’, Journal on the Art of Record Production, 6:6, pp. 16.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Katz, M. (2012), Groove Music: The Art and Culture of the Hip-Hop DJ, New York: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Kealy, E. R. (1990), ‘From craft to art: The case of sound mixers and popular music’, in A. Frith (ed.), On Record: Rock, Pop, and the Written Word, London: Taylor & Francis, Routledge, pp. 20720.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Latour, B. (1993), We Have Never Been Modern, Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Latour, B. (1996), ‘On actor-network theory: A few clarifications’, Soziale Welt, 47:4, pp. 36981, http://www.jstor.org/stable/40878163. Accessed 21 August 2025.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Latour, B. (2005), Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Law, J. (1992), ‘Notes on the theory of the actor-network: Ordering, strategy, and heterogeneity’, Systems Practice, 5:4, pp. 37993, https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01059830.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Lefford, M. N. (2015), ‘The sound of coordinated efforts: Music producers, boundary objects and trading zones’, Journal on the Art of Record Production, 10:10, https://www.arpjournal.com/asarpwp/the-sound-of-coordinated-efforts-music-producers-boundary-objects-and-trading-zones/. Accessed 21 August 2025.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Leyshon, A. (2009), ‘The software slump? Digital music, the democratisation of technology, and the decline of the recording studio sector within the musical economy’, Environment and Planning, 41:6, pp. 130931, https://doi.org/10.1068/a40352.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Malafouris, L. (2008), ‘At the potter’s wheel: An argument for material agency’, in C. Knappett and L. Malafouris (eds), Material Agency: Towards a Non-Anthropocentric Approach, New York: Springer, pp. 1936.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. McIntyre, P. (2015), ‘Tradition and innovation in creative studio practice: The use of older gear, processes and ideas in conjunction with digital technologies’, Journal on the Art of Record Production, 9, https://www.arpjournal.com/asarpwp/tradition-and-innovation-in-creative-studio-practice-the-use-of-older-gear-processes-and-ideas-in-conjunction-with-digital-technologies/. Accessed 21 August 2025.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Pras, A. and Guastavino, C. (2011), ‘The role of music producers and sound engineers in the current recording context, as perceived by young professionals’, Musicae Scientiae, 15:1, pp. 7395, https://doi.org/10.1177/1029864910393407.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Schmidt-Horning, S. (2012), ‘The sound of space: Studio as instrument in the era of high fidelity, in F. Simon and Z. Simon (eds), The Art of Record Production, Farnham: Ashgate, pp. 2942.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Scott, A. J. (1999), ‘The cultural economy: Geography and the creative field’, Media, Culture & Society, 21:6, pp. 80717, https://doi.org/10.1177/016344399021006006.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Seay, T. (2016), ‘Sonic signatures in record production’, in J. G. Papenburg and H. Schulze (eds), Sound as Popular Culture, Boston, MA: The MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Seay, T. (2023), ‘The sound engineer’s creativity: Mediative practices and the recorded artifact’, doctoral thesis, London: Kingston University.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Sheehan, R. (2011), ‘Actor-network theory as a reflexive tool: (Inter)personal relations and relationships in the research process’, Area, 43:3, pp. 33642, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-4762.2011.01000.x.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Stake, R. E. (2010), Qualitative Research: Studying How Things Work, New York: Guilford Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Starman, A. B. (2013), ‘The case study as a type of qualitative research’, Journal of Contemporary Educational Studies/Sodobna Pedagogika, 64:1, pp. 2843, https://www.researchgate.net/profile/A-Biba-Rebolj-2/publication/265682891_The_case_study_as_a_type_of_qualitative_research/links/54183f560cf25ebee988104c/The-case-study-as-a-type-of-qualitative-research.pdf. Accessed 22 August 2025.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Watson, A. and Ward, J. (2013), ‘Creating the right “vibe”: Emotional labour and musical performance in the recording studio’, Environment & Planning, 45:12, pp. 290418, https://doi.org/10.1068/a45619.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Weick, K. E. (1995), Sensemaking in Organizations, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Zagorski-Thomas, S. (2014), The Musicology of Record Production, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Zak, A. (2009), ‘Getting sounds: The art of sound engineering’, in E. Clarke, N. Cook, D. Leech-Wilkinson and J. Rink (eds), Notes: The Cambridge Companion to Recorded Music, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 6376.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Schmidt-Horning, S. (2013), Chasing Sound: Technology, Culture & the Art of Studio Recording from Edison to the LP, Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Simons, H. (2009), Case Study Research in Practice, Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Slater, M. and Martin, A. (2012), ‘A conceptual foundation for understanding musico-technological creativity’, Journal of Music, Technology & Education, 5:1, pp. 5976, https://doi.org/10.1386/jmte.5.1.59_1.
    [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1386/jmpr_00003_1
Loading
/content/journals/10.1386/jmpr_00003_1
Loading

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a success
Invalid data
An error occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error
Please enter a valid_number test