I've been reading and thinking quite a bit recently about the impact of the digital revolution on music making etc. aided by the always thoughtful blog that Dubber publishes.

Here are a few observations under the heading "Digital isn't killing music"
It certainly is causing it to evolve through rapid mutations though.
I remember a friend of mine complaining vehemently about early midi synthesisers because they were artificial and let a thing that wasn't a violin sound like a violin (but not very - though that's another conversation). Then and now my view is quite different - firstly one should confuse music with the tool; any device that allows someone to engage in the creative musical process (and hopefully produce things of musical beauty) is worthwhile; so if that means a fiddle player can write and play an organ recital without having any skill with keys and pedals then that's fine - maybe better than fine since the interface determines the technique and and expression that can be brought to the music.

It also isn't killing CD's. In fact CD distribution of music is probably more healthy than ever. But it's so easy to produce good looking small quantities of CD's that artists are able to publish their own. Which means we have a greater choice than ever (if we can find it - which is where digital communications, communities and digimarketing come in), however it also means that record companies aren't getting the economies of scale they once had since people are consuming music across a broader range of formats and artists.

Digital recording technology makes it simpler for artists to produce high quality recordings of their music, swelling the amount of choice further still. There is a caveat to this though... just because you can record something on your own doesn't mean you should; sound engineers and producers are experts at getting the best out of the music (generally, Brothers in Arms being a clear exception to the rule) and the cost of employing them and hiring a full studio sets the bar high enough that a lot of the dross gets filtered out, to some extent at least. If it's good music it's worth recording well...

The concept of an 'album' has changed. Back when dinosaurs roamed the earth the length of an album was dictated by what would fit on a side of a vinyl record - about 20 minutes, so albums were 40 - 50 minutes long. Then CD's extended the length to 74 then 80 minutes, breaking the side 1, side 2 paradigm, allowed people to more easily dip into individual tracks (lessening the value of singles in the process)  and making it easer to listen to an hour of uninterrupted music (especially whilst on the move). They also helped protect the recording, being rather more resilient to wear and tear than vinyl. Downloadable digital formats allow artists to experiment with all sorts of concepts for albums as well as serving the appetite for the 'pick n mix' generation; web sites are one example of this, but expect to see more 'interesting' evolutions of this in future.

I could go on... please feel free to add to the discussion.

"No Mr Bond, I expect..."

The next James Bond book is due out soon, titled Devil May Care. To celebrate this worthy event (and maybe make huge piles of money when someone buys the rights), we have written a full blown Bond theme.

It has all the elements you'd expect, though the budget hasn't run to a tantalising video of apparently naked members of the fairer sex (volunteers welcome, to make the video of course), but it does have the distinct benefit of been a stonkingly good tune. It might even make it onto the album.

Catch it at the Gig in the Village, or wander over to our TM on MySpace for a taster.