See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/359257753

Learning EDM The "Schooling" of Electronic Dance Musicians

Thesis · January 2022

DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.35891.71200

CITATIONS READS

0 572

1 author:

Tiana Souvaliotis
The University of Sydney
1 PUBLICATION 0 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Tiana Souvaliotis on 16 March 2022.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Learning EDM

The “Schooling” of Electronic Dance Musicians

Tiana Souvaliotis

A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of

the requirements for the degree of

Bachelor of Music (Music Education) (Honours)

Sydney Conservatorium of Music

University of Sydney

2021
 Acknowledgements

Firstly, I’d like to thank the music educators at the Sydney Conservatorium for providing me

with the opportunity to conduct this research project. Although it has tested my self-efficacy

and inner strength, completing this project has helped me grow in many ways, not only as a

person, but as an educator as well. Thank you for all the support, encouragement, and

feedback over the last two years. It is greatly appreciated and never forgotten.

To my supervisor, Dr. James Humberstone: I cannot begin to describe, nor find the words to

say thank you for all the support and guidance you have given me over the past two years.

Thank you for your time, and most importantly your words of wisdom. Just when I thought I

wanted to give up and had lost my way, you were there to guide me back on the right path.

Your patience with all my questions and constant messages is greatly appreciated. May this

be the first of many papers we work on together.A special thank you to Dr Philip Eames for

taking the time to proofread my paper. I appreciate your time and patience with me and with

this paper. Your feedback has been extremely valuable.

To my participants: Thank you for allowing me to study your learning processes and share

your journey with me. I thank you for giving up your time to be part of this project and

inspire the next generation of Electronic Dance Music producers. Your stories and processes

are greatly appreciated.

My family and partner Kieran: Thank you for all the encouragement you have shown me over

the last two years. Your encouragement and support have gotten me through some tough

times, and I appreciate all that you do for me.

ii
 Abstract

This study investigates the learning processes of Electronic Dance Music (EDM) producers.

It aims to provide an expanded outlook on Lucy Green’s (2002; 2008) Informal Learning

model using EDM as opposed to guitar-based rock music. Through the use of interviews and

observations, four participants of various skill levels, demographics, and musical

backgrounds shared their creative process and journey on learning how to produce EDM.

Through the implementation of solitary learning, tinkering, listening and copying, and the

presence of a significant “other” were paramount in the learning process of the participants.

Although the participants expressed that their classroom music learning was not influential in

their learning process, they sought other means learning through external institutions. Their

embodied musical knowledge was demonstrated throughout their creative process, as

participants displayed both verbal and non-verbal understandings of the concepts of music.

The results of this study suggest that the learning processes of these participants can be

adapted to extend Green’s (2008) Informal Learning model.

iii
 Table of Contents

List of Figures 1

Key Terms and Definitions 2

Chapter 1: Introduction 4

Significance of Study 6

Research Questions 7

Chapter 2: Literature Review 8

Informal Learning in Music Education 8

Musical Futures and its Implementation 9

Communities of Practice 13

Musical and Cultural Identity 17

Defining Electronic Dance Music 18

EDM Prehistories 19

Electronic Dance Music in Australia 20

Learning Processes and the Presence of Technology

in Real Life Learning 21

Chapter 3: Methodology 25

Research Design 25

Participant Selection 25

Interviews and Observations 27

Data Analysis Method 29

iv
Chapter 4: Findings 31

Participant Backgrounds 31

Formal Music Knowledge vs. Self-Taught Knowledge 34

The Significant “Other” 37

How Did They Learn? 38

Trial and Error Learning Process 38

Listening and Copying 41

Music Software and Hardware 43

Embodied Musical Knowledge 44

Composing Style 45

Identification of Key and Tempo 47

Instrumentation, Rhythm and Chords 48

Terminology and References to Musical Concepts 52

Instant Feedback 55

Chapter 5: Conclusion 56

Informal Learning and EDM 56

Implications for Music Education 58

Recommendations for Pedagogical Development 59

Limitations and Future Research 62

Bibliography 64

Appendices
Appendix A 75

Appendix B 76

Appendix C 79
v
 List of Figures

Table 1: Interview Log 28

Table 2: Observation Log 29

Figure 1: Dean’s DAW: Use of the Template and Prepared Samples 46

Figure 2: Marcus’ DAW: D Major on the Piano Roll 48

Figure 3 Marcus’ DAW: Harmonic Rhythm 49

Figure 4: Transcription of Marcus’s Chords in Traditional Notation 50

Figure 5: Marie Kiara’s DAW: Chord Building 50

Figure 6: Marie Kiara’s DAW: Further Chord Building 51

Figure 7: Marie Kiara’s DAW: Structure 53

Figure 8: Marcus’ DAW: Structure 54

Figure 9: Dean’s DAW: Automation 54

1
 Key Terms and Definitions

Digital Audio Workstation (DAW): A categorization of software with the capability to

sequence, record, and mix music. It can include software-based synthesizers that imitate

existing instruments, as well as create new tones and timbres (Bell, 2018).

Disc Jockey (DJ): According to Thornton (1995), a DJ is a person who generally selects and

performs a series of tracks using records or CD’s and creatively navigates through a live set

using mixing techniques.

Electronic Dance Music (EDM): According to Butler (2006), EDM is a broad range of

percussive electronic music genres which are made largely for nightclubs, raves, and

festivals. It is also known as dance music and/or club music.

Genre: A style or category of art, music, or literature (Cambridge Dictionary, 2021).

Informal Learning: This term describes the pedagogical approach which first emerged in

the work of Lucy Green (2008). It is developed from the way popular musicians learn and is

directly related to the five-step process Green suggested for the classroom.

Musical Futures: A pilot program that was developed from Green’s Informal Learning

pedagogy with funding from the Paul Hamlyn Foundation in the United Kingdom.

2
Producer: According to Walzer (2016) a producer is an amateur musician who uses

accessible digital technology such as MIDI controller-based instruments and virtual studio

technology to create music.

Semi-professional: People who are paid for their musical activities but do not do it as their

main job. (Oxford Learners Dictionary, 2021).

Subgenre: A category that is a subdivision of a larger genre (Collins Dictionary, 2021).

Tinkering: A style of working characterized by playful, exploratory, iterative style of

engaging with a problem or project (Resnick and Rosenbaum, 2013)

3
 Chapter 1
Introduction

The function of an Electronic Dance Music (EDM) producer encompasses a range of skills

and socio-cultural roles played by the contemporary musician. The EDM producer is a

recording engineer, a computer programmer, composer, lyricist, synthesizer player,

performer and improviser. They are equally comfortable alone in their studio, recording

automation onto a track or using a complex combination of “in the box” and “outboard”

musical devices and instruments, as on a stadium stage, performing their songs live. The

EDM producer must understand musical aspects such as sophisticated harmony and harmonic

relations, rhythm, tempo, and metric relationships, as well as the technical aspects of audio

editing, effects, recording techniques, mixing, and mastering. Further, a mastery of the

specific skills and styles of the various subgenre is required.

In a relatively new and rapidly evolving technological landscape, little is known about how

EDM producers develop the skills and acquire the broad knowledge required to play all these

roles. It is not known to what extent EDM producers learn music in traditional formal music

education (if at all), and how they might absorb the extra technical knowledge and skills

required in this career that are not typically found in high school classroom education. Bauer

(2020) highlights the power of technology as a means of learning, asserting that “Music and

technology are intertwined in many ways, and technology is enabling individuals to be

musical in a variety of ways, even without a formal musical background” (p. 5). Only a few

studies have considered these questions, generally finding that many producers and DJs do

not have deep connections to, or associations with, formal music education or Western Art

Music (Burnard, 2012; Thompson, 2012). To this end, Burnard (2012) makes reference to

4
Jazzie B, a British DJ who she deems as one of the biggest urban acts to play a role in British

dance music history, yet Jazzie B asserts that he “didn’t have any real professional sort of

teaching” and was “never into classical music” (Burnard, 2012, p. 103). Similarly, Thompson

(2012) highlights the various learning processes of DJs, stating that none of the fifty-four

participants of his study encountered popular electronic music within their formal music

education. Instead, participants stated that their learning and skill acquisition occurred outside

the classroom either independently or with a more experienced individual.

This study focuses on the nature of musical learning processes as experienced among

Electronic Dance Music (EDM) producers. Specifically, the purpose of this inquiry is to

analyse the various types of knowledge and skills that EDM producers learn, how they learn

them, and the historical/cultural context in which their learnings occur. Such insight may

offer strategies to engage students in more diverse musical styles and cultures in formal

(classroom) music education (Bull & Scharff, 2017; Lamont, 2010; Kallio, 2017; Wright,

2011; Vakeva, 2012).

Lucy Green’s (2002; 2008) seminal research on how popular musicians learn offers one

possible model for discovering the potential of popular music learning strategies to be

appropriated for the classroom. Through the application of the findings from her studies, the

Musical Futures program was developed (Finney & Philpott, 2010; Green, 2008). The

program was designed to bridge the gap between the positive musical experiences students

encountered outside of school, such as jamming in friendship groups, and the subsequent

disengaging experiences of theoretical or listening experiences within the classroom. The

results of the pilot implementation of the project revealed significant positive results in regard

to student motivation, engagement, autonomy, and social skills. This approach to teaching

5
was created in accordance with the pedagogical approach and theories relating to Informal

Learning evident in work of Green (2008).

Informal Learning introduces the concept of musical learning that remains true to the

methods and processes of learning by which popular musicians have learnt, played, and

created. This can include, but is not limited to, learning music by ear, interacting with other

players, improvising, and creating. As a result, the teacher becomes the facilitator of

knowledge and learning becomes student-led. While Green’s original work and the

subsequent Musical Futures program investigated the learning processes of predominately

rock musicians, this study seeks to fill a distinct gap in the knowledge around the learning

processes of technology-based musicians, specifically that of EDM producers.

Significance of the Study

This study brings an educational perspective to the experiences of those involved in DJ

culture and producing EDM. From its establishment, early producing and DJing in the 1970s

and 80s could be largely described as informal as it developed outside of schools and higher

education institutions (Green, 2002; 2008). Yet little is known about the experience of

learning, or the processes involved in those Informal Learning settings. As learning processes

associated with musical understanding are contextually situated, an examination of EDM

contexts and pre-histories will help illuminate producers’ musical understanding and the

processes involved in their experience of learning (Egolf, 2014).

I believe that this study will assist in paving the way for a new category of Informal Learning

to be introduced within the classroom. In relation to community music making, this study

focuses on a group of musicians who are found largely outside the formal music education

6
paradigm. As such, this study has the potential to inform teaching and learning, curriculum

development, enhance educators’ pedagogies, and develop new pedagogies as recommended

in the Chapter 5. This can ultimately lead to the creation of a more democratic classroom

which meets students within the contexts of the musical cultures in which they participate

(Elliott and Silverman, 2015; Hess, 2019; Talbot, 2018), and avoid traditional teacher-led

didactic models based on hegemonic Euro-centric pedagogies from which students are

already disengaged (Bull, 2019; Hein, 2013; Hess, 2019; Kuhn and Hein, 2021).

Research Questions

The following research question and related sub-questions frame the overarching direction of

this investigation:

Through what processes do DJs and EDM producers, both amateur and professional, become

musicians?

1. How did they learn how to make electronic music?

2. What technical skills and musical understanding(s) did they have to develop in order to

become producers?

3. In what contexts did they learn?

These questions have been devised with reference to the review of literature in Chapter 2.

The literature addresses the history and context of the Informal Learning model, highlights

the beginnings of Electronic Dance Music worldwide, and investigates the emergence of

online community networking in relation to Electronic Dance Music production.

7
 Chapter 2
Literature Review

The pedagogy of the elements often positions some musics as other, outside the canon. The

language of the elements is not the language of jazz, Hindustani vocal music, rap, or

traditional fiddling. (Rose and Countryman, 2013, p. 48)

Informal Learning in Music Education

Informal Learning is a component of popular music practices. This is made particularly

evident in Lucy Green’s publications How Popular Musicians Learn (2002), and Music,

Informal Learning and the School: A New Classroom Pedagogy (2008). In the former, Green

observes that although many students do in fact drop formal music learning during school, an

enormous number still listen to music after this time, with popular music representing the

majority of this music. It was this difference between people making music and the people

listening to music which led Green to conduct this study, aiming to determine whether the

methods employed by popular musicians could be integrated within the formal music

classroom. In her study, she found that their learning practice involved “watching and

imitating musicians around them and … making reference to recordings or performances and

other live events involving their chosen instrument” (Green, 2002, p. 5).

Green identified five characteristics of Informal Learning employed by popular musicians.

These characteristics are further articulated by Jenkins (2011) as: (1) the learners’ choice of

music; (2) copying recordings by ear; (3) collaborative work in “friendship groups”; (4) full

immersion in projects rather than a step-by-step approach; (5) simultaneous incorporation of

8
creating, performing, improvising, and listening from the beginning. Green further describes

the role of the teacher as:

Firstly, standing back and observing during the first few lessons … and secondly …

diagnosing, suggesting and demonstrating during the latter lessons, at which point the

teachers’ roles become more developed. (2008, p. 30)

Ann Clements (2008) further describes the role of the student in this light as “sources of

knowledge” (p. 2).

Musical Futures and its Implementation

Following the 2002 study, Green developed a pedagogical model to introduce a student-

centred learning environment in which Informal Learning methods could be successfully

integrated into the formal music classroom. The application of the five characteristics of

Informal Learning (stated above) provided a strong grounding for the emergence of Musical

Futures, a national music education program funded by the Paul Hamlyn Foundation from

2003. It resulted in the production of online classroom resources for teachers (Jenkins, 2011;

O’Flynn, 2009), as well as professional development courses to successfully enable them to

introduce this style of pedagogy within the classroom.

Throughout the implementation of the Musical Futures project within the United Kingdom a

large number of teachers reported a positive outcome, after being sceptical prior to its

implementation (Hallam, Creech, and McQueen, 2017; Jenkins, 2011). An evaluation of the

Musical Futures project in the United Kingdom conducted in 2008 found that teachers who

had implemented the project reported an overall increase in student engagement, confidence,

9
willingness to participate, as well as better behaviour within the class (Evans, Beauchamp,

and John, 2015; Hallam, et al., 2017; Wright, 2011). Additionally, teachers observed not only

a shift in the attitudes of the students, but also enhanced music skills in listening, instrumental

performance, and composition, as well as a deeper understanding of various musical genres

(Wright, 2011). This in turn led to a larger number of students continuing their musical

studies the following year.

Multiple studies (Evans, et al., 2015; Hallam, et al., 2017; Wright, 2011) have shown that

Musical Futures gained a largely positive response throughout the United Kingdom, and

other countries such as Australia and Canada have since implemented the new pedagogical

model with similar results. While the structure of music education in these countries vary

from that in the United Kingdom, Wright (2011) illustrates that their issues were quite

similar. Therefore, she argues if the issues are similar, then the same solutions may also

apply. It was shown that teachers were easily able to adapt the Informal Learning model to

the classroom as it is a pedagogical approach as opposed to a curriculum. As such, teachers

were able to adopt and adapt parts of the approach to suit their individual contexts (Wright,

2011).

In these studies, there was a strong consensus among teachers that the results of this program

were indeed positive, as well as the responses from students, including those who were

previously disengaged (Evans, et al., 2015; Jeanneret, 2003). Students who participated in

these pilot studies re-affirmed the positive impact of the pedagogy within the classroom, with

one student stating, “It’s just more interesting … you have the option to do whatever you

want” (Evans, et al., 2015, p. 6). In Canada, O’Neill and Bespflug (2011) observed that many

students who did not possess traditional music reading skills were successful at learning to

10
play by ear. The process of trial and error was also observed during the study as students

aimed to learn their selected song, one participant stating that “we had no music to look off,

so we had to try different combinations … If we didn’t get something right, you had to keep

trying again until you got it right” (p. 26). These comments are consistent with the informal

learning practices where Green observes “within these traditions young musicians largely

teach themselves or ‘pick up’ skills and knowledge, usually with the help or encouragement

of their family and peers” (2002, p. 5).

Although these case studies were conducted on a relatively small scale, the results attained

showed that the implementation of Musical Futures within secondary schools had a powerful

impact on teachers and students alike (Evans, et al., 2015; Jeanneret, 2010; O’Neill and

Bespflug, 2011). The results also showed an increase in teachers’ confidence, pedagogy, and

professional satisfaction (Evans, et al., 2015; Jeanneret, 2010) and in Australia, nine out of

ten participants felt they had become more effective teachers (Jeanneret, 2010). Similarly,

students became active participants in, as opposed to recipients of, their learning (Evans, et

al., 2015).

While Green’s (2002) research was well-received by many educators and scholars, it also

received criticism for its narrow focus on rock/garage band music, its lack of references, and

the lack of acknowledgement of technology as a means of learning (Allsup, 2008; Vakeva,

2012). Hallam, et al. (2017) makes reference to Gower (2012), a secondary school teacher

who reflects upon her own shortcomings when implementing Musical Futures. Gower (2012)

points out that the inclusion of Musical Futures within the classroom, “does not sit easily” (p.

44) within the National Curriculum in the United Kingdom. In lessons where clear structures

are expected, it is not feasible to account for student-centred learning. Brandman (2016)

11
further highlights the issues faced during the implementation of Musical Futures within the

Australian Music Syllabus of the New South Wales Department of Education, Stage 4. She

reports that additional teacher direction and supplementation would be needed to successfully

implement the program into New South Wales schools to meet their requirements of the

syllabus, in particular those associated with composition and listening tasks. As “the nature of

the teaching required total commitment” (p. 56), teachers were becoming stressed and

exhausted throughout the pedagogy's implementation.

Additionally, the “Swedish experience” (Hallam, et al., 2017, p. 57) argues that although

informal pedagogy is designed to be student-centred and that the individual has control over

the pacing of the lesson, some students may become disengaged when the projects offered

through Musical Futures do not meet their needs. Hallam’s (2017) study found that

implementing a more balanced music curriculum, which incorporates both the Musical

Futures pedagogy as well as traditional pedagogy would be more beneficial for both students

and teachers alike. In addition, Allsup (2008) suggests that the incorporation of these

processes, or the rock/pop genres does not mean they will operate well in school music. He

continues to criticise Green, stating that “a curriculum based on the copying of CD recordings

apart from the adult interaction is educationally naïve” (Allsup, 2008, p. 6). Further, Evans, et

al. (2015) brings to light the struggles that were faced in Wales during the implementation of

the pilot Musical Futures study. Students criticised the “lack of commitment” (p. 7) from

other members of their groups, with some students opting not to perform. Some students

argued “it’s easier to be given a song” (p. 8) which illustrates the importance of teacher

intervention as a support mechanism (Allsup and Olson, 2012; Rodriguez, 2012).

12
Communities of Practice

Green’s (2002) work places a major focus on the repertoire of Anglo-American guitar-based

musicians, whose interests are primarily focused on the rock and pop genres (Allsup, 2008;

Christophersen, 2017) and this has been defined as a clear limitation of her study. Vakeva

(2012) observes that through the “rapid global proliferation of digital music culture …

information technology has brought forth new, even radically new, ways of conceiving,

manipulating, mediating, consuming, and recycling music” (p. 40). With the emergence of

Facebook and YouTube in 2005, a new way of learning was born which did not require the

use of cassette tapes and CDs which were deemed central to Green’s 2002 research and

informed the design of her Informal Learning pedagogical method (2008).

Lave and Wenger’s (1991) theories provide scholars and practitioners with ways of thinking

about Informal Learning in the context of these new technologies. Green (2002)

acknowledges their work, particularly highlighting their contribution to the advancement of

theory surrounding communities of practice and situated learning. Lave and Wenger (1991)

describe their idea of legitimate peripheral participation:

By this we mean to draw attention to the point that learners inevitably participate in

communities of practitioners and that mastery of knowledge and skill requires

newcomers to move toward full participation in the sociocultural practices of a

community. Legitimate peripheral participation provides a way to speak about the

relations between newcomers and old-timers, and about activities, identities, artefacts,

and communities of knowledge and practice. (p. 29)

13
Lave and Wenger (1991) established the concept of situated learning which is loosely related

to the master-apprentice model. Clements (2008) criticises Green’s (2002) text, stating that

“The master-apprentice model is prevalent throughout most of the world cultures, yet is

strangely missing in Green’s approach” (Clements, 2008, p. 7). He argues that Green

overemphasizes individual learning, particularly via the copying of recordings in solitude,

suggesting that “even when recordings are used, the music is often brought to fruition not

when it’s copied or replicated but when it is arranged or created anew through organic

means” (p. 8).

Although Green (2002) recognizes the importance of Lave and Wenger’s contribution, she

does not use their model because:

Informal Western popular music learning practices tend to be marked by certain

differences from both traditional and apprenticeship music learning contexts,

particularly in the following two senses. First, most young popular musicians in

the West are not surrounded by an adult community of practicing popular

musicians, and therefore legitimate peripheral participation of the sort studied by

Lave and Wenger is largely unavailable to them. Hence, they tend to engage in a

significant amount of goal-directed solitary learning. (p. 16)

Clements (2008) claims that that gathering of musicians is unrepresented in Green’s (2002)

work, however, it is not entirely absent. Green’s work does reference a variety of group

learning practices during the study and in the subsequent publications on this approach of her

arising pedagogy, which encompasses the central idea of learning in friendship groups. These

friendship groups would then be divided into two sub-groups: peer-directed learning and

14
group learning. Whereby, according to Green (2002), peer-directed learning is described as

“the explicit teaching of one or more persons by a peer”, while group learning is described as

“a result of peer interaction in the absence of any teaching” (p. 76). Within Green’s work,

these subgroups are only used in reference to rock musicians and there is little mention of

electronic musicians and their distinct learning processes.

Lave and Wenger’s (1991) formulation of situated learning emphasizes social interactions

and contexts in learning processes and expands definitions related to the apprenticeship

model. A predominant strength of their work is that the model accounts for multiple

participants in the learning process and their collaboration. The influence of Lave and

Wenger’s theory is particularly evident in Bennett’s (2018) work, which explores the remix

practice within online music communities. This occurs particularly within the genre of

Electronic Dance Music, and the numerous ways in which individuals participate and engage

with each other in these online communities. In addition, Koszolko and Montano (2016)

assert that online platforms, such as remix sites, have the potential to establish new creative

relationships which “extend far beyond the confines of the studio” (p. 79).

Lave and Wenger also observe what they describe as learning without intentional instruction

(Egolf, 2014). This means that learning takes place without a teacher’s structured linear

activities. As a result, this breaks down the traditional teacher-learner model which is found

in schools today. They do not deny that there can be learning with intentional instruction,

however they do “not take intentional instruction to be in itself the source or cause of

learning” (Lave and Wenger, 1991, pp. 40-41). Similarly, Waldron (2018) affirms that over

the last decade there has been a shift in the context of music making. Up until the last decade,

context in music has been associated with an offline “place”. Now however, “there are many

15
existing music genres … that are made, performed, and located online and/or ‘in the cloud’”

(p. 99). Furthermore, “the practice of the community creates the potential curriculum in the

broadest sense: that which may be learned by newcomers with legitimate peripheral access”

(Lave and Wenger, 1991, pp. 92-93).

Ethan Hein’s research into an online community of electronic music composers and

producers (2020) highlights Lave and Wenger’s communities of practice model in a new and

modern way, and showcases the theory of “legitimate peripheral participation”. Hein claims

that “the internet supports communities of practice by linking experts with learners” (p. 195).

He argues that individuals have a higher chance of retaining information if learning is

conducted in social settings where they are surrounded by “highly motivated” learners (p.

197). Communities of practice do not need to be in the same close physical proximity from

one another, if participants are able to communicate. Technology is used to foster these

online communities of practice through the use of forums, websites, and comment pages. In

this way, learning is made more accessible to people by not only including those who may be

in physical proximity, but also those from around the globe. The participants of Hein’s study

make clear that formal education was not as useful to their development as producers, and

they sought other means of learning through various online communities.

Hein (2013) asserts that although teachers must aim to embrace new technologies and ways

of learning, this does not mean that teachers must solely base their teaching and curriculum

around popular music. Yet it does involve learning a new vocabulary (one which deviates

from the canon), as well as embodied knowledge (Elliott & Silverman, 2015, p. 380-439), in

order to implement popular music genres within the classroom (Burnard, 2012).

16
Hein (2013) illustrates that very few students choose to continue studying music past their

mandatory classes as they see it as irrelevant to their lives. However, Humberstone (2017)

argues that music made with technology has a great potential to revolutionise music

education as a whole. This observation is also consistent with the Musical Futures research,

as well as the Teacher Identities in Music Education (TiME) research conducted between

2000-2010 (Lamont & Maton, 2010). The obsession of music teachers to stay within the

realms of the canon results in them striving to produce the next generation of Western Art

Music protégés, while failing to understand their students’ culture. As a result, students are at

risk of becoming disengaged and unwilling to participate if they feel the canon is irrelevant to

their lives (Hein, 2013). Teachers often claim that there are too many barriers in relation to

teaching with technology (Humberstone, 2017), however, in a time where many individuals

carry technology in their pockets, learning about technology is no longer an elusive process.

It is therefore apparent that such excuses are more likely embedded in their lack of

confidence in teaching music, technology, and cultures they do not relate to.

Music and Cultural Identity

It is important to consider how key music education philosophers/theorists have considered

the relationship between music-making and cultural context. Emphasising the relationship

between music and culture, David J. Elliott (1995) explains that “subcultures tend to develop

and adopt certain musical practices to constitute and proclaim their cultural-ideological

beliefs and values” (p. 196). He illustrates the pivotal relationship between music and culture

in relation to identity by stating that “a people’s music is not only something they make; a

people’s music is something they are. Thus, to share the music of one’s culture, with others is

to risk that outsiders will not understand and respect one’s self” (p. 197). The idea of

rejection of an individual’s music or culture by an outsider, can be seen as a rejection of the

17
individual’s identity/culture. Small (1998) explicitly ties such cultural/sub-cultural identity

and values to music: “Musicking has always functioned so powerfully as a means of social

definition and self-definition. If members of different social groups have different

values…then the enactment of those relationships that takes place during a musical

performance will differ also” (p. 133).

Rose and Countryman (2013) argue that the teacher-centred pedagogy that is traditionally

encouraged with the music classroom, denies that students are already musickers capable of

constructing their own understandings. Informal Learning pedagogy seeks to legitimise

students’ musical cultures and engages students in critical learning about music. As Rose and

Countryman elaborate further:

The musical passions that enrich many students’ lives, such as garage band jamming,

electronic mixing, or intense listening to specific contemporary genres are usually not

evident in our secondary school programs, confirming for these students that they do

not belong, that they are not musical in the sanctioned sense of the word. (p. 50)

Defining Electronic Dance Music

In the first decades of the twenty-first century, electronic dance music … emerged as

dominant forms of popular cultural expression … manifesting the power of social

media in mobilizing previously isolated communities (Mike D’Errico, 2018, p. 120).

Electronic Dance Music (EDM) encompasses a heterogeneous group of musics which are

made with computers and electronic instruments (Butler, 2006; McLeod, 2001). The various

subgenres are seen as a testament to the rapidly evolving nature of the style of music itself,

18
and they serve as a function of marketing strategies enforced by recording labels, as well as

the appropriation of musics form largely non-White, lower-class people in Great Britain and

the United States (McLeod, 2001). All the subgenres of Electronic Dance Music have very

different beginnings and to completely understand EDM and make sense of the subgenres, an

examination of EDM history is necessary.

Although the roles of the DJ and the producer were traditionally different, today they have

largely become interchangeable. Rietveld (2013) highlights the shift in electronic musicians

from touring with their hardware in the 1980s, to the studio producer in the 1990s

increasingly seen on stage “with a laptop with mixing software, improvising with the

recorded ‘stems’ of their music, or, as a DJ, mixing their own recordings” (p. 89). The

increasing availability of DAWs has enabled the EDM listener to become a skilled DJ (Hall

& Zukic, 2013). The user-friendliness of these DAW’s “provides everyone with a toolkit for

learning basic DJ techniques and tapping into their own unrealized aesthetic powers” (Hall &

Zukic, 2013, p. 117)

EDM Prehistories

During the 1970s in the United States, disco had been established within the urban Black and

gay communities, who used it as a means of social definition. In the 1970s, disco had reached

its peak, however its demise was characterised by a combination of hype, as well as racism

and homophobia within rock culture at the time (McLeod, 2001). What emerged from the

demise of disco, was Chicago house music.

Chicago house and Detroit techno are two genres which are momentous in the development

of Electronic Dance Music. Lawrence (2003) explores the early careers and friendships of

19
legendary DJs Larry Levan and Frankie Knuckles, both instrumental in pre-techno dance

music in New York and Chicago house, respectively (Brewster and Broughton, 2000; Butler,

2006). Lawrence’s account of disco history is distinctive as it also recognizes the New York

clubbing scene in relation to the mafia, police intimidation, and payoffs. The history of disco

is central in the development of EDM, as it is a direct precursor to house music.

It is also worth reaffirming that disco is not the only precursor to EDM. Observing its

beginnings in the United Kingdom, Haslam’s (2001) work is pivotal as it pays particular

attention to northern soul and the modernist (MOD) movement. As most literature concerning

the history of house and techno are written by music journalists, scholarly historical research

is often overlooked. Butler (2003; 2006) criticises Brewster and Broughton (2000) for the

lack of historical research needed to justify their work.

Electronic Dance Music in Australia

For the purpose of the present study, it is also worth examining the Electronic Dance Music

scene Sydney, Australia, as the research conducted in this dissertation takes place in this city.

Montano (2009) illuminates how from the 1990’s, the Sydney dance scene had its roots in

imported culture, with an emphasis on imported vinyl, music, sounds, and styles, as well as

DJs. As the European, and American dance music scenes dominated global dance culture, it

was inevitable that these scenes will hold a position of prominence by clubbers and DJs in

Australia (Montano, 2009). Straw (2002) suggests that the commercial availability of music

will influence the local scene. He highlights that:

In any given cultural space … access to information surrounding new musical

commodities will shape the contours of regional/national musical cultures. Objects

20
 arrive at destinations bearing meanings which the distance of their travel and the

manner of their acquisition have inscribed upon them. (p. 165)

Positioning Sydney’s local dance culture as “borrowed” from abroad places a negative light

on the development of dance music, suggesting that the scene was temporarily “behind” its

overseas counterparts (Montano, 2008). However, with the emergence of technologies in

recent decades such as YouTube in 2005, Spotify in 2006, and SoundCloud in 2007, music

from around the globe became readily accessible to almost any individual. DJs and producers

of EDM now rely less on the physical commodity of a CD or vinyl records to produce their

music, resulting in the international connectedness of dance culture being further enhanced.

Learning Processes and the Presence of Technology in Real Life Learning

Irrespective of the genre with which a popular electronic musician (Thompson, 2012)

identifies, a specific skill set encompassing technique, sequencing and arranging is necessary.

Green’s (2002) study, introduced above, primarily focused on the learning practices of rock

musicians, who frequently experienced group/peer-directed learning. Popular electronic

musicians, however, have revealed that they have only experienced this style of learning

during the early stages of their musical development (Thompson, 2012). In An empirical

study into the learning practices and enculturation of DJs, turntablists, hip hop and dance

music producers (2012) Thompson aims to uncover the various learning practices of nine

popular electronic musicians. Through interviews, more than half of the participants revealed

that through the assistance of a “more experienced individual” (p. 51), which in most cases

was identified as an older sibling, participants were able to internalise information which then

enabled them to work independently. Among the participants, he found only a small amount

of collaborative learning took place, while solitary learning formed the majority of the

21
learning process. Similarly, Fikentscher (2018) reaffirms the influence of the more

experienced individual in his attempt to become a DJ. He states, “the method used to

accomplish this [DJing] was similar to the way musicians learn from their elders in many

cultures around the world: by observing, witnessing, and emulating over long stretches of

time” (p. 85).

Although many texts point to solitary learning as a means of producing EDM (Bernard, 2012;

Humberstone, 2015; Thompson, 2012), we must also consider the increased connectivity that

the internet provides. Dillon, Adkins, Brown, and Hirche (2009) offer the idea of “network

jamming” as a means of communicating and producing music through the establishment of

virtual communities. As a result, engaging musical improvisational experiences for all skill

levels are enabled. Similarly, Koszolko and Montano (2016), as well as Bennett (2018),

support the idea of utilising online platforms such as remix sites, and DAW Ohm Studio to

facilitate the musical and personal growth of these musicians as they collaborate with a

variety of individuals around the globe and form relationships which “extend far beyond the

confines of the studio” (Koszolko and Montano, 2016, p. 79). While the notion of

collaborative online learning shows many positive outcomes for EDM producers of all skill

levels, Koszolko and Montano (2016) mention that there are also limitations when users are

involved in large scale projects. Behaviour, engagement, and participation is diminished in

large group, particularly where contributors come from varied musical backgrounds and

genres (Koszolko and Montano, 2016).

While there is much valid literature surrounding the concept of Informal Learning, in

particular Green’s (2002; 2008) pivotal works, the research fails to go into detail regarding

electronic music, and music sampling. Her decision to not address technology-based music

22
presents a gap for further research in this field. It is therefore essential to look to real life

examples as a means of Informal Learning. With the emergence of YouTube, Facebook, and

other social media platforms, Kruse and Veblen (2012) reaffirm that educators should

promote the use of media as a tool of learning, as opposed to framing these online sources as

hinderances to the educational process. Tan (2013) also brings to light the development of

Informal Learning environments through the use of Facebook, which has become a catalyst

in the organisation of academically related activities. In turn, this has facilitated self-directed

learning, and played a central role in aiding group work. However, Tan (2013) argues that

although students are consuming more online content, their lack of self-assurance to support

their learning can be attributed directly to the students’ traditional reliance on teachers to

identify what is valid and sound to support their academic learning.

The emergence of online educational platforms such as Point-Blank Music School in the

United Kingdom, and MasterClass in the United States have provided an array of

opportunities for individuals worldwide to partake in learning opportunities which would

otherwise not be offered in formal education settings. The vast majority of this learning is

teacher-led. Both platforms provide online platforms which are accessible to the individual at

any given time. Point Blank Music School offers a variety of coursers related to music

production, while MasterClass provides individuals access to “industry giants” in all fields

from music to culinary arts. In these courses, individuals are able to complete the courses at

their own pace over almost any period of time.

As the world is constantly changing around us, the emergence of new technology is rapidly

changing the way society operates. It is inevitable that people will respond to these

technologies in various ways and as a result, new ways of learning will develop. The rise of

23
EDM production has exhibited many similarities to Green’s Informal Learning model

whereby much of the learning is conducted with and by friends or family members of the

“student” (Thompson, 2012; Burnard, 2012). As Clements (2008) asserts “musicians gather;

it’s what we do, the inexperienced alongside the more experienced” (p. 8), complementing

Green’s view of collaborative learning.

24
 Chapter 3
Methodology

Research Design

This research takes the form of multiple case studies which aim to investigate a particular

musical subculture through the use of qualitative research. The subculture involved is that of

electronic music making, and this study will concentrate on producers of this music with

specific focus on the learning processes involved in becoming a producer. This research is

informed by the methods of interview, observation and document analysis and the study is

ethnographic, which means that it aims to understand how people define and understand their

own circumstances (Liamputtong, 2013).

The study will first explore musical understanding and learning processes among the

participants through the form of a semi-structured interview. I will then aim to discover

musical understanding by implication through the use of observation, which may encompass

the learning process if the participant is an amateur or semi-professional. Lucy Green’s

(2002) work offers a promising model from the music education field for this study as it deals

directly with learning that has predominantly taken place outside formal music education.

Participant Selection

Participants were selected through purposive and snowball sampling (Stake, 2008). In each

case, participants were actively involved within the EDM scene on a national and/or

international scale. Armstrong (2011) illustrates that “while some women have made some

inroads into traditionally male dominated areas of music, musical cultures which have a

strong technological focus such as music production, DJing and sound engineering have

25
proved harder for women to break into” (p. 19). Despite this situation, the present study

aimed to encompass participants from a range of backgrounds. This resulted in a selection

including a female producer, an international artist from a Non-Western heritage, a semi-

professional, and a professional.

Yin (2009) suggests that data should address most of the main topics and confirm evidence

from two or more various sources. Field notes of observations, audio and visual recordings,

and interviews constituted the data collected in this study. Both interviews and observations

were utilized as a form of triangulation to observe the validity of the collected data.

Additionally, investigator triangulation will also be employed through the assistance of my

supervisor Dr James Humberstone who will also consider the data and initial findings as well.

I am not an EDM Producer, nor do I consider myself an expert in EDM. Rather, I would

typically describe myself as a casual fan. However, most of the participants are known to me

through my social circles which include attending dance music parties. The above methods of

triangulation, therefore, are the first part of the process to avoid bias in my interviewing,

analysis of the data, findings, and any conclusions arising (Burns, 2000). I acknowledge

friendship with some of the participants and an enjoyment of an interest in the music that

they make, but I do not seek to exaggerate their skills or status, nor to elevate the music they

make or the knowledge and skills they possess. To some extent, these existing relationships

are useful for an ethnographic study, because trust is already present, and the participants

were likely to be open with me (Burns, 2000).

26
Interviews and Observations

An ethnographic approach was taken in the interview process and the observations:

interviews were semi-structured and open-ended in their design to focus on the experiences

and learning processes of the participants (see Appendix C) as well as their perceptions about

the role of EDM in their lives (Creswell, 2013). The interviews were conducted over two

sessions for each participant, with a follow-up interview if necessary. The initial sessions

lasted up to approximately one hour. The purpose of the second (and potentially third)

interviews was to provide any necessary clarification and to test any emerging theories or

concepts after observation. For example, it was possible that in an initial interview, a

participant might say that they have no understanding of formal music theory at all, but in the

subsequent observation, I might observe such understanding (for example as simple metric

relations or key/modal relations/centres). These observations were then able to be discussed

in later interviews in order to discern where and how such knowledge was gained (even

intuitively), while avoiding interruption of the observation process (Charmaz, 2014).

Initial interviews (see Table 1) were conducted face-to-face in the participants’ studios or

over a Zoom call. Given the unpredictable nature of the NSW Government COVID-19

restrictions, necessary measures were taken to ensure that myself and the interviewees were

adhering to current government guidelines.

27
Table 1: Interview Log

Producer Name Initial Interview Initial Interview Date Initial Interview Follow-Up Details
Location and Time Duration
Dean Zlato Participant’s 19 March, 20217:30pm 28'38’’ Personal
Home Studio communication

11 December 2021
16 December 2021
5 January 2022
8 January 2022
Marcus Santoro Zoom Call 7 April, 2021 50'11’’ Personal
12pm communication

23 December

Roan Shenoyy Zoom Call 23 April, 2021 1’00'’ Personal

7pm communication

28 November 2021
22 December 2021
30 December 2021
Marie Kiara Zoom Call 15 July, 2021 1’02’’ Personal
1pm communication

18 December 2021
26 December 2021
13 January 2022

Observations were conducted to better understand the skills and musical knowledge

associated with producing Electronic Dance Music. It is difficult to understand the

knowledge and skillset of the producer from listening to a completed track. As such,

throughout the study I acted as a “fly on the wall” (Green, 2008, p. 1) to ensure the most

authentic processes possible were captured. For this reason, in the observation component of

the data collection I sought permission to record their control surfaces, MIDI keyboards, and

shortcuts. Additionally, I asked the participant to screen capture the DAW while they were

producing in order to analyse the finer details of the production process. Once these were

determined, if there was an option of a follow-up interview to clarify any questions that

arose. The observations were conducted in the workspace of the participant and each

participant was observed for approximately two hours. In addition to the video recording

during the session, field notes were taken, detailing information that was observed.

28
Mirroring the approach taken in the interviews, observations (see Table 2) were conducted

either face-to-face in the participants’ studios or over a Zoom call. Again, this occurred in

adherence to the current NSW Government COVID-19 regulations.

Table 2: Observation Log

Producer Name Observation Location Observation Date and Time

Dean Zlato Participant’s Home Studio 19 March, 2021

8:30pm - 9:45pm

Marcus Santoro Participant’s Home Studio – 4 November, 2021

Recorded Video

Roan Shenoyy* N/A N/A

Marie Kiara Participant’s Home Studio – 17 September, 2021

Recorded Video

* Roan was unable to be observed due to conflicting opinions between his managers. The

recounts of his musical understandings and compositional process were derived from the

interview process as well as follow-up interviews.

Data Analysis Method

Data was coded using grounded theory, whereby theory is derived from a particular

phenomenon supported through the research (Strauss & Corbin, 1998). The grounded theory

approach involves the creative interpretation of the collected data, grouping concepts together

as well as the analysis of the relationships between them. Axial coding will be used to

cultivate relationships between the categories and sub-categories (Strauss & Corbin, 1998).

29
Observation data was analysed to determine whether the research questions were answered

thoroughly, and to check whether emerging theories made sense to the participants. Data was

collected until theoretical saturation was reached, whereby themes were well-established, and

new data made little change to the theoretical picture (Charmaz, 2014).

30
 Chapter 4
Findings

As I reflect on my own journey to become a music teacher, it is evident that there is a clear

path: obtain a degree, become certified, and commence teaching. This is quite different from

becoming an EDM producer where there are no degrees or certifications required. The exact

skill set required and the steps to attain that skill set are rarely documented, and in any case

change significantly across subgenres, technologies, and cultures. How then, does someone

learn to be an EDM Producer?

Participant Backgrounds

The interviews were intended to investigate the participants’ individual learning processes

and the findings are presented based on the themes that emerged from the interviews.

Following this analysis, data from the observations pertaining to the musical understandings

and technical skills needed to produce EDM music will be discussed. Firstly, the four

participants will be introduced and a brief description of their background is provided.

Dean Zlato

Dean Zlato, aged 28, had no experience playing an instrument or being a part of a music

group throughout his schooling years. From the age of twelve, he became intrigued by a

family member’s godfather who was a DJ. Establishing this interest at a young age set the

precedence for Dean’s interest to “peak” at the age of fourteen as he “would see [his family

member’s godfather] play at some like house parties and stuff like that. And he would let me

… mess around on the DJ set”. Wanting to pursue this newfound love for DJing, coupled

with limited finances as a young teen, Dean turned to Virtual DJ. For a year and a half, he

31
continued practicing on Virtual DJ until he acquired his own DJ set at the age of 16; a Santon

setup with two decks and a simple two channel mixer. From this point Dean began DJing at

house parties, learning how to adapt to the crowd's needs and realising that not everyone

enjoyed the same style of music he did. Initially, he focused mainly on playing tracks and

styles of music which he liked, such as “Armin Van Buren [and] Bob Sinclair” but began to

alter his music to better suit the crowds, “introducing hip hop and all the other types of EDM

music”. His interest in producing music was sparked by these experiences as a DJ, as well as

his fascination of “proper” house music from Axwell, Swedish House Mafia, and Eric Prince.

Marcus Santoro

Growing up with music his whole life, Marcus, aged 26, was largely influenced by his father

who was a DJ “years ago when [he] wasn’t even around”. Marcus’ father filled the house

with disco, soul, and rock music when he was growing up. It wasn’t until the age of ten or

eleven that Marcus’ cousins introduced him to dance music, in particular the early stages of

trance through artists such as Tiesto. Marcus vividly recalled this time, stating that “I was too

young at the time to understand exactly what the music was about, but I knew I really liked it

… and from there … it was pretty much tunnel vision”. Marcus’ interest in producing was

sparked at around ten years old, and at this age, he was unsure of what he could do with it. As

a result of this he “lost touch with it”, however, when he commenced high school at the age

of thirteen, the spark for music and producing was reignited when learning about computer
music in Year Seven music class. Coming from a non-musical background, Marcus

acknowledges that “I’m not a self-trained musician, I can’t really play instruments”, so it was

not the concept of a polished final work nor the underlying chord progressions within the

music that Marcus was drawn to, rather it was “more so the fundamentals of putting things

together … working with sound and mixing”.

32
Marie Kiara Tsipidis

When reminiscing on her journey as a producer, Marie Kiara, aged 22, confesses that “I was

producing without realising I was producing” between the ages of thirteen and fourteen.

Receiving iPads at school, Marie Kiara discovered GarageBand on the device. She describes

that she was “always just playing around with it just for fun”. She began working with

various synthesizers to recreate popular radio music with a “dreamy, synthesised sound”.

Marie Kiara’s interest in electronic music was sparked towards the end of her time in high

school in 2016, with the release of the Netflix Original series Stranger Things. Marie Kiara

states that “I thought that the score for that was really cool” and she began experimenting

with different sounds on her DAW. Marie Kiara has an extensive background of formal
music education, having learnt multiple instruments including saxophone, guitar, and

keyboard.

Roan Shenoyy

As a child, Roan, aged 28, was immersed in traditional Bollywood style music, being of

Indian heritage. His interest in other genres was sparked in his early teenage years through

his brother's influence. Sharing one computer, Roan and his brother would argue over each

other’s choice of music, his brother exclaiming “you listen to shit music”. From his brother’s

comments, Roan began to open his music palette and began to listen to more R&B and Pop

music such as the Backstreet Boys. Roan explains that he first came across dance music

whilst at university studying commerce in 2011. Attending a party, Roan recalls the DJ
“playing a lot of good music … like Pitbull, Accent and that kind of music … I actually fell

in love with it”. From there, Roan befriended local DJs in order to gain experience and begin

networking. Coming from a very sheltered upbringing, Roan was not familiar with what a

DJ’s job would entail. After extensive listening, Roan began to hear the clear transitions

between songs; the intro, outro and how the proceeding/following songs would fuse together.

It wasn’t until much later in his university degree that he realised his passion for music and

producing.

33
Formal Music Knowledge vs. Self-Taught Knowledge

The musical engagement of these participants throughout high school, tertiary education, and

their involvement in community music courses, are examples of what can be described as

teacher directed learning. By this, I mean that “the centre of gravity is outside the child. It is

in the teacher, in the textbook” (Dewey, 1899, pp. 51). Despite the usual centre of gravity, the

three participants who undertook formal music training all expressed that their teachers

played only a minor role in their learning.

Two of the four participants described both their high school music and university

experiences as being unrelated to DJing or producing. Roan and Marie Kiara both hold a

qualification in Music at tertiary level; Marie Kiara a Bachelor of Music and Sound Design at

the University of Technology Sydney, and Roan a Bachelor in Sound Engineering and Music

Diploma from Point Blank Music School. Both Marcus and Marie Kiara did have some

positive school and university music experiences, but Dean and Roan explained that neither

high school nor university music experiences taught them how to DJ and produce.

Both Marcus and Marie Kiara had positive experiences in high school music. For Marcus, a

highlight of this was “finally figuring out how it was put together … how things were made,

where the sound came from. Seeing it actually come to life on a screen [was] what really

sparked my interest in it”. Although Marcus considered his school’s music program a very

basic introduction into production, including loop-based music creation using software called

Acid Pro, he states that from this encounter, he wanted “to learn further and … to start

making things from basically the ground up”.

34
Having always been afraid of composing notated scores in a classroom setting, Marie Kiara

explained that prior to producing electronic music, she would approach composition tasks

from a Western Art Music (WAM) perspective in the same way as her peers, “because that’s

the kind of stuff I would study in class”. She successfully sought permission from her

classroom teacher to compose using a DAW as opposed to the traditional notation software

Sibelius. Marie Kiara emphasises that this was a pivotal moment in her composing/producing

journey. When deviating from the canon, she recalled thinking “hey, maybe this is a

composition I can do”. Thinking “out of the box” and seeking this permission from her

teacher allowed her to explore a new realm of composition within a traditionalist classroom.

Unlike Marcus, whose direct classroom experience led to the beginning of his interest in

electronic music and subsequent producing, Marie Kiara’s positive experience was not

directly associated with the content taught within the classroom, however it was sparked from

the opportunity given to her within this environment. Being given the opportunity to

complete the work in the way she wanted can be likened to the same student-centred

pedagogy in Green’s (2008) study.

It is also interesting to note that Roan did not experience any formal music training while in

secondary schooling. He explains that “I didn’t learn anything about music in my school

because my school was only about academics”. He confesses that “I didn’t know how many

beats make a bar, I didn’t know what an intro or what an outro was. I didn’t know what a

mash up was”. Having no formal music training in the form of playing an instrument or

classroom music training, Roan relied solely on external institutions for insight into music

theory, claiming that “there are not many music schools in India that focus only on dance

music, they’re more only classical, older stuff”. After completing two years of university in

Business Administration, Roan enrolled into the I Love Music Academy in Bangalore, India.

35
Reflecting on his time at the Academy, he states “I wouldn’t say they helped me become an

artist to be honest, it only helped me in DJ”. However, it was not until Roan enrolled in Point

Blank Music School in the United Kingdom that he began to learn more about music and

subsequently producing. Similarly, Dean also made it clear that the courses he enrolled in at

the School of Audio Engineering and Studio 301 did not fully prepare him to become a

producer. He acknowledged that the classes he took were helpful for beginners. It is worth

noting that the courses and also piano lessons Dean undertook were experiences he chose to

complete himself, looking for learning.

It is clear from these two accounts above that the formal music training experienced by Dean

and Roan did not significantly assist in their development as electronic music producers. Out

of the four participants, autodidactic learning was most showcased by Marcus. At the

beginning of his journey, Marcus illustrated the lack of resources to assist in his further

learning of Acid Pro, claiming “there wasn’t really a lot of tools back then”. Learning the

software on his own, Marcus says that it was “pretty much trial and error. I was eventually

working on it myself”. He explains that he “never really read manuals … there was forums

on the internet [and] I was Googling ‘how do you do this’, ‘how do you do that’, and [there

were] early videos”. Likewise, Dean explains that he also used YouTube videos to learn

Logic Pro and the beginnings of music production. Watching “other people’s studio sessions

and how they produce when it comes to music production and what their steps are” became a
major influencer in the beginning of Dean’s career.

All four participants were wanting to learn and experience beyond what the traditional music

classroom was offering. As a result, this led to their subsequent external musical experiences.

Seeking out opportunities such as one-off courses to assist in their pursuit. This in turn,

further solidifies the idea that traditional music education struggles to foster student love for

electronic music, and struggles in providing them with the opportunities they require. This

36
lack of opportunity within the formal music classroom is also further highlighted by Rose and

Countryman (2013).

The Significant “Other”

All the participants expressed that at some point in their journey, their learning was

conducted through the associations and affiliations they made with instructors and personal

connections. This significant “other” paved the way for learning, appreciation and love of the

genre for all participants. Dean and Marcus both illustrate the presence of a significant

“other” early on in their journey. In contrast, Roan and Marie Kiara’s significant “other”

presented themselves much later in their pursuit.

Early on in his career, Dean began collaborating with other producers in an attempt to

improve his knowledge of software and the production process. Dean’s first collaboration

was with a friend, Mark, and was completed using Ableton Live. Originally being a Logic

Pro user, Dean had never experienced the workflow of Ableton Live, stating that “I just saw

how quick his workflow was, yeah, how easy he was able to navigate just through the whole

software and run a track really quickly”. The workflow being so quick “[they] wrote the track

in seven hours”. In this case, Dean was mentored by a more experienced individual who

assisted him in his learning process, and this collaboration allowed Dean to quickly transfer

from using Logic Pro to Ableton Live finding Ableton “really simple and easy,

straightforward to use”. Further, this collaboration was a pivotal point in Dean’s beginnings
as a producer even though he was new to the software; Dean gave his creative aural input and

Mark transcribed. Recalling the events during the collaboration session, Dean remembers “he

would just be like, oh, what kind of vibe should we go for? How [are we] going to do the

arrangement and stuff like that. So, I gave him my input and then he just wrote [it] down”.

When studying at Point Blank, Roan was mentored outside of the classroom by his music

production professor. Roan vividly remembers his professor stating “Don’t mix up the black

and the white keys all the time. Just play the black keys or the white keys”. To this day, prior

37
to starting a new track, Roan employs this advice and improvises on the piano using only the

black or only the white keys. Additionally, Roan’s professor also assisted in his

understanding of chords, their function, and explained the fundamentals of a scale and the

purpose of each scale degree. Roan clearly illustrates the significant impact his professor had

on his understanding of music theory, stating “my music production professor did most of the

job [teaching music theory] as my music composition tutor [at I Love Music academy] didn’t

have the time and patience with me”.

In 2021, Marie Kiara completed an internship for producer/artist Helmut Uhlmann. Although

her time in the internship was cut short due to university commitments, Marie Kiara cited

many benefits of the internship in the presence of a more advanced individual, stating “what I

picked up from the internship was more than just using the software”. She goes on to explain

the lack of practical use of the software while at university, recalling being in university class

where “they would pretty much explain everything you need to do … so there was less

freedom to do it ourselves”. In contrast, the internship was a more hands-on experience,

allowing Marie Kiara to further solidify and refine her mixing skills. She was able to

“approach things from a new perspective, [pay] attention to detail and [understand] that just

because I did something that maybe he didn’t agree with, it wasn’t necessarily that I did it

wrong. It was just different tastes”.

How Did They Learn?

Trial and Error Learning Process

Among all participants, the process of trial and error was paramount not only within their

learning process, but also as part of their creative process (“tinkering”, as described by

Resnick and Rosenbaum, 2013). Reaffirming the notion of solitary learning, all four

participants recalled certain times in their learning where the process of trial and error was

38
implemented. Marcus, who began producing at a young age, had very little access to online

resources, and spent his time learning software and experimenting with sounds through the

use of reference tracks, “reverse-engineering songs he liked” (Seabrook, 2015, p. 64).

Similarly, Dean recalled his first experience working with vocals stating that “the mixing is a

little bit different [compared to audio and instrumental tracks] and it was all new to me … so

it was just a little frustrating in terms of trying to get it to fit with the track”. Having no

significant “other” when his interest in producing was first sparked, Roan remembers

watching YouTube videos and then trying to do it on his own. Similarly, Marie Kiara’s initial

attempt at producing with electronic music left her “trying to sort of recreate it on whatever

DAW I had at the time”. Marie Kiara and Roan also used this approach when starting a new

project. To overcome the lack of resources, Marcus “listened to the loops that [he] was using

and tried to recreate them”. This process of listening and copying, is an important distinction,

as Green (2002) found that it was a prominent activity in the practicing among guitar-based

rock musicians in her study. These insights clearly showcase the trial and error process

experienced by the participants.

The process of trial and error was particularly evident when observing the participants’

creative processes. All three participants who were observed showed the constant use of trial

and error, some more so than others. There were numerous examples of trial and error

observed within the composition process. This included the inclusion and subsequent

exclusion of particular instruments (mainly percussion) as the project developed, with Marie

Kiara stating things like “I don’t like the sound of that anymore”. Additionally, the use of

audiation was evident throughout Marcus and Marie Kiara’s process. Being able to hear the

chords before playing them and inputting them directly as MIDI data, forms part of Marcus’

understanding of chords and their sound. In addition, he exhibited processes of trial and error

39
through the playing back of the chords, sometimes single bars in isolation and at other times

in a wider context to reaffirm his thoughts. Similarly, Marie Kiara showed this particular

process of trial and error, playing back small sections of her work to reaffirm her thoughts or

to revise them. Her experimentation occurred primarily when choosing various timbres and

additions made to her initial ideas.

Of the four participants, Dean showed the least reliance on trial and error during the creative

process. Over time, Dean built multiple templates which he uses when beginning a new track:

“I have my drum channel set up with like a bunch of EQ’s … ready to go. So, all I have to do

is drop down some ideas, and then I have a track pretty much ready to go … within like an

hour”. The use of a template can rapidly reduce the amount of time spent writing an original

track. Conversely, the arrangement portion of Marie Kiara’s process, which predominantly

involved trial and error, resulted in a workflow that was slightly slower than that of Dean and

Marcus. However, Dean and Marcus did not show any fully formed ideas before the

production process, while Marie Kiara’s creation of core material was first recorded using

voice memos prior to working in the DAW. Therefore, no trial-and-error process using

technology, was required at this early stage as her ideas were formed through audiation.

Rather, for Maire Kiara, the process of transcribing them into Logic Pro involved trial and

error, such as working out the notes and rhythms.

Roan also employed the use of trial and error in his writing; he would “draw the notes on the

MIDI trackpad, and then see if it sounds good”. He employed the use of the randomise

function on both Logic Pro and Ableton Live, explaining that “when you press randomise,

Logic and Ableton make their own notes. Then if it sounds good, just try and make a few

changes”. The use of templates in Logic also assisted in his creative process, making it his

40
own by adding a synth such as a Sylenth, Nexus, or Massive. The addition of kick drums, hi

hats, and snares for a more percussive sound was then implemented.

Listening and Copying

The process of listening to other artists work and copying was adopted by all four participants

throughout their creative process. Analysing the creative process of others by watching

YouTube videos was a major influence in the beginning of Dean’s career. He claims that

watching “other people’s studio sessions and how they produce[d] when it comes to music

production and what their steps are” greatly assisted in determining his own production

processes. Similarly, Marcus expressed this same reliance on early YouTube videos and

online forums to assist in his learning and creative process. Marcus states that even now, ten

years on, “[he] is still … learning new things every day”. The emergence of dance music

production was very rare to come by at such a young age particularly because “there wasn’t

anyone really doing it or really speaking about it … at least people my age”.

With the goal of creating her personal sound, Marie Kiara aimed to blend the music of

various bands and artists she had been listening to. She explains that The Midnight

“specifically had a very electronically based sound” which can be classified as synthwave, a

subgenre of electronic music. She expressed that as an artist, she was “trying to figure out a

way to blend the music that [she] listened to into music that [she] would be able to sell” and

create a mainstream product. Between the ages of fifteen and sixteen, Marie Kiara took

inspiration from a Justin Bieber album, stating that “I was actually listening to it, I was

thinking it was actually really good music”. Having the album on repeat, she would analyse

the instrumentation and sound design which was “simplistic and minimalist” and then aim to

recreate it on Logic Pro. Transitioning from the musical textures of Justin Bieber to the fuller

41
sound of Zed, her aim was to “replicate something like that, and actually make it sound sort

of legit”.

Additionally, it is worth noting that all four participants stated that listening to reference

tracks was imperative to their production process. When experiencing writer’s block or

simply a lack of inspiration, participants would listen to works of a similar style or genre to

what they were producing to gain inspiration. When wanting to create a new and unique

sound, Roan stated that he focused on improvisation and aimed to make his project different

to the various reference tracks used. Drawing inspiration from his staple artists Swedish

House Mafia, Roan confesses:

If you listen to some of my songs that is In My Arms, which is with Nino Lucarelli,

the artist’s called Captain Curtis. That would remind you of Sun is Shining by Axwell

Ingrosso. So it's inspired from that … And my song with LV, which is called Call Me

Beautiful. That is actually inspired from Don't You Worry, Child.

Social Media

The emergence of social media platforms such as Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, and Tumblr

have made “accessing practically any genre of music possible at any time” (Veblen, Waldron

& Horsley, 2020, p. 4). As the youngest participant, Marie Kiara attributes a great portion of

her inspiration to artists found on social media. She explains that she “flipped things off

YouTube” in order to create a niche sound. Distancing herself from mainstream radio music,

Marie Kiara also highlights that the majority of the music she listens to is from movies and

TV shows she has watched.

42
Marcus remarked on the lack of social media influence on his creative process. He explains

that “social media wasn't really a thing back then. I didn't have access to it because it was so

young, and the only thing that was there was … MSN, and Myspace”. He attributes losing

touch with electronic music due to the lack of social media because he “was so young”.

Music Software and Hardware

Throughout the interview process, all four participants reflected on their experiences using

various DAWs and audio/MIDI hardware to highlight the development of their workflow.

Wanting to pursue his newfound love for DJing, coupled with limited finances as a young

teen, Dean turned to Virtual DJ, audio and video mixing software. He states: “So basically,

what it is, it's just a software and it has a left and a right deck … like a mixer, then you just

drag and drop music onto a deck and then kind of like use your mouse to DJ with and that

was like my entry level”. As his interest in producing developed, he began using Logic Pro.

Having never been exposed to this style of software before, Dean enrolled in a four-month

course to assist in navigating and using the software.

Similarly, Marcus also began experimenting with various software titles as he began

producing. Having been introduced to computer music in music class at school, Marcus was

introduced to the DAW Acid Pro. Primarily looping software, the majority of his initial

experimentation with electronic sounds, and loop-based music occurred. As his interest in

producing grew, Marcus began to use FL Studio as his primary DAW. FL Studio assisted

Marcus in his progression DAWs such as Ableton Live 11 and Logic Pro X. He observes, "I

love using [Logic Pro] for mixing and overall production, whereas I like using [Ableton Live]

for mocking up quick ideas and the songwriting aspect to my process”.

43
Like Dean, Roan’s initial exposure to music software was Virtual DJ. Roan explains that he

would save all of his playlists and music onto Virtual DJ and utilise it to practice DJing and

mixing songs together. Roan’s experience with various DAWs came as he began at the I

Love Music Academy and Point Blank. He expressed that before beginning at the former he

“didn't even know what Ableton [was]”. Although the Academy “made it sound [like] super

rocket science”, Roan employed the use of YouTube videos to assist in learning the software.

Having spent some time using Ableton, Roan stated that the software was broad in size and

quite specialised. As a result of this, Roan began using Logic Pro and found it to be “more

user friendly” as opposed to Ableton. Logic Pro is now Roan’s primary DAW.

Being the youngest participant, Marie Kiara gained access to GarageBand during her

schooling years through the use of an iPad. As her interest in producing and creating beats

grew, Marie Kiara transitioned to Logic Pro. She explained that she progressed because it “is

pretty much GarageBand on steroids”. Marie Kiara explained that Logic Pro “was pretty easy

to navigate my way through … which is one of the good things about Logic … there's also

like a help button that you can use to … show you what you're doing”. Today, Logic Pro is

Marie Kiara’s primary DAW.

Embodied Musical Knowledge

The preceding section of this chapter focused predominantly on the journey and learning

processes of the participants in order to become EDM producers. The following section will

address the embodied musical understandings of the participants through the lens of

observation. It is worth noting the presence of self-depreciating thoughts among the

participants throughout their learning process, with Roan expressing “I wouldn’t say I’m

super advanced in music theory, I just know what notes are” and Marie Kiara stating that “I

44
never was the best with sort of the theory side of music … it wasn't my strength out of what

we were doing”. However, analysing their creative process revealed a plethora of musical

knowledge.

Composing Style

Of the four participants, Dean’s composing style and processes were the most unique. He

expressed that using the templates he created over time assist in his workflow. Dean explains

that “because I'm doing other things now … my time is very crucial … I have everything set

up in a template just to save time” (see Figure 1). Observing his process, I noticed that in

comparison to the other participants, Dean used mostly prepared samples from purchased

sample packs, as well as his own samples curated from snippets of tracks, vocals, and drum

patterns. This approach made it “easy for me to drag and drop those kicks that are already

processed, ready to go. So, I’m not spending time tweaking them”. For Dean, the process is a

matter of finding the correct sounds for the style of music he is aiming to produce. Dean

explained that “the kick is the most important thing that stands out in the track, and then you

build up the track around the kick”. Following the kick, the addition of the drums and

percussion also play an important role. Dean states that once a “solid groove” is established,

he will listen to a few reference tracks to provide further insights into possible arrangements

for the project. For the purpose of the study, Dean omitted this step in the observation

process. He emphasised that EDM is “very repetitive” and creating interest for the listener is

achieved through changes in processing and changes in the texture of the work. It is here

where we can question how a self-taught producer understands the use of texture and its

musical definition. In the case of Dean, where he reported having limited formal music

education and verbal knowledge (Elliott & Silverman, 2015), his musical understanding is

45
evidenced in the sophisticated use of texture in the observation tracks, as well as in his

released output.

Figure 1: Dean’s DAW: Use of the Template and Prepared Samples

In the case of Marcus and Marie Kiara, their level of musical knowledge was quite similar.

Although both producers identify with different subgenres of EDM, their use of terminology,

both for Western art music and electronic music, can be viewed as the result of acquired

knowledge throughout their journey to become producers. While Marcus adopts a more

systematic approach to his producing, focusing more on building a foundation and then

embellishing and arranging, Marie Kiara focuses primarily on the different lines and layers of

the work.

The process of thinking in lines is unique to Marie Kiara’s process. Being a vocalist, Marie

Kiara employs the use of humming to assist in creating the melody line, explaining “I start

my humming [of] the melody for the vocals, the bassline, and then maybe a little bit of what I

want some of the instruments doing at the time”. She made it clear that this process was

46
specifically for one section of the work. While humming, she will typically record herself

using the voice memos app on her phone to ensure all her ideas are recorded. Additionally,

she states that “I’ll say like random words just to remember it. And then I’ll immediately go

to my notes, and I’ll play the voice over I just recorded … and I’ll just start experimenting

with different lyrics”. Having the ability to hear the various lines of the work in combination

in her head is a very unique way to create, as she is thinking in lines, and not chords. This is

also clear as she produces her work, thinking about the role of each instrument and their

individual lines.

Identification of Key and Tempo

Both Marcus and Marie Kiara had specific reasons for their tempo choice and key signature.

It is important to note that both direct and indirect reasoning was evident for the chosen key.

Firstly, Marcus stated definitively that he was working in D major, and then loaded up a

piano roll, highlighting the notes of D major (so that notes outside the key were hidden, see

Figure 2). He remarked that “if you’re limited with musical knowledge, you should be alright

with this” as all the notes of the scale are clearly presented to the user. Marie Kiara, having

pre-recorded her ideas for a bass and melody line on the voice memos app on her phone,

approached the DAW by first figuring out the notes she has sung in the recording to

determine the key, in what seems to be the key of G# natural minor. Dean’s process was

notably different, utilising prepared samples allowed Dean to manipulate their parameters,

including key, to suit the style of music he is producing. This process was done through the

transposition function, he was able to not only create a unified sound in the same key, but

also to integrate various keys in the same work.

47
Figure 2: Marcus’ DAW: D major on the piano roll

In terms of tempo, Marcus set a definite tempo of 125bpm. As the project evolved however,

this tempo is then adjusted to 127bpm and remains there. Marie Kiara’s choice of tempo is

more upbeat. After clapping the tempo she was looking for, she attempted to identify it on the

DAW, settling on a 168bpm. Similarly, Dean’s choice of tempo reflected the festival style of

work he created, sitting at 135bpm.

Instrumentation, Rhythm, and Chords

When beginning the project in the DAW, Marie Kiara affirms “I always start with the

bassline”. Using the bass instruments available on her DAW, she selects the instrument she

believes will best suit the sound and genre of the song. In the case of the observation, Marie

Kiara articulated that she was writing in an 80’s synthwave style, with the vast majority of

her instrumentation consisting of various synthesizers or unpitched percussion instruments. In

contrast, Marcus stated that he had no specific style or subgenre of EDM he wanted to

produce for the observations, remarking that “I think the style that I’m going for today is

pretty much whatever comes at me”. As the work progressed, he began to make decisions

regarding the instrumentation of the work and what would suit the style best. This primarily

48
consisted of percussion, pitched instrumentation such as piano, and violin, as well as various

ambient samples.

During the interview process, Marie Kiara explained that she does not have one set process

for producing a work. As the majority of Marie Kiara's creative process is completed by ear,

the transcribing of the parts occurs via the recording function on Logic. Once the part has

been recorded into the DAW, the quantize function is employed to snap the recording in time.

Interestingly, Marcus exhibited rhythmic understanding through the manual inputting of the

harmonic rhythm, inputting four dotted quavers and a crotchet as seen below in Figure 3:

Figure 3: Marcus’ DAW: Harmonic Rhythm

Starting with the tonic chord in the key of D major, Marcus doubled the tonic up the octave

and immediately proceeded to place the chord in second inversion after only one playback of

the initial chord in bar 1. Marcus continued to write the following chords all in second

49
inversion, with bar 2 chords on the mediant, and bar 3 chords on the subdominant, as seen

below in Figure 4. Although Marcus had expressed that he has had little to no formal music

training, his embodied musical knowledge is clear from this process, illustrating his

knowledge through his practice.

Figure 4: Transcription of Marcus’s Chords in Traditional Notation

Similarly, Marie Kiara began transcribing the chords from the bass note, which in the

observation case was G#. She doubled the tonic an octave above, played the track back, and

decided to add inner parts to the chords as seen below in Figure 5.

Figure 5: Marie Kiara’s DAW: Chord Building

50
Although not as deliberate and confident as Marcus’ transcription, Marie Kiara also exhibited

her knowledge of chord construction and clearly identified the type of sound she is hearing

intrinsically. Following the playbacks after this transcription, she questioned herself “is this

too perfect?” This appeared to be an expression of her desire to steer aware from the WAM

tradition, and she began to add dissonance to the chords as seen below in Figure 6:

Figure 6: Marie Kiara’s DAW: Further Chord Building

Given the choices made in these instances, it appears that both Marcus and Marie Kiara were

not intimately familiar with the chord voicing in conventional tonal theory. As functional

harmonic theory avoids parallel fifths and octaves, the WAM student learns appropriate voice

leading to avoid this parallel movement, and in this musical context it sounds less jarring. As

such, from the WAM and classroom music teacher’s perspective, parallel chords within a

work are “wrong”. EDM however, deliberately adopts the use of parallel chords throughout

its planning. One could argue that the participants are unfamiliar with chord voicing, however

51
what can be seen as incorrect or simplistic in one musical style, is authentic in the other. This

is clearly shown in Marcus’ work through the use of parallel octaves (see Figure 3).

Terminology and References to Musical Concepts

All three observed participants presented their musical understandings not only through their

ability to notate and compose EDM, but also through the use of both WAM terminology and

sound source terminology. WAM terminology relates to the traditional formal music terms

one would learn in the classroom and in higher education. Sound source terminology refers to

the various effects and plugins that are available to the producer within the DAW.

Marcus’ extensive knowledge of both WAM and sound source terminology challenged my

pre-conceived idea of his musical understanding. His specific description of “violin staccato

sound” highlighted the particular sound he was envisioning for the work and showcased his

knowledge of various orchestral instruments and their potential timbres. In contrast,

throughout the interview process, Marcus was quite self-depreciating regarding his musical

theory knowledge. Dean and surprisingly Marie Kiara employed more use of sound source

terminology such as “maybe I went too hard on the delay” as opposed to the WAM

terminology. It is possible that this could be due to the specific styles of music that the

participants were writing.

The manipulation of structure and texture was evident throughout the participants’ work.

Employing the use of techniques such as staggered entries and layered sounds created not

only interest and appeal within the works, but also illustrated a visual structure of the work on

the DAW. Marie Kiara produced a synth wave pop song, with clear sections as seen in Figure

7.

52
Figure 7: Marie Kiara’s DAW: Structure

The clear use of a traditional pop song Verse/Chorus structure is evident, whereby the

“thicker”, more dense sections of the work are attributed to the chorus such as in bars 49-65,

and the “thinner” sections are associated with the verse, clearly identified in bars 33-49.

Similarly, Marcus’ overall structure can be determined also through the use of texture and the

staggered entries of the instruments and samples, gradually getting “thicker” as the piece

builds to the drop (See Figure 8).

53
Figure 8: Marcus’ DAW: Structure

Additionally, the extended use of automation and volume control, as shown in Figure 9, was

also exhibited among participants. In the same way that WAM composers employ the use of

dynamics on their score, so too do the participants, programming particular instrumental

volumes throughout the project.

Figure 9: Dean’s DAW: Automation

54
Instant Feedback

Through the use of modern technological advancements, the EDM producer has the ability to

obtain instant feedback from the DAW. At the click of a button, producers are able to

playback their works and make amendments accordingly. Similarly, notation software such

as Sibelius, now also allows WAM composers to gain instant feedback and revise their work.

All participants, from a young age, were captivated by electronic music. Their interest in the

genre, as well as the art of DJing for participants such as Dean and Roan, led them to

experiment with various DAWs and looping software to further enhance their skills. Unable

to gain the necessary skills and knowledge from formal learning settings such as the

secondary school classroom, participants sought learning from external places such as the

Point Blank Music School, internships, a significant “other” and also through internet

platforms such as YouTube.

The process of trial and error was demonstrated by the observed participants through their

learning process as well as in their creative processes. All four participants recall significant

times within their learning process where they employed the use of trial and error,

particularly during times of solitary learning. Within their creative process, participants

showcased the trial and error process through the playback of chords and sections of the work

to reaffirm their thoughts. Throughout the observation of their creative process, the observed

participants demonstrated their embodied musical knowledge through the inputting of

structured chords into the DAW, as well as their choosing of instruments.

55
 Chapter 4
Conclusion
In an effort to determine what constitutes learning and embodied knowledge among EDM

producers, this study focused on two components. Firstly, I sought to develop an

understanding of how the necessary musicianship is acquired among EDM producers through

a historical and cultural context. In order to gain a deeper understanding of this acquisition, I

investigated these contexts through the use of literature review, interviews, and observations.

Informal Learning and EDM

Green (2008) clearly defines Informal Learning as:

Using music that pupils choose, like and identify with; learning by listening and

copying recordings; learning with friends; engaging in personal, often haphazard

learning without structured guidance, and integrating listening, performing,

improvising and composing in all aspects of the learning process. (p. 23)

Although aspects of the model needed to be modified in order to suit EDM production, from

the findings it was clear that the learning processes of each participant can be likened to that

of the popular rock musicians described in Green’s work.

While Green’s seminal works (2002; 2008) focused primarily on performance as the outcome

as a result of “listening and copying records”, EDM production focused directly on

producing as the outcome, with the opportunity to perform these “compositions” as DJs. The

process of “listening and copying” however, is also present throughout the learning processes

of EDM producers, with all participants, as described in the findings, implementing this

56
technique in their learning process. Similarly, Green (2002; 2008) highlights this process

stating, “although they all did it [learn songs] by copying recordings, many of them had not

considered this practice to be a part of learning” (p. 61). One participant of Green’s (2002)

study explained that “‘I’d listen to the line over and over again till I could sing it’” (p. 61).

Another participant claiming “‘normally I will have listened to the stuff before to have an

idea of what should be going on’” (p. 67). In the context of EDM production, this process of

“listening and copying” is seen not only in the early stages of learning, but also throughout

the creative process where participants would aim to emulate a particular sound or subgenre

of EDM music. Ranging from imitating the bassline, a particular chord progression,

arrangement style, timbres, specific rhythmic combinations, as well as structural elements,

participants would, make it their own unique and original work through the use of their inner

ear.

Both Green’s Informal Learning Model and the findings within this study have emphasised

the presence of a significant “other” in the learning processes of both garage rock music, and

EDM producing. Green (2008) says:

The role of the teacher throughout the project was to establish ground rules for

behaviour, set the task going at the start of each stage, then stand back and observe

what pupils were doing. During this time teachers were asked to attempt to take on

and empathize with pupils’ perspectives and the goals that pupils set for themselves,

then to begin to diagnose pupils’ needs in relation to those goals. After, and only

after, this period, they were to offer suggestions and act as ‘musical models’ through

demonstration, so as to help pupils reach the goals that they had set for themselves.

Teachers told their pupils that they would be available for help if required, but that

57
 they would not be instructing in the normal way. The role of the teacher was thus

rather different from a normal, formal educational role, and was particularly

challenging for all of the teachers involved. (pp. 24-25)

Similarly, participants in this study illustrated that the “experienced other”, being either a

family member, university professor, or friend, contributed in a similar way to the classroom

teacher within Green’s study, and in both cases, the “teacher” is depicted as an expert.

Although not directly involved in the learning process, the teacher is there to provide

guidance and assistance.

Implications for Music Education

It is clear from the findings that EDM producers also possess a sophisticated musical

knowledge obtained through a relatively solitary learning process. The participants of the

study demonstrated an array of knowledge pertaining to both traditional WAM, and

electronic music terminology. Indirectly referencing the codified musical concepts

throughout their process, it is clear that both WAM and electronic music at one point or

another coincide. The use of electronic music within the classroom can be seen as a new way

to engage students using music which they identify with, whilst achieving valuable musical

knowledge.

With reference to music education, this paper suggests that further consideration to be given

to the myriad of processes by which individuals learn. The participants in this study engaged

in a variety of learning processes that were quite similar overall. Participants engaged in

teacher directed learning, solitary learning, group learning, and situated learning, with the

58
most prevalent being solitary learning. As such, it is likely that other producers do not learn

through just one process.

While some music educators focus on secondary school music experiences as a site of

learning, in the case of the participants in the study learning to produce EDM was largely not

covered in these classes. Their teachers chose not to deviate from the WAM canon and as a

result, participants in the study pursued other avenues of learning in an attempt to learn. It

has been shown in this study that the framework of Green’s (2008) Informal Learning Model

can be amended not only to encompass garage rock music, but also the use of computer

music. Crafted in stages, students can be exposed to more composition and listening based

activities to create a deeper understanding of electronic music.

It is therefore suggested that Green’s Informal Learning Model should be reformed to include

EDM music, as well as other popular styles such as hip hop. Additionally, it is also worth

questioning whether the model could be expanded to include any genre of music (Green,

2008). The multi-skilled music teacher should be happy having groups working on radically

different genres of music simultaneously. This is the ultimate version of Informal Learning,

where the students are free to explore their desired genre of music within their friendship

groups as a means of learning.

Recommendations for Pedagogical Development

The following recommendations are made with regard to the findings presented in this study,

to integrate electronic music production into the classroom:

59
1. Loop-based composition as a simple, yet effective starting point for students where

they gain momentum to segue into creating material from scratch rather than

exhausting the same loops.

2. That students have open access to online platforms such as YouTube to access

tutorials to learn DAW-specific material. As stated in the findings, the use of online

forums (where applicable) can be a reliable source of information.

3. Time is allowed for experimentation and listening in order for students to gain a

deeper understanding of EDM, its subgenres, and arrangement.

4. The seeking of feedback by students from peers and teachers is facilitated where

necessary in addition to Recommendation 6.

5. Assessment that allows for embodied musical knowledge to be assessed through

analysing student DAW project files as opposed to assessing a music vocabulary.

6. Teachers require a sound level of knowledge on DAW interfaces and essential

production techniques for EDM, including basic mixing skills. Teachers would also

benefit from directed Professional Development courses in advance of implementing

this framework, such as those listed below. Self-motivated teachers could very easily

self-teach by producing their own EDM alongside their students. Professional

Development resources include:

• Roaring Records: (https://www.youtube.com/c/RoaringRecords/featured)

The Roaring Records YouTube channel was created and hosted by Dr. Andy

Edwards of Peachtree Ridge High School in the USA. Edwards created a

variety of tutorials and vlogs which discuss how to navigate and teach skills

using software such as Soundtrap, GarageBand, and Logic Pro X. He also

provides resources that he uses within his own classroom to help students

build electronic and acoustic instruments.

60
 • Technology for Music Education: (https://ti-me.org/) The Technology for

Music Education is an organization dedicated to the advancement of music

technology. Based in the USA the organization not only offers regional and

national professional development opportunities, they also allow individuals to

access their archives through annual membership. They also offer Level one

and two certifications which can be completed online from any country around

the world.

• Midnight Music: (https://midnightmusic.com.au) Created by Katie Wardrobe

in Australia, this website offers twelve online courses which cover topics such

as iPads, FGarageBand, Mixcraft, Sibelius, Music Tech for Beginners, and

Audacity. The courses are specifically designed for music teachers with the

courses focusing on student-based projects. Wardrobe also offers a plethora of

“freebies” such as free shortcut lists for software such as Sibelius, Acid Music

Studio, Audacity, and a free Music Tech Resources eBook.

7. The use of guest specialists brought into the school to mentor students (where funding

allows), or the use of local volunteers who may be happy to take this role.

Through the findings and observations of this study, it is clear from the above

recommendations how the processes of Dean, Marcus, Marie Kiara, and Roan can be broken

down and transferred into a classroom setting. Green’s initial approach to Informal Learning

can be modified from one that only considers popular guitar-based rock music created in

groups, to including modern day, technology-based music through the use of loops and

samples in a more solitary learning environment. With these expansions, I believe the

classroom music teacher would not only engage the students in a different style of learning,

but would also provide the students with an array of choice. This would create an

61
environment to direct their own learning while listening to, composing, and even performing

the music that they love and identify with.

Limitations and Future Research

The size of the data set must be acknowledged when considering the data. As there were only

a small number of participants in this study, it is not possible to generalise the findings.

Additionally, limitations were placed on direct contact with the participants due to COVID-

19 restrictions in Sydney, with all but one interview and observation conducted in an online

setting. This in turn limited the data collected and my ability to ask questions during the

observation process. Due to the semi-structured nature of the interviews, participants were

free to talk about their experiences as producers as well as responding directly to the

questions stated. True to the nature of qualitative research, all data was given merit.

However, due to responses being dependent on the producer’s context, not all responses were

fully applicable to every question within the interview process. The validity of the observed

trends was therefore highly dependent on the producer’s specific context. Further, heavy

reliance on memories of interactions and learning situations was unavoidable. As the study

did not observe learning processes as they occurred, understanding to what degree solitary

learning or group learning was used was based on self-reporting.

Future research of this nature would benefit from replicating the study using a larger number

of participants. It may also be worth considering participants who are internationally based as

to gain a broader cross-section of the population. Additionally, this research could be

converted into an action research project within a school or with a group of high school aged

students, employing the above recommendations for Informal Learning using EDM. This in

turn would provide further insight into the success of the processes employed by the

62
participants in this study when applied in a controlled setting. The research would also

benefit from using the framework with other genres of music such as hip hop and rap to

develop a fully inclusive model of Informal Learning.

63
 Bibliography

Allsup, R. E. (2008). Creating an educational framework for popular music in public schools:

Anticipating the second-wave. Visions of Research in Music Education, 12(1), 1–12.

Allsup, R. E., & Olson, N. (2012). New education frameworks for popular music and

informal learning: Anticipating the second-wave. In S. Karlsen & L. Väkevä (2012),

Future Prospects for Music Education: Corroborating Informal Learning Pedagogy (pp.

11–21).

Armstrong, V. (2011). Technology and the gendering of music education. Ashgate.

Bauer, W. (2020). Music learning today: Digital pedagogy for creating, performing, and

responding to music. In Music Learning Today. Oxford University Press.

https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780197503706.001.0001

Bell, A. P. (2018). Dawn of the DAW: The studio as musical instrument. Oxford University

Press.

Bennett, S. (2018). Intermixtuality: Case studies in online music (re)production. In S. Bennett

& E. Bates (2018), Critical approaches to the production of music and sound (pp. 201-

219). Bloomsbury Publishing USA.

Brandman, C. J. (2016). Is the future Musical Futures? A comparative analysis of the

Musical Futures approach and the NSW BOS 7- 10 Music Syllabus [Master’s Thesis].

64
Brewster, B., & Broughton, F. (2000). Last night a DJ saved my life: The history of the disc

jockey (1st American ed.). New York: Grove Press.

Bull, A., & Scharff, C. (2017). ‘McDonald’s music’ versus ‘serious music’: How production

and consumption practices help to reproduce class inequality in the classical music

profession. Cultural Sociology, 11(3), 283–301.

https://doi.org/10.1177/1749975517711045

Bull, A. (2019). Class, control, and classical music. Oxford University Press.

Burnard, P. (2012). Musical creativities in practice. OUP Oxford.

Burns, R. (2000). Introduction to research methods (4th ed.). Pearson Education Australia.

Butler, M. J. (2003). Unlocking the groove: Rhythm, meter, and musical design in electronic

dance music. [PHD Thesis] – Indiana University).

Butler, M. J. (2006). Unlocking the groove: Rhythm, meter, and musical design in electronic

dance music. Bloomington: Indiana University Press

Butler, M. J. (2012). Electronica, dance and club music. In The library of essays on popular

music. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004

Cambridge Dictionary. (2021). Retrieved from https://dictionary.cambridge.org/

65
Collins Dictionary. (2021). Retrieved from https://www.collinsdictionary.com/

Creswell, J. W. (2013). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods

approaches (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Charmaz, K. (2014). Grounded theory in global perspective: Reviews by international

researchers. Qualitative Inquiry, 20(9), 1074–1084.

https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800414545235

Christophersen, C. (2017). Challenging music teacher education in norway: Popular music

and music teacher education. Utdanningsforskning I Musikk–Didaktiske, Sosiologiske

Og Filosofiske Perspektiver, 105–114.

Clements, A. C. (2008). Escaping the classical canon: Changing methods through a change of

paradigm. Visions of Research in Music Education, 12(1), 1–11.

D'Errico, M. (2018). Technologies of play in hip-hop and electronic dance music production

and performance. In S. Bennett & E. Bates (2018), Critical Approaches to the

Production of Music and Sound (pp. 120-134). Bloomsbury Publishing USA.

Dewey, J. (1899). The School and Society. The University of Chicago Press.

Dillon, S., Adkins, B., Brown, A., & Hirche, K. (2009). Communities of sound: Examining

meaningful engagement with generative music making and virtual ensembles.

66
 International Journal of Community Music, 1(3), 357–374.

https://doi.org/10.1386/ijcm.1.3.357_1

Egolf, E. J. (2014). Learning processes of electronic dance music club DJs (Doctoral

dissertation, New York University).

Elliott, D. J. (1995). Music matters: A new philosophy of music education.

Oxford University Press.

Elliott, D. J, & Silverman, M. (2015) Music matters. A philosophy of music education.

Oxford University Press.

Evans, S. E., Beauchamp, G., & John, V. (2015). Learners’ experience and perceptions of

informal learning in key stage 3 music: A collective case study, exploring the

implementation of musical futures in three secondary schools in Wales. Music

Education Research, 17(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/14613808.2014.950212

Fikentscher, K. (2018). The disc jockey as composer, or how I became a composing DJ.

In Electronica, Dance and Club Music (pp. 83–88). Routledge.

https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315094588-5

Finney, J., & Philpott, C. (2010). Informal learning and meta-pedagogy in initial teacher

education in England. British Journal of Music Education. 27. 7 - 19.

10.1017/S0265051709990167.

67
Gower, A. (2012). Integrating informal learning approaches into the formal learning

environment of mainstream secondary schools in England. British Journal of Music

Education, 29. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0265051711000490

Green, L. (2002). How popular musicians learn: A way ahead for music education. Ashgate.

Green, L. (2008). Music, informal learning and the school: A new classroom pedagogy.

Ashgate.

Hall, M, M., & Zukic, N (2013). The DJ as electronic deterritorializer. In In B.A. Attias & A.

Gavanas & H C. Rietveld (Eds.), DJ culture in the mix: Power, technology, and social

change in electronic music (pp. 103-123). Bloomsbury Publishing USA.

Hallam, S., Creech, A., & McQueen, H. (2017). What impact does teaching music informally

in the classroom have on teachers, and their pedagogy? Music Education Research,

19(1), 42–59. https://doi.org/10.1080/14613808.2015.1122749

Harrison, T. (2021). On the historical and future role of the music producer [Senior Honours

Thesis]. https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/honors/1081/

Haslam, D. (2001). Adventures on the wheels of steel, the rise of the superstar djs. Fourth

Estate.

Hein, E. (2013). Designing the drum loop. A constructivist iOS rhythm tutorial system for

beginners. [Master's thesis], New York University.

68
Hein, E. (2020). The disquiet junto as an online community of practice. In The Oxford

handbook of social media and music learning (pp. 195-213). Oxford University Press.

Hess, J. (2019) Music education for social change: Constructing an activist music education.

Routledge.

Humberstone, J. (2015). Defining creativity for a more pluralist approach to music education.

In Proceedings of the ASME 20th National Conference. Music: Educating for Life (pp.

56-63). Prince Alfred College.

Humberstone, J. (2017). A pluralist approach to music education. In R. Mantie & S. A.

Ruthmann (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Technology and Music Education. Oxford

University Press.

Jeanneret, N. (2010). Musical futures in Victoria. Australian Journal of Music Education, 2,

148–164.

Jenkins, P. (2011). Formal and informal music educational practices. Philosophy of Music

Education Review, 19(2), 179. https://doi.org/10.2979/philmusieducrevi.19.2.179

Kallio, A. A. (2017). Popular “problems”: Deviantization and teachers’ curation of popular

music. International Journal of Music Education, 35(3), 319–332.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0255761417725262

69
Koszolko, M. K., & Montano, E. (2016). Cloud connectivity and contemporary electronic

dance music production. Musical and Media Connectivities: Practices, Circulation,

Interactions. 6 December 2016, 60–86.

Kruse, N. B., Veblen, K. K. (2012). Music teaching and learning online: Considering

YouTube instructional videos. Journal of Music, Technology & Education, 5(1), 77–87.

https://doi.org/10.1386/jmte.5.1.77_1

Kuhn, W., & Hein, E. (2021-06-17). Electronic music school: A contemporary approach to

teaching musical creativity. Oxford University Press.

Lamont, A., Maton, L. (2010) Unpopular music: Beliefs and behaviours towards music in

education. In R. Wright (Ed.), Sociology and Music Education, (pp. 63–80). Ashgate.

Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation.

Cambridge University Press.

Lawrence, T. (2003). Love saves the day: A history of American dance music culture,

1970-1979. Duke University Press.

Liamputtong, P. (2013). Qualitative research methods (4th ed.). Oxford University Press.

MasterClass Online. (2020). Retrieved from https://www.masterclass.com/

70
McLeod, K. (2001). Genres, subgenres, sub-subgenres and more: Musical and social

differentiation within electronic/dance music communities. Kembrew McLeod, 13.

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1533-1598.2001.tb00013.x

Montano, E. (2008). 'You're not a real DJ unless you play vinyl' Technology and formats -

The progression of dance music and DJ culture. Journal on the Art of Record

Production, 3(1), 1-9.

Montano, E. (2009). DJ culture in the commercial sydney dance music scene. Dancecult,

1(1), 81–93. https://doi.org/10.12801/1947-5403.2009.01.01.05

Music Production & DJ School (Producer) - London, Los Angeles, Ibiza & Online, Point

Blank Music School. (2020). Retrieved from https://www.pointblankmusicschool.com/

Naderifar, M., Goli, H., & Ghaljaei, F. (2017). Snowball sampling: A purposeful method of

sampling in qualitative research. Strides in Development of Medical Education, In Press.

https://doi.org/10.5812/sdme.67670

O’Flynn, J. (2009). Lucy Green, music, informal learning and the school: A new classroom

pedagogy. International Journal, 99(2005), 109–113.

O’Neill, S., & Bespflug, K. (2011). Musical Futures comes to Canada: Engaging students in

real-world music learning. Canadian Music Educator, 53(2), 25–27.

Oxford Learners Dictionary. (2021). Semi-professional. Oxford Learner's Dictionaries | Find

definitions, translations, and grammar explanations at Oxford Learner's

71
 Dictionaries. https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/semi-

professional_1?q=semi-professional

Point Blank Music School. (2020). Graduate testimonials | Student feedback | Point blank

online music school [Video]. Retrieved from

https://www.pointblankmusicschool.com/about-point-blank/about-online-

school/student-testimonials/

Resnick, M., & Rosenbaum, E. (2013). Designing for tinkerability. In M. Honey & D. Kanter

(Eds.), Design, Make, Play, Growing the Next Generation of STEM Innovators (pp. 160-

179). Routledge.

Rietveld, H, C. (2013). Journey to the light? Immersion, spectacle and mediation. In B.A.

Attias & A. Gavanas & H C. Rietveld (Eds.), DJ culture in the mix: Power, technology,

and social change in electronic music (pp. 79-103). Bloomsbury Publishing USA.

Rodriguez, C. (2012). Informal learning in music: Emerging roles of teachers and

students. In S. Karlsen & L. Väkevä, (2012) Future Prospects for Music Education:

Corroborating Informal Learning Pedagogy: Corroborating informal learning pedagogy (pp.

117–128). Cambridge Scholar Publishing.

Rose, L. S., & Countryman, J. (2013). Repositioning ‘the elements’: How students talk about

music. Action, Criticism, and Theory for Music Education, 12(3), 20.

http://act.maydaygroup.org/articles/RoseCountryman12_3.pdf

72
Seabrook, J. (2015). The song machine: Inside the hit factory. W.W. Norton & Company.

Small, C. (1998). Musicking: The meanings of performing and listening.

University Press of New England.

Stake, R. E. (2008). Qualitative case studies. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.),

Strategies of Qualitative Inquiry (3rd ed., pp. 119–149). Sage Publications.

Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures

and techniques. Sage

Straw, Will. (2002). Value and velocity: The 12-inch single as medium and artifact.

In Popular Music Studies, edited by D. Hesmondhalgh and K. Negus. Arnold.

Talbot, B. (Ed.) (2018), Marginalized Voices in Music Education. Routledge.

Tan, E. (2013). Informal learning on YouTube: Exploring digital literacy in independent

online learning. Learning, Media and Technology, 38(4), 463–477.

https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2013.783594

Thompson, P. (2012). An empirical study into the learning practices and enculturation of DJs,

turntablists, hip hop and dance music producers. Journal of Music, Technology and

Education, 5(1), 43–58. https://doi.org/10.1386/jmte.5.1.43_1

73
Thornton, S. (1995), Club cultures: Music, media and subcultural capital,

Polity Press.

Tracy, S. J. (2012). Qualitative research methods. Wiley-Blackwell.

Väkevä, L. (2012). The world well lost, found: Reality and authenticity in Green's "new

classroom pedagogy". In S. Karlsen, & L. Vakea, (2012), Future prospects for music

education: Corroborating informal learning pedagogy (pp. 23-49). Cambridge Scholars

Publishing.

Waldron, J. (2018). Questioning 20th century assumptions about 21st century music practices.

Action, Criticism, and Theory for Music Education, 17(1), 97–113.

https://doi.org/10.22176/act17.1.97

Walzer, D. (2016). Independent music production: How individuality, technology, and

creative entrepreneurship influence contemporary music industry practices. Creative

Industries Journal. 10.1080/17510694.2016.1247626.

Wright, R. (2011). Musical Futures: A new approach to music education. Canadian Music

Educator, 53(2), 19–21.

Yin, R. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods. Sage

74
 Appendix A
Ethics Approval

75
 Appendix B
Participant Information Statement

76
77
78
 Appendix C
Interview Questions

79

View publication stats