Media Coverage

John Jurgenson's article on Thumtronics in the Wall Street Journal has triggered a very welcome spate of follow-on media coverage, including:

• Dec 7th: A blog posting by the esteemed Richard Florida, in which he writes "wow. I am totally blown away. I am starting in my music, innovation and society project and I can really use [your] help."
• Dec 10th: KXAN TV News, "Austin Man Has His Thumb on Next Great Musical Invention."
• Dec 12th: KZOK Radio, "Jim Plamondon, Inventor of the Thummer" (13 minutes).

Apparently, there's more to come.

The media stories describe the Thummer as "an expressive new musical instrument which is easier to learn," so the core message is getting through OK. That's encouraging.

The strong interest shown by the media in this story tells me two things:

• That the media believes – as NAMM's tri-annual Gallup polls indicate – that consumers are interested in learning to play a musical instrument if it's cheaper and easier. (Else, they wouldn't think that the story was interesting enough to run.)
• That once Thumtronics gets a credible Version 1.0 of the Thummer to market, awareness of it will spread rapidly through free PR and word of mouse.

It's interesting to see the message simplify over time. John's WSJ article was about Jim Plamondon, inventor of the Thummer, which some experts say has better commercial prospects than most new musical interfaces, which have a long history of commercial failure. This complex story has been simplified to “the Thummer could be the next electric guitar.” What’s most interesting is that the simpler version is almost certainly more accurate (albeit less complete) than the complex version. Unlike the various other proposed new musical interfaces of the last century or so, the Thummer has that rare combination of simplicity, power, affordability, and uniqueness that leads products to succeed in any market. So the story really is that “the Thummer could be the next electric guitar.”

It's also interesting to see that none of the media coverage of the Thummer has yet mentioned Dynamic Tonality. I can understand why: Dynamic Tonality is hard to explain, and I can’t yet provide compelling demonstrations. So, at this stage of its development, if I were a reporter, I'd probably ignore Dynamic Tonality, too.

Yet the Thummer’s unique ability to control Dynamic Tonality indicates that the Thummer has the potential to truly revolutionize music, even more so than the electric guitar did. The more accurate comparison is to the piano. The piano added a new degree of expressiveness to keyboards, and its felt-covered hammers (starting in the mid-1800's) dampened the Harmonic Series' high-prime harmonics sufficiently to make 12-tone equal temperament acceptably consonant, thereby enabling a paradigm shift to equal temperament. Equal temperament expanded the framework of tonality by making a slew of notes enharmonically equivalent. This paradigm shift has been so complete that most musicians don't even know what equal temperament is, let alone that there are alternatives to it...or that it has ruined harmony.

The Thummer enables similar leaps in expressiveness and in the expansion of the framework of tonality, while "un-ruining" harmony. It remains to be seen whether these benefits will engender a similar paradigm shift.

Obviously, I'm betting that they will. :-)

Thummer and Austin

The Thummer gives Austin – Thumtronics' home town – the opportunity to emerge as the new center of the global music industry. Here’s how.

First, let’s recognize that Austin is a minor league “farm team” in the music industry, where musicians develop their chops and audiences before being called up to the major leagues by the record labels based in Los Angeles & New York (and, arguably, Nashville).

Second, let’s assume that the record labels’ business model has collapsed, significantly reducing (a) the revenues musicians derive from recorded music and (b) the influence of the record labels’ home cities on the music industry.

Third, let’s assume that, as discussed in Going Somewhere?, the Thummer (a) resolves Schoenberg’s “crisis of tonality” by giving artists new fuel for creativity within the time-honored framework of tonal harmony, which, in turn, (b) can give new life to established musical genres and possibly spawn new musical genres, too.

With these three assumptions, Austin’s next step is to invest in the local development of
1. A new business model for the music industry, centered on live performance, including the many specialized service providers necessary to the efficient implementation of that model, and
2. A critical mass of local expertise in all things Thummer, including product design & manufacturing, music education courseware development & delivery, Thummer-based music composition & performance, etc.

Notice that neither of the above developments is sufficient unto itself.

• If Austin fails to keep the design and manufacture of Thummers at home by investing accordingly, then it will (in effect) be exporting those design, engineering, and manufacturing jobs to China, which significantly increases the chance that some Chinese city – not Austin – will be the first to hit critical mass in the exploitation of the Thummer’s musical potential.
• If Austin successfully establishes itself as being the home of the Thummer’s design & manufacture, but isn’t the first to hit critical mass in the development of new musical uses of the Thummer (e.g., Dynamic Tonality), then it will be nothing more than Hamamatsu – a city that exports musical instruments, but not music or musicians.

Many individual Austinites already recognize the Thummer’s potential, and Austin is already taking the first steps towards developing a new business model for the music industry based on live performance. Under the auspices of the University of Texas’ IC2 Institute, Thumtronics led the recent organization of the Austin Music Industry Growth Initiative (AMIGO). By working closely with Austin’s existing music scene, the McCombs School of Business at The University of Texas at Austin, third-party service providers, and potential corporate partners, AMIGO can be the focal point for the development of a new business model for the music industry, centered in Austin.

The Thummer itself can easily be brought to market from Austin, which is rich in the needed design, engineering, and manufacturing capabilities. It may be maximally efficient to offshore the volume manufacturing of Thummers, but it is likely to be economically & culturally optimal to keep the design of all prototypes and low-volume trial runs here at home.

Furthermore, Austin’s live music community and UT’s School of Music can work together to accelerate the exploration and exploitation of the musical possibilities created by the Thummer’s expressive power. Such a cooperative effort between working & academic musicians should accelerate Austin’s attainment of critical mass.

All we need now to bring Thumtronics’ and AMIGO’s innovations to market is cash.

Going Somewhere?

In a forum at the Classical Music Guide, a poster named Ralph stated that the the Thummer was "Interesting but I doubt it's going anywhere."

To discuss what is required for a new musical instrument to “go anywhere” in classical music, we must first discuss what “going anywhere” means in the context of classical music.

Hopefully, we can all agree that there is a respected body of opinion supporting these three claims:

1. One aspect of classical music is its exploration, over time, of the emotional affect of the “resources of tonality” -- such as polyphony, voice leading, counter-point, cadences, chord progressions, key modulations.
2. The resources of tonality are derived, in large part, from the properties of the Harmonic Series, as described by Rameau, Helmholtz, Plomp, Sethares, etc.
3. Schoenberg (among others) attributed the end of the classical period to a “crisis of tonality,” in which the resources of tonality had been exhausted.

From this very narrow perspective, then, in order to “go anywhere” in classical music, a new instrument would have to provide new resources to tonality. That is, it would have to expand the framework of tonality to include truly novel effects that were likely to have an emotional affect.

That is exactly what the Thummer does.

Here's how.

The cover article of the Winter 2007 issue of MIT Press’ peer-reviewed Computer Music Journal (of which I am co-author) describes a property – previously unknown to art or science – called tuning invariance, which is shared by many two-dimensional keyboard note-layouts. A second article (of which I am also co-author), recently accepted for publication in the forthcoming Spring 2008 issue of the peer-reviewed Journal of Mathematics and Music, compares and contrasts tuning invariant keyboard note-layouts and concludes that the Thummer’s is optimal for the widest valid tuning range.

Tuning invariance is only found among note-layouts that are also transpositionally invariant – i.e., “have the same fingering in every key.” Transpositionally-invariant keyboard note-layouts have been known since the 1880’s, with implementations from Janko, Wicki, Fokker, and Bosanquet, among others.

Tuning invariance – “having the same fingering in every tuning” – allows the composer/improviser to change tuning on the fly without changing fingering patterns. Whereas “alternative tunings” have previously been considered to be static, fixed tunings, on a tuning invariant keyboard, one can change tunings along a smooth continuum, all across the range of Blackwood’s range of recognizable diatonic tunings (and beyond). A given tuning range is defined by its temperament, which can be defined by a sequence of commas which are all tempered to unison. Within a given temperament, the set of relationships among intervals remains constant even as the widths of the individual diatonic intervals change. This notion of “temperament” is, in effect, an abstraction of the structure of the underlying Harmonic Series from which tonality arises.

The harmonics in any given timbre can be adjusted in real time to maintain this same set of relationships, maximizing consonance across the temperament’s tuning range. In effect, this approach abstracts the relationship between the Harmonic Series and Just Intonation to a higher level, which embraces a much wider range of tunings and timbres while retaining the fundamental structure of tonality.

There is a smidgeon of evidence that, at this higher level of abstraction, there is a single unifying acoustic basis for the music of all (or at least most) cultures, possibly including those which are based on instruments which emit inharmonic timbres, such as the Thai renat, the African balafon, and the Indonesian gong.

You can explore this using a very rough, preliminary implementation of a Dynamic Tonality-enabled synthesizer described here.

The dynamism of tuning & timbre which is enabled by tuning invariance is something truly new under the sun. This “Dynamic Tonality” enables new musical effects such as polyphonic tuning bends, new chord progressions, and temperament modulations. These new effects are likely to have emotional affects as inherent as (say) the V-I cadence.

All of this new dynamism requires a great deal of real-time expressive control – which brings us back to the Thummer. Its thumb-operated joysticks and internal motion sensors offer unprecedented expressive control, while still providing control over which individual notes are played when (as on a piano).

You might imagine that all of this new functionality would make the Thummer a difficult instrument to learn to play – yet it is being widely hailed by music educators as being quite possibly the easiest instrument to learn, ever. Or more information on this point, see the ThumMusic System.

Furthermore, musicians need not understand one iota of the mathematics or music theory underlying these innovations. All they need to do is wiggle one of the Thummer's joysticks, or move it through space, and cool new musical effects happen.

In short, the Thummer creates new resources of tonality. It has *exactly* what it takes to “go somewhere” – and to make it easier than ever for musicians to go there – within the context of classical music, and in other genres, too. Indeed, the Thummer’s expansion of the resources of tonality and its expressive power have the potential to spawn entirely new genres, the way the electric guitar spawned rock.

Indeed, the Thummer has the potential to increase the percentage of our population which masters the fundamental knowledge and skills needed for music-making.
http://www.thummer.com/blog/2007/10/growing-market.html

Unless I’m missing something?

Why the Thummer Will Succeed

Proposed new musical instruments tend to fail in the marketplace because:

1. they have to be much better – not just slightly better – than traditional instruments in at least two or three different ways that consumers care about, and
2. they are sold through a traditional bricks & mortar distribution channel, which favors "me-too" products over radically different designs.

The Thummer and Thumtronics' sales model solve both problems.

1. The Thummer is WAY Better

• The Thummer allows novices to learn music much faster – at least three time faster, and (with the ThumMusic System) perhaps ten times faster – than traditional instruments.
• The Thummer is has far more expressive power than any other instrument, due to its thumb-operated joysticks and internal motion sensors. With these, musicians can control up to ten different independent musical variables simultaneously while playing, instead of the two or three variables available in most traditional musical instruments.
• The Thummer offers artists the opportunity to explore vast new creative frontiers through its novel support for Dynamic Tuning.
• The Thummer is tiny – potentially even pocket-sized.
• The Thummer can be very affordable, due to its being made from standard, off-the-shelf consumer electronics components.

Simple, Powerful, Portable, & Affordable – these are the keys to success in ANY market. That’s why the Thummer can – and will – succeed.

2. The Thummer Has Low Inventory and Distribution Costs

Most musical instruments are large, heavy things, made from special-purpose components. For example, my Roland ep-97 digital piano weighs 32 pounds, which means that it would cost over $105 to ship it across the USA overnight. The Thummer, on the other hand, weighs about a pound, and would cost only a quarter as much to ship. Furthermore, the Thummer occupies only about a tenth of the volume of the ep-97, reducing my inventory and bulk shipping costs accordingly. Keeping inventory and distribution costs low is essential for products that are likely to start out as low-volume niche products before they climb up the Long Tail up into the mainstream. Most proposed new musical instruments are simply too big, too heavy, and too expensive to be profitable in a small niche, so they never get the opportunity to climb out into the mainstream. The Thummer can survive profitably as a niche product while musicians and music educators learn to exploit its revolutionary strengths. World-changing revolutions take time, and the Thummer can be profitable throughout.

That's why the Thummer will succeed: because it addresses both the product issues and the business process issues that have led other new musical instruments to fail.

WSJ: Tiny "Thummer" Could Be Music's Next Big Thing

Here's a press release I sent out earlier today to leverage the Wall Street Journal's coverage of Thumtronics.

--------------------------------------------------------

Wall Street Journal: Tiny "Thummer" Could Be Music's Next Big Thing

New Musical Instrument is Simple, Powerful, and Packed with Potential

Austin, Texas (December 7, 2007) -- If today’s Wall Street Journal’s cover story about Thumtronics Inc. is correct, then a tiny new instrument called the Thummer™ could be music’s Next Big Thing.

In the article, John Jurgensen tells the story of Jim Plamondon’s invention of a new musical instrument, the Thummer, and his struggle to bring it to market.

Grace Newman says that learning to play the Thummer could give working musicians a competitive advantage. "As a VP at BMG’s Windham Hill label, I decided which bands to sponsor, promote, and endorse, from unknown bands to Grammy-winning artists. I looked for musicians that had something new, something different, that would stand out in the market... and so did every other label. The first musicians to master the Thummer will rivet the attention of the entire music industry. If you're looking for a way to break out of the pack, this is it."

Why? Because the Thummer allows musicians to express their emotions musically better than ever before. Dr. Garth Paine, an internationally-recognized leader in the field of New Interfaces for Musical Expression, has stated that “Of all of the musical interfaces that I have seen, I think that the Thummer has the most potential for broad adoption as an outstandingly expressive instrument.”

Yet the Thummer is uniquely simple to learn, which could help the high percentage of music students who quit their lessons in frustration. Dr. Sam Leong, former Director of Music Education at UWA and Treasurer of the International Society for Music Education, said that “Throughout my work in music education for 30 years, I have not seen any innovation with as much potential to revolutionize music education. The Thummer could transform the musical landscape in the 21st century.”

This combination of simplicity and power can change entire industries. Hank Coleman, CEO of Austin’s OpenLabs, makers of the award-winning MiKo™ and NeKo® keyboard workstations, he says that “After half an hour with Jim, I definitely ‘got it.’ The Thummer could be the Next Big Thing in the musical instrument industry.”

A peer-reviewed scientific paper in the recently-published Winter 2007 issue of MIT Press’ Computer Music Journal proves – using the arcane language of mathematics – that a firm theoretical foundation supports Thumtronics’ innovations. This advance in theory is to music what the Periodic Table of the Elements was to chemistry, helping students gain musical knowledge and skill faster while expanding expressive power and opening up new creative frontiers.

So, why isn’t the revolutionary Thummer already on store shelves? Because Thumtronics needs additional capital to complete its development and bring it to market.

If today's Wall Street Journal story is correct, driving a new musical instrument into the mainstream is never easy... but many experts agree that the tiny Thummer has what it takes to become music’s Next Big Thing.

# # #

WSJ Story: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB119698832376116538.html?mod=hpp_us_leisure

CMJ Paper: http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/comj.2007.31.4.15

Jim Plamondon: jim@thumtronics.com, (512) 363-7094.

WSJ video: props to Gavin Healy

The WSJ article is accompanied by a video, which includes a couple of demos by Gavin Healy. He is not credited in WSJ's video...so I'm crediting him here.

Way to go, Gavin! :-)

WSJ: Thanks!

John Jurgensen's article on Thumtronics, which was initiated back in October, appears in the Wall Street Journal tomorrow (Friday, 7th December). John -- and the WSJ staff -- put an impressive amount of work into the story. Whether I end up liking the article or not, I applaud their professionalism and diligence.

Thanks, guys! :-)

Go-to-Market Strategies & OS Partnerships

Thumtronics has four different strategies for getting the Thummer to market, depending on the kind of deal it can make with future investors.

1. US Independent: Bring the Thummer to market as in independent US firm, climbing up The Long Tail from low-volume “niche” sales in the first couple of years to high-volume “mainstream” sales thereafter.
2. Chinese Independent: As above, but partnering with a Chinese OEM of electronic musical instruments to complete the Thummer’s engineering and undertake its manufacturing.
3. OS Partner: Partnering with an operating system (OS) vendor – Apple, Microsoft, or Sony – to bring Thumtronics’ innovations to market.
4. Open Project: If all else fails, assign Thumtronics’ IP to a non-profit organization which can lead the open, non-profit development of Thumtronics’ innovations.

The Independent options could lead to an OS Partnership, with an OS vendor buying Thumtronics after its products’ potential had been proven in the marketplace.

Why would an OS vendor care about Thumtronics?

OS vendors such as Apple, Microsoft, and Sony are currently fighting a pitched battle to control the technology standards for connected entertainment, including music. This competition has been most obvious to consumers in battles over “downstream” music data formats, such as AAC, WMA, and ATRAC. OS vendors are also competing to gain similar proprietary advantages “upstream.” One example is Apple’s Core Audio, which Apple says “let you do things that are simply not possible on other platforms.”

Thumtronics’ innovations are sufficiently disruptive that an OS vendor could use them to add proprietary value to many of today’s music technology standards (aka embrace and extend or de-commoditization), making its platform even more attractive to the creators of musical content, and giving it greater influence over downstream music-related standards, too.

Any one of Apple, Sony, or Microsoft would benefit from a partnership with Thumtronics, albeit each in different ways.

Successful New Musical Interfaces: Why So Rare?

Why is the mainstream commercial success of new musical interfaces so rare?

Here’s my reasoning:

1. The characteristics required for ANY new product to be successful are that it be simpler, cheaper, and/or more powerful;
2. All new musical interfaces are inherently disruptive;
3. A disruptive new product has to be two or three times better than current offerings along at least two of these dimensions (simplicity, affordability, power);
4. The vast majority of proposed new musical interfaces do not deliver benefits sufficient to disrupt the status quo.

If there's any novelty to this analysis, it's in the observation that any new musical interface is inherently disruptive. You can introduce a "new and improved" synthesis algorithm to a keyboard synthesizer, electrify a guitar, or even make drum heads electronic, without requiring significant changes to the instrument's interface. These are sustaining innovations, as far as the musical instrument consumer is concerned. But any change to a musical instrument' interface is inherently disruptive -- and disruptive innovations must deliver a much higher level of benefit to become successful.

There are other minor issues, such as:

• The availability of complementary goods, which in the music products industry include compelling demonstrations of the new interface’s virtuosic potential, interface-specific arrangements of popular music, and interface-specific education materials. However, these days, such materials can be generated free, rapidly, and with high quality by the interface’s early-adopter community, and shared over the Internet.
• The Long Tail favors products which have low inventory & shipping costs, such as tiny instruments which can be manufactured on demand by any consumer electronics-capable factory (without the need for specialized music-related skills or equipment).
• YouTube and other viral marketing mechanisms favor products which provide visually-engaging benefits, such as the use of internal motion sensors to control musical effects.

For any proposed new musical interface, the question then becomes: “is it sufficiently better in ways that matter to the potential market and which facilitate rapid diffusion?” For the vast majority of proposed new interfaces, the answer has been “no.”

Does the Thummer meet this stringent standard? Time will tell – but I think that it does, and I’m not alone in this belief.