# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Introduction

Welcome to the world of Makey Makey! A world where everyday objects are much more than they appear. Bananas are more than just a curvy fruit --- they're keys to a virtual piano. Play-Doh isn't just a child's toy --- it's the controlling force behind Pacman's up/down/left/right. And your simple pencil drawings are a portal to Portal.

Be prepared to look at everyday objects in a whole new light. Be stoked! The world is your construction kit.

Materials Required

Makey Makey --- The star of the show! The kit should already include:

Mini-USB Cable

Alligator Clip Cables

Tinned Tipped Wires

A computer (Windows, Mac OS X, or Linux) with an Available USB Slot

Button Material (e.g., fruit, Play-Doh, tin foil, copper tape, pencil, a friend)

A Primed Imagination

Suggested Reading

What is the Makey Makey?

The Makey Makey is a collaborative project between Jay Silver and Eric Rosenbaum of the MIT Media Lab and SparkFun Electronics. It's an invention kit that encourages people to find creative ways to interact with their computers by using everyday objects as a replacement for keyboards and mice. With the Makey Makey, you could replace your space key with a banana, use Play-Doh to move and click your mouse, or high-five your best friend to advance PowerPoint slides.

Hardware Overview

Top Side

The Makey Makey is a two-sided circuit board. On the more simple top side, the Makey Makey has six inputs: the up/down/left/right arrow keys, as well as the space bar and mouse left click:

Each of those inputs as well as the very important "Earth bar" are available in the form of what I like to call "alligator-bait" connectors. You'll use the included alligator clip cables to clip right into the hole pairs. This will all be made much more clear in the next section. For now, let's keep summarizing your Makey Makey.

If any key is activated with the "Earth Bar," an associated LED will light up next to the pad.

Back Side

When you flip the board over to the back side, you will notice a mini-B USB connector and POWER LED. The connector is where you will connect the USB cable to a computer. The LED will light up when the board is powered.

You've also got access to 12 more keys via the black female headers:

W, A, S, D, F, and G on the keyboard side

up/down/left/right mouse movement and left/right clicks on the mouse side

The bottom header has six additional ground (aka Earth) outputs.

The top header is an expansion/output header. They KEY OUT and MS OUT are connected to the LEDs on the back to indicate whether you're pressing a keyboard or mouse key, respectively. This can be used to connect low-power LEDs and small motors. The RESET will reset the board when connected to ground. There are also pins for power through the 5V and GND. The last two pins (PGD and PGC) are used by the factory to program.

The pins broken out through the black female headers are all available in the form of "jumper-wire" connectors to connect male jumper wires, header pins, stripped wires, or tinned tipped wires.

Hardware Hookup

The simplest Makey Makey key you can make is one that only uses your fingers. Below are instructions to make yourself into a key!

Connect a USB Cable

First, grab the mini-USB cable included with the Makey Makey and insert the cable into the connector. Connect the other end to a USB port of your computer.

Ignore Pop-up Windows

When you first insert the Makey Makey into your computer, a window may pop up. You can cancel or close out the window.

Connect Earth

Touch the Earth bar to ground yourself.

Connect Yourself

Simultaneously touch the SPACE pad. The LED above the SPACE key should light up, and a space command should be sent to your computer.

Now try leaving one finger on the Earth bar while quickly tapping the space button. Getting a feel for it? It should work just like your standard space key!

Testing With a Text Editor

Open up some sort of text editor (Notepad, Word, TextEdit, etc.) on your computer to confirm if the Makey Makey is sending a space to your computer. Remember, just as with your boring ol' keyboard, your computer will interpret keypresses differently depending on what program is active. You can also use your mouse to click between the words in the textbox shown below.

Online Apps for Makey Makey

Looking for some fun games to test out the Makey Makey? Click on the link below to try out the online apps provided by JoyLabz!

Making Your First Key

Makey Makey Key-Making Materials

To make your "standard" key with the Makey Makey you need the following:

A connection to a Makey Makey input. This can be done using alligator clips on the the hole pairs, or jumper wires on the black connector sockets.

Connection to a Makey Makey ground (Earth). Again, you'll connect to earth using either alligator clips or jumper wires.

Some sort of key material. This is the fun/creative part! There's a world of Makey Makey keys out there. Anything that's even slightly conductive is just waiting to become a computer input. The classics include your fingers, bananas and pencil scratchings.

Something to activate the key by connecting between the key material and the ground input. Your fingers work pretty well for this. Anything even slightly conductive will do, though.

Making a Key

Activating a key means creating a closed circuit. For the circuit to work, electrons have to be able to flow from the Makey Makey input key to Makey Makey's ground. Usually your fingers will be the missing link between those two:

Image courtesy of JoyLabz

Let's try making a bona fide Makey Makey key. First, you'll need to find some sort of key object. Dig around your house, check your fruit basket or coin purse, or grab a pencil and make a drawing to try it out.

Pick out your favorite-colored alligator clip cable, open one of the jaws, and snap it down onto your key. Clip the other end of the clip into one of the Makey Makey top-side inputs. SPACE is great for testing purposes, so we will start with that key pad:

Now, grab a second cable for the ground connection. Black is the classic "ground color", but set your own trend and pick whatever you want. Clip one end of one cable into the Earth bar and let the other end dangle for now.

Open up some sort of text editor (Notepad, Word, TextEdit, etc.) on your computer. Or you can click between the words in the test box provided below.

Finally! Grab the dangling end of the ground cable with one hand. Make sure you're touching the metal part of the clip. Then use your other hand to touch the banana, or whatever your key might be. BAM! Space!

Experimenting With Key Materials

Don't have a banana? Try experimenting with different materials. Some materials conduct better than others. Certain materials can also be conductive over a period of time. Try it out!

Below is an example of a hand-drawn key from a standard pencil. A dotted circle was drawn on two sides of a piece of paper and extended to the center. Lines of alternating lengths were drawn (short and long) from each extension with a gap between the lines so that one finger could be used as the key.

The first drawing with the thin lines labeled "Button 1" was a poor conductor on paper. However, the second drawing with the bold, thick lines labeled "Button 2" was able to conduct. In this case, the pencil was only able to conduct when there was enough of the material. After a few uses, the lines faded and required another layer of graphite.

Using the Back

Remember the black connectors on the other side of the board? There are additional keys that you can connect! You can follow a similar set of steps, replacing alligator cables with jumper wires. The wires included with the Makey Makey is one type of jumper wire. Jumper wires can be a bit tougher to connect to keys. An easy solution is to connect an alligator cable to the free end of the jumper.

Let's try it out. Insert one end of the tinned tipped wire fully into a socket. Connect the other end to a conductive material. You may need to use an alligator cable to extend and connect to the material. Repeat for the ground connection.

The example below is similar to the hand-drawn button. Strips of copper tape were used for "Button 3" instead of a pencil. Since the material is more conductive and thicker than the hand-drawn lines, only two stripes were used. Regular tape was used to secure the tinned ends of the wire against the paper and table. After a few uses, the copper fared better than the graphite pencil.

Adding More Keys!

To add more keys, simply connect another alligator clip to another Makey Makey input (e.g., arrow keys or mouse click) and connect the other end to a key material. No further ground connections are necessary as long as there is one available. Be creative and connect as many keys as you can to the Makey Makey!

Jim and a Makey Makey connected to various types of keys!

What Makes a Key? Conductivity.

A material is a conductor if it allows electricity (even just a tiny bit of it) to flow. This is the magic behind the Makey Makey: most of the world is conductive! Anything metal will almost certainly conduct electricity. The "standard" conductors are copper, silver, gold, etc. But with the Makey Makey our conductor scope grows. Most organic materials --- things like human skin, liquids, foods and frog legs --- are at least a little conductive. And that's really all the Makey Makey needs.

If an object isn't conductive, it's an insulator. Common insulators include plastic, glass, ceramic and wood. You can usually tell just by looking at something whether it's an insulator or conductor. You'll have to watch out for objects like this, as they just won't work with the Makey Makey. To get around that, though, you can line them with a conductive material (like copper tape, or just regular old wire) or paint. This creates the illusion that they're conducting electricity.

Makey Makey held against an enclosure and connected to a controller with copper tape and alligator cables.

Resistance is a measure of exactly how conductive a device is. Resistance can be measured with just about any standard multimeter. Any object with a resistance of about 4.5MΩ (that's a really high resistance) or less should work as a Makey Makey input. If you're not sure if something will work with the Makey Makey, whip out a multimeter (buy one if you have to; they're an essential tool for electronics hobbyists) and test that resistance! Or, better yet, just connect it to your Makey Makey and experiment.

Remapping Keys

The Makey Makey v1.2 Classic has an option if you ever need to change the default keys. To remap the key, you will need to go online and head over to JoyLabz using any internet browser. Click on the button below to open a new window.

Following the instructions provided by JoyLabz is pretty straightforward, but we also outlined the instructions below. By clicking on the link, it should have opened up a new tab or window. You will have two options. Click on the Makey Makey Classic.

Heads up! When reprogramming the Makey Makey keys, you will need to have the browser window active. If you happen to click outside of the window, it will become dark. All you need to do is use your mouse and click back on the reprogramming window.

The page will also time out if you take too long of a break. When this happens, you will need to start at the beginning.

Once selected, the prompt will ask you to check and ensure that you have the correct Makey Makey version. On the back side with the black female headers, you will notice that the board has a version number printed as v.1.2 If you do not have that version, you will not be able to remap the keys with these instructions. If it is v.1.2, proceed by connecting the Mini-USB cable to the Makey Makey and clicking on the START button. For now, do not connect the other end to your computer's USB port.

Grab two alligator clips and connect the up (↑) and down (↓) arrows together. Then connect the left (←) and right (→) arrows. Once connected, connect the other end of the USB cable to your computer's USB port. You will notice the green LEDs begin to fade in and out, indicating that the Makey Makey is in programming mode.

The browser will eventually respond with a note indicating that the Makey Makey is detected. If you do not see the message, you may need to unplug the USB cable from your computer and start again. Also, make sure that the browser to remap keys is active. Otherwise, follow the prompt by removing the alligator clips if the Makey Makey is in programming mode.

With one hand, ground yourself by touching the exposed GND pads. With the other hand, touch the left or right keys to navigate to the key that you are interested in remapping.

Note: You will only be able to use the Makey Makey to navigate. You will not be able to use your keyboard or mouse.

The key that will be remapped will be highlighted yellow. Let's remap the left mouse "CLICK" on the Makey Makey. Navigate to the left mouse "CLICK" button. Once selected, keep one hand on GND and touch the "CLICK" pad to remap the key.

The key that is being remapped will be highlighted green. The replacement key will be highlighted yellow. At this point, you can select the replacement key located at the bottom of the browser. Navigate through the keys using the Makey Makey's arrow pads. Let's select the "enter" key by moving to its icon and touching the "CLICK" pad.

The browser will have a nice animation and replace the old key with a new key. At this point, you can continue to remap the other keys. For now, we will just remap one key.

Navigate to the SAVE button by pressing on the down pad. Here, you will be able to SAVE the remapped key, CANCEL any changes that you have made, or RESTORE the Makey Makey default keys. Let's save the remapped key by pressing on the "CLICK" pad.

A prompt will pop up asking you to confirm the save. Use the left arrow pad to highlight "YES". Click on the "CLICK" pad to confirm.

The settings will save and you will be greeted with a "SUCCESS!"

Troubleshooting

Not working as expected? Check out the Troubleshooting section for the Makey Makey v.1.2 Classic:

You may even want to check out their Frequently Asked Questions:

Resources and Going Further

If you're left with any questions after reading this tutorial, here are all the Makey Makey-related resources we can find:

Example Projects

Sometimes following by example is the best way to learn. If you're not sure where to start with the Makey Makey, give these examples a look-over. I hope they inspire you! If you want your project added to this list, post it in the comments below, or send us an email!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Welcome to the world of Makey Makey! A world where everyday objects are much more than they appear. Bananas are more than just a curvy fruit --- they're keys to a virtual piano. Play-Doh isn't just a child's toy --- it's the controlling force behind Pacman's up/down/left/right.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The new Makey Makey Apps are the culmination of years of learning and play at JoyLabz. We took our tried-and-true piano app that was created when Makey Makey was first introduced, and we took it up a level alongside a number of new apps that we have created from the ground up. The new apps all have a number of cool fea

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Beat of the Heart is a short documentary film exploring the revolutionary work of music therapist Brian Schreck. Based at the Norton Cancer Institute in Kentucky, Brian has been recording the heartbeats of cancer patients to incorporate into a unique musical composition written with the patients and their families. Just as each individual's heartbeat is unique, each musical composition becomes a celebration of the individual beauty and spirit of each of the patients involved. THE FULL-LENGTH DOCUMENTARY IS OUT on VIMEO: https://vimeo.com/ondemand/thebeatoftheheart

You can watch the longer trailer here: https://youtu.be/WsguDhDaMIg and the teaser below:

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Beat of the Heart is a short documentary film exploring the revolutionary work of music therapist Brian Schreck. Based at the Norton Cancer Institute in Kentucky, Brian has been recording the heartbeats of cancer patients to incorporate into a unique musical composition written with the patients and their families.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Eko Digital Stethoscopes, AI Disease Detection, & Telehealth

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Eko brings together stethoscopes, powerful software, and AI-supported analysis - elevating the way we detect cardiovascular disease. Try Eko in your practice today!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Soundtrap Blog: Your Place for Music Making Inspiration

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Visit the Soundtrap Blog! Helpful resources to get you started with your music creation. Learn how to make music online, from anywhere!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A MIDI keyboard-also known as a MIDI controller-is a piano-style device that lets you play and record your DAW's software instruments and any other VST synths you have. They typically connect to your computer via USB for easy integration with minimal set-up.

You can then manually change the recorded notes using your DAW's MIDI functions. Before you get your first MIDI keyboard, it's a good idea to familiarize yourself with the basics of MIDI technology.

What is MIDI?

Short for Musical Instrument Digital Interface, MIDI is a standard which includes a communications protocol, digital interface, and physical connectors for different electronic instruments, computers, and other audio devices for playing, editing, and recording music. It was established in 1983, and not much has changed over the years!

A single MIDI link through a MIDI cable can carry up to 16 channels of information, each of which can be routed to a separate device or instrument.

MIDI carries messages including a note's notation, pitch, velocity, vibrato, panning, and clock signals (which set tempo). When you play a MIDI controller, all of the key presses, button presses, knob turns, and slider changes are converted into MIDI data.

As we described earlier, one of the most common applications is to play a MIDI keyboard to trigger a digital sound module to generate sounds.

Other advantages of MIDI include small file size and the ability to easily import and modify MIDI data in a variety of ways. A MIDI recording of a performance on a keyboard could sound like a piano or other keyboard.

But, since MIDI records the messages and information about notes and not the specific sounds, this recording could be changed to any other sound you'd like, based on whatever virtual instruments you have at your disposal. It's as easy as changing the instrument on whichever track you've recorded MIDI data.

It's important to remember that a MIDI recording is not an audio signal.

The Best MIDI Keyboards for Beginners

MIDI keyboards range from portable 25-key units that fit in your backpack to full-on 88-note keyboards with weighted keys. And because they're technically "controllers," a lot of them also come with extra knobs, drum pads, buttons, and faders which can be used to control DAW or VST parameters.

Most of the top MIDI keyboards also come with handy templates for seamless integration with DAWs like Ableton Live, Logic, and FL Studio, so you can jump into creating as quickly as possible!

While no means a comprehensive list of anything and everything MIDI keyboard, these are some of the best options to get started!

Komplete Kontrol M32 is one of the best MIDI keyboards for the price. It's a compact 32-key unit with some really incredible features, like "Smart Play" which allows users to stay in key with over 100 different scales. It's deeply integrated into Native Instruments' own Maschine software, but it can also be used as a generic MIDI controller in any DAW with any VST synth.

It also includes a software suite to so you can get up and running with great sounding instruments from the jump.

Akai's MPK series is a phenomenal entry point into the MIDI keyboard world. The MPK Mini MkII is small enough to fit in your backpack, with 25 velocity-sensitive keys, Octave Up/Down buttons, and a 4-way thumbstick for pitch-bend and modulation.

It also comes loaded with get 8 velocity-sensitive MPC-style drum pads, and 8 additional Q-Link knobs which you can customize to control whichever parameters you choose. The MPK Mini has other great features as well, like an onboard arpeggiator with adjustable resolution, range, and modes.

The Xkey is one of the sleekest slim and portable MIDI keyboards available. If you're looking for fashion and function, the Xkey excels at both.

At .14″ thick, the 25-key controller provides all 128 levels of velocity sensitive, pitch bend and modulation buttons, octave up and down buttons, and a sturdy aluminum frame.

On the opposite end of the portable MIDI keyboard spectrum is the full-size 88-key Nektar Impact. It's one of the best values for full-size MIDI controllers, and comes preloaded to seamlessly integrate with Bitwig Studio, Cubase, Digital Performer, Garageband, Logic Pro, Nuendo, Reason, SONAR, Studio One, FL Studio, and Reaper.

Other features include 8 pads, 8 knobs, 9 faders, pitch bend and modulation wheels, and of course, 88 semi-weighted keys.

SEE ALSO: Humbucker vs Single Coil Pickups
SEE ALSO: 10 Best Small Tube Amp Options for Home Use in 2022
SEE ALSO: Best Acoustic Guitar Pickups for Any Playing Style in 2022

One of the most versatile MIDI controllers, the KeyStep is a compact keyboard controller and a polyphonic sequencer in one.

The KeyStep comes with a 32-note "Slimkey" keyboard for better playability than other units with undersized keys. There are also capacitive pitch and mod strips, which are easy to play but don't include moving parts that can get damaged in transit.

KeyStep's major advantages, though, are its advanced functions: Chord Play allows you to play a chord and subsequently trigger it with single keys across the keyboard. It also includes an onboard polyphonic 64-step sequencer.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
MIDI Keyboard 101: Ultimate Beginner's Guide

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A MIDI keyboard will let you get hands-on with your DAW's software instruments or any VST synths you have to play and record in real-time!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Check out our new sampler app. Load sample packs, and play music with the world at your fingertips!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The world's most advanced wearable musical instrument, for expressive creation, composition and performance.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Introduction: Holiday Makey Makey Door Display

Today, I'm gonna share a super simple paper circuit board that is a miniature version of a holiday door display. Teachers, I know you like your door displays, so I'd love to see you take this idea and run with it! I also know teachers can't always afford copper tape, so I challenged myself to make this without conductive tape! All you need is a Makey Makey and everyday stuff.

This project is made with entirely:

Holiday Waste and Scraps (My backdrop is from some candy we bought for our kids' teachers, the snowman I cut out of regular construction paper, and Santa is upcycled from used wrapping paper!)

Step 1: Create Foil Tape

Since foil is conductive and you probably have some in your kitchen, it makes a great way to create interactive touch points on everyday items. Plus, you can cut it in any shape you want! Cut your foil to be your circuit traces and use a gluestick to adhere it to your background. It's best to have one length of foil instead of piecing the foil together. While a gluestick is conductive when wet, it will most likely loose its conductivity when it dries. Therefore if you have to piece your foil together, make sure the two sides of foil touch without the glue acting as an insulator.

Step 2: Create Circuit Traces

For Makey Makey to work, you need one foil trace for your key press, and one foil trace for your ground (AKA EARTH).

For my mini display, I used one foil track for EARTH and hooked my grey alligator clip to it. For the first key press, I've made a small foil trace and hooked the red alligator clip to it. You can either touch both traces to activate the switch, or use a conductive item to bridge this circuit.

Step 3: Making a Switch

I used two different types of switches here. You can decide which version you like better!
KEY PRESS AND EARTH
You can make your foil trace the key press and attach it to your "ornament." Above, I've made Santa's tummy the key press, and wrapped the foil all the way to the top of this cut out. The foil belly wraps to Santa's hat and the red alligator clip is attached directly to this foil. The other end of the alligator clip is hooked to "space."
BRIDGING CONDUCTIVE TRACES
The other way to do this is to create a positive foil trace and a negative foil trace. (I used the same EARTH foil trace for my whole project.) Instead of the belly foil being attached to a key press, I've made a second foil trace. The alligator clip is hooked to the right arrow. So instead of the key press, the foil on the snowman's belly, is just a conductive pad that bridges the circuit when it presses and touches both foil traces. (Much like the way YOU bridge the circuit when you play a banana piano.)

Sometimes, it's frustrating to have alligator clips all over your display. So you might try making your own paper circuit board with this second style of switch. This type of switch is exactly how calculators and kid's toy buttons work! Bust open an old calculator and you are likely to find two conductive traces that are only bridged when a conductive pad is pushed to close the circuit.

Step 4: ​Hacking Old Ethernet Cables or Cat5

It's super simple to hack an old ethernet cable and have multiple wires for Makey Makey-ing! This way you can add some length to your project. The wires inside the cable work like an extra long DIY alligator clip. (In fact, I'll make a tutorial soon for adding alligator clips heads to a wire like this, it's really very simple!) Just cut off the outer casing a few inches and strip the wires you want to use. Bonus: This is like making your own ribbon cable! It will contain all your wires AND be color coded. If you want to, you can easily attach an alligator clip head to each wire.

Step 5: Code It in Scratch!

The last step for your door display is to code your sounds in Scratch! I uploaded mp3 files and decided it would be fun to have my song ONLY play when the switch is activated. So if you stop pressing the switch, the sound stops. Adding the "Stop all sounds" makes the sound stop when you let go of the key- or if you stop pressing the switch on the door display.
Make sure to share your creations in the "I made it" section! For more holiday madness, check out these projects: More switch ideas:

Step 6: Check Out These Teacher Examples on Twitter!

Finished coding my office door with @handym13 last night! Even if I don't win the door decorating contest at least I learned how to use scratch and makey makeys. Learning around the Christmas tree quoting all the greatests! #shareLJA pic.twitter.com/ExYS5SvAw0
- Leah Magana (@IBLeahMagana) December 11, 2018

An interactive Christmas..... tree with kindergarten class at TCEA #makeymakey@makeymakey@teacher2teacher pic.twitter.com/5MVkvpJwV3
- Kalo Haslem (@kjh011) December 11, 2018

Also can't stop won't stop with the Christmas spirit here in #MaybornDesignDen! Look at our @makeymakey Christmas tree! 🎄 pic.twitter.com/oSftGp3sWx
- Emily Clark (@emilyrclark24) December 12, 2017

Christmas Around the World Project. An interactive bulletin board using @makeymakey and inspiration from @mraspinall@StJamesOCSB#ocsbBeInnovative#ocsbdl pic.twitter.com/WWovlmufI3
- Stephen Swan (@mrswanjam) December 19, 2018

Our first major project with #makeymakey and #scratch-an interactive Christmas tree for the hallway outside of my classroom! pic.twitter.com/bC4ThqFxm0
- Anna Hanrahan (@HanrahanLEAP) December 4, 2018

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Holiday Makey Makey Door Display: Today, I'm gonna share a super simple paper circuit board that is a miniature version of a holiday door display. Teachers, I know you like your door displays, so I'd love to see you take this idea and run with it! I also know teachers can't always a...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Skoogmusic: Accessible Musical Instrument for Everyone

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Skoog is an easy to play musical instrument, accessible to all! | Make Music | Learn to Code | Available at Apple & Amazon - NEW LOWER PRICE!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
EyeHarp is the first musical instrument that allows people with disabilities to learn and play music with gaze or with head movements.

About Eyeharp

About Eyeharp

What is Eyeharp?

EyeHarp is a gaze-controlled or head-controlled digital musical instrument. It allows people with disabilities to learn and to play music without barriers. Designed with musicality in mind, EyeHarp offers the same expressive qualities as any traditional instrument.

About Eyeharp

How does it work?

Eyeharp musicians only need to install the software and use it with their Eyetracker, that is a special camera that monitors eye movements. With these two things, musicians can play beautiful melodies simply by looking at the notes on the screen.

About Eyeharp

Who is it for?

Eyeharp is best suited for people with disabilities who want to play music, for music therapists who use it with their clients, and for music teachers who have students with disabilities.

We offer training for professionals on a regular basis.

Testimonials

What people are saying about Eyeharp

Eyeharp is a very important instrument for my life because I always wanted to play music. Since I was little I had that goal, to play music. It is an innovative instrument, great and very fresh, I mean it is new and can be played by anyone who wants.

Joel Bueno

12 year old student with cerebral palsy

EyeHarp is a creative and joyful instrument for Joel. It helps him learn and develop musical language, enhances his concentration, memory and rhythm. It has opened doors for us to social activities, to interact and empathize with other people, and of course to enjoy music.

I have had the opportunity to try EyeHarp and see the work that Zacharias Vamvakousis does with people with motor disabilities, and I think it is an absolutely innovative, unique, and extremely useful tool. It enables people with severe physical difficulties to access playing music in a way that would not be possible without having a tool as advanced as the EyeHarp. As a professional, I recommend using EyeHarp and experimenting with this tool, which can open new possibilities for us, and give us access to patients with something that will definitely improve their quality of life.

Adriana Fasani

Music Therapist

EyeHarp is an amazing application, suitable for all levels of physical or mental disability. It offers great motivation and better accessibility than many low or high tech devices and software. The satisfaction and joy for the end user while creating sounds, rhythm, and music is immense. It is a great tool for all occupational therapists, with easy access and great benefits for all patients.

Polyvios Mylonas

pediatric occupational therapist

EyeHarp is an excellent tool that helps to bring music and its benefits to the people of functional diversity. I never imagined that one day I would get to play music with my eyes! Music is opening the door to a fantastic world. Music needs to be within everyone's reach, and EyeHarp does it!

Pili Egea

Writer with with cerebral palsy, EyeHarp student

Leo likes to learn music with the EyeHarp from the comfort of his bed, calm, focused and enjoying himself. The whole family participates in this magical moment: his brother hums, his grandmother and I cheer, his father and grandfather each listen from their place in the house. Music unites us. We are grateful for EyeHarp and Zacharias.

Sonia, Leo's mother

6 years old student with spinal muscular atrophy type I

I always wanted to play music, but for a very long time I couldn't, because I can't use my hands. I found EyeHarp through a music foundation for disabled people in the Netherlands. I play classical and pop music. I can play almost anything by heart without help. I am very glad that Zacharias invented EyeHarp, otherwise I would never have played music.

Margot

EyeHarp student with cerebral palsy

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
EyeHarp is the first musical instrument that allows people with disabilities to learn and play music with gaze or with head movements.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Theremini is a reimagination of one of the oldest electronic musical instruments, and Bob Moog's first love - the Theremin. Its design fuses the experience of playing an instrument you don't actually touch, with a powerful sound engine derived from Moog's award winning synthesizer, Animoog. The Theremini guarantees immediate success to anyone at any skill level or physical ability, while also providing new ways to experiment with music, education, and gestural control.

Assistive pitch correction allows each player to adjust the instrument's level of playing difficulty. When activated the Theremini will play every note in a selected scale perfectly, making it impossible to play a wrong note. As the assistive pitch correction is decreased, more expressive control of pitch and vibrato becomes possible. When deactivated, the Theremini will perform as a traditional Theremin and there is absolutely no pitch correction.

A built-in tuner supplies real-time visual feedback of each note as it is played, as well as its proximity to perfection. This is useful for correcting a user's playing position, and for educating younger players about pitch and scales.

The Presets section of the Theremini allows you to select from 32 wave or wavetable-based presets, store a selected scale, set and recall a specified playing range, and specify settings for the included stereo delay and more.

Recessed in the top of the Theremini is a compact speaker perfect for private rehearsal and quick setup anywhere. Silent rehearsal is also possible via the front panel headphone jack. Simply plug in ear-buds or headphones and the built-in speaker becomes silent.

For live performance and gestural control, the rear panel of the Theremini features stereo line level audio outputs, a Pitch CV output with selectable range, and a mini USB jack for MIDI connectivity to the free Theremini Mac / Windows software editor and Theremini iPad editor.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Theremini® is a re-imagination of one of the oldest electronic musical instruments, and Bob Moog's first love - the Theremin. Its design guarantees musical success to anyone regardless of age or physical ability.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Get your hands on TouchMe, the musical instrument that turns skin, water, or flowers into sound. Play with friends or alone. As the area of touch and intensity changes, the sound changes too. Ready to get started? Connect to a computer, tablet or smartphone and play with our online synth or your fav…

# data[].attributes.headline
Music Therapy & Use of Technology in COVID-19

# data[].attributes.subject
Music Therapy & Use of Technology in COVID-19

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Yong Siew Toh Conservatory of Music, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore

LUCA School of Arts, Leuven, Belgium

Faculty of Biomedical Sciences, Department of Development and Regeneration, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium

University Psychiatric Centre, Kortenberg, Belgium

United World College of South East Asia, Singapore, Singapore

In recent years, the field of music therapy (MT) has increasingly embraced the use of technology for conducting therapy sessions and enhancing patient outcomes. Amidst a worldwide pandemic, we sought to examine whether this is now true to an even greater extent, as many music therapists have had to approach and conduct their work differently. The purpose of this survey study is to observe trends in how music therapists from different regions around the world have had to alter their practice, especially in relation to their use of technology during the COVID-19 pandemic, because of limited options to conduct in-person therapy due to social distancing measures. Further, the findings aim to clarify music therapists' perspectives on the benefits and limitations of technology in MT, as well as online MT. In addition, this survey investigated what changes have been necessary to administer MT during COVID-19, in terms of virtual therapy and online tools, and how the changes made now may affect MT in the future. We also explored music therapists' views on whether special technology-focused training might be helpful to support the practice of MT in the future. This is the first survey, to our knowledge, to break down opinions of and trends in technology use based on geographical region (North America, Europe, and Asia), and several noteworthy differences were apparent across regions. We hope our findings provide useful information, guidance, and a global reference point for music therapists on effectively continuing the practice of MT during times of crisis, and can encourage reflection and improvement in administering MT.

Introduction

Music Therapy and Technology

Within the last 20 years, music therapy (MT) has embraced various technologies to try to improve the practice or expand the realm of possibilities offered to patients. Technology may be used to cater to the multifaceted needs of patients, be it in terms of patient capability, or accessibility and portability of digital tools. The primary goal of MT is to help patients achieve higher levels of wellbeing, using musical experiences and interaction with the therapist as dynamic forces of change ( Kirkland, 2013; Bruscia, 2014). With this goal in mind, having a wider scope of digital MT tools available allows music therapists to select tools that will best suit their patients' cognitive, emotional, and/or physical needs. It is widely accepted that utilizing new technology allows MT to become more inclusive to more individuals, often allowing physically limited patients to participate in MT that would not be possible using only traditional instruments ( Magee, 2006; Hahna et al., 2012). This in turn can result in higher motivation levels to pursue and continue undergoing therapy. Technology also allows a greater degree of feedback to be generated while participating in MT, giving patients a greater sense of agency, participation, and purpose ( Lem and Paine, 2011; Ramsey, 2011).

Therapists may be inclined to embrace certain methods and technologies depending on the diagnoses of their patients, as well as their approach to diagnostics (e.g., symptomatically, versus a more broad/holistic, multidimensional approach). Some considerations that may influence the use of technology are clinical contexts/applications, and the music therapist's orientations (e.g., community music therapy, neurologic music therapy) and approaches (e.g., psychodynamic, humanistic, cognitive-behavioral, developmental), as well as factors external to the therapy or patient, such as accessibility and availability of funding. Another influence undoubtedly stems from the music therapist's various beliefs and values regarding clinical practice and the therapeutic process, i.e., their own biases and cultural beliefs may influence how they approach working with patients. Finally, the therapists' training, familiarity, and skills with regard to technology will also play a crucial role in the adoption of new technologies.

Although a full review of the technologies available for various clinical applications is not possible here, we will briefly describe several examples of music-based technologies and therapeutic tools that may be employed to help those with physical and cognitive impairments, mental disorders, and emotional/social disorders, as well as support wellbeing and help foster one's sense of identity and purpose.

Technology provides many options to aid those with physical impairments during MT, as traditional musical instruments are often too complex to handle. Adaptive Use Musical Instruments (AUMI), for example, are a form of technology that involves the creation of music in non-conventional ways, such as using a camera to track the body/head movements to different points on a screen in order to create music ( Oliveros et al., 2011). Another example is a Brain Computing Music Interface (BCMI) system, a kind of neurofeedback technology that involves mapping neural signals from the brain to a music creation/generation system, an applicable tool for those who cannot use their body to create music ( Miranda et al., 2011). Serious games (i.e., games created primarily for education, healthcare, etc, and not for the sole purpose of entertainment) that involve movements in response to musical stimuli have also been developed to support patients' physical abilities and motor control, as well as their motivation to undergo strengthening exercises ( Agres and Herremans, 2017). In general, incorporating technology into MT for those who are physically restricted can maintain or improve a patient's condition, as well as boost morale and wellbeing.

Music technology may also make MT more accessible to those with cognitive impairments, such as those with neurodevelopmental and neurocognitive disorders. Voice Output Communication Aids (VOCA), for example, assist those who have trouble communicating orally, and are controlled by a series of switches to output vocal commands ( Magee et al., 2011). Serious games have also been developed to support cognitive function, such as memory performance ( Agres et al., 2019). Broadly speaking, technology can facilitate accessibility and inclusivity across a range of cognitive abilities, and can be particularly helpful for those who have difficulty with verbal communication.

Music technology has been also used to assess mental conditions/states through, for example, acoustic analysis of improvizational music performance ( Luck et al., 2006; Streeter et al., 2012; Snape, 2020). When patients, who may have a broad range of psychopathologies and severity profiles, create music, their performance contains information that relates to underlying affective and communicative processes that occur during music making. For example, in a study with Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD) patients-patients who have trouble with interpersonal relationships, emotional instability, and impulsive behavior-music information retrieval (MIR) techniques were used to analyze improvizations in which a therapist and patient play in tandem on a single piano ( Foubert et al., 2017). This approach yielded clear disparities between BPD patients and the healthy control group, and affords a new way of assessing non-verbal interactions and cognitive processes.

As for enhancing social-emotional competence in MT, recently, MT has been aided by applications that facilitate patients' development of psychological resources that support adaptive growth and wellbeing. Technology may be used as an additional tool to learn beneficial ways of using music for one's health (by better understanding personal music listening behavior in daily life), and this skill transfers to general emotion regulation ability ( Randall and Rickard, 2013; Gold et al., 2017). To enhance patient wellbeing, the use of technology allows stress to be reduced, as seen when engaging in musical games ( Whitehead-Pleaux et al., 2011; de Witte et al., 2020). In addition, using technology that incorporates resonance frequency breathing during therapy sessions has been shown to deepen and support interpersonal and emotional processes naturally occurring during therapy, e.g., helping with the regulation of excessive arousal ( Brabant et al., 2017). Recently, BCMI systems have also been developed to aid emotion self-regulation in listeners, by providing music and neurofeedback to help listeners identify and train their emotion states, as measured through EEG ( Ramirez et al., 2015; Ehrlich et al., 2019).

Finally, adopting music technology allows identity to be explored: music from a patient's culture or background is more widely available via music technology ( Whitehead-Pleaux et al., 2011), and personally tailored music can strengthen the formation of identity through "peak experiences" that provide meaning, purpose, and significance to our lives ( Ruud, 1997). Technology can also afford personal choice and ownership, which are connected to agency and belonging, allowing individuals to be an agentic actor of their personal health promotion ( Saarikallio, 2017). For instance, in youth culture, technology opens new pathways to access music that does not belong to mainstream popular music, giving young individuals a voice to explore their position and identity in relation to ethnicity, gender, and class, anchoring a sense of belonging.

In summary, from streaming services and recording technologies to Serious Games and wearable devices, various kinds of technology have been incorporated into the clinical practice of MT in order to help patients achieve higher levels of wellbeing. Increasingly, technology has evolved to better meet patients' cognitive, emotional, and/or physical needs, and can help foster the patient's motivation, purpose, and sense of identity. Certain technologies, such as new digital musical interfaces and teleconferencing tools, have improved accessibility for some patients. In addition, advancements in technology have assisted therapists with patient diagnostics and assessment. Although there is an increasing trend in the use of various types of technology (see Magee, 2006; Hahna et al., 2012), this uptake of technology is not universal, and seems to be influenced in part by factors such as the cultural context, MT methods/approach, and of course the patients' diagnoses.

Online Music Therapy, and the Challenge of Administering MT During the COVID-19 Pandemic

The global COVID-19 pandemic has affected the way MT may be practiced. Countries around the world have gone into lockdown and enforced strict social distancing measures, in which regular interactions with members outside of one's household or immediate family are disallowed. This is a disturbance in the way MT is normally practiced, as music therapists often depend on face-to-face interactions with patients to achieve optimal outcomes. In order to allow MT to continue during the pandemic, music therapists have had to embrace alternative methods of conducting sessions, such as teletherapy, or virtual music therapy (VMT). This refers to the administering of MT remotely using online conferencing tools, such as Zoom, Skype, etc., which have made themselves prevalent in allowing other required activities such as schooling and work to take place. The maintenance of MT sessions is of the utmost importance to patients, especially during such times of crisis, in which patients might experience heightened levels of stress due to a lack of future perspective and the unpredictability of this global pandemic ( Mastnak, 2020).

Amidst the changes required due to social distancing measures, concerns have been voiced regarding the efficacy of online therapy, stating that there is limited access to affective embodiment in human interaction, which is considered to be one of music's key strengths in relation to both internal experiences and interpersonal interactions in MT ( Saarikallio, 2019). Patients have also shown concern about the privacy of the therapist's space during online sessions, as they had no full view of the therapist's room, which has stimulated anxiety and paranoid thoughts in some patients ( Desmet, 2020). In addition, Desmet (2020) found that the patients' own family members were sometimes in the same room, causing an unsafe environment for the patient.

Therapists (and patients) have spoken about "digital depression," where the digital means of communication and of being present is experienced as more exhausting than sessions in physical contact with the therapist ( Desmet, 2020). In MT, new learning processes often take place in an environment where the musical sounds of the therapist are attuned to or resonate with physical body gestures and facial expressions of the patient ( Foubert et al., 2020); affective experiences are thus grounded/embedded in the body, having vitalizing importance. Research shows that such an exchange between humans has an emotional but also vital importance on biological functions of the human body ( Desmet, 2020). It is theorized in this work that in online sessions, participants are frustrated because they yearn to experience immediate and direct affective embodied exchanges. While the content of what is said may be unaffected, the musical interaction is a complex, dynamic process that involves subtle exchanges. It will therefore be affected in online sessions by slight delays, which can be perceived as a passivity of the other, and which also contributes to the phenomenon of depression ( Desmet, 2020).

On the contrary, past studies examining the efficacy of teletherapy claim that this method has the potential to be as effective as traditional, real-life therapy, provided the online tools are used correctly ( Lightstone et al., 2015). Teletherapy, studied in many forms such as telerehabilitation, also tends to increase accessibility, especially to those from poorer economic backgrounds, geographically isolated individuals, or those who have other mobility challenges ( Spooner et al., 2019). Attending teletherapy sessions may also be generally more convenient, and have reduced travel costs, compared with traditional in-person therapy ( Latifi et al., 2021). It should be noted that not all patients will find online sessions to improve convenience or accessibility (i.e., those who do not have an internet connection at home, or who do not have the skills required to use the technology). Technology can therefore be an obstacle for some individuals. That said, for the significant number of patients for whom technology does improve accessibility, online therapy may serve as an adequate substitute for traditional in-person sessions. This may be especially true during difficult and unusual times (such as the COVID-19 situation), in which in-person MT is not always a possibility. Indeed, some practitioners have been honing the art of teletherapy. Knott and Block (2020), for example, offer a model for VMT that describes how to develop VMT that carefully considers the clinical goals, and ensures that the online format is as accessible, appropriate (taking into consideration the patient's abilities), and effective as possible to meet the patient's needs. Further, Molyneux et al. (2020) describe how continuing to deliver sessions virtually provided support, continuity, and an ongoing connection for people living with dementia and their companions who were isolated in their own homes due to the national lockdown in the United Kingdom.

The Current Survey: Investigating Changes to Music Therapy and Technology Use During COVID-19

Previous survey studies have been conducted to investigate music therapists' attitudes and practices involving technology ( Magee, 2006; Hahna et al., 2012). These studies involved understanding how technologies were being used, the drawbacks and limitations of the technology, and music therapists' own opinions on technology within MT. They also helped establish why music technology was not quickly/easily adopted in the practice of MT. The reasons primarily center around a lack of training ( Magee, 2006), and trends in using music technology in MT across different demographics such as gender and age ( Hahna et al., 2012). In this study, we aim to provide an updated account of technology in MT, particularly within the year 2020, to shed light on the impact that the COVID-19 pandemic has had on the field of MT and technology use within the field.

One area of focus here is to examine the practice of MT and technology use by geographical region, and how different clinical applications, as well as the use of technology, reflect the region in which MT is practiced. MT practices differ across geographical locations, a consequence of being embedded in different government systems, health care systems, education, training, and the way in which health is viewed within the country ( Gadberry et al., 2015). The different approaches and practices-didactic, medical, healing, psychotherapeutic, recreational and ecological practices ( Bruscia, 2014)-make the rules of transaction and interaction in MT, and the common basis upon which to establish any intervention, very difficult ( Ruud, 2000). On top of that, the practice is subject to idiosyncrasies within each culture ( Ruud, 2000). These cultural influences shape therapists' views and beliefs on their practice, their use of technology, and have a large impact on the therapeutic interactions' role and quality ( Wheeler and Baker, 2010).

This study aims to (a) provide a current overview of the technology used within MT, as well as music therapists' experiences and views regarding the use of technology in MT, (b) examine the impact of COVID-19 on the practice of MT and use of technology within MT, (c) identify trends in technology use in MT with regard to geographical location, and (d) investigate the reasons for not using technology within MT. To address these goals, certified music therapists in several countries around the world were invited to participate in a brief online survey containing questions about the music therapist's background and practice, their experiences and views about conducting therapy using technology, and their experiences practicing MT during the COVID-19 pandemic. This study seeks to clarify how the pandemic has influenced the practice of MT in general, and how music therapists embrace technology in particular. Finally, by examining technology-related limitations (such as a lack of specialized training, and a lack of bespoke, accessible, human-centric technologies), this study aims to identify what changes would be required to be of greatest help to music therapists when using technology in the future, which might lead to more successful integration of technology into the practice of MT.

Materials and Methods

Recruitment

To recruit volunteers, an email including the relevant background, study motivation, and information regarding the online survey, was sent to MT organizations in Asia, Europe, and North America via their website contact form or to the organization's secretariat to recruit potential participants. In addition, information was distributed on social media (i.e., music therapy Facebook groups, such as the World Federation of Music Therapy). Volunteers were allowed to share the survey by word of mouth (i.e., to their music therapist contacts), and the information and survey link were also shared with music therapists who were personal contacts of the study investigators. These forms of advertisement resulted in participants from several additional countries. Only certified music therapists who were currently practicing MT were invited to be a part of the study.

Survey Procedure

At the beginning of the survey, an introduction to the study was displayed via the online form, describing the aims of the study and how the information gathered would be used. Next, participants were asked to provide their informed consent before participating. If the participant gave consent, they could then proceed on to the survey questions; if not, they did not proceed. No names or other personally identifiable information were collected during the consent taking process. Participants were also informed that this research study was approved by the National University of Singapore Institutional Review Board (NUS-IRB Reference Code: NUS-IRB-2020-146).

The survey was provided in English and was divided into three sections. Participants could not continue to the succeeding sections if previous sections were not completed. The first section of the survey consisted of questions relating to the background of the music therapist and their practice, e.g., their demographic information, as well as their expertise in the field of MT and the type of MT conducted. The second section focused on their use of technology within their practice of MT, including their experience using technology, and more general views on the use of technology in MT (such as the benefits and limitations of technology use). The final section dove into the impact of COVID-19 on their MT practice, namely, how their MT practice was altered during this period of time, and which online/virtual tools were utilized to enable the continuation of their practice (when this was possible at all). Looking toward the future and the possibility of embracing greater technology use, music therapists were also asked whether more training opportunities would be welcome, and generate increased adoption of technology in the future. At the end of the survey, participants were given the option of entering their email address to participate in the prize drawing of one of two US$50 amazon gift vouchers, as a token of appreciation for participating in the study. In total, there were 36 questions within the survey, across the three sections described above, and the survey took approximately 15-20 min to complete.

Participants completed the survey during the month of September in 2020, several months after the COVID-19 pandemic swept across the world, and after all of the countries contacted went through (or were still in middle of) some type of lockdown or social distancing period. Once all responses were made, we examined the aggregate quantitative data, as well as qualitative (short answer) responses, that were collected from the survey. The results are provided in section "Survey Results and Discussion."

Participants

A total number of 112 volunteers participated in this study, hailing from three different regions around the globe: North America (including Canada and the United States), Europe (including Austria, Belgium, Germany, Italy, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Spain, and Switzerland), and Asia/Oceania (including Australia, Bahrain, Hong Kong, Indonesia, Israel, Malaysia, New Zealand, Singapore, Taiwan, and Thailand). Of those who participated, 16.1% identified as male, 81.3% identified as female, and 2.7% identified as non-binary. In terms of age, 23.2% of the participants were between 20 and 29 years of age, 31.3% were between 30 and 39 years, 25.0% were between 40 and 49 years, 13.4% were between 50 and 59 years, and 7.1% were aged 60 or above.

Survey Results and Discussion

Here we discuss the results of the three main sections of the survey as described in the section "Survey Procedure." First, the participants' professional background is presented, which covers the music therapist's training, qualifications, type of MT conducted, and general characteristics about their patients. Second, we present music therapists' responses about their use of technology in their MT practice. Third, we present responses about how the music therapists' have had to change and adapt their practice during the COVID-19 era, and also how their use of technology has changed accordingly. We further discuss what the therapists suggest might be the most helpful features of technology to consider moving forward, including factors both inherent to and external to the technology (such as affordability), and how a more widespread use of technology may be adopted through educational workshops and training sessions.

Background Questions

The demographic background of the music therapists who completed our survey is provided in the section "Participants." This section provides details regarding the professional background and experience of the participants, and the types of patients the music therapists see in their practice.

The participants had an average of 10.8 years (SD = 9.4 years) of professional experience as a music therapist. In terms of their MT qualifications, 26 participants (23.2%) indicated holding a Diploma in Music Therapy from a private institution, 35 (31.3%) hold a Bachelor's degree in Music Therapy, 54 (48.2%) hold a Master's degree in Music Therapy, 4 (3.6%) have a Doctorate degree, and 13 (11.6%) indicated other degree qualifications. The majority of music therapists conduct both group and individual MT sessions (74 individuals, or 66.1%), while 25% conduct individual sessions only, and 8.9% conduct group sessions only. In terms of the method of MT conducted, the majority conduct both active and receptive MT (83 individuals, or 74.1%), while 23.2% conduct active MT only, and 2.7% conduct receptive MT only.

In terms of the background of the patients seen by our sample of music therapists, there was a relatively even distribution of patients from each age range, from 0 to 9 up to 60+ years of age. Details of the age ranges of patients seen can be found in Table 1(a). There was also a wide range of patient diagnoses seen by music therapists. Because the question about patient diagnoses ("What clinical needs/diagnoses (motor impairment, aphasia, etc.) do your patients/patients tend to have?") was open ended, responses were categorized into patients from more than one diagnostic category. The most prevalent diagnostic category of patients was neurodevelopmental disorders, and the full distribution may be found in Table 1(b). The percentages in Table 1(b) provide the percentage of music therapists from a region who have treated that particular diagnostic category (for example, 13% of the music therapists from Europe treat patients with trauma and stress related disorders). Note that because many music therapists indicated treating more than one diagnostic category, the percentages across each row total more than 100% for each region.

General Questions About the Use of Technology in One's Practice of MT

In order to be able to compare the participants' technology use prior to and during the pandemic, we first asked the music therapists general questions about their use of technology. These responses are reported and discussed below.

General Attitudes and Use of Technology

When asked "Do you currently use technology (broadly defined) within your practice of music therapy?", 96 participants (85.7%) responded "Yes," while 16 (14.3%) responded "No." This is in line with the rapidly increasing trend of greater technology use, from Magee (2006), in which 30% of music therapists responded having used (electronic) music technology in their clinical work, to Hahna et al. (2012), reporting just six years later that 71% of those surveyed had used music technology in a clinical setting.

In a follow-up optional question, we asked "If you do not use technology, do you believe that the use of technology could help you conduct music therapy sessions in the future?" Here, 52 reported "Yes" (85.2% of those who responded), 5 (8.2%) responded "No," and 4 (6.6%) reported "Other" or "It depends." This displays a strong positive view toward technology, and an openness about embracing technology for MT in the future.

To gain a more precise view of the specific technologies that music therapists have used in the past, as well as those which would be most beneficial to use (that are not currently employed) in the future, we asked about a set of the specific technologies, ranging from specialized MT software to more general technologies such as recording technologies and wearable devices. These findings are reported in Table 2.

As one can see, many out of this pool of music therapists have used smart devices, apps, recording technologies, as well as streaming services, electronic devices, and teleconferencing tools. Few have used specialized MT software, new digital musical interfaces, or brain computer interfaces (BCIs). In terms of the technology viewed most beneficial to use in the future, over half of the respondents (59 individuals, or 52.7%) reported that specialized MT software would be the most useful for their practice. This was followed by virtual instruments, music software, and MIDI instruments/recording tools/new digital musical interfaces. Twenty-one (19%) or more of the respondents were also interested in tele-conferencing tools, apps, wearable devices and BCI technology as well.

In addition to being asked which kinds of technologies would be useful in the future, music therapists were also asked, "To be worth using in your MT practice, what would technology need to offer?" (see Table 3). These open-ended responses were categorized according to topic(s) mentioned multiple times (i.e., by more than one music therapist); note that many music therapists mentioned several aspects of what technology would need to offer to be worthwhile. According to our respondents, the most important factors are "Ease of use," "Cost Effectiveness and affordability," and "Accessibility/availability of technology." These were followed by "Hardware/software to support patient's needs," and the ability to "Assist with analyzing patient's performance or diagnosis." Of lesser concern, but still noteworthy, were points regarding "Effectiveness, security, and reliability," and aspects concerning a high-quality online experience, such as stable wifi, minimizing the internet/online time-lag, and aspects that support the online music-making experience.

The Use of Technology for Assessment

As opposed to using technology to help conduct MT more generally, music therapists have recently been increasingly interested in using technology for the diagnosis or repeated assessment of patients. Along these lines, we sought to explore whether our sample has used technology for assessment purposes. When asked "How does technology influence your assessment of patients?", 50% of respondents did not provide a response or did not understand the question (note that this was an optional question, as not all music therapists use technology when assessing patients). Of the remaining 56 participants, 30 individuals (53.6% of those who responded) indicated that the use of technology improves some aspect of the quality of observation of patients (feasibility, usability, accuracy, widening the scope of assessment, less time-consuming, etc.), and 9 individuals (16.1% of those who responded) indicated that the use of technology increases engagement.

Limitations of Technology

Music therapists were asked, "What limitations have you encountered when using technology in your music therapy practice?" Here, 49.1% ( n = 55 of 112) of music therapists mentioned limitations relating to the use of technology when conducting online sessions, 37.5% ( n = 42 of 112) described limitations when using technology during in-person sessions, and 13.4% ( n = 15 of 112) did not provide an answer. Below, we first describe the limitations of conducting online MT, and then we describe the limitations of technology during in-person sessions, as described by the respondents.

In total, 76.4% ( n = 42 of the 55 respondents who described limitations of technology in online sessions) indicated that conducting online sessions "interfere with the ongoing therapeutic process." Among these 42 therapists, many ( n = 21 of 42; 50%) found that the lack of physical contact, and "not being in the same room," affected their therapeutic listening attitude and their capacity to know the right timing for specific interventions. The lack of close physical proximity and non-verbal cues made it difficult to attune to and empathize with the patient. This difficulty is associated with a loss of richness and vitality in (inter)subjective experiences, and a decrease in interaction and engagement, as shown in patients who are more easily tired and distracted. Other therapists ( n = 11 of 42; 26.2%) pointed to the latency time, the unpredictable internet connection, and poor sound quality as disturbing, particularly in making it difficult to play together and simultaneously with the patient. In addition, some of the therapists ( n = 8 of 42; 19%) described how they experienced, when confronted with non-familiar technology, a lack of necessary skills and training. This restricted them in their capacity to guide and support the patient. Finally, some therapists ( n = 3 of 42; 7.1%) mentioned limitations with regard to the restricted field of vision. A screen camera allows only one perspective, i.e., there are fewer degrees of freedom to observe each other, which reduces the potential to target multiple modalities in therapy. Moreover, the overall image or sense of the group is lacking; that is, there is no group in its totality, because only a few people are visible at once.

In addition, 54.5% ( n = 30 of the 55 respondents who described limitations of technology in online sessions) indicated problems related to the "accessibility of technology," and described that this complicated the organization of online sessions. Among these 30 therapists, most of them mentioned difficulties because of a poor or unreliable internet connection ( n = 24 of 30; 80%) and unstable applications ( n = 6 of 30; 20%). Others ( n = 10 of 30; 33.3%) stated that they did not have sufficient access to (specialized) devices and software for their sessions. Respondents mentioned that this lack of access was due to financial issues, but also because devices and software were not adapted to the needs of patients with limited mobility. They described this as a limitation, especially during the COVID period, where online MT was the only possibility to stay in touch with patients. It is also worth noting that one respondent ( n = 1 of the 55 respondents who described limitations of technology in online sessions) experienced no limitations during online sessions, and mentioned explicitly the importance of online sessions to get in touch with isolated patients in times of crisis.

As mentioned above, 37.5% ( n = 42 of 112) of the music therapists described limitations when using technology during in-person sessions. Of these respondents, 52.4% (22 of the 42 respondents who described limitations of technology during in-person sessions) mentioned that technology "interferes with the ongoing therapeutic process" during in-person sessions. Some of these 22 therapists ( n = 5 of 22; 22.7%) describe how technology hinders human connection and affective attunement, and how it is sometimes used as a digital wall to avoid interaction and fears. Others ( n = 8 of 22; 36.4%) mention that patients are more distracted, decreasing the development of interpersonal functioning and regulation when using technology in sessions. Finally, respondents ( n = 9 of 22; 40.9%) describe limitations due to a lack of necessary skills and training, which restricts them from being able to work flexibly and attune themselves to the patients' needs or solve problems when necessary.

Many therapists (50%, or n = 21 of the 42 respondents who described limitations of technology during in-person sessions) indicated problems related to the "accessibility of technology," such as poor or unreliable internet connection ( n = 5 of 21; 23.8%), unstable applications ( n = 9 of 21; 42.9%), and no access to specialized devices and software for their sessions due to financial issues ( n = 6 of 21; 28.6%), but also because devices and software were not adapted to the specific needs of patients ( n = 7 of 21; 33.3%). Finally, 14.3% ( n = 6 of the 42 respondents who described limitations of technology during in-person sessions) mentioned "no limitation" when using technology in their MT practice.

Views Toward Technology by Geographical Region

To our knowledge, no survey of the use of technology in MT has examined regional differences, especially in non-Western countries, beyond comparing the United States to "non-US countries" including Australia, Canada, and the United Kingdom (see Hahna et al., 2012). Because we were able to collect responses from music therapists from 21 countries in three regions around the world, and because views toward technology use may vary given different MT traditions and broader cultural differences, we sought to investigate whether any regional differences exist in these attitudes and trends. Therefore, we examined the use of technology across three regions-Europe, North America, and Asia/Oceania-as outlined above. In this section, we provide an overview of the attitudes toward and use of technology in MT from these three regions.

Table 4 presents the results of the five questions in this section of the survey (regarding attitudes toward and actual use of technology) that were presented in Yes/No/Other format, broken down by geographical region. Note that the percentages reflect the responses by row, i.e., the percentage of Yes/No/Other by region. Generally, there were very positive views on the use of technology for improving patient outcomes, although this varied somewhat by region (See Table 4).

There are several noteworthy findings here. First, there were differences in technology use by region: All of the music therapists from North America indicated that they currently use technology (broadly defined) in their MT practice, and 92.6% of those in Asia/Oceania use technology. In contrast, 74.1% of music therapists in Europe reported using technology. A chi-square test confirmed that this difference between regions in technology use is statistically significant [χ ² (2, 112) = 15.8, p < 0.001]. For the following (optional) question about whether technology that is not currently used could be helpful to conduct MT sessions in the future, 100% of those who responded from North America indicated that it would be helpful, 94.4% responded positively from Asia/Oceania, and 77.2% of those from Europe responded affirmatively. There was no significant difference in this response across regions [χ ² (4, 61) = 6.97, p = n.s.]. These are very positive responses across all regions, although Europe's enthusiasm for technology is slightly more tempered than responses from North America and Asia/Oceania.

A more obvious division in views is observed with the third question: "Do you believe that the use of technology could help your patient more effectively reach his/her goals and outcomes across music therapy sessions?" While there are once again very positive views from North America, only around two-thirds of respondents from the other regions responded "Yes," and this difference was statistically significant [χ ² (2, 112) = 9.49, p < 0.01].

When asked about technology training (the fourth and fifth questions in Table 4), there were again very pro-technology views from all regions, with North America being the most embracing of technology, and Europe displaying the most cautious views. Specifically, when asked about whether they would be willing to invest their time in training and learning about new technologies, participants from all regions indicated overall that they would be willing to invest their time to this end, with 96.8% positive responses from North America, 92.6% positive responses from Asia/Oceania, and 85.2% positive responses from Europe. There was no significant difference between countries [χ ² (2, 112) = 3.54, p = n.s.]. When asked if they "believe that there would be greater use of technology within the practice of music therapy if music conservatories and music therapy schools offered more technology-specific training programs?", there was unanimous (100%) agreement among North American music therapists, 92.6% concurring from Asia/Oceania, and 85.2% agreeing from Europe. This difference between regions was marginally significant [χ ² (2, 112) = 9.49, p < 0.05]. These views indicate that there is a fairly global pro-technology trend, with music therapists from all regions generally agreeing that technology would be useful for their practice, and that they would be willing to invest the effort to undergo some sort of training in order to be better prepared to adopt new technologies in the future (although European music therapists were more reluctant than others to invest their time in technology-related training).

When further asked about training opportunities ("Have you received training opportunities for incorporating technology into your practice, or has your experience using technology been self-taught (including consulting online references/sources?"; see Table 5), the majority of respondents indicated that they had not received training, although regional differences were apparent. Specifically, while around one quarter (25.8% of those from North America, and 25.9% of those from Asia/Oceania) reported having received training, only 5.5% from Europe have received training. This difference was statistically significant [χ ² (4, 112) = 12.62, p < 0.05]. Around two-thirds of respondents from all regions indicated being self-taught with respect to their use of technology, and the highest percentage of those with no technology-related training (27.8%) were from Europe. This finding closely matches previous findings, in which 61% of music therapists across the United States, United Kingdom, Australia, and Canada reported being self-taught with respect to music technology ( Hahna et al., 2012).

Changes to MT Practice and to Use of Technology During the COVID-19 Era

To gain insight into how the music therapists' practice and use of technology changed specifically due to COVID-19, we asked about the general changes needed due to the pandemic, as well as technology-specific questions, in the final section of the survey. Here, open-ended questions were included to gain a deeper understanding of music therapists' experiences than is possible in the more superficial yes/no questions. The open-ended questions were analyzed using the "six-phase approach" of thematic analysis (i.e., familiarization, generating codes, constructing themes, revising, defining themes, and writing up) ( Braun et al., 2019). An inductive coding approach was chosen where the active and reflexive process of the researcher was given priority during the qualitative analysis; as such, the results of this analysis will inevitably bear the mark of the researcher.

We first discuss the most broad and open-ended question, which was, "How has your music therapy practice changed due to Covid-19?" One hundred nine of the therapists ( n = 109 of 112; 97.3%) indicated that their MT practice changed due to COVID-19. Two of these 109 ( n = 2 of 109, or 1.8%) described changes related to their job function, i.e., being required to conduct tasks other than MT, or being moved to another unit. Thirty-five ( n = 35 of 109, or 32.1%) mentioned that MT was not provided anymore, mainly due to (temporary) institutional decisions made in order to follow strict safety measures during the lockdown. Respondents described how these decisions affected both therapists and patients. Several therapists lost their job or were required to work only at one workplace. Many patients were no longer able to receive MT, which was described by two respondents as having drastic consequences, especially in end-of-life care.

Therapists who were able to continue practicing MT described how their MT practice had changed due to COVID-19. In this sample, 84 ( n = 84 of 109, or 77%) of the respondents described changes to the MT setting. Many individuals reported that face-to-face sessions were no longer provided, leading to a need to adapt and search for alternative ways to maintain a connection with the patient via phone calls, streaming sessions, online MT sessions or telerehabilitation sessions. But even in cases where face-to-face sessions were maintained, or were rebooted after a strict lockdown, respondents mentioned many changes to the setting, related to specific safety rules (such as wearing a face mask, disinfection, and distance rules), and this was also associated with changes to the organization of the session, i.e., smaller groups, more individual MT, and shorter sessions. Some therapists described how they were no longer allowed to use musical instruments, and were especially forbidden from singing. Seventeen respondents ( n = 17 of 109, or 15.6%) described how this change of setting influenced their MT method and interventions. Therapists elaborated here upon three themes: (i) the need to change to receptive methods in MT; (ii) the changing role of the therapeutic relationship; and (iii) the changing role of embodied expression and verbal language in interventions. Nine respondents ( n = 9 of 109, or 8.3%) discussed how this change of setting had an impact on the MT culture in their sessions. Respondents elaborated here on three themes as well: (i) changes in the group culture in group sessions; (ii) changes in the subjective experiences of patients (e.g., a decrease in felt safety and security; increased neediness, dependency and depressive states); and (iii) changes in the quality of the therapeutic relationship. Finally, six of the respondents ( n = 6 of 109, or 5.5%) described how the crisis also offers opportunities to be creative and flexible to explore new ways of conducting MT. This was related to exploring and learning how technology can be used in MT practice.

We also asked specific questions regarding how the music therapists' practice has changed, and how their use of technology has changed, during the pandemic: in total, we asked nine questions in Yes/No/Other format, the results of which are reported in Table 6. Note again that the percentages reported reflect responses by row, i.e., the percentage of Yes/No/Other responses according to each region. The results of these nine questions, as well as an additional question reported in Table 7 on the effectiveness of online MT, are discussed in the following two subsections: the first discusses the ways that conducting MT has changed as a result of the pandemic, from reductions in patients seen to the consequences of conducting online (teletherapy) sessions, and the second section focuses specifically on technology use during COVID-19.

Regional Differences in Changes to Music Therapy Practice During COVID-19

To gain a sense of the potentially increased need for MT during the pandemic, as well as whether (and how) music therapists were able to see patients and do their best to meet that need, we asked whether they believe there is a greater need for MT during the COVID-19 period (see Table 6). The response was largely affirmative, with 100% of those from North America agreeing that there has been an increased need for MT during the pandemic, followed by 85.2% of those from Asia/Oceania, and 79.6% of those from Europe. A chi-square test confirms that these results by region are statistically significant [χ ² (2, 112) = 10.96, p < 0.01]. When asked whether they have seen fewer patients during the past several months due to COVID-19, respondents reported that in fact, they had been forced to see fewer patients: 90.3% of those from North America confirmed seeing fewer patients, followed by 77.8% of those from Europe, and 74.1% of those from Asia/Oceania. The responses by region were not statistically significant [χ ² (2, 112) = 3.15, p = n.s.]. This finding tells us that while there was greater need around the world for MT, due to all of the hardships and stressors stemming from the pandemic, music therapists were unfortunately not able to see as many patients during this time, most probably due to social distancing measures and temporary clinic closures.

We also asked, in open-ended format, for music therapists to explain their response to the question of whether they believe there is greater need for MT. Overall, 68 respondents ( n = 68 of the 97 therapists who indicated that they do believe there is indeed a greater need for MT during the COVID-19 period; or 70.1%) discussed how MT is needed to provide social-emotional support and connection in times of social isolation. This is illustrated in the following quote from one respondent, writing about MT: "Music is always about making a connection, whether it is interpersonal or within oneself, and connection is precisely what we tend to lose during this time of isolation and quarantine." The second most quoted reason (to explain the greater need for MT) was the need to target increased levels of stress and anxiety. Finally, respondents explain how the impact of the COVID-19 situation has led to an increased awareness both in stakeholders and policy makers of the importance of non-verbal and embodied qualities targeted in MT, and the role of these non-verbal qualities for well-being and quality of life.

We then asked several questions about whether the therapist has had to conduct online (teletherapy) sessions with their patients. Here, there was a large difference based on region: most of those from North America have needed to conduct online sessions (93.5%), as opposed to three-quarters (74.1%) of those from Asia/Oceania, and fewer than half (48.1%) of therapists from Europe. These differences are statistically significant [χ ² (2, 112) = 21.59, p < 0.001]. The following two questions aimed to gain more clarity about the nature and limitations of online therapy in those who did conduct virtual sessions.

When asked whether their patients ever used musical instruments they had available at home, 82.8% of respondents from North America, 60.0% from Asia/Oceania, and 42.9% from Europe responded affirmatively. This difference by region was statistically significant [χ ² (2, 112) = 10.18, p < 0.01]. These percentages suggest that while the majority of patients seen in North America had a physical instrument available to support their online MT session, many fewer were in this position in Asia/Oceania, and potentially half of those had an instrument available (compared to North America) in Europe. We speak about the use of online tools and instruments in the following section.

Music therapists were also queried as to whether the remote setting between patient and therapist during online sessions has hindered their MT practice. Here, based on those who responded to this optional question, between 75 and 79% of music therapists from all regions reported "Yes." A chi-square test confirmed no regional differences [χ ² (2, 73) = 0.13, p = n.s.]. Therefore, we can infer that roughly three-quarters of music therapists in these regions around the world have found online sessions to be sub-optimal, as compared to in-person sessions. In an optional question, we also asked music therapists if they believe that conducting MT using online tools has been more, less, or equally effective compared to real-life sessions (see Table 7). The majority of respondents reported that online MT has been less effective, although just over half (51.8%, or n = 15 out of 29) of those from North America found online MT to be just as effective as in-person sessions. In contrast, only around 40% of those from Europe and Asia found online MT to be as effective as real-life sessions. These regional differences were statistically significant, [χ ² (4, 83) = 11.8, p < 0.05]. Together, these results inform us that the respondents to this study would largely prefer their practice to be face-to-face when possible, and suggest that tele-music-therapy (TMT) may not be widely embraced in the future due to its drawbacks and limitations. This finding is in line with several limitations discussed in the literature, namely that remote sessions reduce the opportunity for affective, embodied, interpersonal experiences between the patient and therapist, and that they raise concerns regarding patient well-being, such as increased anxiety due to limited privacy of the sessions (e.g., Desmet, 2020).

From these findings, one can see that online sessions are very often regarded as less effective than in-person sessions, and seen as just as effective in the best case scenario. For further discussion of the effectiveness of online MT sessions, please refer to section "Limitations of Technology."

Regional Differences in Technology Use During COVID-19

Here we discuss the results of questions 6-9 in Table 6, which focus on the technology that music therapists have adopted during the pandemic. First, we found that the majority of music therapists have needed to embrace new technologies during COVID-19, as expected, however there were large differences based on region, which were statistically significant [χ ² (2, 112) = 34.11, p < 0.001], with 100% of respondents from North America reporting that they have had to embrace new technologies/techniques in order to conduct MT sessions, in comparison to 77.8% of those from Asia/Oceania, and only 48.1% from Europe. There were also striking differences between North America and the other regions when asked whether embracing new technologies has influenced the therapist's opinion of the use of technology in MT. Here, 80.6% of those from North America concurred with this statement, while only 48.1% of those from Asia/Oceania, and 35.2% of those from Europe, agreed with the statement. These differences are statistically significant [χ ² (2, 112) = 21.66, p < 0.001].

The music therapists were asked whether, during online sessions, they ever used virtual instruments or specialized software (not including conferencing software such as Skype) due to the virtual format. About one quarter of the therapists from each region responded that they had used virtual instruments or specialized software, ranging from 23% in Europe to 25% in Asia/Oceania, and this result was not different across regions [χ ² (2, 75) = 0.02, p = n.s.]. This suggests that while most music therapists did not use virtual instruments or speciality software, there were a considerable number of therapists around the world who have tried using special tools to support the online MT format. Finally, the majority of music therapists in North America (80.6%) and Asia/Oceania (85.2%), but not Europe (48.2%), said that they will continue to use technologies that they adopted during the pandemic. This difference is statistically significant [χ ² (4, 112) = 18.22, p < 0.01]. This is interesting to consider given the general reluctance toward technology exhibited more overtly by European music therapists compared to the others (described in section "Limitations of Technology"), and the finding above that less than half of the European therapists have adopted new technologies in order to conduct MT sessions during COVID-19.

Conclusion

Takeaway Messages and Concluding Remarks

The results from this survey offer a rich set of findings regarding the practice of MT during COVID-19, describing how music therapists have had to alter their practice, and providing insight into when and why new technologies have been adopted during this time. Because therapists from over 20 countries around the world responded to this survey, it was possible to explore differences in views and approaches to MT between Asia, America, and Europe. That is, not only was the general impact of the pandemic on the practice of MT (and incorporation of technology) of interest, but also the differential effects based on region.

First, in terms of the most general findings regarding the use of technology in the practice of MT, the majority of music therapists in this sample indicated that they have used some form of technology in their practice. This is in line with an increasing trend in technology use in MT, given the findings from Magee (2006) and Hahna et al. (2012). That said, the increasing use of technology does not appear to be ubiquitous, but depends somewhat on the region in which one practices MT.

There were significant differences across regions in terms of whether the music therapists use technology in their practice: almost all respondents from North America and Asia/Oceania have used technology, while around three-quarters of those from Europe have used technology. A similar pattern-of more positive views from North America and Asia/Oceania compared with Europe-was demonstrated for the questions about whether technology can help patients more effectively reach his/her goals and outcomes.

It is interesting to note that the highest percentage of those with no technology-related training were from Europe, and those from Europe were also the most hesitant to claim that the use of technology would be beneficial for future MT sessions, or agree that technology may enable patients to more effectively reach their clinical goals. It may be that fewer training opportunities and less overall familiarity with technology have contributed to greater skepticism in this region regarding the efficacy of technology and willingness to embrace technology for future use, in comparison to North America and Asia/Oceania, where both training and positive views toward technology were more prevalent. It is also possible that differences in the cultural context and theoretical orientation across regions (along with the types of interventions that therapists are inclined to integrate into their practice based on their orientation) contributed to the differences seen across regions in attitudes toward and use of technology. Further, it is possible that many of the more skeptical music therapists are in fact interested in the use of technology, but the limitations of technology that they have encountered foster their reluctance, as respondents described a significant need for more human-, therapy- and relationship-driven technology, as opposed to the technology-driven methods that are more prevalent. That is, while many therapists are open to the notion of including technology and digitalization in their practice, especially during times of crisis and isolation, the majority of music therapists across all regions are concerned with losing basic, affective and embodied modalities in human interaction that they view as so vital to therapy. These humanistic, embodied aspects are often described by respondents as being at the center of the therapeutic relationship. One may therefore speculate that it is not only the differences in training opportunities and prior use (as well as MT methods, traditions, and approaches) that are responsible for different viewpoints regarding technology use, but also cultural differences, such as the importance of interpersonal interaction, and reluctance to conduct virtual therapy sessions.

The findings above discuss general trends and views in technology; next we review the findings related to COVID-19 in particular. In relation to changes to the practice of MT and adoption of technology due to the pandemic, nearly all (97.3%) of the music therapists in this study indicated that the pandemic has impacted their MT practice. Nearly one third of respondents indicated that their practice of MT was temporarily halted, and several therapists indicated that they had unfortunately lost their job. For those who were able to continue practicing MT, the majority discussed alternative approaches (such as phone calls, streaming sessions, and online sessions) they needed to adopt in order to maintain a connection with their patient. In addition, the vast majority of music therapists believe that there is currently a greater need for MT (especially regarding stress and mental health issues), but most therapists have seen fewer patients in the wake of COVID-19, due mainly to lockdown measures, social distancing, funding, and department-level changes during the pandemic.

Some countries and regions were harder hit, and faced stricter lockdown measures, than others. For example, the majority of music therapists in North America and Asia/Oceania have needed to conduct virtual MT sessions due to COVID-19, while less than half of those from Europe had to do so. Interestingly, the region with the most widespread reported use of technology in general (all of the music therapists from North America) also had the most positive responses (over half) regarding online sessions being just as effective as in-person sessions. This result (of positive views of online MT from North American music therapists) is generally in line with recent findings from the American Music Therapy Association: in their survey, the majority of respondents reported that their clients have had a positive response to remote MT sessions ( Fay et al., 2020). That said, the majority of music therapists in our sample (between 75 and 79% across regions) who have had to conduct online sessions believed their sessions were hindered by the remote setting. It was also striking to find that those with the greatest amount of training and greatest adoption of technology (as well as the most prevalent use of teletherapy) were also the most optimistic about online sessions and about technology in general (see Tables 4, 6, 7). The implication is that technology-specific training may lead to greater use of technology, which may in turn lead to more optimistic opinions of technology use in MT, a point that we further explore in the next section.

We also investigated the ways in which the pandemic has altered the practice (setting, methods/approach, outcomes, and overall "feel") of MT. The majority of music therapists reported that COVID-19 resulted in changes to the music therapy setting, such as needing to find new ways to stay in touch with their patients (online sessions, phone calls, etc.), organizational changes (such as more individual sessions), and restrictions on sharing instruments or singing when in-person sessions were possible. This is in line with a recent study from the United States showing that music therapists were remarkably resilient to adapt and shift to alternative delivery methods such as telehealth ( Gaddy et al., 2020). While many music therapists in the study by Gaddy et al. (2020) were grateful to be able to offer virtual services to maintain contact with their patients, therapists also described the negative impact of the disruption of in-person sessions on their mental health and professional identity. This relates to a recent paper in which team members in a Belgian ward, offering group therapy for people with personality disorders and dysfunctions, describe how drastic transformations took place in the ward due to preventive COVID-19 measures ( Van Duppen et al., 2021). They reflect:

In only a few days' time, the ward had changed completely. What was once a therapeutic ward with long-standing routines, rhythms and continuity, had transformed into a hastily abandoned collection of empty hallways, unused chairs and soulless rooms. Patients, as fragments of their group and community, wandered about the ward, as confused testimonies of what was once a self-evident normality. Others were at home, no longer part of their group, increasingly forgotten by the team, pushed aside by the intrusive tasks of the next day. ... We had set up a base camp: à la guerre comme à la guerre! (p. 21, translated from Van Duppen et al., 2021).

Some therapists in our sample also discussed needing to change their MT method or intervention, how the therapeutic relationship had changed, and how the roles of embodied expression and verbal language were impacted during the pandemic. They described how the musical affective-embodied attunement between therapist and patient, which forms the base for the relational context in which a new psychological balance may be reached and inner experiences may take shape, was disturbed. This disruption makes it difficult to truly be in the present moment with the patient ( Stern, 2004). The therapists' reflections on how their methods and embodied relationship with patients changed relates to the following impression of a music therapist ( Van Duppen et al., 2021), which describes the impact of the COVID-19 measures during face-to-face sessions:

All musical instruments hang on the wall, decontaminated, no longer allowed to be played, leaving the chairs naked in the room. The murmur of patients echoes hollowly against the hardness of the static walls. The anticipating silence of a potential interplay, where music emerges, has degenerated into a desolate sound.

The time of the here and now, in which bodies seek to tune in, through which I let myself be guided musically along tension and relaxation, frustration and satisfaction, has been stripped of all pulsation. Without this pulsating process of Gestaltung, every movement, every act, seems to be a tenuous orchestration in a tightly conducted time. I feel awkward. I am voiceless, in a frantic attempt to resonate without senses. (p. 24, translated from Van Duppen et al., 2021).

In cases where patients were no longer allowed to come to the clinic or ward, this disruption to embodied attunement was especially apparent. Some therapists in our sample noted how patients were offered only a minimal degree of virtual or phone contact, and emphasized the limited access to affective embodiment in human interaction during online sessions.

Although many music therapists embraced new technologies out of necessity during COVID-19, there were large differences in many cases based on the region, with all respondents from North America indicating that they had recently adopted new technology to conduct MT, in comparison with a little over three-quarters of those from Asia/Oceania, and fewer than half of those from Europe. Around one quarter of respondents from each region indicated that they had used virtual instruments or specialized software when conducting online sessions during the pandemic. Compared to Europe, many more music therapists from North America and Asia/Oceania said that they will continue to use technologies that they adopted during the pandemic. With this view toward the future in mind, the final section of this paper focuses on the implications our findings have for how to move forward, and what might be able to benefit the practice of MT in the future.

Implications for Music Therapy During Times of Crisis, Insights Gained About How to Move Forward, and Considerations for the Future

Here we draw conclusions from the findings of this study that are pertinent for the future of MT, and the incorporation of technology into the practice of MT in the future. Before discussing the findings and implications, it is pertinent to note here that the theoretical framework and applied methods of the music therapist will influence the needs, experience, and roles of technologies adopted for MT. In addition, sociocultural factors and the cultural context in which the therapy is administered will further influence the use of technology in MT. The role of the musical exchanges in the therapeutic relationship, and aspects such as the subjective experiences in the MT process, need to be considered when deciding when and whether to adopt particular technologies. With these, as well as patient needs and considerations in mind, therapists can assess what technology may be used both to promote the patient's wellbeing, and to avoid a decline in the quality of human relationship involved in the MT process.

It is also prudent here to note the limitations of this study. First, given the number of countries involved, we had a relatively small sample size, due in part to the brief data collection window, and the fact that the survey was only administered in English. Note, however, that our sample is comparable to other studies of technology adoption in MT (e.g., Magee, 2006), and many of the differences between regions had relatively large effect sizes, which allow us to be more (cautiously) confident when making generalizations regarding regional trends. Another limitation is that during the data collection period (September 2020), many music therapists were still in the process of changing and adapting based on the repercussions of COVID-19 and social distancing measures. We hope that this work can serve as a useful snapshot of the technology use and changes that occurred due to the pandemic. Further, our study included several open-ended questions, and, as is the case with thematic analysis, distilling themes apparent in all of the free responses will reflect the researcher's sensibilities to some degree ( Braun et al., 2019). Finally, a thorough investigation of the values and beliefs of the therapists was outside of the scope of this work; however it would be interesting to explore this aspect (especially in relation to technology use and views toward remote therapy sessions) in the future.

In terms of using technology to support the practice of MT in the future, a large percentage (over 85% of those who responded) believe adopting technology would be useful for conducting MT in the future, and the majority of music therapists in North America and Asia/Oceania, but not Europe, said they will continue to use technologies they embraced during the pandemic. For the specifics of which technologies precisely, the survey provided not only a current breakdown of the software and hardware technologies used by music therapists around the world today, but also examined which technologies are viewed as most beneficial to adopt in the future. There appears to be a clear desire for more specialized MT software; indeed, music therapists often use software and devices that were created for different or more general purposes (e.g., recording technology, wearable devices, and BCI systems), and there is a lack of bespoke MT software available today. In the future, music therapists and technologists should collaborate to develop effective tools and techniques that maximize the patient's wellbeing, and are minimally disruptive to the MT process and therapeutic relationship ( Agres et al., 2021). Finally, to be worth adopting, music therapists indicated that they believe technology should be easy to use, affordable, and accessible for their patients. In addition, the technology should be able to support their patients' needs, and ideally be able to help analyze the patients' performance or assess their diagnosis/progress.

The limitations reported by music therapists also gave insight into the drawbacks of technology (both in online and in-person settings), and what would be helpful to improve in the future. In terms of the drawbacks of conducting online sessions, many music therapists reported difficulties from the lack of physical contact, such as a lack of non-verbal cues, lack of rich/subjective experience, and a decrease in interaction and engagement (as described above in section "Takeaway Messages and Concluding Remarks"). The open, therapeutic listening attitude, characterized by a receptive welcoming and affectively resonant listening, was strained. Consequently, the role and quality of the therapeutic relationship changed, transference relations crumbled, and therapists felt inadequate. Online therapeutic sessions were turned into mere moments of contact meant to offer continuity for the duration of the interruption (COVID-19 period), rather than a holding environment that could help to recover from the gaping hole of overwhelming rupture and loss.

Many other therapists mentioned basic issues with the communication medium itself, i.e., an unreliable internet connection. In addition, many therapists working remotely did not have sufficient access to specialized devices and software to help conduct their sessions, which made online MT sessions particularly challenging. This was primarily the result of both funding restrictions and the fact that software and devices were not adapted to the needs of patients. It is undeniable that teleconferencing platforms such as Zoom and Skype made online sessions possible in many scenarios where they would otherwise be impossible, but for remote MT sessions, there is a clear need to develop technology that is better able to support the embodied and affective experiences and benefits of in-person MT. For both online and in-person sessions, some music therapists mentioned that technology interferes with the ongoing therapeutic process, e.g., technology hinders human connection and affective attunement. These concerns need to be considered in future directions and technological developments. In order to design a synergetic practice, more research is needed to develop and integrate technology that is fundamentally human- and relationship-driven ( Agres et al., 2021).

In addition to the need for more humanistic, bespoke technologies, another crucial factor for the future is specialized training. Indeed, a recent study indicated that about two-thirds of music therapists from a large sample around the world would like to have more formal training opportunities as part of their MT credentialing/certification program ( Kern and Tague, 2017). The music therapists in our study mentioned that a lack of training has limited their knowledge and ability to use technology with patients during in-person sessions. Most music therapists (although slightly fewer from Europe) agreed that if MT schools and music conservatories offered more technology-specific training programs, that there would be greater adoption of technology within MT. To date, technology-specific training is scarce in the curricula of MT training courses. To move along in a meaningful way, it is advisable to train educators in MT first, increasing their knowledge about the current state-of-the-art. In addition, training for supervisors associated with a professional MT organization would be helpful, as they guide many therapists in their clinical work. While most music therapists in our sample have not received technology-specific training, therapists from all regions indicated that they would be willing to invest their time in training and learning about new technologies. Therefore, while music therapists around the world believe they have not had sufficient opportunities for technology-specific training, there is a clear desire for more training. MT organizations may help meet these needs of their members by organizing dedicated workshops and training.

Further, an interesting link between training and views toward/adoption of technology emerged in our results: those in our sample who received the fewest training opportunities (i.e., those in Europe) were also the least likely to use technology, and had the most reserved opinions about whether technology might prove helpful when conducting MT sessions in the future. The other regions, with higher percentages of those who had received training or were self-taught, held more optimistic views of technology in MT, and have adopted technology at higher rates. Therefore, additional training may lead not only to smoother technology use during in-person and online MT sessions in the future, but would likely enable greater adoption of a wider range of technologies moving forward.

Alongside more formal training opportunities, the formation of peer-mentor groups (involving international music therapists who have experience/expertise in the use of technology) would be enriching to those who have less technology-related knowledge and experience, and would provide a platform for discussing the potential sociocultural constraints and hesitations in the use of technology. In addition, adopting the participatory approach of including the stakeholders (patients) themselves may create new and surprising insights about the use of technology in MT sessions, and how this use is related to their (digital) daily life.

Data Availability Statement

The dataset presented in this article is not readily available due to compliance with NUS ethics board policies regarding data confidentiality. Requests to access the datasets should be directed to KA, katagres@nus.edu.sg.

Ethics Statement

The studies involving human participants were reviewed and approved by National University of Singapore Institutional Review Board. The patients/participants provided their written informed consent to participate in this study.

Author Contributions

KA led the project and manuscript writing, in collaboration with KF and SS. KF and KA led the participant recruitment. SS and KA created the data tables. KA performed the statistical analyses. KA and SS created the survey questions, with input from KF. All authors contributed to the data analyses and contributed meaningfully to the research study and manuscript preparation.

Funding

The funding for this study (to compensate the winners of the Lucky Draw) was provided to KA by the Yong Siew Toh Conservatory of Music at the National University of Singapore. This study was also supported by the RIE2020 Advanced Manufacturing and Engineering (AME) Programmatic Fund (No. A20G8b0102), Singapore.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Acknowledgments

We would like to acknowledge the time spent by all of the music therapists who kindly offered their time to answer the survey and make this research possible, as well as the Yong Siew Toh Conservatory of Music for providing funding to support this research.

Footnotes

References

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Music Therapy During COVID-19: Changes to the Practice, Use of Technology, and What to Carry Forward in the Future

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In recent years, the field of music therapy (MT) has increasingly embraced the use of technology for conducting therapy sessions and enhancing patient outcomes. Amidst a worldwide pandemic, we sought to examine whether this is now true to an even greater extent, as many music therapists have had to approach and conduct their work differently.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
SUBPAC is used by thousands of audio and VR professionals to add a heightened level of immersion, impact and awareness.

The New SUBPAC X1 System Combines Hardware, Software & Pro-Wireless I/O with a hybrid design for both your studio chair and for you to wear.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
SUBPAC - The New Way to Experience Sound: Feel it.™

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
SUBPAC is used by thousands of audio and VR professionals to add a heightened level of immersion, impact and awareness. The New SUBPAC X1 System Combines Hardware, Software & Pro-Wireless I/O with a hybrid design for both your studio chair and for you to wear.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
|

Double click on the product picture for more detailed information

($1935.00) (Special Institution Pricing) New: Body Pillow : An ingenious idea that works great! Clinically used for positioning, and either stimulating or calming. Personally used for "Fantastic feely fun". Accommodates one to two people of any size.

($1575.00) (Special Institution Pricing) New: Cloud Chair : Small soft filled child's vibroacoustic chair. Used for positioning, calming and entertaining. Great to enhance the "Mozart Learning Effect".

($2,045.00) (Special Institution Pricing) New: Learning Chair : Large soft filled teen/adult vibroacoustic chair. Assists in making studying enjoyable and effective. The perfect chair to enhance the "Mozart Learning Effect".: Large soft filled teen/adult vibroacoustic chair. Assists in making studying enjoyable and effective. The perfect chair to enhance the "Mozart Learning Effect".

The "Body Birkenstock"! A quality easily portable (14 lbs.) vibroacoustic device at an unheard of low price.: The "Body Birkenstock"! A quality easily portable (14 lbs.) vibroacoustic device at an unheard of low price.

Somatron-Style Mat includes a combination of 6 built in transducers for low sound frequencies and a music speaker. The systems includes a tablet with 7 low sound frequencies composed by Olav Skille - The Inventor of Vibroacoustic Therapy

Feel the stress melt away as you listen to and feel your favorite music. Manufactured in three flexible sections that allow a variety of uses. Place on any recliner, bed, or lounge chair and enjoy.

Strong welded steel frame, rugged modular construction, built to withstand punishing conditions. Easily reclines to the doctor recommended "Trendelenburg" position using a DC, hospital approved grounded motor. (Also comes EZ Access)

($5,850) (Special Institution Pricing) EZ Access Clinical Recliner : Strong welded steel frame, rugged modular construction, built to withstand punishing conditions. Easily reclines to the doctor recommended "Trendelenburg" position using a DC, hospital approved grounded motor. Seat height corresponds to wheel chair height. The arm drops down to seat height for ease of patient transfer. "The relaxation therapy professionals rely on". Used by hundreds of facilities daily including the National Institutes of Health, The Bethesda Naval Medical Center and the US Air Force.

Music Mattress ($2,265.00) (Special Institution Pricing) : The STAPH-CHEK 20 � Healthcare Fabric is fluid proof, non-allergenic, bacteria resistant fire resistant, stain/tear resistant, and antistatic.�

Tubby Ball Pool ($3,561.00) (Special Institution Pricing) - Feel the soothing music vibrations permeate through your whole body as you float in the pool of 80mm balls. The whole experience is enhanced by gentle changing colored light shining throughout the ball pool. (Amplifier not included; lighted for clear balls - 500 balls per carton $230; minimum of 2 cartons of clear balls per order.)

Somatron Water Bed ($3600.00) (Special Institution Pricing) - Permeate your whole body with soothing and relaxing music vibrations while benefiting from the warmth of the waterbed. One Somatron Dual Coil speaker is built in to the water mattress providing tactile stimulation. Feel the music as well as hear it for a full body experience of sound, vibration and water sensation.

Snugums™ ($840.00) (Special Institution Pricing) : The Somatron Vibroacoustic Products is proud to introduce its latest therapeutic creation "Snugums".

Multi-sensory Play Floor ($3270.00)

Lie about or roll around in the soft cushioned floor space while soothing music vibrations impart a calming therapeutic effect.

Neurotron ($2365.00) (Special Institution Pricing)

Comfortable headrest that imparts soft tactilemusic sensations to stimulate the head, neck, and shoulders

Stimulation CDs™ Albums ($60.00) Stimulation CDs™ uses sound and composition techniques that optimise the Somatron vibrotactile experience by choosing instruments that produce low frequencies and certain timbres (textures) of music. Somatrons work at their best when used with Therasound™ music .

All of the recordings in the 2 Relaxation CDs have been created and duplicated on the highest quality audiophile equipment, mastered on a digital computer system. This assures you a maximum performance and long lasting quality.

All of the recordings in the 4 Classical CDs have been created and duplicated on the highest quality audiophile equipment, mastered on a digital computer system. This assures you a maximum performance and long lasting quality.

All of the recordings in the Emotional Body Program CDs have been created and duplicated on the highest quality audiophile equipment, mastered on a digital computer system. This assures you a maximum performance and long lasting quality.

All of the recordings in the Pain and Anxiety CDs have been created and duplicated on the highest quality audiophile equipment, mastered on a digital computer system. This assures you a maximum performance and long lasting quality.

All of the recordings in the Pain and Anxiety Program have been created and duplicated on the highest quality audiophile equipment, mastered on a digital computer system. This assures you a maximum performance and long lasting quality.

Exercise Chair ($3250.00) (Special Institution Pricing) : A good choice for long term care facilities, this chair is ideal for individuals who have balance issues and/or lack of coordination necessary to use a conventional rocker. The chair is stationary with the exception of the "rocking back", while the 3 position footrest accommodates a wide variety of clients.

Therapy Lounge ($2860.00) : Affordable lounge ergonomically designed to the semi "Trendelenburg" position to maximize the therapeutic effect of having your legs higher than your heart. Somatron patented "Transpeakers"™ are placed in the back and leg section to produce the maximum therapeutic benefit! Built Somatron durable to give lasting performance at a reasonable price. Easily connects to any stereo system (not included) with 10 to 100 watts of power.

SOMATRON Abbottsford Chair ( $3470.00) (Special Institution Pricing) : The Somatron Abbotsford Chair connects easily to any stereo system or VCR/TV with 20 to 200 watts of power. Incorporated in the Abbottsford is one large, full range, Patented Somatron Dual Coil, Vibroacoustic speaker in the seat that imparts soothing tactile sound sensations and resonance throughout the body. The Somatron Abbottsford Chair is covered in soft vinyl upholstery for an exceptionally comfortable feeling. This vinyl upholstery has Prefix® coating which is body sulfides and acid resistant.

Fitness Rocker ($3455.00) (Special Institution Pricing) : As your clients rock in this vibro-tactile chair, it "rocks" back with music, deepening their sense of vibration. An active somatosensory experience for all ages and abilities! Chair connects to any 10-100W stereo system with bass boost (not included). Durable vinyl upholstery is treated with PreFixx® protective finish. SIZE: 56"L x 30"W x 17"H.

Massage Table Deluxe $3850.00 Deluxe (Special Institution Pricing) No Longer Available

The ultimate sensory experience. Special order only. Durable stationary tables made from solid oak. Adjustable height from 22" to 28" with a full length storage shelf.

i-Sensory Pod $18,000 (Special Institution Pricing)

This small enclosure has inviting entry openings and a vibrotactile play floor. Using the included video camera, children can watch themselves on the 26" flat panel tv mounted on the inside of the pod. Perfect environment for both special needs and all school populations.

· 2x15W 1% THD and 2x75W MAX.
· BLUE LED output level display
· POWER ON/OFF switch and LED indicator
· Compatible With Any Audio/Computerize Devices
· MP3)Via 3.5mm To RCA Converter
· MASTER volume control
· TREBLE and BASS controls
· PUSH TYPE speaker output
· RCA jack input
· 115/230 VOLTAGE selector
· Dimensions: 7.48''W x 2.87''H x 5.39''D
· CD player; AM/FM tuner and AUX cable to connect Mp3 player; iPod or any other music source

Lighted Crawl Space $4,800 No Longer Available
Facilitates aural, tactile and visual stimulation. Stimulating sounds and light. Floors vibrate to music offering your body a stimulating experience as you tunnel your way through this sensory... more

Optional Add-On Components for the Crawl Space

Crawl Space Tube $2550 (Institutional Price) No Longer Available
Facilitates aural, tactile and visual stimulation. Stimulating sounds and light. Floors vibrate to music offering your body a stimulating experience as you tunnel your way through this sensory... more

Crawl Tunnel $1,400 No Longer Available
Facilitates aural, tactile and visual stimulation. Stimulating sounds and light. Floors vibrate to music offering your body a stimulating experience as you tunnel your way through this sensory... more

Somatron Controller $140 The Somatron Controller enables up to 5 Somatron Products to be connected to one stereo system (up to 200 watts of power). Also included is a head... more

VibePad
The idea behind "whole body vibration" is that frequent , vigorous vibrations cause instability in the muscles which contract to stabilize themselves... more

VibePad Square Vibration Pad 24 x 24 $1021 (Special Institutional Pricing)
VibePad Ultra Vibration pad 24 x 48 $1505 (Special Institutional Pricing)

Swing Arm Multi-Position Chair, Regular Price: $5700; $5255 (Special Institutional Pricing)

Zero Gravity Chair, Price: $2200 + Shipping

To order or send for a brochure contact:

Dr. Philip Brotman
Biofeedback Instrument Corporation
255 W. 98th Street
New York, N.Y. 10025
Tel. (212) 222-5665 (5667 Fax)
Email: brotmanp@verizon.net
or order through our online order form

| Home Page | Products | About Somatrons | Client List | Press Release | NIH Report |
|Clinical Experiences | Research Articles | New Research | Client Letters | Autistic Services |
|Vibrant Technologies | Instructions | Patents | Vibrotactile Room |
|NASA News Release | NASA Good Vibrations |

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Somatron Products, vibroacoustic, snugums, mattress, mat, body, pillow, Pain and Anxiety Management Program, home theatre, water bed, stress relief

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Somatron Products,, recliner, mattress, mat, snugums, mattress, body, pillow, Pain & Anxiety Management Program, music vibrations, home theatre, water bed, stress relief

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Before we start, there are a few things I'd like to clear up. I'm not an expert, by any means, but from my knowledge of the topic, I'd say that audio engineers and music producers make mixing more complicated of a process than it needs to be.

As a general rule in life, the simplest solution is usually the correct one. Over sophistication and overanalysis is a big problem for many. Not only in terms of making a mountain out of a molehill but also for scaring beginners away from taking their first step in the door.

Less is often more, in my ever-so-humble opinion, and the least complicated, the better.

Similar to mastering which I've written about at length before, usually the more you mess around with the song, the worse it gets due to overanalyzing and getting tripped up on minute details, which may be important to audiophiles, but are not at all to the average listener.

This is the same reason why I recommend using simple learning aids like PianoForAll for the piano, which will help you take control over the main tool for music producers: the MIDI keyboard, in a way that isn't bogged down by needless sophistication. It doesn't matter how you got it done, as long as it sounds good and the same thing goes for mixing (usually).

By the way, I'm always on the lookout for deals in the music industry (there's usually something if you know where to look). Right now, there are 2 deals that stick out to me.

Adjusting the volume of a track by 0.01dB is really not going to make that much of a difference. However, +1-2dB may be the difference between guitars that sound too loud or too quiet.

I've collected a useful depository of tips and tricks over the last couple of years messing around with DAWs, watching YouTube videos, and reading books on audio engineering and mixing.

Here are just a few mixing tips before we really dive in:
The most important tips for mixing in Garageband:
Without further ado, here are some basic mixing tips for Garageband: 1) Make Sure Your Tracks Aren't Clipping One can't stress enough the importance of avoiding clipping audio in your DAW. The reasoning for this is simple: you don't want your music to crackle and sound terrible.
2) There Are 15 Possible Plug-ins For Each Track
3) Change the Order of Your Plug-Ins in the Signal Chain
4) Use Good Monitors *Usually, if your volume output meters are at -6.0dB and below, there won't be any clipping.
In my experience, it doesn't matter a lot if the master volume is clipping a tiny bit when you're getting ready to export your track for mastering. 5) Turn Off "Export Projects At Full Volume" in the Preferences
***A lot of these are good for other DAW's too like Pro Tools from Plugin Fox, and not just Garageband.

Make Sure Your Tracks Aren't Clipping

Many users when they first start out, including me, had no idea why my tracks always sounded awful whenever I uploaded them to SoundCloud as well as iTunes (my guide). It turns out, output meters matter and they matter a lot.
Essentially, if you want to name your tracks, it's as simple as secondary clicking (two-finger click or right-click), the track region and then a list of options will show up where it clearly says, "rename track."
I struggled with this for a while, because I didn't know precisely what was meant by "clipping," or output meters.

In layman's terms, clipping means that the audio signal is too strong, and the regular cycling process of the audio signal is being disrupted due to the amplifier reaching its limit.

Garageband - and probably every digital audio workstation - comes with output meters that show a user that the signal is too hot. In Garageband, when the signal is clipping, the volume meter will be in the red, rather than the green and yellow.

It's imperative that your tracks are going only into the yellow (or green), during the loudest parts of your song, and never into the red.

It's fine if your tracks are hovering in the lower end of the green throughout the entire track.

It's Ok If The Master Volume Output Is Clipping (A Little Bit)

I usually have the master volume set at 0+ dB or -0.5dB when I export it through an AIFF File and resubmit it back into Garageband for the final process.
If you want to set up more plug-ins, you have to hover your cursor beneath the four standard plug-ins that come as default with each Software Instrument and Audio Track. You'll see a little white line show up. Click on the very bottom of the Audio Effect Slot.
The master volume meter is on the top-right-hand side of Garageband above the workspace. Whenever I'm working on new music, I usually have it cranked, but later turn it down when I'm getting ready to mix/master.

Make Sure Your Tracks Are Named Properly

In my other article, 16 Editing Tips In Garageband (That Are Actually Useful), I spoke about the importance of naming your tracks and MIDI Regions, and I'm going to mention it again here.

It's the same thing for the actual MIDI Regions as well - "Rename Regions."
In layman's terms, the signal is transferred in a chain through each plug-in. For example, let's say you've just completed a new song without plug-ins on the master track. You add a Channel EQ, and then the signal runs through the Channel EQ, and into the Compressor, which compresses the sound and then sends it through a bit of Reverb, and then that signal is finally put through the Limiter. It's literally a signal chain, so it makes perfect sense as to why the order of plug-ins matter.
This is quite useful for the mixing process because what good is having a bunch of different tracks when you don't even know what each one is?

For beginners, this may not be a super important tip, but after one has used Garageband and other DAW's for about a year, you'll notice that the number of your tracks will likely increase by a lot, simply because there is so much potential variation in the creative process.

One example: you can use up to 15 different plug-ins on each "Software Instrument" and "Audio" track, so there are endless ways to modify your music, including with flangers, compressors, phasers, and so on and so forth.

Which brings me to the next tip:

There Are 15 Possible Plug-ins For Each Track (Channel) in GarageBand

A lot of users are surprised to find out we can actually use up to 15 plug-ins in Garageband. Finding and setting them up is not quite as intuitive as you would think; for that reason, I'm sure a lot of people miss out on this treat.

Once you've clicked on the white line, it'll give you the option to open up a plug-in, however, it's misleading because it looks like you're just setting up a plug-in for an already-existing audio-slot.

But, once you choose a plug-in, you'll notice that Garageband just created a whole new Audio Effects Slot and plug-in for you. Be careful though, because the order of them matters.

Changing The Order Of Your Plug-Ins In The Signal Chain

The order of your plug-ins in the signal chain actually matter for the overall tone and shape of your mix's sound. It's a lot like using effects pedals for guitar. The order of guitar pedals actually makes a difference due to basic input-output processing.

For the sake of experimentation, you can see what I mean when you reorder the Channel EQ and Distortion plug-ins. If you put the Channel EQ after the Distortion, you'll notice how much stronger the distortion is, which is good or bad, depending on your intention.

As a general rule, start with the Channel EQ plug-in, and use compression after that. There's a theory in the world of mixing: "cut before compression and boost after," and apparently it's a good rule to follow.
When listening to your track, it's worth hitting the "Cycle Area" option on top of the ruler and listening to each part of your arrangement on its own, individually, while adjusting the volume sliders to your choosing.
For instance, when I'm mixing the 808 - I actually use Initial Audio's 808 Studio II from Plugin Boutique - I'll make the Channel EQ the first plug-in, then a bit of distortion follows, and maybe the Compressor after that.

Frankly, there is no right way of doing this. It's all up to you and your ears.

Cut first, smooth it out, soften, and then add a limiter to make sure nothing gets out of control. That's how I think of it.

Turn Off "Export Projects At Full Volume" Within The Garageband Preferences

This is a simple one, but also one of crucial importance. You're not going to be able to export music at a competitive level if you have this option selected. Frankly, like I said in my article on normalization, I'm not entirely sure why Garageband has this option, to begin with.

1) Just go into Garageband's preferences.

2) Click on Advanced.

3) And then un-check the box beside the word, "Auto-Normalize."

It says "Export At Full Volume," yet when this option is selected, tracks are exported at such a low volume that they're almost entirely useless.

Use The "Cycle Area" Function to Repeat Phrases For Mixing

Now, this isn't something I do personally, but I know a lot of others do this. It's a good way of analyzing each part individually. It's sort of like compartmentalizing the mixing process.

Hit the 'C' button on your keyboard, and that should begin the "Cycle Area" which you can then adjust to your choosing. Or, hit the top of the ruler with your cursor to set it up manually.

How To Fade Out in Garageband

There are two ways of fading out your audio in Garageband.

Option Number 1:
Setting up automation like this is incredibly use useful for individual tracks, as well as on the Master Track. *Select "Show Master Track" in "Track" setting In the top toolbar - Also, (Command + M) *You can also delete the little yellow dots by double-clicking with your track-pad or hitting the delete button.
Fading out in Garageband is as simple as going into the "Mix" setting in Garageband's tool settings, and then selecting the option, "Create Volume Fade Out On Main Output."

This will automatically lower the volume gradually on the entire track. This setting works really well. There's no reason, really, for creating a different automation fade-out.

However, let's say, for whatever reason, you're not happy with the automatic fade-out offered by Garageband.
* You can also establish automation tracks for "reverb" and other settings, not just volume.
Option Number 2:

1) You can, instead, create your own automation track by hitting the 'A' key, on your keyboard. You can also hit the "Show-Hide Automation" button on the top-right-hand side of the track-header. It's a lot easier, however, to just hit the 'A' on your keyboard.

This'll bring up all of the automation settings in your workspace.

2) Click on the Automation Line. It's yellow.

3) Now, click on the yellow line as many times as you want. This will create little yellow dots permitting the user to create very specific and adaptable automation.

4) Drag the lines according to how you want your volume levels.

How To Fade In

Like the method shown above, it's as simple as hitting the 'A' on your keyboard, then clicking on the yellow automation line, and dragging the line according to how you want to fade the volume.

How To Reverse Playback

This is a dope feature I figured out while I was researching all the possible things I may have missed when looking for special mixing tips.

Just double-click on the recording as you normally would, and it'll bring up the details in the Smart Controls below.

With the exception of "Software Instrument" tracks, you can hit the "Reverse Playback" checkbox where the plug-ins usually are, and this will literally play your recording backward.

An amazing feature if you're trying to break out of a creative slump. If you've sampled something cool and need a quick new sound in the same key signature, hit the "Reverse Playback" button.

Lowering the Volume Of Tracks By 1/10ths Rather Than 1/2ths and 1/5ths

Sounds a bit confusing, so let me explain.

When adjusting the volume, you'll notice that as soon as you get below -6.0dB, the numbers start decreasing by 0.2 rather than by 0.1, and then once you're down to -18.0, the numbers decrease by -0.5dB instead of -0.2dB.

There's actually a way of getting around this, and it's through the "Automation" section in the workspace.

1) Hit 'A' for Automation on your keyboard, and Garageband will bring up the yellow volume bar.

2) Drop two automation points on the yellow line (there are three in the image above because I made a mistake).

3) Now select both of the points by clicking and dragging a box around them.

4) You can start pulling down the line by the two points, and you'll notice the movement in volume is more precise.

This may not seem important in the beginning stages of mixing, but it will come in handy later on when more precision is needed.

Listen to Your Mixes on Both Quality and Terrible Headphones - Also In A Car

This is self-explanatory but crucial. While it's a great idea to use quality headphones to mixes, it's also useful to listen to your mix with bad headphones/speakers.

The truth is, most people won't listen to your music on the best gear in the world, because most people aren't audiophiles or audio engineers.

When browsing around on internet forums and the like, I've seen producers/musicians say things like, "If the listener doesn't respect my music enough to listen to it on a good pair of headphones, then they're beyond helping anyway."

Obviously, a mentality like the aforementioned is absurd. You want your music to sound as good as possible using every medium which is one reason why I use multiple sound systems for listening including Etymotic ER4SRs from Amazon for when I'm on the road.

Use Subtractive EQ First And Then Additive EQ After

When you first open your Channel EQ, typically the very first thing a mixer does is they drop the lowest of the lows and the highest of the highs. The human ear can't really pick up those super high frequencies anyway, so nothing's lost.

The first thing that I normally do, is I go over to the part around +200hz and I drop that frequency out just a tiny bit, because that is the point most audible to humans, and thus, it's usually the "problem area," so to speak.

It can get a little "muddy" if you have too much signal coming from this area.

Then, I'll give a nice little boost to the part starting from +300hz all the way until +10,000khz. I like it when my mixes sound bright and clean, so that's why I give a boost of about +2.5dB.

After that, I'll boost the +100hz area by +3.0dB, but I'll also have the 'Q' set to around 0.50.

Use Compressor Pre-Sets

The presets that come with Garageband are actually quite good. It's rare that I'll use a compressor and actually make custom settings for each track. I usually employ the "Platinum Analog Tape" setting, and that's all the compression I'll use on the entire mix.

In my opinion, it isn't worth messing with when you're first starting out as a music producer/audio engineer. Compression is one of those tools in a mixer's toolbox, that, for whatever reason, people tend to use and abuse.

There are other pre-sets worth checking out including "Tight Snare" and "Modern Kick," and so on and so forth.

If you're serious about becoming a producer/engineer, it's worth researching the compressor and all of its parameters, including ratio, attack, gain, threshold, and release. A great place to start is Timothy Dittmar's book from Amazon, Audio Engineering 101.

Don't Be Afraid Of Reverb But Don't Use it Too Much - Use Delay As Well

Using too much reverb is a common mistake for beginning music producers. Let's be honest, reverb is a great feature, and it adds so much especially if you're using SP2016 from Eventide (on Plugin Boutique).

However, the mistake is that people will, for instance, record 5-7 different tracks, each one with reverb on it, and then when all of those tracks are mixed together, the sum total of all the reverb on each individual track makes the amount of it gargantuan and awful sounding.

I use reverb on guitar, but I rarely douse my music in it. It's great to use it sparingly, otherwise, you'll pay for this mistake later on when it's time to master.

With that said, reverb isuseful, and it sounds great. There's no question about that, and the same thing could be said for delay as well.

Make Sure There Aren't Any Effects Running On Your Output Master Track

This is crucial. There should never be any effects, EQ, compressors, limiters, or any tools on your output master track for a simple reason. All of that stuff should be empty and unused until it's ready for mastering.

If you try and mix and master your track later with all of these effects, you'll find that everything has become muddied and almost impossible to mix and master correctly.

Use Noise Gate On Recorded Audio

This one's a no-brainer for all of the guitar players out there - if you're into metal, anyway. Noise gates are very useful for people who play metal because there is so much distortion involved, so whenever you stop playing the guitar, there tends to be buzzing and hissing from the amp.

However, when you employ a Noise Gate on your guitar parts or vocal tracks, the tool eliminates all of those annoying sounds that would later become a problem in the mix.

The Noise Gate is an option down in the Smart Controls' plug-in area under the "Dynamics" sub-heading.

It's important not to use the Noise Gate too much, however, because it'll end up destroying the dynamics of your recording. For instance, if you're playing a guitar solo and need a note to ring out, a Noise Gate will limit the sustain.

Understand Signal To Noise Ratio

Often abbreviated as S/N or SNR, Signal-To-Noise-Ratio is an important concept for mixers and music producers. In layman's terms, it's the comparison between the desired signal's power to the background noise.

In other words, let's say you're recording guitar and using a lot of distortion for a guitar solo. If the S/N is too low, that means the hissing signal of the amp, people talking in the background, the sound of the air conditioner, and so on and so forth, is too close to the signal of the actual guitar playing.

Many products come with an S/N ratio, but not all of them.

Measured in dB, a higher specification means for every dB of the desired signal, there is 'x' many dB of undesired signal. For instance, if an S/N ratio is 100dB, that means that the signal is 100dB stronger than the noise.

Using the example of a refrigeration, if you've recorded a conversation between two people in a kitchen, in which a fridge is running and humming at 30dB, the pair's conversation better not whisper, because the fridge might actually be much louder than the sound of the conversation.

Later on, this problem is amplified in the mixing and mastering process, especially in the case of compression, which will accentuate the loudness of the refrigeration and bring down the volume of the conversation.

It's all pretty intuitive. Make sure that your signal is much, much, much stronger than the surrounding noise. It's essential as well to make sure recordings are executed at similar volume levels, otherwise, the audio engineer will never bring balance to the mix later on.

Let Your Instruments Ring Out - (Fade Out)

It's always a good idea to let your instrument ring out, that way the entirety of the part is recorded and there aren't poorly executed fades at the end of each track, and thus, your final recording.

For instance, let's say you've recorded a guitar solo. If you didn't let the final note ring out and the solo suddenly just stops in the middle of a note playing, it's going to sound abrupt and unnatural.

The same thing can be said for in-between sections of your arrangement. For example, if you've recorded a bass line, then let the final note ring out, or even use the volume Automation to fade the one section into the other. It adds a bit of cohesiveness and naturality to the music.

Get Your Hands On A Good Pair Of Headphones

Even though studio headphones and monitors are never truly "neutral," they attempt to offer a balance of low and high frequencies.

When listening to mixes, you want the most accurate reflection of the music, without being colored by the headphones. The Dre Beats, for example, are absolutely not meant for the studio, due to their increased low frequencies.

The same is true for most casual headphones. Almost all of them have boosted the bass and low frequencies because that's what consumers want.

However, in the studio, engineers want "neutral" headphones that give the most accurate representation, that way when they've mixed and mastered the music, it won't come out with too much bass or too much low-end due to increased low frequencies of most listening systems.

For further explanation, if you've mixed and mastered using Dr. Beats, you'll likely think there's enough bass and low-end in the mix, only to later discover when listening in a car or on another pair of headphones that there's hardly any bass at all.

The headphones just made it seem like there was a lot of low frequencies, even though there wasn't.

I recommend grabbing a pair of Audio-Technica ATHM50X Headphones for mixing on Amazon). They're noise canceling studio headphones that are great for mixing and mastering tracks.

Emphasis on "noise-canceling" because you don't want the acoustics of the room affecting your listening ability.

The link above will take you to the Amazon page for the headphones I always use for recording, tracking, mixing, and mastering. The cable on them is very long which is pretty convenient for using in the studio, and the sound is super clear and balanced.
*This is more useful for Audio recordings and less so for MIDI.
However, if they cost too much money, there are other models of the same brand to try out on Amazon. Can't go wrong with the ATHM50X headphones though.

Using Auto-Tune And Pitch Correction On Your Recordings

This is give-in that most people consider when thinking about the magic of recording studios. Everyone thinks auto-tune is this magic feature that everyone uses on their vocals to sound great, and truthfully, it is.

Every major singer does use it.

Trippie Redd said recently that he uses it on all of his vocals, as does everybody else in the scene. It's pretty much an imperative for most.

In Garageband, you can use "Pitch-Correction" in the bottom portion of the Smart Controls. I haven't written an article on how to use Auto-Tune yet (update: now I have), but I will in the future.

Not only is there a default Pitch Correction in Garageband, but there are also external plug-ins that you can buy, including Antares Auto-Tune Pro (from Plugin Boutique) which is easily the best vocal tuning tool you can get for Garageband.

Use Volume Automation To Turn The Volume And Signal Down During Silent Parts

During the quiet parts of a track, I turn it right down with the Automation option, and then up again once the instruments start back up. I do this whether it's MIDI or a standard Audio recording.

It cuts out any unwanted signals and frequencies, that way there is plenty of room for frequency later on in the mixing and mastering process.

There is only so much room in a particular frequency. For instance, Jason Newstead, the bass player for Metallica, claimed he didn't know about how bass and rhythm guitar shared the same frequency when he recorded bass on ...And Justice For All.

For that reason, Lars and the mixing engineer decided to lower the volume on his bass guitar because they didn't want to take anything away from James Hetfield's guitar playing.

Cut Out The Low-End On Your Vocal Tracks To Bring Your Singing "Out Front"

This is a bit difficult to describe in words, but if you're having trouble mixing vocals in your track, notably, if the singing doesn't appear front and center, sometimes just cutting out the low-end of the vocals can make the singing sound like it's more "in front" of the rest of the instruments.

You Don't Have To Use Compression

You don't actually have to use compression. A lot of people are hung up on this tool and use it for everything, thus, over-compressing their music like crazy.

In one of my tracks on SoundCloud titled, "Romania" I didn't use any compression at all, with the exception of a multipressor on the final Master track. You can check it out here:

I tried putting a regular compressor on it like I normally do, but it sounded terrible so I just left it off. A multipressor essentially separates the signals into 3-5 different signal frequencies and compresses each one individually.

A regular compressor compresses the entire file as one signal.

Bonus Tips

Mixing In Mono

This is one of the most commonly suggested tips for mixing for music producers and engineers.

To mix in mono (my guide on how to do it) means that we're monitoring the sound through just one channel, rather than through stereo, where the signal is being spread across more than one channel, usually two, left and right.

Simply put, if you want to convert your music over to Mono, you just go into the "Utility" plug-ins on your master channel, and then choose "Gain," and go into its drop-down menu and select "Convert to Mono."

Use Premium Mixing Plugins

Eventually, there will come a point where you realize that there are better audio processing tools available and Fab Filter's mastering bundle on Plugin Boutique is one of them. You have the ability to solo frequency ranges to see how they sound in isolation which made a huge difference in the way that my music sounded.

Another thing that I like to do is take some of Garageband's presets and apply them to the Fab Filter plugins. I find I'm able to modify and tweak them a lot more to get everything to sound amazing and 100% suited to my production.

Other Articles You May Be Interested In

Conclusion

That's all for basic mixing tips in Garageband. Help a brother out and share this on your social media accounts. It's much appreciated.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
24 Basic (And Actually Useful) Mixing Tips For Garageband

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A list of some of the best tips for mixing in Garageband.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Heartbeat Music Therapy Helps Parents Cope with Loss of Teen

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Making Sense of Music Therapy Technology Resources

# data[].attributes.headline
Making Sense of Music Therapy Technology

# data[].attributes.subject
Making Sense of Music Therapy Technology

# data[].attributes.headline
Using electronic music technologies in music therapy

# data[].attributes.subject
Using electronic music technologies in music therapy

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
ULTIMATE GUITAR TABS - 1,100,000 songs catalog with free Chords, Guitar Tabs, Bass Tabs, Ukulele Chords and Guitar Pro Tabs!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Your #1 source for chords, guitar tabs, bass tabs, ukulele chords, guitar pro and power tabs. Comprehensive tabs archive with over 1,100,000 tabs! Tabs search engine, guitar lessons, gear reviews, rock news and forums!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Song Maker, an experiment in Chrome Music Lab, is a simple way for anyone to make and share a song.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Make your own music like a pro. Create sick beats, perfect and perform unique tracks!

Features:
* Great variety of music styles: Hip-hop, Drum & Bass, Trap, Dubstep, House, and many others;
* Unique sound packs. Get access to professional-quality audio samples created by professional musicians and DJs;
* Instruments & FX. Use Drum & Piano for creative sound designs;
* Sequencing. Get studio effects including Tempo Regulation and EQ;
* Beat School. Try the lessons for each sound pack to improvise freely;
* Quick sharing. Share your music with the world.

Enjoy this powerful, yet easy-to-use tool to get the best music experience!

Drum Pad Machine Premium
Drum Pad Machine Premium Subscription allows you to unlock all the sound packs, get new releases every week and remove ads. Choose from different subscription options.

Payment will be charged to Apple ID Account at confirmation of purchase. Subscription automatically renews unless auto-renew is turned off at least 24-hours before the end of the current period. Account will be charged for renewal within 24-hours prior to the end of the current period. Subscriptions may be managed by you and auto-renewal may be turned off by going to Apple ID Account Settings. For more information please visit the link https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT202039. Unused portion of a free-trial period will be forfeited when a user decides to subscribe.

EULA: https://easybrain.com/terms.html
Privacy Policy: https://easybrain.com/policy.html

Version 2.14.0

- Performance and stability improvements.

If you have any questions or ideas, feel free to contact us via the Support section. We will be happy to help. Be a beat maker with Drum Pad Machine!

AMAZING APP!!

I really love this app I recommend you getting this app, I love this app because I like to make beats and I just like beatboxing and stuff and I really think you should get this game because it's really really fun and I rate a five star because this game is really fun when you like want to make a beat and stuff it will just go to the app and there's different types of like some things you can choose to make different beats there is different types of beat you can make like there's a saying where you can put all the best together to make your own type a B but I recommend you get in this game it's really really fun andIf you don't like it that's OK but I in my personal opinion I really I love it because it's super Duper fun like I said a long time does super Duper fun because it you can just like there's this thing on there on the app where you play a beat like you put different beers together like get one B and then another like if you get it you know and then there is this there different types of be like different types of ones you can do there's not just once in a while and there's like a lot of like hundreds and hundreds and hundreds but I read this a five star in yeah I just love this game

Hello there. Thank you for the feedback. As we are always doing our best in order to enhance the experience of our users, we'll continue working on improving our app. Stay tuned for future updates! 😃

Good game do GGS

This app is sick I am made me a nice beat and I'm a keep recording until I find me a nice one this is just like piano tiles to anyone but whoever made this game they should try it out because they're missing out if they don't even played and they made it because what they are missing out on is the cool beach and the nice music thing did they know that you could switch your pad to make it like a good beat I did that and then there's the beach started changing and I was like what so if you're reading this thanks for the one to re-it and download the app and sick that's all that's going to bring it down because this app is cool I wish I knew about this before 2020 home and yeah that's it but whoever made this should've told me before 2020 they left me hanging out with this game and have a great Christmas bye I also made Christmas songs in thisAnd before I go out also have something else for those who hate on games don't hit on this one because this is a good game you could try out have a good day and don't hate

Hi, thank you so much for your kind words and positive feedback about our game! We're thrilled you're enjoying it and having a great experience. Your support and enthusiasm mean a lot to us, and we're committed to delivering the same exciting gameplay to keep you entertained. Please don't hesitate to reach out if you have more feedback, suggestions, or questions. We value your input and look forward to providing you with an even better gaming experience.

Lovely, but a little lacking

Oh I love this app, but I wish they had more choices for people who couldn't get a subscription. They don't give as many options as I would hope, so it's a little bit lacking, and I can't make some of the great sounds I wish I could. I've heard people with premium before play some songs I've never heard, and I wish they had it so maybe you had to watch a little bit of longer an ad, so you can still use the premium features but you have to watch more ads during it. I hope the creators find this review, so that way they can hopefully take this into Account. There are just so many premium features that some people do not have, and I find it unfair that if your parents say no to getting premium for you, then you cannot do almost 3/4 of what the game gives you they have so many different options for people who have premium, and then people who don't, they have like an eighth of what the game is telling them there is. I just find it very very unfair to those of which cannot get a premium. To the creators of the game, please take this into recommend Dacian so that way you may find it a little unfair yourself, and therefore give people who do not have premium more options.

Hi! Thank you for taking a moment and leaving a review! Please keep in mind you can use our app without any payment. You can unlock all the Premium packs by watching a short rewarded video. If you require any further information, you can reach us through the Support in the app or at support@easybrain.com where we'll be on hand to assist you!

The developer, Easybrain, indicated that the app's privacy practices may include handling of data as described below. For more information, see the developer's privacy policy.

Data Used to Track You

The following data may be used to track you across apps and websites owned by other companies:

Data Linked to You

The following data may be collected and linked to your identity:

Data Not Linked to You

The following data may be collected but it is not linked to your identity:

Privacy practices may vary, for example, based on the features you use or your age. Learn More

Information

Compatibility

iPhone

Requires iOS 12.0 or later.

iPad

Requires iPadOS 12.0 or later.

iPod touch

Requires iOS 12.0 or later.

Languages

English, Arabic, French, German, Hindi, Indonesian, Italian, Japanese, Korean, Polish, Portuguese, Russian, Simplified Chinese, Spanish, Thai, Traditional Chinese, Turkish, Vietnamese

In-App Purchases

1. Drum Pad Machine Pro - Weekly $7.99

2. Music Beat Maker Premium $7.99

3. Beatmaker Premium $14.99

4. Drum Pad Machine Pro - Annual $46.99

5. Drum Pad Machine Pro - Monthly $14.99

Family Sharing

Some in‑app purchases, including subscriptions, may be shareable with your family group when Family Sharing is enabled.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
‎Make your own music like a pro. Create sick beats, perfect and perform unique tracks! Features: * Great variety of music styles: Hip-hop, Drum & Bass, Trap, Dubstep, House, and many others; * Unique sound packs. Get access to professional-quality audio samples created by professional musicians and...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Music Notation Software - Sibelius - Avid

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Sibelius is the world's best-selling music notation software. Compose, arrange, publish, and teach music writing and scoring-on desktop and mobile.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Music Made with Purpose

Our music is grounded in science.

All of the music and guided meditations on Humm.ly are created by board-certified music therapists and world-class music producers.

Using Music to Tune the Heart

Tracking function through Apple Watch to let you observe how the music regulates your heart while listening.

Music can make you laugh or cry, rile you up or calm you down.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Humm.ly Music Wellness App Combining Therapy & Mindfulness

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Humm.ly music wellness app combining music therapy & mindfulness techniques for your health. Learn how your life can improve in a click.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A fun, interactive music experience
Incredibox is a music app that lets you create your own music with the help of a merry crew of beatboxers.Choose your musical style among 9 impressive atmospheres and start to lay down, record and share your mix.

Where making music is child's play!

Part game, part tool, Incredibox is above all an audio and visual experience that has quickly become a hit with people of all ages. More than 80 million players worldwide have already enjoyed it. The right mix of music, graphics, animation and interactivity makes Incredibox ideal for everyone. And because it makes learning fun and entertaining, Incredibox is now being used by schools all over the world.

Create a mix

Drag and drop icons onto the avatars to make them sing and start to compose your own music. Find the right sound combos to unlock animated choruses that will enhance your tune.

Share it

Once your composition sounds great, just save it and you will get a link to your mix. You can easily share it with anybody so they can listen and even vote for it.

Be a legend

If you share your mix a lot and get enough votes from other users, you may go down in Incredibox history by joining the Top 50 chart. Ready to show your stuff?

Ready to lay down
your mix?

';

Sign up for news!

Subscribe to our newsletter to receive news directly in your mailbox.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Incredibox is a music app that lets you create your own music with the help of a merry crew of beatboxers. Choose your musical style among 9 impressive atmospheres and start to lay down, record and share your mix.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Seize
Inspiration.

A real-time rhyme suggestion engine
offering color-coded rhyme highlighting, the ability to save your work to the cloud, the power to embed SoundCloud jams into your notes, customizable visual layouts, and more.

A community for creative writers -
A social space for sharing your work, with the freedom to comment, collaborate, and show respect to others, and of course the opportunity for off-the-cuff rap battles (if that's your thing).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Rhymer's Block: The Best Rap / Poetry Writer

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
GuitarTuna | Online Guitar Tuner for Acoustic, Electric and Bass

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Tune your guitar and other instruments with GuitarTuna, the world's #1 online tuner. Our online guitar tuner comes with over 100 different tunings.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.provider_name
HoursTracker - Time Tracking App for iPhone and Android

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Powerful features. Simple to use.

Easily track your time and earnings for one or more jobs. Clock in and clock out as you work or enter start and stop times yourself. HoursTracker groups your entries by day, week, or month, so you can easily see how you spend your time week to week or across jobs. Pay periods are automatically calculated, including overtime and net pay estimates.

Never forget to clock in again.

Receive notifications when you arrive or leave, or let HoursTracker use your location to automatically record your time entries. Your jobs list can be ordered nearest-first to save scrolling. Low-power location services minimize battery drain.

Organize using tags.

Tags are a powerful way to organize your jobs and time entries. Simply tag jobs or entries with a keyword, like "Paid." Multiple tags can be applied to an item, and you can reuse tags. Tag a job, and that tag also applies to all of its entries.

Declutter using filters.

Create filters to quickly show or hide jobs and entries based on tags. Filters are always available by pulling down on any list. And, filters can be combined for even more power. Just tap a filter to toggle it On or Off.

Watch the Video

No need to watch the clock.

HoursTracker can alert you when you're done for the day. Set an expected number of hours per day, and you'll get a notification when you reach those hours for that job, taking multiple time entries and the job's time rounding options into account. A notification fifteen minutes prior helps you get to a stopping point by quitting time.

Manage jobs in a few taps.

Editing jobs is quick, easy, and non-destructive. You control whether or not changing the job rate affects prior entries. Changing pay period or overtime settings never alters your time entries.

Add jobs easily. Only a name is required, but many options are available. You can copy an existing job if you need to add several similar jobs. Add more than 15 jobs, and HoursTracker will display an index, like the Contacts app.

Streamlined time entry.

Select a start time, then either an end time or a duration. Shortcut buttons help you make selections faster. Entries can have their own hourly rate. You can easily add a day's entries at once using the Add Break function to account for any number of breaks.

Flexible export options.

Export your time entries to e-mail in text or spreadsheet-ready CSV format. Select specific jobs, or date ranges to narrow your export. Numerous options give you control over how your export is organized and what is included in it. You can send your export to one or multiple e-mail addresses by separating them with semi-colons.

More than a list of jobs.

If you spend your day jumping between jobs, jobs list actions help you quickly get things done without losing your place. You can clock in or add an entry to any job right from the list. Just tap a job to call up the actions menu.

Shortcut gestures save you time and effort.

Shortcut gestures speed up your everyday tasks. Tap on a job with two fingers to instantly clock in or out. Tap and hold a job to edit the most recent time entry for that job. Double-tap pickers to switch between one-minute and five-minute increments.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
HoursTracker: Time Tracking App for iPhone and Android

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Easily track your time and earnings for one or more jobs. Clock in and clock out as you work or enter start and stop times yourself. HoursTracker groups your entries by day, week, or month, so you can easily see how you spend your time week to week or across jobs.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Guides, Tutorials, and Lessons on Technology for and in Music Therapy | A collaborative resource created by music therapists, music therapy researchers, and music therapy educators.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Jay Silver: Hack a banana, make a keyboard!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Your everywhere studio. Create and record easily with powerful tools and sounds, all in one place.

Get started

Vocal & mixing tools

Reverb, Distortion, EQ, Delay, Compressor, and more.

Virtual instruments

Beatmaker, software synths, drum kits, and 808 with Glide sounds.

Royalty-free sounds

Thousands of loops, samples, one-shots, and sound effects.

Collaborative studio

Make music online anytime, with anyone, on any device.

Industry quality sounds, every 2 weeks

New and exclusive sound packs are dropped every two weeks from trending genres like Phonk, Drill, Lo-Fi, K-Pop, and more. Our sound library has up to 24,000+ loops and hundreds of presets, designed and mixed by professional producers.

Latest Soundtrap Originals

Explore more sound packs from your favorite genres

Collaborate with anyone, from anywhere

Create and collaborate with your bandmates, friends, or other musicians in real-time through video and chat, directly in the studio. Leave comments on your shared projects and let auto-save keep you in the creative flow.

Mix and master for a chart-ready sound

Finalize your song with our mixing and mastering tools, suitable for beginners and pros alike. From auto-mixing to EQs, compressors, and more - access all the tools you need to take your song to the top 50!

More features

Vocal tuning

Achieve pro-sounding vocals from every take with our pitch correction software.

Automation

Tweak the volume, pan, and use the filter sweep effect with this powerful audio editing tool.

Patterns beatmaker

Make your own beats with ease. Sequencing a unique beat for your next track has never been easier.

Plug and play

Connect your own microphone, guitar, or any other instrument.

*Access to Vocal tuning and Automation available on the Music Makers and Complete plans.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Make music together online. Free instruments, loops, drum kits, and vocal tuner in one studio. Record, edit, mix, and master your audio, no downloads - sign up for free.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic prompted a sudden rethinking of how music was taught and learned. Prior to the pandemic, the web-based digital audio workstation Soundtrap emerged as a leading platform for creating music online. The present study examined the growth of Soundtrap's usage during the COVID-19 pandemic. Using machine-learning methods, we analyzed anonymized user data from Soundtrap's 1.6 million educational users in the United States to see if the pandemic affected Soundtrap's education user base and, if so, to what extent. An exploratory data analysis demonstrated a large increase in Soundtrap's user base beyond five standard deviations beginning in March 2020. A subsequent changepoint analysis identified March 17, 2020, as the day this shift occurred. Finally, we created a SARIMAX model using data prior to March 17 to forecast expected growth. This model was unable to account for user growth after March 17, showing highly anomalous growth rates outside of the model's confidence interval. We discuss how this shift affects music education practices and what it portends for our field. In addition, we explore the role of machine learning and artificial intelligence as a method for research in the music education field.

Keywords: electronic music, machine learning, music education, quantitative, research methods, technology

Introduction: Digital audio workstations in music education

School music in the United States follows a long and storied tradition of synchronous, in-person music teaching and learning ( Mark & Gary, 2007). In broad terms, this usually involves lessons in elementary schools following an approach modeled on the teachings of Kodály, Dalcroze, or Orff, and large-ensemble instruction in middle and high schools ( Benedict, 2010; Elpus & Abril, 2019). For logistical, technological, and economic reasons, having one teacher work with many students simultaneously in a physical space has been an obvious and necessary paradigm for music instruction.

A major growth area for music education in recent years has been at the intersections of music technology and popular music, often including moves away from the dominant performance-oriented paradigm toward practices centered on making original music with digital tools. As part of this change, the use of digital audio workstations (DAWs) to allow students to create, arrange, and store music online has increased in music education classrooms ( bell, 2015a). Some of today's most popular DAWs include GarageBand, Pro Tools, Ableton Live, and Soundtrap. Most DAWs show visual representations of recorded audio from left to right, with layered "tracks" (individual audio files) shown from top to bottom. In addition, many DAWs offer users a library of samples and loops that they can add to their compositions. These include beats (i.e., percussive tracks mimicking or sampling drums that often include bass lines and synthesizer sounds) and a range of short melodies and harmonic progressions on a wide variety of virtual instruments. Within the DAW, users can alter musical parameters such as pitch, key, tempo, equalization, panning, and dynamics. DAWs also often provide a range of effects (e.g., chorus, flange, tremolo, reverb, echo, delay) alongside a selection of simulated specific microphones, amplifiers, guitars, and keyboard sounds.

As technology has become more affordable, and DAWs such as GarageBand come free on Apple computers and iPhones, the incorporation of DAWs continues to expand in music education settings ( Clauhs, 2020). This presents an exciting prospect for music educators as many learners of all ages and abilities have access to an all-in-one musical-instrument-recording-studio at all times ( bell, 2015a). At this point, many students in K-12 classrooms can be considered digital natives ( Prensky, 2001; Thomas, 2011) and many are increasingly becoming familiar with audio recording and editing through digital applications such as TikTok. This being said, of course, not every young person confronted with a digital musicking interface will be excited by the creative potential it offers; nonetheless, DAWs present new opportunities that prior technologies did not.

Facilitating musical experiences with students who grew up using technology provides opportunities for music educators to shift the focus from music education as performance to music education as computer-mediated creativity through media ( Thibeault, 2014). This shift might also bring more students into to the music education classroom, as DAWs can "appeal to a wide range of students, many of whom might not participate in music-making otherwise" ( Walzer, 2016, p. 24). In addition, the incorporation of DAWs into the music classroom can allow music educators to facilitate opportunities for student composition ( Ruthmann, 2007) and other creative projects ( Rosen et al., 2013).

Soundtrap: Web-based DAW

The COVID-19 pandemic prompted a sudden rethinking of music teaching and learning. Portable computer technology, widespread internet access, and online music-making software enabled a previously unthinkable shift in music education praxis. When the pandemic began in early 2020 and school districts across the country closed and local and state governments issued "lockdown" or "rest-in-place" orders, schoolteachers were suddenly thrust into an unknown realm ( Smith, 2020). The notion of asynchronous instruction was anathema to most music teachers as recently as the beginning of 2020. But by mid-March of that year, the coronavirus pandemic had forced everyone out of their classrooms, and technology made teaching and learning online a viable proposition, and in some instances, mandatory. While research and pockets of practice pointed to the potential for engaging students via technology and especially the internet, many teachers lacked familiarity with such modes of instruction ( Cayari, 2021). Some music educators found themselves in unfamiliar territory: reliance on technology; project-based learning; informal pedagogies; emphasis on play, composition, and improvisation; peer learning; and a lack of direct, synchronous instruction.

Many teachers turned to various internet-based music-making and learning platforms, including BandLab, Acapella, Auralia, Noteflight, and others to serve a range of creative and other learning goals. Among these platforms was the popular DAW Soundtrap. Soundtrap is a cloud-based DAW that enables musicians to collaborate synchronously and asynchronously to make music, including the option to communicate via in-app video conferencing. There are consumer and educational versions of the software. Educational accounts may be purchased in bulk by schools and school districts, and provide a "walled garden," a secure site with no access to the public or anyone outside of that subscription group. Soundtrap also offers free training courses to its users. Throughout the spring and summer of 2020, these training options included Soundtrap "Expert" and "Educator" certifications, which provided customers with an introduction to the functionality of the DAW and, in the case of the training designed for educators, suggestions on how to use it for music learning.

One appealing aspect of Soundtrap, and some other DAWs like BandLab, is that it works on a range of hardware devices, including Mac and PC computers, tablets, and smartphones. This arguably made these platforms more accessible during lockdown periods of the pandemic, when some students did not have access to a computer or tablet. In addition, Soundtrap is cloud-based; students can share projects and collaborate using an internet browser without the need to download and transfer projects. This collaborative aspect of cloud-based DAWs allows students to work on projects simultaneously, instead of one at a time; an analog in the word-processing domain is Google Docs. While any level of technological requirement means that a platform or instrument is not going to be accessible to every potential user ( bell, 2015b), the relative accessibility of Soundtrap made it a viable option for schools and teachers during the pandemic in ways that other existing platforms were not.

Soundtrap, like other DAWs, is designed to be used for purposes of music creation or composition. It is necessary to construe "composition" in a way that accounts for contemporary, 21st-century modes of music creation. For instance, working in a DAW no longer requires reliance on older modes of music notation, such as the (paper or electronic) five-line staff. In the DAW context, this is substituted by the visual representation of audio waveforms and MIDI clips that also offer greater utility within the software. The roles of "composers," too, in the realm of the DAW to include arranger, performer, improviser, engineer, technician, songwriter, and producer ( Moir & Medbøe, 2015).

The present study examined the growth of Soundtrap's educational user base during the COVID-19 pandemic. Specifically, our research aimed to determine (a) if there was a growth in Soundtrap's educational user base during the pandemic; (b) if so, the size of this growth; and (c) if this growth was an anomaly, unable to be predicted by pre-COVID new user rates. Although commonsense interpretations of educators' responses to the pandemic indicate an increase in the use of Soundtrap during this time, it is nonetheless helpful as a matter of historical record to verify and precisely document this increase. This documentation may provide a foundation for future research about the use of online platforms in music education as well as the longer term effects of the pandemic. Researchers were given access to anonymized user data to determine if the pandemic affected user rates on the platform, and, if so, the scale of these effects. Although this study only examined data from one platform, Soundtrap is among the most widely adopted platforms for music educators. As such, we believe the results speak more broadly for the music education field. Understanding the extent of Soundtrap adoption during the pandemic might serve as a proxy for music educators' overall engagement with DAWs and increased reliance on technological resources during the height of the pandemic. For this research study, we used methods that we believe to be new in music education research literature; the machine-learning methods we describe in the following sections appear to be a first in music education scholarship.

Method

Data were obtained from Soundtrap, which enumerated every user on the platform. This included more than 10 million users beginning from the platform's inception on January 1, 2011, to January 31, 2021, when data were obtained. User information received from Soundtrap was anonymized, and the only variables available for analysis were: the date created, country, and account type. Account type refers to Soundtrap's different user types of "consumer" and "educational." We filtered this data set according to our research questions, and only examined the educational users in the United States. Although these accounts began from January 17, 2014, we further filtered the set by date, only examining the accounts from January 31, 2015, and onward. We did this because, according to Soundtrap, these first few educational accounts were often test accounts created internally before launching their educational version of the platform. In addition, by beginning our analysis from this date, the data set was trimmed to exactly 6 years, making the seasonality of the time series more regular. This final data set included approximately 1.6 million users.

Because of the size and scope of data used in this analysis, more familiar parametric tools were unavailable. Instead, the researchers chose to interrogate the data using machine-learning methods most often associated with big data analysis. Although lacking a precise agreed-upon definition, most data scientists agree that the term "big data" describes large volumes of data that may be examined for patterns using computationally sophisticated tools ( McAfee et al., 2012). We believe the present study is without precedent in the music education field in terms of the size of the data analyzed and the kinds of machine-learning methods employed to do so. However, analysis of big data is commonly used in related fields, including a subfield of musicology termed "computational musicology" ( Bel & Vecchione, 1993), music theory ( Anders, 2021), composition ( Briot & Pachet, 2020), and digital humanities ( Burgoyne et al., 2015). The data in this study were not exhaustively large by big data standards, but the size of the data in this project was too large, and the analytical tasks below were too computationally expensive for consumer computers. Thus, we used a big data approach for our methodology. The data were ingested into a MySQL database running on a Ubuntu server. A separate Windows server running R Studio was given access to the server and used to query the data and create data objects within R to be analyzed.

R is an open-source research language and environment designed for statistical computing and formatting of graphical outputs ( Ihaka & Gentleman, 1996). More common in fields where large data sets are the norm, like economics and the physical sciences, R allows users to manipulate large amounts of data, compute a wide range of statistical variables for analysis, and format graphics from these analyses to tell a visual story of the data. R was selected for this project because of its ability to handle large amounts of data, its large user base of support, and its long history in data science.

Once in R, the data were analyzed using three layers of analysis. The first layer was an exploratory data analysis ( Myatt, 2007) that allowed the researchers to visually inspect the time-series data for possible trends or seasonality. Following this inspection, a changepoint test ( Hinkley, 1970) was used to determine any precise changes in means during the time series. These two layers of analysis allowed us to answer our first two research questions, specifically to determine if there was a change in Soundtrap's user base, and, if so, the size of this change. Finally, a Seasonal Autoregressive Integrated Moving Average (SARIMA) model ( Brockwell & Davis, 2016) was used to determine if this change in Soundtrap's user base was anomalous and could not have been predicted by prior new user rates. These methods of analysis are discussed in more detail in the following section.

The authors sought and were granted institutional review board approval for the present study from each of our respective institutions. Due to the data being obtained by a third party, and because those data were anonymized with no personally identifiable information, this study was considered exempt from human subjects review. There is a possibility of a conflict of interest in the present study due to the fact that the analyses below depend upon the authors being provided access to Soundtrap's proprietary data. It is possible that we would only be given access to data that are in the interest of the corporate entity holding the data. It is also possible that, as authors who wish to have continued access to proprietary data, we might conduct research that encourages this access. Although research that involves the participation of a non-neutral third party may raise valid concerns, we would argue that the benefits of analyzing a data set of this size and scope-and one that is only available through a third party-outweigh possible conflicts of interest, especially given the particular significance of the COVID-19 pandemic as a unique context for music education. In addition, there have been no limitations placed on the researchers by Soundtrap, other than ensuring that our reporting of the data does not violate securities and exchange regulations in the United States that prevent the disclosure of internal company information that shareholders do not have access to. In our analysis below, explicit daily new user rates have been removed upon request from Spotify-Soundtrap's parent company-and are instead displayed using arbitrary units. This allowed the researchers to conduct our analyses without violating these regulations. Finally, there is no financial relationship between the researchers and Soundtrap, other than some of the researchers being users on the Soundtrap platform.

Results

This study investigated the use of Soundtrap during the COVID-19 pandemic by examining educational account data in the years before and during the onset of the pandemic. This examination consisted of three layers of analysis, beginning with an exploratory data analysis ( Myatt, 2007), followed by a changepoint analysis ( Hinkley, 1970), and finally developing and testing a predictive model using a SARIMA model ( Brockwell & Davis, 2016).

Exploratory data analysis

For the initial exploratory data analysis, a plot of daily new users was generated for educational users in the United States. This time series spans from January 31, 2015, to January 31, 2021, and uses a 7-day moving average (MA). Visual analysis of the daily new users plot ( Figure 1(a) ) shows a regular time series from January 31, 2015, through March 2020. This first segment demonstrates consistent trend and seasonality corresponding to school semesters. The trend is seemingly interrupted in March, when there is a sudden change in mean, while the semester seasonality persists.

Before determining the precise changepoint, and to further explore the data, we examined the data for stationarity. A Llung-Box test demonstrated significant nonstationarity (χ ² = 60,633, p < .001). With the data determined to be nonstationary, we differenced the time series to produce a stationary plot. Differencing a time series removes any trend and seasonal effects, creating a time series that shows the variances of consecutive values. This demonstrated the extent that daily values deviated from a stationary (i.e., detrended and deseasoned) plot. To demonstrate the distance of each data point from the mean, this differenced time series was normalized and displayed using standard deviations. This normalized time series ( Figure 1(b) ) demonstrated the extent that data beginning around March 2020 deviated from normal, at times exceeding five standard deviations.

Changepoint detection

Although our visual analysis demonstrated a high level of confidence that a changepoint occurred in March 2020, we wanted to select a precise changepoint for our SARIMA modeling. We selected a changepoint detection method that could detect multiple changepoints, if any were present. The Pruned Exact Linear Time (PELT) method was developed to detect changepoints in large data sets, like genomes, where accurate detection is desired without a loss in computational time ( Killick et al., 2012). The PELT method tests for various combinations of changepoints, referred to as segmentations, looking for the combination with the least cost function. Research into the accuracy of the PELT method has demonstrated that it is comparable with the At Most One Change (AMOC) method for single changepoint detection and Binary Segmentation for multiple changepoint locations ( Killick & Eckley, 2014; van den Burg & Williams, 2020).

With our data, the PELT method produced a matrix of 19 segmentation combinations that included 30 possible total changepoints. Every segmentation had changepoint clusters in March 2020. Because the minimum segment length in our PELT test was set to 1 week, March 16, March 23, and March 30, 2020, were the most commonly identified changepoints. Of the 18 most conservative segmentations, there were no changepoints identified prior to March 16, 2020. This indicated a dramatic shift in mean occurring sometime in middle to late March. The most conservative segmentation identified only one changepoint on March 23, 2020 ( Figure 2(a) ).

The second most conservative segmentation included three changepoints, at March 23, May 15, and August 24 ( Figure 2(b) ). However, from this plot, it is clear that these additional changepoints are correlated to seasonality, with a dip during the summer months. Because the function of differencing expects annual trends to be highly correlated, the scale of the anomalous findings after March 23, 2020, causes additional changepoints at the beginning and end of the semesters to be identified by the PELT test. Therefore, we selected the single changepoint segmentation as the most appropriate representation of change in mean.

To confirm this choice and further pinpoint an accurate changepoint, we ran an additional changepoint test using the AMOC method. Research has indicated this method is slightly more accurate than PELT, if it has already been determined that there is a single changepoint ( van den Burg & Williams, 2020). Results of the changepoint test using the AMOC method demonstrated a changepoint on March 17, 2020. This result corroborated the results of the PELT test and reflects the experiences of many students and teachers who were suddenly moved to online learning around this time ( Smith, 2020).

Forecast model

With the changepoint identified as March 17, 2020, we created a forecast model based on the first time-series segment from January 31, 2016, until March 17, 2020. These pre-COVID training data were used to create a predictive model of new daily users to the platform. Using this model, we were able to forecast what new user rates might have been after March 17, 2020, and determine how anomalous the daily user rates during COVID were.

For our forecast, we selected the Seasonal Autoregressive Integrated Moving Average with exogenous factors (SARIMAX) model. Like all ARMA models, SARIMAX consists of an autoregressive (AR) and an MA component. The former regresses the model based on its prior lagged values, and the latter incorporates prior error terms to create an MA. Figuratively speaking, the AR component creates a short-term memory based on immediate past results, while the MA component creates a longer-term memory based on the accumulated errors of past results. Put together, ARMA models are useful in forecasting future results based on prior events. ARMA models are commonly used forecasting models in economics and physical sciences and have recently been used to investigate the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic ( Auger et al., 2020).

The SARIMAX model in the present study has three elements added to the simpler ARMA model. The first, which is shared by all ARIMA models, is an integrated function (I) that incorporates a differencing step for nonstationary time series. This was necessary to account for our time series' nonstationarity. In addition, SARIMAX also incorporates a seasonal function (S) by reproducing the three AR, I, and MA functions, but according to the time series' seasonal element.

In the present study, we began by using SARIMA in our forecast. However, because of the complex seasonality of the data as evidenced by the peaks and troughs correlated to academic semesters, we decided to instead use a SARIMAX model for greater accuracy ( Arunraj & Ahrens, 2015; Manigandan et al., 2021; Vagropoulos et al., 2016). SARIMAX models allow for the inclusion of additional exogenous elements (X) into the model. These elements may be any other function or variable that increases model accuracy. In our SARIMAX model, we created a Fourier function consisting of two sine and cosine pairs, one with a once-per-year cycle, and another with a twice-per-year cycle corresponding with academic semesters. Visual and statistical analysis demonstrated that adding this Fourier function created a model that was more accurate to the pre-COVID data than the SARIMA model alone. Graphs of the SARIMAX model's residuals and residual distribution from the pre-COVID training data demonstrated Gaussian residuals that were normally distributed around zero and with minimal skew ( Figure 3 ).

With the model created, we turned to examine the ability of the model to predict new users during COVID. Visual analysis already demonstrated a large shift in March 2020, with new users during COVID exceeding five standard deviations from normal. In addition, we detected a change in mean on March 17, 2020.

Although our model was successful in accurately describing new users in the pre-COVID training data, we expected it to perform poorly with the COVID test data. Results of the forecast demonstrated the SARIMAX model (2,1,2) (1,0,1,12) was unable to accurately account for the number of new users during COVID, with the rate of new users far exceeding the model's confidence interval of 95% ( Figure 4 ).

Summary

Exploratory data analysis showed a sudden uptick in Soundtrap users in March 2020. When detrended, deseasoned, and normalized, this increase represented a shift that was at times more than five standard deviations above normal. Put simply, Soundtrap's increase in users beginning in March 2020 was highly abnormal. To confirm if and when a change had occurred, we conducted a changepoint analysis. Results from the PELT changepoint method demonstrated a cluster of segmentations that included dates in the middle of March. An additional AMOC examination identified March 17, 2020, as the most likely single changepoint.

To further examine how anomalous data after March 17, 2020, were, we created a SARIMAX forecasting model to predict what daily new user rates would have been after March 17, 2020, using the previous time-series segment as our training data. Using a SARIMAX model (2,1,2) (1,0,1,12), we included an exogenous Fourier function to more accurately simulate the time series' complex seasonality based on academic semesters. The model performed very well against the pre-COVID training data, but exceptionally poorly using the COVID test data.

Across our three phases of analysis, there was overwhelming evidence that a sudden and drastic shift occurred within Soundtrap's educational user base in the United States around March 17, 2020. This shift occurred alongside sudden and drastic changes to K-12 education in the United States following the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic. Although causation cannot be ascribed with the present study's descriptive design, the authors are confident in attributing this increase to the COVID-19 pandemic based on a facial claim to validity.

Implications for music education

The data collected and analyzed in this study show the rate at which new Soundtrap educational accounts were created before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. As discussed previously, we believe it is important to verify and measure the extent of this increase for historical record. While DAWs have become more commonplace in school music programs over the past decade ( bell, 2015a), the drastic increase in the use of DAWs at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic presents interesting challenges and possibilities for the music education field, especially to those working in preservice music teacher education and creators of music curriculum and content standards. At the start of the pandemic, DAWs moved from being used primarily in specialist music technology and production classes, to more widespread adoption by music teachers of all content area specialties, including large ensembles and general music ( Cayari, 2021).

This research team did not have access to data demonstrating exactly what activities teachers and students undertook with their Soundtrap accounts (e.g., songwriting, composition, recording vocal or instrumental parts for virtual ensembles). Similarly, the data do not provide insights into sustained curricular integration of Soundtrap by teachers or continued engagement on the part of students after the initial influx of account creations in 2020. There is a need for future research to determine the extent to which music teachers and their students continued to use Soundtrap once in-person instruction resumed. Should future research show that there has been continued engagement with Soundtrap and other DAWs coming out of the pandemic, it would strengthen the case for the incorporation of more DAW-based training in preservice music teacher education ( Bauer & Dammers, 2016).

Another implication of this research for music educators is the need to explore equity and access when it comes to the use of DAWs. Although DAWs have become increasingly user-friendly, and Soundtrap is accessible via a range of hardware devices, including tablets and smartphones, utilizing the platform requires a level of access to technology and funding not available to all students. This is especially salient, for instance, in rural or urban schools that tend to be less well funded in comparison with suburban schools in the United States, and in cases where students do not have access to resources of time or technology at home ( Catalano et al., 2021). The School District of Philadelphia, for example, banned teachers from requiring students to work remotely or grading virtual participation during the remote-instruction period of the pandemic as not all students had equal access to technology ( Mezzacappa & Wolfman-Arent, 2020). While DAWs and other digital technological solutions offer exciting opportunities that can be democratizing to an extent, it is important to bear in mind local and individual circumstances that prevent technologies from providing a panacea.

This study demonstrated that, during and following the transition to internet-based music teaching and learning during the COVID-19 pandemic, many music educators turned to Soundtrap to assist them in facilitating music learning activities. Time will tell how much of this creative and technology-based activity will carry over in the years to come, now that, as of fall 2022, almost all schools have returned to in-person instruction. Will the affordances provided by DAWs such as Soundtrap be compelling enough to attract music educators who might seek to return to "normal" in their music programs? As more user data become available from Soundtrap, it will become clearer whether the COVID-19 pandemic was a tipping point for the use of DAWs in music education or merely a life raft until such a time as music educators could return to business as usual.

Emerging music education research

As digital platforms such as Soundtrap proliferate and come to occupy greater space in society, data collected by them are able to help researchers answer previously unanswerable questions ( Rudder, 2014). The present study incorporated machine-learning methods that are novel to music education, a research field typified by educational psychology and its contingent methods ( Colwell & Webster, 2011; Yarbrough, 2002). As the educational sphere-including music education-becomes more digitized, there is an opportunity to ask new questions of the abundance of available data, or to ask old questions in new ways, leading to new understanding. As an example, previous research regarding musical preferences has been conducted using smaller scale studies observing students' behaviors ( LeBlanc, 1979). Online platforms like Soundtrap, on the contrary, are able to offer data on students' preferences at a scale in the millions. By using sophisticated machine-learning models, the relationships between these vast data can be further examined for complex patterns.

We can also ask questions regarding students' creative behaviors and processes using data collection methods that were previously unfathomable. Whereas these questions would have previously required smaller scale-observations of in-person learning episodes, now they can be asked of an enormous swath of music learners across age groups and geography, without the limitations of an observer inside a single classroom. Because platforms like Soundtrap are both the instruments for learning and contain the products and processes of this learning, students' creative behaviors are automatically encoded as data. The creative output is entirely digitized, as is the user interface and process that led to students' creative output. The limitation, then, is not the availability of data, but the creation of analytical methods that appropriately use this wealth of data to draw valid and useful conclusions for music learning. As practices and practitioners in our field move further into digital spaces, we will need to develop new research methodologies that respond to these new spaces and attend to the different ways music-making and learning are taking place. One possible response to this opportunity, as the authorship of this article demonstrates, is a collaboration between music education researchers and data analysts, data scientists, and individuals in other allied fields to ensure the data are being appropriately interrogated.

Finally, while the present study uses machine learning to describe a phenomenon within music education, machine learning and artificial intelligence are increasingly being used as creative tools within music learning. Soundtrap, for example, integrates a recommendation system for selecting loops based on the elements a student has already added to their project. Rowe et al. (2016) describe an improvisation companion for elementary-aged students that can learn their musical vernacular and create novel responses based on a student's musical call. The musicians and scientists Carré and Pachet have developed what they call a flow machine, which is able to translate musical elements from one piece or body of music into another. This allows users to, for example, autonomously create a novel melody based on the work of The Beatles that is bespoke to a user's chord progression, rhythm, accompaniment, or some other musical parameter ( Avdeeff, 2019; Pachet et al., 2021). As these artificial intelligence tools become more integrated within music learning tools, our field will need to begin considering their educational purposes and effects.

Author biographies

David H Knapp is an Assistant Professor of Music Education at Syracuse University, where he teaches modern band, music technology, steel band, and philosophy of music education. His research has been published in the International Journal of Community Music, General Music Today, Journal of Popular Music Education, Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, and Music Education Research.

Bryan Powell is an Assistant Professor of Music Education/Music Technology at Montclair State University. Bryan is the founding co-editor of Journal of Popular Music Education, author of Popular Music Pedagogies (Routledge), and Executive Director of the Association for Popular Music Education. Bryan is the immediate past Chair for the NAfME Popular Music Education SRIG.

Gareth D Smith is Assistant Professor of Music, Music Education at Boston University. Gareth plays drums with Stephen Wheel, Dirty Blond and Black Light Bastards. His research interests include drumming, popular music education and sociology of music education. His latest book is A Philosophy of Playing Drum Kit: Magical Nexus.

John C Coggiola is a Dual Associate Professor and Chair of Music Education in the College of Visual and Performing Arts and the School of Education at Syracuse University. Dr. Coggiola is also the Director of Jazz Studies in the Setnor School of Music. Coggiola's research focuses on aesthetic response to jazz music and is published in The Journal of Research in Music Education, The Bulletin of The Council for Research in Music Education, Contributions to Music Education, The International Association of Jazz Educators Jazz Research Proceedings Yearbook, and The Instrumentalist.

Matthew Kelsey received his Ph. D. in experimental high energy particle physics at the Large Hadron Collider in 2018 from Syracuse University. He held two postdoctoral fellowships at both Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory and Wayne State University, where his research focused on experimental high energy particle and nuclear physics at the Relativistic Heavy-Ion Collider until 2022. Now, Matthew is a data scientist at Ford Motor Company, where he specializes in machine learning/AI techniques in the field of vehicle prognostics.

Footnotes

The author(s) declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: Because the analysis contained in this paper is based on access to data provided by a private entity, it is possible that as authors our analysis might be skewed to maintain access to these private data. This is discussed in the text of the article so that the reader may consider.

Funding: The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iDs: David H Knapp https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2955-2354

Bryan Powell https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1907-8900

John C Coggiola https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1022-6225

Contributor Information

David H Knapp, Syracuse University, USA.

Bryan Powell, Montclair State University, USA.

Gareth D Smith, Boston University, USA.

John C Coggiola, Syracuse University, USA.

Matthew Kelsey, Wayne State University, USA.

References

Anders T. (2021). On modelling harmony with constraint programming for algorithmic composition including a model of Schoenberg's theory of harmony. In Miranda E. R. (Ed.), Handbook of artificial intelligence for music: Foundations, advanced approaches, and developments for creativity (pp. 283-326). Springer. 10.1007/978-3-030-72116-9_11 [[CrossRef] Google Scholar]

Auger K. A., Shah S. S., Richardson T., Hartley D., Hall M., Warniment A., . . .Thomson J. E. (2020). Association between statewide school closure and COVID-19 incidence and mortality in the US. JAMA, 324(9), 859-870. 10.1001/jama.2020.14348 [[PubMed] [CrossRef] PMC free article] [Google Scholar]

Benedict C. (2010). Methods and approaches. In Abeles H. F., Custodero L. (Eds.), Critical issues in music education: Contemporary theory and practice (pp. 194-214). Oxford University Press. 10.1017/S0265051711000428 [[CrossRef] Google Scholar]

Myatt G. J. (2007). Making sense of data: A practical guide to exploratory data analysis and data mining. Wiley-Interscience. 10.1002/0470101024 [[CrossRef] Google Scholar]

Rosen D., Schmidt E. M., Kim Y. E. (2013, [June). Utilizing music technology as a model for creativity development in K-12 education [Conference session]. Proceedings of the 9th ACM Conference on Creativity & Cognition (pp. 341-344). 10.1145/2466627.2466670 [CrossRef] Google Scholar]

Rudder C. (2014). Dataclysm: Love, sex, race, and identity-What our online lives tell us about our offline selves. Crown. [Google Scholar]

Vagropoulos S. I., Chouliaras G. I., Kardakos E. G., Simoglou C. K., Bakirtzis A. G. (2016). Comparison of SARIMAX, SARIMA, modified SARIMA and ANN-based models for short-term PV generation forecasting [Paper presentation]. 2016 IEEE International Energy Conference. 10.1109/ENERGYCON.2016.7514029 [[CrossRef] Google Scholar]

Yarbrough C. (2002). The first 50 years of the [Journal of Research in Music Education: A content analysis. Journal of Research in Music Education, 50(4), 276-279. 10.2307/3345354 [CrossRef] Google Scholar]

Articles from Research Studies in Music Education are provided here courtesy of SAGE Publications

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Soundtrap usage during COVID-19: A machine-learning approach to assess the effects of the pandemic on online music learning

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The COVID-19 pandemic prompted a sudden rethinking of how music was taught and learned. Prior to the pandemic, the web-based digital audio workstation Soundtrap emerged as a leading platform for creating music online. The present study examined the growth ...