Music City live music venue

Connecting through Music

Design, Music, and Sense of Community

Liisa Pangborn

Master of Arts in Interior Design Washington State University

Connecting through Music

Design, Music, and Sense of Community COMMITTEE: MATT MELCHER, CHAIR KATHLEEN RYAN ROBERT SPITTAL

LIISA PANGBORN Master of Arts in Interior Design, Non-Thesis project Interdisciplinary Design Institute, Washington State University, Spokane, WA May 5, 2010

2

CONTENTS 4

Abstract

5

Introduction

6

Review of the Literature

7

Live music experience

8

Sense of community among audience members

9

Servicescape

11

Concert hall design

12

Research Gap

12

Justification

13

Methodology

14

Analysis

15

Results and Discussion

17

Design Guidelines

17

Project Description

17

Design Program

18

Site

19

Design Solutions

32

Limitations and Future research

32

Summary

33

References

36

Appendix I: Survey questions

36

Appendix II: Survey responses

44

Appendix III: Programming matrix

45

Appendix IV: Process work

3

ABSTRACT This study explores the experience of live music, the phenomenon of sense of community among audience members, and the potential impact of interior design on that phenomenon. A gap in the research of live music venue design led to the research question how can the design of an independent live music venue encourage a sense of community among audience members, between audience members and artists, and audience members to the community at large?

The purpose of the study is to understand the experience of live music venues and the relationship to design and social interaction, then use design to strengthen those relationships.

In order to examine the issues of community in live music venues a qualitative methodological approach is used consisting of researching the existing literature, a survey, and a design investigation. The result is a list of design considerations, tested here in a design project.

Figure 1 types of social connections in the live music experience 4

INTRODUCTION Live music venues are unique spaces because of the opportunity for two distinct types of personal connections to take place (Figure 1). First, there is the live music performance.

This can establish a bond between the performer and audience.

Second, in the time when the music is not being performed, there is a chance for connections among audience members.

Music venues can act as social spaces providing like minded people a place to interact. They can offer a place to sustain existing social networks and the prospect of new networks developing (Gehl, 1980). One of the challenges in supporting both types of connections is that the needs of one activity may be at odds with the other, such as requiring different lighting, sound conditions, or spatial adjacencies (Bitner, 1992).

This study addresses the following research question: How can the design of an independent live music venue encourage a sense of community among audience members, between audience to artist, and the audience to the community at large?

In order to answer the research question an understanding of what impacts the live music audiences’ sense of community is required. How can sense of community be supported through design of the built environment?

A review of the literature, a survey experiment, and a design project explore how to meet the needs of the two conditions (the live music performance, and the social connections among audience members) in design and encourage the sense of community in each. This led to a list of design guidelines that is responsive to the entire live music experience by supporting the connections between people. Ultimately a stronger sense of community could be experienced as a result of using the guidelines in the design process, which has implications for things such as civic behavior and ecologically responsible behavior (Long & Perkins, 2007).

axon of the proposed design 5

REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE A review of the relevant literature uncovers how the experience of live music creates a bond between the audience and performer and unifies the audience, how sense of

LIVE MUSIC EXPERIENCE Bond with performer

Musicians’ work environment Concert Hall Design

community research applies to musical communities, and the physical environment of live music venues including traditional concert hall design.

Membership Shared emotional experience

VENUE DESIGN

SENSE OF COMMUNITY RESEARCH Social networks

Environment and Behavior research, Proxemics Social interaction

SERVICESCAPE FRAMEWORK Built environment

research frameworks in the literature review 6

LIVE MUSIC EXPERIENCE In the literature on the experience of music in space, music is most commonly studied as a component of the overall environment for its impact on consumer behavior (Gueguen, Jacob, Le Guellec, Morineau, & Lourel, 2008; Jacob, 2006; North, Hargreaves, & McKendrick, 2000; Oakes & North, 2007).

However this study regards space where music is the pursuit, not a background element. More importantly the study focus is on live music performance, described as, “playing live, that the creation of the music is co-temporal and co-spatial with the audience’s presence” (Filimowicz, 2008).

Music is a universal part of the human experience; a form of communication common to all cultures and across time.

Historically music has been available in live performances, then through removed experiences like radio, and more recently in various forms of recordings. Now in an age of digital reproduction one can listen to music anywhere, anytime and often for free. Yet curiously the abundance of downloads and declining record sales have also seen a rise in live performances (Black, Fox, & Kochanowski, 2007; Collins, 2008; Smith, 2009).

The present visibility and profitability of live performances suggests that live music offers us something that recorded music cannot - a social connection.

of listeners around you” (p 68). The emotional experience is heightened by this joint participation, which can then form a connection among audience members as part of a cohesive sum.

The bond with the performer is another significant aspect unique to live performances. Schutz (1951) describes the social relationship between performer and listener as a common experience of living simultaneously in time. “Performer and listener are “tuned-in” to one another, are living together through the same flux, are growing older together while the musical process lasts” (p 93). Through this an illusory bond is formed with the performer (Auslander, 1998). Horowitz (2009) further explains, “The empathy, the very sweat of the musicians, are elements that the audience can identify with and share with the musicians” (p 10). The importance of the audience relationship with the performer is stressed by Kubacki (2007), “Music might be what often brings customers into a pub or club (Kubacki et al, 2007), but it will not keep them there for long or make them come back if the musicians do not connect with the audience” (p 409). The connection between artist and audience during live music performances is a fundamental piece of building a sense of community.

Live music performances create a shared experience and an occasion for a sense of community to form among the audience as part of a whole. Cochrane (2009) writes that during rock concerts “the opportunity for music to generate a deep sense of community in an audience becomes most apparent” (p 70). This is accomplished in part by the occurrence of joint attention, which is defined as when two or more people are mutually aware that both are attending to some object in the environment (Cochrane, 2009). This makes listening to music as a group very different from listening individually. The awareness of others’ reactions, and monitoring one’s own reactions, alters the listening experience fundamentally.

Music has an especially high potential for uniting listeners in experience because music is so richly expressive (Cochrane, 2009). To be involved with the music is to “locate a source for the character of one’s inner life that is common to the thousands

7

SENSE OF COMMUNITY AMONG AUDIENCE MEMBERS Researchers have identified the psychological sense of community as an important part of the community psychology movement (Chavis, Hogge, & McMillan, 1986). Sense of community is defined as “a feeling that members have of belonging, a feeling that members matter to one another and to the group, and a shared faith that members’ needs will be met through their commitment to be together” (McMillan & Chavis, 1986). Four main components of sense of community are: membership, influence, integration and fulfillment of needs, and a shared emotional connection. Sense of community can apply to both territorial communities, like neighborhoods, and to relational communities such as a common interest in music.

The strongest links between live music and sense of community research can be seen in the elements of membership and shared emotional connection.

essential components of the live music experience with design implications, so what is known about the physical environment of live music venues?

Membership is the feeling of belonging to a group and is defined by the boundaries of those who belong and those who don’t (McMillan & Chavis, 1986). Live music performances create what Schutz (1951) describes as “a tuning in relationship by which the “I” and “Thou” are experienced by both participants as a “We” (p 79), creating a sense of belonging. Horowitz (2009) writes of two ways live music creates membership boundaries: First it distinguishes attendees from non-attendees. Second it fuses those in attendance as an exclusive group, “a temporary cluster of young people going to a nightclub to see Miles Davis or Yo Yo Ma in that very activity distinguish themselves from all other passing ‘communities’” (p 13).

Shared emotional connection refers to the quantity and quality of social interaction, which leads to the formation of groups with common histories who partake in shared events (McMillan & Chavis, 1986). The social interaction between audience members, particularly when the music is not playing, is critical for the basis of extended interactions. These interactions lay the foundation for shared emotional history to take place, as well as to be discovered. For instance, on several occasions during data collection it came up that the researcher and the participant had been to the same show. This allowed for an immediate connection because we had a shared history. The connection to the performer and the audience community are

potential connections in live music performances 8

SERVICESCAPE There is limited literature available on the design of music venues specifically; however the literature on general service environments can be seen as applicable. Service environments are described by Bitner (1992) as places where “the service is generally produced and consumed simultaneously, the consumer is ‘in the factory’, often experiencing the total service within the firms physical facility” (p. 57). Live music venues are considered service environments as they provide a service,

live music, which is consumed on location without a take away product. The value of the physical setting has particular importance in experiential service environments, such as music venues, because of the amount of time spent in the physical surroundings engaging in the service (Arnould and Price, 1993). A theoretical framework developed by Bitner (1992) includes the service environment’s tangible (building, fixtures, and decorations) and intangible (temperature, scent, music)

Figure 2 (Bitner, 1992) 9

features (Figure 2). The framework is based in environmental psychology research and ties together literature in marketing, organizational behavior, ergonomics, proxemics, and design.

Figure 2 summarizes the environmental design elements we can control, such as space layout, and the behavior we hope to influence, social interaction between and among customers and employees.

A definition of servicescape synthesized from the literature by researchers Ezeh and Harris (2007) is, “the design of the physical environment (with or without customer input) housing the service encounter, which elicits internal reactions from customers leading to the display of approach or avoidance behaviors” (p 61). Thus the service environment is purposefully built to induce a desired response from patrons. This is valuable because it connects the design of the environment to the consumer experience and resulting behavior.

The servicescape has further effects when considering employees, such as the performing musicians, who are in the servicescape longer than customers, and the impact on the quality of their interactions (Parish, Berry, & Lam, 2008).

Consequently informed servicescape design is necessary for bringing out the desired responses and resulting behaviors in patrons and employees.

In addition to influencing individual behavior, the servicescape is particularly significant for its impact on social interaction. This influence of the physical environment on conduct has been examined in the environment behavior research literature. Bitner cites research by Holahan (1982) that show behaviors such as small group interaction, friendship formation, participation, aggression, withdrawal, and helping can all be influenced by environmental conditions. Research

by Festinger, Schachter, and Back (1950) found friendship formation to be influenced by functional distance rather than physical distance, measured by the number of passive contacts (casual or involuntary meetings) that position and design can encourage, such as common paths from the residences to parking areas. Whyte (1980) in observing a public plaza

10

with seating and tables in close proximity illustrates how the design encouraged interaction, “…people were compressed into meeting one another, waiting in line or weaving their way through tables. I’ve never seen so many people striking up conversations and introducing people” (p 85).

Lang (1980) writes of architectural affordance, the ways to which the environment allows human occupants to act or affords them opportunities to do so, but then it depends on the individual to do so. Canter and Stringer (1975) agree; “A third process of interaction is the degree to which the environment encourages or inhibits interactions between individuals” (p 10).

“Research suggests that the servicescape influences the nature of social interactions between and among customers and employees” affirms Bitner (p 61). As designers we can facilitate a desired behavior or inhibit it.

CONCERT HALL DESIGN A review of concert hall design revealed what shapes the design of buildings intended for music performance, and what is applicable in the design of less formal listening spaces. The common feature of all buildings for the arts is the core activity of the live performance and the reciprocal experience between audience and performer (Appleton, 2008). Traditional concert hall design techniques are analyzed and adapted for the current music needs of this project. The historical precedent is used of how to set up the listening experience and how to set audience behavior expectations during the music.

In Concert Halls and Opera Houses (2004), Beranek illustrates the far reaching impact of good design, “The relationship between good acoustics and good seasons is symbiotic, as demonstrated above: the best performers will gravitate to the best halls because that acoustic enhances their sound. The combination produces the excellent performances that leave listeners profoundly happy” (p 17). Similar to the claims in the servicescape literature, good-quality halls result in happy performers, which result in enjoyable performances and happy listeners.

A study of concert halls revealed that use, symphony vs.

Opera, and audience capacity control the design (Beranek, 1962). Several elements were consistently found in the design of traditional concert halls: • Shoe box proportions: tall, long and narrow, double cube volume • Entry sequence: public lobbies, move into auditorium • Band shell: to reflect sound from the stage and help musicians hear each other • Dropped acoustical panels: reflect sound to the rear and center of the auditorium • Shallow balconies: three-sided balcony or horse shoe shape maximizes views • Acoustical finishes: thick plaster shell, wood veneers, reflective and absorptive material balance • Raked (slanted) floor and seating: using the principal Scott Russell’s isacoustic curve for lines of sound and lines of sight (Forsyth, 1985).

• Proscenium stage: division between front of house and back of house • Irregular surfaces: columns, coffered ceiling, and niches to diffuse sound

Experimental Media and Performing Arts Center, New York 11

RESEARCH GAP

JUSTIFICATION

According to the literature live music can create a sense of community through the bond between artist and audience, and among the audience members as a part of something larger than themselves. Social interaction can initiate and sustain the audience sense of community among each other. The physical environment of live music venues can impact user behavior and social interaction. Therefore the sense of community can be strengthened by designing the physical environment to support the experience of live music and positive social interaction.

Fostering a sense of community experienced by patrons of live music is valuable on many levels. People form bonds to people and places and respond by and taking better care of them (Stedman, 2002). The implications of this can be seen in everything from littering and ecologically responsible behavior (Long & Perkins, 2007), to civic behavior (Zacks, 2002), and longer residencies.

What are the physical design elements that can influence sense of community in a servicescape setting? There is limited research in this area. Bitner (1992) called attention to the gap in the research in the seminal servicescape article stating, “There is a surprising lack of empirical research or theoretically based frameworks addressing the role of physical surroundings in consumption settings” (p 57). A 2007 review of servicescape literature by Ezeh and Harris confirmed this disparity is still an issue.

The problem is that both environmental design and research focus on performance or marketing goals, but not the social implications. In a study of the audience experience at chamber music festivals, Pitts (2005) recognized that the “discussion of auditoria design is generally preoccupied with acoustics, paying little attention to the social effects of being in a shared listening space” (p 261). Other potential social spaces have also received little attention in the literature, stating that architecture for music performance “makes little mention of the experience of listeners, and none at all of the ‘non-listening’ spaces within concert halls—the bars, foyers, and ticket queues where opinions about the music and its performance might be shared” (p 262). In a study of festival listener satisfaction, Morgan (2006) found “The main event is often only a pretext for the real purpose, which is to enjoy the company of friends.

Places to meet before and chill-out afterwards are vital to the experience”, an argument for these spaces to be incorporated in the music venue (p 312). There is a gap in the literature on performance spaces addressing the audience experience and potential for sense of community, missing an opportunity to design socially conducive spaces.

12

Earl (2001) argues that “much of the demand for live music should be understood as something other than a demand for the music itself”, such as an existential need (p 354). He addresses this communal side of live music and claims that is comparable to participation in a ritual. It allows for personal expression and for what Ehrenreich (2007) describes as “collective joy”.

Experiencing live music as a community is an activity that fulfills an ancient need for collective ecstasy. Design is the vehicle to experience sense of community through live music, so it is vital to understand its impact.

METHODOLOGY The literature review revealed that live music can create a sense of community among listeners. A survey was developed in order to confirm the literature and to better understand the sense of community in independent live music venues directly from the participants, specific to a small venue setting.

Goodsell (1988) supports this approach to research where “we study on their own terms the meanings derived by present-day occupants of actual environments. This should be done firsthand, open-ended, and extensively� (p 46).

Data was collected through surveys consisting of open-ended questions (Appendix 1). Thirty surveys were distributed on site during live music events at several independent Spokane area venues; the Empyrean Coffee house, the Service Station, Art, Music and More, and Caterina Winery. The Empyrean Coffee House is a small scale, adaptive reuse building, with a residential feel and furnishings. The Service Station is a medium scale venue in new construction, with a more commercial atmosphere. Art, Music and More is a small, non-profit run gallery space for performances with no additional services like food or beverages. Caterina Winery is also in an adaptive reuse building, with a combination wine tasting room and a small performance space.

Using a convenience sampling method, the thirty participants were a sample of twenty show attendees and ten musicians.

Patrons of live music tend to follow the bands, not the venue, so it was important to visit venues with various types of performances to observe a representative sample of patrons (Schippers, 2002). The music genres ranged from indie rock to blue grass. Musicians responding to the survey may have particular insight compared to customers from the amount of time spent performing. This will provide information about how participants experience live music from multiple perspectives.

SERVICE STATION

EMPYREAN COFFEE HOUSE

ART, MUSIC, AND MORE

CATERINA WINERY music venue survey sites 13

ANALYSIS Content analysis was used to analyze the data in several steps by looking at the gathered responses to see what main themes emerge, and the specific aspects of each identified the underlying issues (Waxman, 2006; Zeisel, 2006). First, all of the responses from the surveys were grouped together by question.

Since the questions were open-ended there were often three or four components to each response, so then each reply was broken down into its multiple parts. Next, the response parts were grouped according to the overall issue they addressed, such as all the replies that mentioned specific physical features of a venue or responses that dealt with sound quality. There was considerable consensus in the survey responses overall, and these categories emerged out of the over arching issues; social factors, music, musicians, venue physical factors, and other.

Zeisel (2006) found that quotations describing the relationships between people were useful for design decisions about how people, objects and places relate to one another. Evaluation of the identified needs and the potential design responses lead the design guidelines.

PARTICIPANTS:

MALE: 18, FEMALE: 12 AGE RANGE: 18-34 AVERAGE AGE: 22.2 MEDIAN AGE: 21 SPOKANE RESIDENTS: 22 PERFORMING MUSICIANS: 10

RESPONSE CATEGORIES

SOCIAL FACTORS: friends; socializing; meet new people MUSIC: live vs. recorded; see what’s new in music MUSICIANS: support musicians; see music unique to band VENUE PHYSICAL FACTORS: atmosphere OTHER: staff; business policies; fun

14

survey response:

“Community. I suppose I could just dance around to a CD at home but there’s something about connecting with others that make and like the same music as I do.”

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION The first question asking “why do you go see live music” is intended to discover what people want to accomplish in seeing live music, then how the design can help them accomplish that. In this case music and musician appreciation are the most common reported motivating reasons to see live music, so the importance of a physical environment that facilitates the bond between artist and audience is reinforced. Social factors play a part as a motivating force as well. Later questions further reveal how the social climate influences the experience, so understanding how the physical environment can positively impact social behavior is crucial.

The impact of the venue design is revealed in the next question of how the venue influences the decision to see live music; only three out of thirty participants responded that the desire to see the music made the physical environment irrelevant. Many factors with design implications were identified such as size, comfort aspects like seating and floor finish, sound quality, and an overall inviting atmosphere. A descriptor that was repeated throughout the survey was “comfortable”. In reference to the social atmosphere it could mean the ease of casual interaction, which is impacted by proxemics and the distance the human voice carries (Hall, 1969). Another factor is the ability to circulate easily without feeling “on display”, a function of the spatial layout and points of focused attention.

For instance, in the Empyrean the entrance to the performance space is directly beside the stage, actually higher than the stage, so all the occupants are aware of the comings and goings in the space which could be uncomfortable due to the unwanted attention (Augustin, 2009). In the responses to this question the only data regarding location within the city are mentioned, which will be used to inform the site selection of the project.

Almost all the participants reported feeling connected to other people at the show. The common interest in music was the most often cited contributing factor. The crowd response to the music was the highest reported social factor; if there is a shared reaction then a connection is more likely. How could the physical environment help make people comfortable expressing themselves to the music, thereby contributing to the connection? Design factors include the overall atmosphere and an inviting environment, venue size, space for dancing and seating.

“When musicians are in an environment that lets them do whatever it is that they do, then that’s a good venue,” wrote one participant. How can the design of the physical environment support the musician’s needs, so they can perform up to their ability? The survey results suggest that this will enhance the audience connection to the artist. The size of the venue can also affect the connection with musicians, from the actual physical closeness to the opportunity to meet and talk with musicians. Interaction with the artist is a unique feature of live music performances, especially in smaller venues, so there should be space for this in the design. Balancing the audience desire for interaction and musician need for privacy is an issue; artist green rooms can inhibit interaction with fans, keeping the musicians secluded.

The role of sense of community was explored next in the survey; the majority of participants find it positive to the experience to see people they know at shows, only three out of thirty responded that this did not matter. This suggests that the social component is an important part of the experience. How can the physical environment support the social element of the live music experience? Key elements include lighting, sound levels, and socializing spaces.

catagorized responses to question #7 15

A crowd, music, and a performer that is consistent with individual expectations was the most reported factor for creating a positive live music experience. A venue that has a “good” crowd could be interpreted as an environment that supports positive interactions, communicates behavior expectations, is comfortable for freedom of expression, and offers control or choice for the individual experience. Specific design factors reported include sound quality, atmosphere, cleanliness, visuals of the band, lights, seating, art displayed, and space for dancing and socializing. Appropriate size was an interesting response, which has implications for several factors like performance quality and crowd reaction. For instance, during a musician interview in the pilot study phase it was mentioned that the band would rather play a small venue that they can “pack out” rather than play in a larger space that feels empty. If the musicians’ perception of audience attendance can influence the performance, how can the design positively shape that perception?

The next question addressed special features of preferred music venues. The majority of venues reported are local, independent, and smaller in size. The Spokane area venues vary in their programming; some places only operate with a show (Big Dipper, Cretin hop), and some are open with other services but rely on live music for entertainment almost always or occasionally (Empyrean, Caterina winery, Service Station, Sunset Junction, and the Boulevard). The venues with more than one program far outnumber the other responses, which support the requirement for other amenities and activities available in a music venue. Important design features of the favorite venues reported include a defined space for the music performance allowing for various activities and choice in the experience, flexibility through multiple stages, and a balcony for different viewing levels. The entry sequence of the venues reported as favorites is also of interest. In a formula that echoes formal concert halls, it prepares patrons for the listening experience with the ritual of entry, ticket, beverage, and then live music to set up the experience.

When asked about what makes for a negative live music experience the power of the audience impact is clearly seen.

16

There was almost unanimous agreement in describing an undesirable crowd. The design of the environment which can positively influence the crowd perception and behavior would be most effective in contributing to a positive experience.

Sound quality and a supportive musician work environment are also valuable. The following design guidelines are a result of the literature review and survey experiment analysis to address issues impacting participants’ sense of community through design.

DESIGN GUIDELINES

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

1. Facilitate engagement between the audience and musicians during the performance and outside of it.

Design a live music venue in Spokane that supports the needs of both the performer and audience to encourage the connections between them in order to understand how design can support the experience of live music and strengthen the sense of community through design.

2. Support the musician’s needs to they can perform up to their potential.

3. Encourage social interaction among audience members.

4. Emphasize respect for the music and listening experience.

5. Allow the individual to choose their desired level of engagement and interaction by offering different options.

These design guidelines then formed the framework for the design problem.

Design Program The design program consists of spaces to support the two main activities: music performance and social interaction (Program matrix, Appendix III). The front stage program includes the performance space and auditorium for a 250 person capacity, social spaces such as a bar and seating area, amenities such as a kitchen, rest rooms, vertical circulation, and a controlled entrance. The backstage program includes loading and equipment storage, a performer space, employee break room, management office, and support spaces such as furniture storage.

17

SITE The project site at 1011 W 1st Avenue was chosen because of the location in the Davenport Arts District, an area of Spokane with a culture of live performance. The Fox Theater, Knitting Factory Concert House, and the Bing Crosby Theater are all within one block of the selected site. This project will contribute to the atmosphere of live performance by offering a different size and market than the other theaters and create synergy in the district. The building is located in a turn of the century block, with some areas undergoing revitalization. There is access to other night life to the East on 1st Ave, the main entrance to the building. The building is named the Music City building after the piano store that occupied it from 1962-2000.

Several influential site elements include the pedestrian traffic on 1st Ave, the 5’grade change from the front of the building to the alley, and the parking lot adjacent to the building alley for loading. Within the building the column grid running down the center of the space and the floor to floor height of 17’ are important design constraints.

Site: 1011 West 1st Avenue, Davenport Arts District 18

Downtown Spokane

DESIGN SOLUTION The design guidelines and research inform the design solutions through form, overall spatial organization and relationships, the user entry sequence, acoustical strategies, materials and textures, lighting, and circulation paths.

The overall organization of the space supports both connection and separation. There is a dedicated space for socializing and for music; informed by the theory diagram and findings from the survey. An initial organization decision was a result of 1st Ave access, which has neighboring night life, to orient the social space and entry sequence from there. The design uses curvilinear forms, which hold activity zones for music and socializing. Each radiates out from a center like sound waves, and the wave curves become a container for the opposite activity.

the theory diagram influenced the spatial organization 19

The mezzanine forms a mass in the space between the two activity zones. This acts like a filter, buffering the two activities while allowing for varying degrees of connectivity. Circulation flows around the curved forms and connections are encouraged through proximity, continuous lines, and blending floor levels.

The material finishes add acoustic benefits and visual texture to connect users to the place. The following design strategies from the research and literature review are used to realize the design guidelines.

1. ENTRY 2. BAR 3. SEATING AREA 4. SMALL STAGE 5. LEVEL 1 6. LEVEL 2 7. MEZZANINE 8. STAGE 9. LOADING ZONE 10. PERFORMER SPACE

20

FLOOR PLANS

7

5

6

2 4 10

8 9

1 3

Top: Mezzanine Plan Bottom: Main Floor Plan 21

GUIDELINE: FACILITATE ENGAGEMENT BETWEEN THE AUDIENCE AND MUSICIANS DURING THE PERFORMANCE AND OUTSIDE OF IT • In the performance space the right to see and hear well is most important for the audience and performer. “If the performers are put in a position where they cannot perform well, the implication is that their performance is that their performance is not worthy of better treatment” (Deasy & Lasswell, 1985). For performers, the right to have an audience that can see and hear well is vital.

• Isacoustic curve principals ensure sight lines and direct sound path to every listener (Forsyth, 1985). In other words, if each audience member can see the performer, they will also be able to hear them. This accomplished by the levels at different heights, the mezzanine, and raised steps opposite the stage to maximize sight lines. The raised drum set platform also increases sight lines to musicians.

• Proximity and intimacy are formed by the thrust stage and a balcony that wraps around on three sides. The thrust stage creates an increased sense of intimacy because the audience surrounds the performance on several sides (Brown, Fleissig, & Morrish, 1989). It also breaks down the boundary between performer and audience—producers and consumers.

Accessibility to the musicians is what survey responders value at small shows. The horseshoe shape is also reminiscent of the form of mezzanines in concert halls used for efficiency, by providing the most views for the area (Beranek, 1962).

• The open stage form, unlike a proscenium stage, in a fan shape is encircled by the audience which allows the performer to command the audience and for the performer to be seen against a backdrop by the audience (Appleton,

Main performance space: the band shell directs attention to the stage, announces what is going on in the space, and houses lights and equipment. Made of an acoustically transparent mesh, it has theatrical potential for projecting lights and images onto it.

22

2008). The fan shape also encourages flexibility by allowing the performers to move around and direct their performance anywhere along the curve.

• To improve communication between the audience and performers, bring them close together (Deasy & Lasswell, 1985). The height of the stage is the lowest that would still provide optimal views, but also let the audience up close be nearer eye-to-eye with the performer.

• Equipment steps for sound monitors and cables free up the stage for the performers and lessen the division between the audience by clearing the visual field. Also a safety benefit by removing tripping hazards.

• In the study of jazz, less formal clubs were reported to foster interaction between the musician and audience, and therefore connect them (Berliner, 2004). The atmosphere of this venue is less formal to facilitate engagement between the artist and audience.

• The smaller stage offers a place to interact with musicians outside the performance without disturbing it, and also provides merchandise space.

• Flexible lighting from both sides to illuminate the performers’ faces (Brown et al., 1989).

Stage from mezzanine: the fan form stage creates intimacy and proximity to audience, breaks down boundary between performer and audience.

23

GUIDELINE: SUPPORT THE MUSICIAN’S NEEDS TO THEY CAN PERFORM UP TO THEIR POTENTIAL • The literature and interviews with musicians brought attention to the need for a supportive work environment, such as privacy, hospitality, and something to do (Appleton, 2008;Raeburn, 1987). These are considered in the design of the stage, performer space, and spatial adjacencies to the stage, management office, and loading area.

• A secure place for storage is located near the stage, with movable panels for easier loading in.

• The stage is located near the parking lot for loading, taking advantage of the grade change so loading directly to the stage level, only 2’. A roll up loading door and a standard door provide access.

• A Cascade coil curtain can be drawn in front of the mezzanine to quickly change the visual perception of the space to accommodate a smaller crowd. This will support musicians in playing to an appropriate size crowd if they can’t fill a large room. It is practical enough to put into use often without demanding much set up time.

• The private performer space is homelike for touring musicians, with a private bathroom, space for eating, sleeping and entertainment. A communal kitchen offers a place to interact with venue staff, their social support.

• The sound booth is located in a central spot to ease communication with the sound engineer, but still leaves the more valuable real estate for the audience.

Mezzanine from stage: the mezzanine wraps the performance space on three sides for efficiency, by providing the most views for the area, and the horse shoe curve is reminiscent of concert hall design.

24

A cascade coil curtain quickly changes the perception of space without changing the acoustics, and is practical for everday use.

Viewing levels; the levels blur the boundary between the main floor and mezzanine, and maximize sight and sound lines to the stage 25

GUIDELINE: ENCOURAGE SOCIAL INTERACTION AMONG AUDIENCE MEMBERS • Increase the chances of encounter by providing greater opportunities and cause for social contact. Design for the possibilities of encounters: strategic sight lines, places for sojourn and intersections of articulated circulation routes (Hertzberger, 2002). In the seating area attention is diffused around the perimeter to direct lines of sight around.

• Eye contact: “To mix with other people, we need an

uninterrupted view of them and often we need to see each other’s eyes” (Augustin, 2009). The bar angle encourages eye contact across and the bar stools swivel for flexibility in interactions.

• Circulation routes are defined by the form, moving around the curves. Crossing paths of circulation to the performance space, mezzanine, bar and rest room increase chances for

Seating area: the continuous banquette blurs boundaries and allows for more fluid transitions between groups. The projection screen of the performance maintains connectivity to the performance without disturbing it.

26

interaction.

• Social interaction is influenced greatly by interpersonal distance. For example, three barstools was the maximum distance observed to initiate an encounter, any farther would require voices to be raised and drawing attention (Cavan, 1966). Designing places to interact within the social distances comfortable for interaction can lead to increased interaction.

The distance from the bar to the standing bar is designed to allow circulation yet close enough to encourage interaction.

This is 4-7’, where speech and expressions are clear (Deasy & Lasswell, 1985).

• The boundaries at bar seating are unclear and easier to

cross than seated tables, which can lead to more fluid and frequent interactions (Sommer, 1969). Continuous elements are used for the bar and seating banquette.

• Self congestion: “What attract other people most, it would appear, are other people” (Whyte, 1980, p 20). This strategy is used by locating the social zones near 1st Avenue so passerby can see activity inside. A screen of the projected performance is another level of connection back to performing space.

• Sound levels: The background level or noise rating for nightclubs is 40 (Lawson, 1987). Speech must be 6 dB higher than background sound levels to be heard clearly. Intimate conversation at one meter is 44-69 dB, normal speech 50-75

Bar: crossing paths of circulation to the mezzanine and performance space increase chances for interaction.

27

GUIDELINE: EMPHASIZE RESPECT FOR THE MUSIC AND LISTENING EXPERIENCE dB, and raised voice 56-81dB. Higher sound pushes people together but is counterproductive here— if the sound level is too high for conversation it limits chance interactions.

Acoustic strategies are used to keep the sound level in social areas appropriate for conversation.

• The poster wall along the circulation path uses the idea of triangulation to initiate interaction, described by Whyte (1980) as “the process by which some external stimulus provides a linkage between people and prompts strangers to talk to each other as though they are not” (p 94).

• In the performance space, the mezzanine lets the audience watch each other; this can bind the audience as a whole, and heightens experience.

• The open mezzanine provides a visual connection and a “see and be seen” opportunity.

Emphasize respect for the music and listening experience.

• Behavior expectation: using elements of concert hall design in this venue can communicate behavior expectations.

Barker (1968) described this as a behavioral setting, where a physical setting is associated with a behavior that is consistent over time and individuals, such as whispering in a library. In this case concert hall design strategies, like the entry sequence and seats oriented to the stage, work to communicate that listening is the expected behavior. This will help to create an atmosphere of respect for the music, which would address audience concerns about rude crowd behavior from the survey responses. It is not a performance that happens to be in a bar that is secondary to the social functions, yet without the formal division between musician and audience. It is important to maintain the accessibility to the artist.

• Elements of concert hall design to use: band shell over stage, mezzanine level and viewing on sides, convex surfaces, reflective or absorptive finishes.

• The band shell directs attention to the stage, announces what is going on in the space, and houses lights, speakers, and equipment. It is an acoustically transparent mesh, with theatrical potential for projecting lights and images onto it.

• Other elements will be reinterpreted: raked floor and seating becomes vertical circulation that expands the viewing area and blurs the division between floors. Backstage and front of house boundary is reduced.

• The layers of slat screens around the stage reference stage sets and the fly loft of theater design. The screens dissolve the formal boundary between front and back of house, providing another level of connection. Visual connection to musicians, before and after a performance, creates anticipation.

• Transition spaces into the music zone put listener in a receptive mood along journey.

Poster wall: Archive of show posters honor the culture of live music, and creates conversation points – triangulation.

28

GUIDELINE: ALLOW THE INDIVIDUAL TO CHOOSE THEIR DESIRED LEVEL OF ENGAGEMENT AND INTERACTION BY OFFERING DIFFERENT OPTIONS • Columns: The existing column grid of the site serves as a place for patrons to lean and cluster around. Leaving them open and available for standing near is a strategy for making listeners feel comfortable in the space, especially in low attendance or early in a show. In the study of public

plazas, Whyte (1988) found consistent standing patterns near objects and defined edges, rarely the center of a large space, which he termed “architectural support”. Canter and Stringer (1975) confirm this phenomenon reporting several studies (1968, 1970, & 1974) where people stood near structural

Small stage: it offers an alternative performance, and a place to interact with musicians outside the performance, merchandise space.

29

pillars, out of the direct line of movement, and in a place with good visibility.

from the edges and protect escape routes (Deasy & Lasswell, 1985).

• The auditorium has two entrance paths and is open to allow free movement. A goal of the auditorium space is for an individual to be able to move around freely without hindrance on personal initiative from an occupied position to exits and other services (Appleton, 2008).

• A variety of seating types meet the most needs: Different types and heights for choice, lightweight and movable for flexibility.

• The mezzanine level provides for observing the performance without committing, as does the projection screen in the seating area, and where the circulation paths enter into the space. People like to sample a performance

• The entrances are not on display, but enter into back of the bar or music action, which allows patrons to get oriented.

Entry experience to the venue is protected in a vestibule, not overwhelming sound or sensory overload. Time and space to get collected and transition from public space travel to venue to the listening experience. Prepare for music and social experience; observe the space before making a choice.

• The smaller stage offers flexibility for various types of performances and various crowd sizes, and another layer of choice for the individual experience.

Transition to performance space: allow patrons to observe a space before committing to enter.

30

ACOUSTIC STRATEGIES TO SUPPORT DESIGN GUIDELINES • Using these acoustic strategies will allow the sound to be at a level that is appropriate, not the louder is better approach observed in several venues that necessitate earplugs, can cause hearing damage, and inhibit conversation (Lord & Templeton, 1986).

• In the book The Architecture of Sound, Lord and Templeton (1986) list recommendations for discotheques, several of which are applicable for live music venues. For instance, buffer louder spaces with other functions, like rest rooms or storage, and do not rely only on walls for sound separation.

Loudspeakers should not be affixed to walls but hung from the ceiling to prevent vibrating the walls, and directed towards the corners.

• Internal finishes are sound absorptive both to allow clarity of sound reproduction by keeping the reverberant level within the space down, and to prevent the space from sounding obviously empty at low occupancy (Lord & Templeton, 1986).

• Materials are textural for acoustic properties but also to create a rich backdrop for intense experiences, which can attach to memories and connect them to this place as well.

Not simply a great show that took place in a black box. “The landscape or townscapes, the local food and drink can become the sensory cues associated with the experiences, which give the event or location its distinctive and memorable appeal” (Morgan , 2006, p 312).

• The stage is hollow like a drum and works as a resonating chamber for instruments that touch the floor directly, such as the drums or a stand-up bass (Gerace & White, 2003).

• People absorb sound. The sound level in the back of a horizontal auditorium is 1/8 as loud as it is at the front.

One solution is to slope the listeners upwards, like a Greek stadium (Beranek, 1996). The levels in the auditorium use this principal of raising listeners away from the stage to maximize sound and sight proximity to the performers.

• Open stairs capture sound waves, and make the levels vibrate, increase connection to music.

• The combination of acoustic strategies is used to achieve a “dead” acoustic in the auditorium, i.e. no reflected sound from the stage, which is preferable for amplified music (Appleton, 2008). A dead room does not alter the music in any way, like playing in an open field (Beranek, 1962).

• One potential complication is the direct sound from the drums, combined with amplified sound. Again the remedy is a dead acoustic with low reverb time. The slat screens and gypsum wall near the stage alternate absorbent and reflective materials to realize this. A room that alternates reflective and absorptive materials can achieve a flat reverberation time (Rettinger, 1988).

• Concave surfaces could concentrate sound, so the surrounding surfaces should be absorbent, or the back wall (Rettinger, 1973). For this reason the mezzanine railing is allows sound waves to pass through, and the wall opposite the stage is left exposed brick to absorb sound. When the sound source to the reflective wall is smaller than half the radius of curvature, the reflected sound rays spread as if they came from a single point behind the wall, broadening the sound field (Meyer, 2009). The radius of the wood screens surrounding the stage act to distribute the sound.

• The band shell, stages and mezzanine edge forms work to distribute sound since convex curves distribute sound (Rettinger, 1988).

• Sound baffles built in the corners are made of perforated wood lined with felt to absorb sound waves.

• The ceiling construction is acoustic tile with an air gap to maximize absorbency, and avoid parallel reflective surfaces since the floor is a reflective material (Rettinger, 1988).

• The actual listening depth of the mezzanine is narrow to keep sound from being trapped, and because views drop of quickly at that height.

31

LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH

SUMMARY

One study limitation is the other factors that may influence a sense of community that were not addressed, such as previous familiarity with the music, or quality of staff interactions. The types of events where surveys were collected included only a few genres of music, limiting the generalizability of the study to all styles of music. The small number of study participants and locations will also limit the generalizability of the study to any music venue in any location.

This study explored the research question how can the design of an independent live music venue encourage a sense of community among audience members, between audience to artist, and the audience to the community at large? To discover what the issues of community are in a live music venue a qualitative methodological approach was used, made up of a review of the literature, a survey experiment, and a design investigation. The purpose of the study is to understand how design can support the experience of live music and strengthen the sense of community between musicians and audience members. Fostering a sense of community experienced by patrons of live music has many consequences, since people form connections to others and specific locations and act in response by taking better care of them (Stedman, 2002). Live music shared as a community activity also meets an ancient need for ritual and collective joy (Ehrenreich, 2007).

Future research should explore how different music genres influence sense of community and their varying needs in a live music venue of specific user groups. A question regarding the location of music venues was not included in the survey, but it would be valuable to understand if the location within the city plays a role. The impact of staff interactions on the experience should also be explored in future studies, and what aspects influence the employee work environment. In order to understand how the existing or historic design elements may contribute to a connection to place and history, the physical environment could be explored more in depth in survey questions and the literature review. A guideline addressing significant historical features would be valuable as another layer of connection to site, place, and time.

The objective was to develop design guidelines, then test them in the design of a live music venue in Spokane. The value of the study lies in the development of a checklist of general guidelines for venue design that support the needs of both the performer and audience to encourage the connections between them, applicable for many types of performance spaces. Also beneficial is seeing the application of the guidelines through design strategies supported by the literature and survey results.

This study has been personally valuable by learning to develop a tool for measuring design decisions against beyond a concept, client needs, and performance or aesthetic goals.

The process has given me an appreciation of the larger social impacts involved in any space. This knowledge will forever enrich my design process in the future.

axon of Music City from 1st Ave 32

REFERENCES Appleton, I. (2008). Buildings for the performing arts: A design and development guide. Oxford: Elsevier Limited.

Arnould, E. J. & Price, L. L. (1993). River Magic: Extraordinary experience and the extended service encounter.

Journal of Consumer Research, 20 (1), 24-46.

Augustin, S. (2009). Place Advantage: Applied psychology for interior architecture. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.

Auslander, P. (1998). Seeing is believing: Live performance and the discourse of authenticity in rock culture. Literature and Psychology, 44 (4), 1-26.

Auslander, P. (1999). Liveness: Performance in a mediatized culture. New York: Routledge.

Barker, R. G. (1968). Ecological psychology: Concepts and methods for studying the environment of human behavior. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Beranek, L. L. (1962). Music, acoustics & architecture. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Beranek, L. L. (1996). Concert and opera halls: How they sound.

Woodbury, NY: Acoustical Society of America.

Beranek, L. L. (2004). Concert halls and opera halls: Music, acoustics & architecture. New York: Springer.

Berliner, P. F. (1994) Thinking in jazz: The infinite art of improvisation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Bitner, M.J. (1992). Servicescapes: the impact of physical surroundings on customers and employees. Journal of Marketing, 56, 55-71.

Black, G. C., Fox, M. A., & Kochanowski, P. (2007). Concert tour success in North America: An examination of the top 100 tours from 1997-2005. Popular Music & Society, 30, 149-172.

Brown, C. R., Fleissig, W. B., & Morrish, W. R. (1989). Building for the arts: A guidebook for the planning and design of cultural facilities. Santa Fe, NM: Western States Arts Federation.

Canter, D. & Stringer, P. (1975). Environmental Interaction: Psychological approaches to our physical surroundings.

London: Surrey University Press.

Cavan, S. (1966). Liquor license: An ethnography of bar behavior.

Chicago: Aldine.

Chavis, D. M., Hogge, J.H., McMillan, D.W., & Wandersman, A. (1986). Sense of community through Brunswiks lens.

Journal of Community Psychology, 14. 24-40.

Cochrane, T. (2009). Joint attention to music. British Journal of Aesthetics, 49, 59-73.

Collins, N. (2008). Why live? Performance in the age of digital reproduction. Leonardo Music Journal, 18, 7-8.

Deasy, C. M. & Lasswell, T. (1985). Designing places for people: A handbook for architects, designers, and facility managers. New York: Whitney Library of Design.

Earl, P. E. (2001). Simon’s travel theorem and the demand for live music. Journal of Economic Psychology, 22, 335358.

Ehrenreich, B. (2007). Dancing in the streets: A History of Collective Joy. New York: Metropolitan Books.

Ezeh, C. & Harris, L. C. (2007). Servicescape research: a review and a research agenda. The Marketing Review, 7 (1), 59-78.

Festinger, L., Schachter, S, & Back, K. (1950). Social Pressures in Informal groups: A study of human factors in housing.

New York: Harper & Brothers Publishers.

Filimowicz, M. (2008). Intimachines. Leonardo Music Journal,

33

18(1), 40-40.

Florida, R. (2002). The Rise of the Creative Class: and how it’s transforming work, leisure, community and everyday life. New York: Basic Books.

Forsyth, M. ((1985). Buildings for music: The architect, the musician, and the listener form the seventeenth century to the present day. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Gehl, J. (1980). Life between buildings. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.

Gerace, G. & White, G. (Eds.). (2003). Symphony: Frank Gehry’s Walt Disney concert hall. New York: Harry N. Abrams, Inc. Goodsell, C. T. (1988). The social meaning of civic space: Studying political authority through architecture. Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas.

Gueguen, N., Jacob, C., Le Guellec, H., Morineau, T., & Lourel, M. (2008). Sound level of environmental music and drinking behavior: A field experiment with beer drinkers. Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, 32, 1795–1798.

Kubacki, K. (2007). Jazz musicians: creating service experience in live performance. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 20, 401-411.

Kubacki, K., Skinner, H., Parfitt, S., & Moss, G. (2007). Comparing nightclub customers’ preferences in existing and emerging markets. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 26 (4), 958-73.

Lang, J. (1980). The built environment and social behavior: Architectural determinism reexamined, Via 4, 147-53.

Lawson, F. (1987). Restaurants, clubs & bars. London: The Architectural Press.

Long, A. D. & Perkins, D. D. (2007). Community social and place predictors of sense of community: A multilevel and longitudinal analysis. Journal of Community Psychology, 35, 563-581.

Lord, P. & Templeton, D. (1986). The architecture of sound: Designing places of assembly. London: The Architectural Press.

McMillan, D. & Chavis, D. M. (1986). Sense of community: A definition and theory. Journal of Community Psychology, 14, 6-23.

Hall, E. T. (1969). The Hidden Dimension. Garden City, NY: Doubleday & Co.

Meyer, J. (2009). Acoustics and the performance of music. New York: Springer.

Hertzberger, H. (2002). Articulations. New York: Prestel.

Morgan, M. (2006). Making space for experiences. Journal of Retail and Leisure Property, 5 (4), 305-313.

Holahan, C. J. (1982). Environmental Psychology. New York: Random House, Inc. Horowitz, I. L. (2009). Mass, class, and audience: Beyond the Glenn Gould problem. Modern Age, 51 (1), 6-14.

Jacob, C. (2006). Styles of background music and consumption in a bar: An empirical evaluation. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 25, 716-720.

34

North, A. C., Hargreaves, D. J., & McKendrick, J. (2000). The effects of music on atmosphere in a bank and a bar.

Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 30, 1504-1522.

Oakes, S., North, A. C. (2007). Reviewing congruity effects in the music service environment musicscape. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 19, 63-82.

Parish, J. T., Berry, L. L., Lam, S. Y. (2008). The effect of the servicescape on service workers. Journal of Service Research, 10, 220-238.

Pitts, S. E. (2005). What makes an audience? Investigating the roles and experiences of listeners at a chamber music festival. Music & Letters, 86, 257-269.

Raeburn, S. D. (1987). Occupational stress and coping in a sample of professional rock musicians. Medical Problems of Performing Artists, 6, 41-48.

Whyte, W. H. (1980). The social life of small urban spaces.

Washington, D. C.: The Conservation Foundation.

Zacks, S. (2002, November). Punk-rock urbanism. Metropolis, 58-62.

Zeisel, J. (2006). Inquiry by design. New York: W. W. Norton & Company.

Rettinger, M. (1973). Acoustic design and noise control. New York: Chemical Publishing Co., Inc. Rettinger, M. (1988). Handbook of architectural acoustics and noise control: A manual for architects and engineers.

Blue Ridge Summit, PA: Tab Books, Inc. Schippers, M. (2002). Rockin’ Out of the Box: Gender Maneuvering in Alternative Hard Rock. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

Schutz, A. (1951). Making music together: A study in social relationship. Social Research, 18(1), 76-96.

Smith, E. (2009, February 20). Can he save rock ‘n’ roll? Irving Azoff wants to concentrate power in the music world like never before; Bruce Springsteen objects. Wall Street Journal. Retrieved February 23, 2009, from http://online.wsj.com Sommer, R. (1969). Personal space: the behavioral basis of design. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc. Stedman, R. C. (2002). Toward a psychology of place: Predicting behavior from place-based cognitions, attitude, and identity. Environment and Behavior, 34, 561-583.

Waxman, L. (2006). The coffee shop: Social and physical factors influencing place attachment. Journal of Interior Design, 31(3), 35-53.

35

APPENDIX I SURVEY QUESTIONS

APPENDIX II SURVEY RESPONSES

1. Why do you go to see live music?

1. Why do you go to see live music?

2. At a given venue, will you see people you know there? How does this matter?

3. At a live music performance, do you feel a connection to the people around you? What helps contribute to this?

4. Do you feel a connection to the musicians? What helps contribute to this connection?

5. What makes a positive live music experience?

6. How does the music venue factor into the decision to see live music?

a. To see what other bands are doing, to meet & network with musicians, and lastly (if the band and venue are good) for the fun of it. b. Pure pleasure and passion for the dark lighting. c. Music and atmosphere- the energy! d. Because I know/ enjoy the band or have heard good things about the band.

7. What is your favorite live music venue? What is special about it?

e. I go support the musician, give gas money, and if I really like the band I want to see the people sing and move.

8. What can make for a negative live music experience?

f. Specific bands.

9. Other issues or thoughts on live music or venues:

g. The atmosphere, to see bands I like.

10. About you: Gender & Age

h. I like the recorded version.

Live here in Spokane?

i. I am a booking agent/promoter so it’s my job, but also I love meeting people and the music.

Performing musician?

j.I just love the connection that I get with the music and people at the shows. It gives me a sort of escape from my daily life and lets me fill the void with something positive. k. Community. I suppose I could just dance around to a CD at home but there’s something about connecting with others that make and like the same music as I do. l. I like it. m. I like the way live music feels. It rumbles through the body. n. It inspires me to play music. o. Because music in your ears is a great feeling and the good vibes. p. Live music is better (than recorded). q. To feel the vibe. r. Energy, creativity, support friends, have fun! s. To see upcoming musicians perform new styles of music. t. The feeling of watching a musician perform what is really inside. u. For one, all my friends are there so it’s a social thing. And second I love to hear new things that people are doing with music. v. To support local music/bands with talent. Friends. w. Because I enjoy the music and the environment. x. Because there are certain musicians that are far superior in their live sound than the studio version of their music. Also, some people

36

put on an amazing live show and have an interesting angle that can’t be derived from a recorded album.

m. The more user friendly and comfortable, the better the crowd and community.

y. (blank)

n. House shows get busted a lot; venues are more of a sure thing.

z. Cause I enjoy music.

o. Not a big factor, I attend to see the music.

Aa. Fun and the music web site that I’m a photographer for.

p. I like open space.

Bb. I go to see music in the moment- that moment that will never exist again.

q. How far do I have to drive?

Cc. It’s the art in the music. The connection from the artist in me to the artist on stage.

Dd. It’s better than cable! I am a huge music fan! I am all about supporting local and touring musicians.

2. How does the music venue factor into the decision to see live music? a. I won’t usually go if I know I’m going to be standing up all night on polished concrete. I also prefer venues that start their shows a little earlier (say around 7:30 or 8) so that I won’t be up half the night. But if I love the band enough, I’ll go through any amount of torture to see them play.

r. If I’m on the fence about seeing a show, it may be the determining factor. s. A good sound stage t. It really depends on what type of music is playing for the venue to matter. u. I like when they are cozy and not so big and commercial, no security guards. v. Has to be comfortable and welcoming, inviting, smell nice (always a plus). w. If I like the music enough, I’ll go no matter what venue, but if it isn’t an intimate venue or if the service isn’t great, I’m less likely to attend.

b. If the group is good the venue is irrelevant. Sound quality of venues plays a role in the experience.

x. If the venue has poor acoustics or a typical crowd that is undesirable I usually won’t come out.

c. There are a few places I would go to see a show even if I don’t know the band because the venue rocks.

y. Doesn’t matter that much.

d. If the sound is bad or the venue charges a high cover I won’t want to go.

Aa. I prefer smaller rooms where I feel close to the performer.

e. Depends on how much they charge for cover. I don’t like bars. f. Mostly if I want to see the band. g. If it’s tiny with no seating I may not go, but if it’s huge and expensive and sterile I won’t go either. h. Some venues attract a lame crowd, aren’t loud enough, or just dumb with booking and advertising. i. For me, it doesn’t often. Unless I know the sound is subpar. j. A lot of venues will have a different attitude. The Blvd is more dark and gives a less warm feel so it would be for hardcore shows as opposed to the chill atmosphere of the Empyrean for acoustic. k. I don’t like smoking venues. If it’s too loud that sucks too. I also like micro brewed beer and hot beverages. l. Usually doesn’t.

z. Yes. Bb. If the music is good, the venue matters little, although it sucks when the acoustics suck.

Cc. Location: parking, safe, walking distance. Bar: you need it to keep an older crowd and to have late shows. Dd. All Ages: kids like music too, plus it’s one of the only “hangout” things to do. A lot of artists are kids.

3. At a given venue, will you see people you know there?

How does this matter? a. No, I don’t really have a venue like that where I can expect to see friends. b. Well at any given venue in Spokane, yes. Chances are I will see people I know. Depending on my mood this could be good or bad. c. Probably. I like to see people I know but it’s ok if I don’t.

37

d. Yes, usually. Sometimes it’s negative because I don’t want to see them. Otherwise it doesn’t matter- I go to see the bands. e. Yes, sometimes this can enhance the musical experience and other times I dread seeing familiar faces (social anxiety). f. If it’s a good venue, good rep, good bands. g. Yes, because it’s awkward if not. h. Mmm. Sometimes. It’s more fun with people you know. It’s easier to get crazy and be yourself. i. Yes, It makes it 10 times more fun to enjoy it with friends. j. I will generally see some usual people, but it changes a lot with the genre of music and location of the venue. Those groups are my family and it’s also nice finding new people to share the passion with. k. I play music so I like to see familiar faces at my shows. I like new people a lot too; they haven’t heard what I have to say and likewise.

Aa. It helps create a sense of bonding and community. It can become a little family.

Bb. It doesn’t.

Cc. (blank) Dd.I get out a lot so yes. Plus a lot of the same kids go to shows; it’s such a great nice group of people. It doesn’t matter to me too much; I just want the artist to have a crowd and people to see cool music!

4. At a live music performance, do you feel a connection to the people around you? What helps contribute to this? a. If we all love the band, I feel that way. Or if the venue itself is really pleasant (like the Woodland Park Zoo shows, or the Triple Door in downtown Seattle).

l. Most of the time doesn’t matter.

b. Yes, we come for the same purpose and that is great. A positive inviting environment contributes to this.

m. Yes, a strong community leads to more support for all types of music.

c. Yes, if the venue isn’t huge, the actual physical closeness helps.

Also the common likes.

n. Yes, it matters because I love to see friends.

d. If I like the music I feel a connection to peers because we both enjoyed the performance. If I don’t enjoy the music I feel disconnected because I assume they like it.

o. Always! It’s an additional perk that makes the experience. p. Yes, I like to be around my friends and my friends are in bands. q. Of course, it definitely makes the experience. r. It’s always good to see people you know. It may allow me to be more comfortable and enjoy the show.

e. Not really, most of the time I’m judgmental and annoyed by them and if their singing want them to shut the fuck up. f. Chairs.

s. I see people I know around. It makes the music more enjoyable.

g. Sometimes, the overall atmosphere, lighting, whether they know the songs, common interest, you know.

t. Most likely I will, but mostly because I know way too many people in the music scene.

h. It depends on how “lame” the crowd is. If we’re all really into the band and know all the words, it helps.

u. Yes! All my friends are very into music so they are always going to be a few. I would rather go if I can meet someone there so I’m not alone.

i. Yes, the music!

v. Yes, makes me more inclined to go. w. Usually, it’s always nice recognizing people. It makes situations more comfortable.

38

z. Yes, there are a lot of the same people at the Spokane shows.

j. I always feel a connection with the people around me since we are all here for the same reason. I also really live to feel the connection with the bands. The atmosphere and genre of music always help me with this connection. k. Yes, at least most of the time. We all like the same music.

x. If I’m at a few specific venues I can be guaranteed to run into people I know and this matters because it enhances the enjoyment of the show experience because you are sharing that joy with people you know and love.

l. Sometimes, if we are enjoying music together.

y. Yes, I feel more comfortable.

o. Yes, the music helps us connect.

m. We all appreciate music. That’s a strong connection. n. Music can be a bridge to connect different people.

p. Musical atmosphere. q. Yes, dancing and vibes.

f. Yes and No. “Artist green rooms” can be a problem at smaller levels.

Make them talk to their fans!

r. When the people love the music, and everyone is on the same page, it’s amazing.

g. Warmth in the venue, Moon lit.

s. I feel a connection when people get into the music.

i. Yes, especially if you know the music.

t. Music always connects people in ways that are indescribable.

j. Yes, I do. The musicians joking with the audience/ crowd and treating them like friends always helps. Nobody likes a dick.

u. Oh yes, there is usually something I have in common with a lot of them. v. Generally, because we have music in common. w. If the music, sound, and environment are right, I get comfortable and see that the people around me feel the same. x. As previously stated, I feel a connection to the people I’m attending with and this enhances the enjoyment of the show.

h. Sometimes. If the band is high energy or eccentric.

k. Yes, we have music in common. If it’s a touring musician we have tours in common. l. Usually, they are just people and I feel a connection to all people. m. Yes, because I know how much hard work and dedication goes into music.

y. No.

n. Music is something that feels good and unclutters the mind, playing together.

z. Just depends of the type of show.

o. The loud music which they let flow.

Aa. Seeing music in a small room with people that really want to be there- definitely connection.

p. Yes, when the music is live there’s more of a vibe.

Bb. Obviously.

r. When musicians are in an environment that lets them do whatever it is that they do, then that’s a good venue.

Cc. (blank) Dd. Not so much at this show (karli Fairbanks). It’s an older crowdbut that’s a good thing! Parents and older couples need to see that it’s safe to go! Fun too- age shouldn’t matter at a concert. At a middle age show the persons taste in music, respect and love for it connects the room- more talking!

5. Do you feel a connection to the musicians? What helps contribute to this connection? a. If they are really professional and good, if they sing well (since I’m a singer), if their instrumentation is exciting, then I feel a connection. b. Yes, my love for the music connects me to the musicians, happy people = happy times. c. Same as above, If the venue is small enough that they have to interact, it helps too.

q. If they are passionate with what they do, yes.

s. When I’m friends with the musicians, its more enjoyable to know their influences. t. Sometimes, if the musician is really about what they’re playing and singing. u. Yes usually, a lot of my friends are musicians so they are just regular people doing what they love and so it is easy to connect to them. v. Not usually, unless I know the band. w. If the band is down-to-earth, I’ll definitely feel a good connection.

Also singing along and knowing the music just as well as the musicians is good. x. Depending on the show/venue I will feel a connection to the musician by being able to talk and interact with them about the music. (This usually isn’t possible in a large venue setting). y. More so, it helps that they talk to you.

d. Only rarely do I feel a connection to the musicians. It usually occurs if I know the musicians before I go.

z. Sometimes, if there into what they are performing and having fun then yes.

e. Sometimes, I think I feel more connected to the songs and they ignite emotion for me.

Aa. Small room, seeing friends, not too loud, meeting them.

Bb. See question 1.

39

Cc. (blank) Dd. I am not a musician, but the lyrics are normally something everyone can relate to!

6. What makes a positive live music experience?

y. That the crowd is ok to be around. z. Fun and it’s a lot better that staying home watching TV.

a. A chair to sit in. Preferably, a chair at a table with a candle, and a nice glass of booze. Friends to sit with and chat with. And really good music.

Aa. Good not too loud sound. Not overly crowded.

b. Sound quality, diversity, and vibe.

Cc. (blank)

c. If it’s clean, if the sound is good, if the size is appropriate. d. Cheap cover, good sound, entertaining band. e. If I can hear the musician’s voice, if I can see, If I don’t have to be around people I don’t like, cheap cover, and if they play my favorites! f. Good sound, clean floors, clean bathrooms. g. Good music, the right group of people. h. Lights, crowds, favorite bands, etc. i. Good music, good audience, copious amounts of people. j. The crowds, venue atmosphere, how positive the band is, and the music. k. Good music, if the performer connects to the audience through speech. l. Good music and good people. m. Good music and people that are into it. n. Friends and beats. o. Dancing, good music, friends, art, and drinks. p. Loud music and people who are into it. q. Passionate, lively people there for music. r. A confident performer and an excited crowd. s. Seeing the band enjoy their performance. t. Good sound, a good emotional feeling from the music as well as damn good music. u. Passion. If the band is excited about it then so are the people and it makes the show all around better.

40

x. An interesting environment, good vibes from the audience, musicians passionate about the music, and a personal anticipation for the show make for a positive live experience.

Bb. A combination of factors related. Good artist and musician mainly.

Dd. On time! Positive energy from the band and crowd! Laughter, clapping, feet tapping- music.

7. What is your favorite live music venue? What is special about it? a. The Triple Door in downtown Seattle is my favorite. It has a great stage, gorgeous sound system, these lovely “stars” shining behind the stage, candles, good drinks, delicious food, and a respectful and quiet audience. b. I like the Sunset Junction, it smells amazing. c. Right now, the Empyrean. It’s smaller, it has personality, but can accommodate a large variety. d. The Empyrean in Spokane: the music has its own space, so I can get coffee/play games in the front room if I don’t like one of the bands on the bill. e. The Empyrean, I can hang out in the coffee part if I choose to and they have games! f. See #9. g. I liked Neumo’s in Seattle: it was big but warm, balcony, visually interesting and unique. h. Service Station. Big, loud, open area with a coffee shop. Nice staff that isn’t trying to be too “trendy”, has a balcony. i. The Empyrean , the people, the feel. j. The Empyrean. It has always put on amazing shows and has a great community for people who love music and just wanna make friends. k. N/A.

v. Good sound tech, good people music with feeling.

l. Empyrean, I know the people and enjoy the environment.

w. Good people and music.

m. Empyrean or Caterina –they have a warm, comfortable feel.

n. Empyrean.

f. Bad sound, not clean, over assertive staff, rude or intoxicated staff.

o. The Vera project: it’s volunteer based and they screen print inside.

g. Lame people, sterile venue.

p. Cretin Hop, I’m a groupie to a band who plays regularly.

h. Bad acoustics/sound mix. Lame crowd.

q. Any, as long as the music bumps.

i. Low turnout, crap bands.

r. Showbox in Seattle; perfect size to get sweaty and there is no bad view.

j. Mostly the band being jerks or playing really drunk/high. A lot rests on the crowd itself though.

s. The Empyrean has two stages for bigger bands. t. My favorite is probably Empyrean but mostly because I work there.

k. Drunk, yelling, cigarette smoke, moshing, danger, bad attitudes from bands.

u. The Empyrean or the Cretin Hop. They are both small and great people working there.

l. Bad music. m. Bad sound, too loud (no balanced levels), negative people, fights.

v. Empyrean; very comfortable, inviting staff, good coffee.

n. Bros and drunk assholes.

w. In Spokane, I enjoy the Blvd and the Empyrean. Comfort zones!

I’m used to these venues, plus there aren’t many choices here.

o. Bad music with no variation and spilt drinks.

x. The Empyrean and the Big Dipper are two live venues in Spokane that I love. I love them because they are raw and intimate.

q. Bros.

y. I don’t have a favorite. z. Caterina Winery: great atmosphere, PK the booker books perfect shows for the venue.

Aa. Sheldon concert hall in St Louis. It’s a beautiful room that holds 750 people, great sound, beautiful all wood, great views.

p. Shitty performances. r. Jackasses! s. Bad quality in sound if it’s too loud, you can’t hear the other musicians in the band. t. A very annoying drunk. Bad sound guy. u. Security guards and overpaying.

Bb. Empyrean as of now. The sound there seems to be there, excellent beer, lots of community.

v. Stupid people.

Cc. (blank)

x. A rowdy (drunk) audience usually makes for a poor live experience.

When people in a negative surrounding detract from your ability to fully appreciate the music it makes for a negative experience.

Dd. First Caterina Winery: art, Platform Booking (PK), respectful crowd, good wine. Second Empyrean: art, ages, Michelle and Chrissy, poetry.

8. What can make for a negative live music experience? a. Noisy audiences, bad sound guys, bad sound equipment, and bad performances.

w. People, bad sound/equipment, unenjoyable music.

y. Crappy crowd. z. Shows that start late, run late and drunk performers.

Aa. Bad sound, oversold, annoying fans, loud.

Bb. Annoying younger kids, bad music.

b. Bad sound quality, poor riffs.

Cc. (blank)

c. If the place is uncomfortable, like if you have to walk through everyone to get where you’re wanting to be, or if the venue doesn’t seem friendly, or poor sound.

Dd. Poor attendance, late, mean/quiet crowd.

d. Bad sound, drunks, expensive cover. e. Douche bag kids who are obnoxious, drunks, poor sound –can’t hear lyrics, and a high cover charge.

9. Other issues or thoughts on live music or venues: a. I don’t enjoy coffee shop shows very much. I think coffee is the wrong drug with which to enhance a show. A cocktail is better. And bookstore gigs are just awful. Fluorescent lights, folding chairs, etc.

41

You need some ambience. b. Keep it alive, we need the added bonus. c. I heart small venues! Especially if they have strong personality. d. All ages venues are preferred because it usually draws people that are more interested in music as opposed to drinking. e. We need more all ages that charge reasonably and brings good acts. f. Multi-use rooms: coffee, beer, wine, music, food. g. Uniqueness is key! h. Good advertisement on upcoming shows! i. I love it all. j. Save the Empyrean. k. (heart) l. I don’t like this venue (Art, Music and More). Draws and crowd I can’t identify with. m. They are great! n. Need more promotion in Spokane. o. “I love music” p. Not so much. q. More venues. r. Live music is about energy between artist and listener, whatever facilitates that is good for shows. s. A good performance is giving freedom of expression in music. t. It’s hard to find all ages venues nowadays. u. It makes me feel very connected to my town. v. Good for the soul. w. Spokane needs more venues and more good music to come through. x. Any venues that focus on alcohol and or simply making money vs. being personally involved with booking the shows is a huge turnoff. y. Customer service could do a lot with a venue; it’s nice to go to a place and feel welcome not snubbed if people don’t know you. z. Need a few more venues in town; tons of musicians but not enough venues.

Dd. It’s cheaper than cable! Get out, once a week- try it! We manage

42

to get out at least 15 times a month!

10. About you: Gender & Age Live here in Spokane?

Are you a musician?

Participant

Gender

Age

A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V

F M F M F M F M M M M M F M M F M M M M F F

34 20 24 24 22 31 22 19 18 29 24 22 21 20 20 21 24 19 21 18 18

Performing Musician Y Y N Y N Y N N N N Y N Y Y N N N N Y N N N

Spokane Resident N Y Y Y Y N Y Y N Y N Y Y Y Y Y Y Y N Y Y Y

W X

F F

18 21

N N

N Y

Y Z Aa Bb Cc

M M M F F

21 28 24 21 21

Y N Y N N

Y Y N Y Y

Dd

M

26

Y

N

43

APPENDIX III PROGRAMMING Programming Space Stage

Goal/Intent Engage the audience; Support the artist in performance; Flexibility; Limit separation between the performer and audience (stage ht)

Auditorium

Facilitate connection from listener to musician by seeing and hearing listening, dancing clearly, allow them to participate fully in the event; Bind audience as a whole; create a comfortable environment

mezzanine, social space, amenities allow for flexibility in user options such as the desired acoustic strategies, open and flexible, furniture: seating & tables, use columns for physical closeness to stage, and a sound level that is desired (food, drink), furniture storage by patron, ease in circulation, seating options, safety: architectural support; different viewing exiting and crowding levels

Performer Space

Support musicians' needs so they can perform up to their potential

Bathroom, access to kitchenette, activities Homelike environment, privacy to pass time, sleeping space, sound isolation

Stage and loading space, Office, venue manager, staff break room

Bar

Facilitate casual interaction and to connect individuals; put patrons socializing, in a receptive mood; minimize sound competition with performance drinking/eating

kitchen, clean up area, dishwasher, trash, recycling, refrigerator, ice machine

Social space

Facilitate casual interaction and to connect individuals, Less formal socializing, drinking/eating listening space; interact with musicians outside performance, provide for personal control: allow individuals to select their level of engagement

Easy circulation, drink prep area, undefined boundaries for casual interaction (bar vs. round tables), swivel stools lighting tables and faces; seating options; corners facilitate group interaction; Food options to keep people, because limited options in the neighborhood

Second stage

Less formal listening space; interact with musicians outside performance

Second performance, selling merchandise

Sized to accommodate performers, lighting Alternative to main performance; Merchandise space performer, height to delineate from circulation

Entry Vestibule; Exit

Orient patron, transition from travel mode to listening experience; Clear and welcome arrival from street, entice passerby

ticketing, check IDs; leaving, emergency egress

Visibility, space for upcoming event info, staff person to check IDs; meet code requirements

Exterior

Entice passerby, connect performance inside to community at large; potential customers test Signage Communicate atmosphere, experience performance, smoking

protect from elements, screen of performance, project onto Fox building?

Storage

Allow for flexibility in seating

Stacking chairs, tables

near auditorium, convenient to put into use

Bathrooms

Opportunity for interaction, common circulation path

Code requirements: 1 per 40 occupants, 4 screening from performance and social space, sound toilets and 2 sinks each isolation

Employee space

opportunity for interaction with performers and among staff

Transition and Prepare patron for the next space experience, provide opportunities Circulation Spaces for casual interaction; lessen boundaries between floors for patrons to move easily

44

Activity performance, loading equipment in/out

Waiting,

break room

Functional requirements Isolate from outside noise; Stage, Sound equipment, monitors

Kitchenette, lockers for personal storage

Performance requirements Adjustable lighting levels, several directions; Sightlines; Sound level and quality, loading in/out, flexibility

Sound level for conversation; at 60db only one ‐on‐ one conversation possible, no group discussion; human voice carries 12' max, 3 barstools max distance for conversation

Support spaces Performer space, sound booth, gear storage

Continuous seating to dissolve boundaries, choice for adjacency to concert space and bar patron, alternative performance; see and be seen by others area from mezzanine level

adjacency to concert space and bar area

Life Safety; Diffused attention from who is entering, control ticketing cash, office thermal environment, Transition space, Control access, security

Off main space, controlled access

Poster wall: pin up gallery space for archive buffer music and social spaces, create triangulation around show posters show poster archive, engage music community, honor culture of live performance

Cleaning supplies, janitor closet

APPENDIX IV PROCESS WORK

stage enclosure 45

VERTICAL CIRCULATION AS VIEWING SPACE

Liederhalle concert house, Germany 46

mezzanine level

main level

47