I am supervising several last-year PhD students this year, and they all have to write a methodology chapter for their thesis. Remember that a methodology chapter is not a methods chapter. While “method” is how you do something, “methodology” is the knowledge (“logy”) of the methods. Still, that requires that you can name your methods and reflect on them. Given that music technologists often work on method development (and related tools) as their core research activity, I see many struggle to describe and reflect on the methods they use. Hence, this little blog post to help people along the way.

Quantitative vs Qualitative

Some researchers distinguish between qualitative and quantitative methods. Qualitative approaches focus on non-numerical data such as interviews, observations, and case studies. For example, ethnographic studies of musicians and producers can reveal how they experience and adapt new music technologies. Quantitative methods, conversely, involve numerical data and statistical analysis—surveys and controlled experiments might measure how different technologies affect production quality or listener preferences.

However, this distinction is rarely clear-cut. Qualitative data, such as interviews, are often coded and analyzed in structured, quantifiable ways. Similarly, quantitative findings require qualitative interpretation. I generally prefer mixed-methods approaches that combine both quantitative and qualitative data collection and analysis. This triangulation often provides richer insights into the adoption and effectiveness of music technology.

Research Approaches

Last week, I wrote about how the Technology Readiness Level (TRL) can help in clarifying what one works on. Music technologists can work at different TRLs; some focus on fundamental research, while others are more applied. Many cover multiple levels; hence, they also need to use various methods. Here is a non-exhaustive overview of approaches one could take for the different levels.

TRL Level 1: Basic Principles Observed

  • Literature Review: A thorough examination of existing research and technical documentation to uncover trends, gaps, and opportunities in the field of music technology development.
  • Theoretical Development: Discussing terminology and exploring conceptual frameworks and models that explain fundamental principles of music technology through scholarly analysis and theoretical reasoning.

TRL Level 2: Technology Concept Formulated

  • Ethnography: This method entails immersive observation and participation within a relevant user group, allowing researchers to understand how technologies are adopted and adapted across various musical cultures.
  • Autoethnography: For some, the primary focus of investigation is one’s own artistic practice, hence it is relevant to systematically document and reflect on one’s own experiences and cultural practices within a specific domain.

TRL Level 3: Experimental Proof of Concept

  • Rapid Prototyping: A method that emphasizes quick iterations of design and development, allowing researchers to test and refine ideas rapidly.
  • Iterative Prototyping: Similar to rapid prototyping, this approach involves continuously improving a product through repeated cycles of testing and feedback.

TRL Level 4: Technology Validated in Lab

  • Experimental Research: Conducting controlled experiments to test hypotheses related to music technology, such as evaluating the impact of different audio processing techniques on sound quality.
  • Comparative Analysis: A method where researchers analyze multiple music technologies, tools, or systems to identify their similarities, differences, and performance characteristics, aiding in the establishment of best practices.

TRL Level 5: Technology Validated in Relevant Environment

  • User Testing: Structured sessions where users interact with new music technologies, providing researchers with valuable feedback on usability, effectiveness, and creative potential.
  • Action Research: An iterative process involving planning, acting, observing, and reflecting, often used to develop and refine new music technologies with users collaboratively.

TRL Level 6: Technology Demonstrated in Relevant Environment

  • Software Development: The process of designing, coding, and testing software applications tailored for music technology.
  • Hardware Development: Involves creating and refining physical devices or instruments that enhance music production and performance.

TRL Level 7: System Prototype Demonstration in Operational Environment

  • User-Centric Design: A design philosophy that prioritizes the needs and experiences of end-users throughout the development process.
  • Task-Centric Design: Focuses on optimizing tools and technologies based on specific tasks musicians or producers need to accomplish.

TRL Level 8: Actual System Completed and Qualified Through Test and Demonstration

  • Artistic Experimentation: This involves systematic exploration of new techniques, tools, or creative possibilities within artistic practice. Researchers document and analyze their experimental processes to extract insights about music technology and its creative applications.

TRL Level 9: Actual System Proven Through Successful Mission Operations

  • Artistic Production: This method uses the creation of musical works or sound installations as a primary research activity, where the technical and aesthetic decisions made during production contribute to knowledge development in music technology.
  • Research Creation: This approach positions artistic creation itself as research, where the act of making music or developing audio tools generates new knowledge. The creative output serves both as the method and as evidence of the research findings.

Working between art and science, design and engineering

What differentiates music technology as a research discipline is that it involves both artistic and scientific inquiry, blending creative practice with technical rigor. Researchers in this field must navigate between subjective aesthetic judgment and objective measurement, between intuitive design exploration and systematic validation.

This duality means that music technologists often employ methods from the arts and humanities, natural and social sciences, and design and engineering in parallel. They might conduct artistic experiments to explore creative possibilities while also running controlled tests to measure technical performance. This hybrid approach requires researchers to be “bilingual”, capable of communicating findings through both artistic demonstrations and peer-reviewed publications, bridging communities that don’t always speak the same language. That is easier said than done, but that is also why people do a PhD in music technology!

This text was co-written with Claude Sonnet 4, and I have used Grammarly Pro for grammar checking.