The future of music still sounds like the 1980s. The case of Dixon and Stein with “Stranger Things”

“We went from being complete unknowns to becoming famous in the space of a weekend. The first series of Stranger Things was an instant hit, something we could never have predicted. We simply did our job.” Kyle Dixon and Michael Stein, American musicians and composers, members of the electronic band Survive and creators of the original Stranger Things soundtrack – including the series’ opening theme – speak to Il Foglio about the sudden popularity brought about by Netflix, their connection to 1980s music, and the transformations in the music industry in the age of artificial intelligence. For their work on the series, they won an Emmy and received two Grammy nominations. On Thursday 19 November, they will be in the Sala Sinopoli at the Auditorium Parco della Musica Ennio Morricone in Rome with a show spanning the music from all five seasons. “We’re presenting a selection of tracks that alternates between darker, more frightening moments and more tender ones.” It will not simply be a soundtrack to the episodes, but a show in which the lighting design will serve “to add a dramatic and cinematic effect to the music”.

The series, the two artists continue, “has completely changed our lives. We used to work for other people, whereas now we’ve managed to work mainly for ourselves. It’s given us much more freedom and the chance to take music seriously as a profession”. Success, however, hasn’t turned them into unapproachable celebrities. “In a sense, we’re still anonymous. We can move about freely in the world and we’re not the sort of people who are constantly stopped for an autograph when we leave the hotel.” There is also a more personal satisfaction: knowing that we’ve introduced someone to music. “I enjoy meeting young people who tell me they’ve been influenced by us or have discovered new music thanks to us.” Although, they admit, “it’s hard to really believe that our work can have the same impact that other musicians have had on us.”

Their relationship with the 1980s, however, is less nostalgic than one might imagine. Both were children during that decade and their perception of those years is ‘an image constructed in retrospect’. Music, however, has remained an important point of reference: “We listened to a lot of songs from that decade, probably more than we realised, partly thanks to the pop radio stations that kept playing them.” Their relationship with television was different. “I don’t have many memories of the programmes from those years, but I really liked the original MacGyver series,” says Stein.

So why does popular culture constantly look back to the 1980s? “I’d heard that everything follows cycles of 20 or 25 years. What was popular back then comes back because there’s a new generation discovering it,” says Dixon. But it’s not just a matter of generational change. “The 1980s were a period when electronic and synthetic sounds and special effects began to explore different possibilities. Technology changed and people began experimenting very quickly, creating a wide variety of music, images and techniques,” they explain. Then, with the arrival of the 1990s, part of that aesthetic was abandoned by the mainstream, though it did not disappear from underground music. “Perhaps today we look back on the early versions of those technologies with a certain fascination. But the image of the 1980s is different for each of us.”

On the future of electronic music, the two musicians do not seem particularly impressed by the constant evolution of instruments. “Innovation lies in approaching something familiar from a different perspective, or in combining two elements that do not normally go together.” They add: “We don’t believe there are many completely new ideas. Most things can be traced back to fairly simple elements, but that doesn’t mean we should downplay what is being created.” The point, in short, is not just the sound, but today “it is easier than ever to produce generic music, using samples, templates, presets and instruments that allow you to sound like everyone else. Even artificial intelligence can be used to copy something. But you can be just as derivative by following an academic path and trying to make music like John Williams. Originality depends on the ideas behind the music, not on whether it’s electronic or not.”

When it comes to artificial intelligence, their stance becomes even clearer. “We don’t believe it will have any effect on our music, other than making certain tasks easier for us.” The problem, for them, is the risk that technology might end up replacing creative work. “If someone can do something more cheaply, they will. But why try to take away art instead of doing something good for people, like producing low-cost medicines?” The two musicians do not reject every application of AI, provided it remains a tool in the service of creativity. “The question is how much you really learn when something does everything for you.” They are therefore willing to use technologies that simplify the work, for example “those that allow you to isolate individual instruments in an old recording”. It is a different matter, however, to ask AI to compose a track for them: “We have no interest in doing that. The beauty lies precisely in the creative process.”

Finally, there remains the most difficult question for anyone whose name has become synonymous with international success: how do you avoid becoming a prisoner of it? “It’s something we grapple with every day. You have to do something different that becomes just as popular as what made you famous. But the chances of succeeding are rather slim.” Repeating the formula of Stranger Things, after all, wouldn’t be a solution, because “it would bore us”. The path to follow is to “develop interesting collaborations, take on new projects with directors who trust you and support their ideas. Create something new together, hoping it isn’t just a spin-off of what you’ve already done. And perhaps one of these projects will become popular. We’ll make music; it’ll have a certain sound, and people may or may not listen to it”.