Now that a relationship between the four introductory concepts has been established, we can move to develop these concepts into their final incarnations. Let us first start with the what to do section.

Presented in Motivation and Personality (Maslow 1954), the Hierarchy of Basic Needs establishes a model of Abraham H. Maslow’s interpretations of motivational and developmental psychology and psychiatry. This model has served as a starting point for developing a similarly structured hierarchy, and as such several characteristics from Maslow’s basic need hierarchy have proved significant in the development of this research project. The following sections shall break two of these characteristics down: relationship, and outcome orientation.

Relationship

Within the hierarchy, Maslow posits five categories of basic needs: Physiological, Safety, Belongingness and Love, Esteem, and Self-actualisation (1987, pp 15-22). Maslow then orders them into a hierarchy, later identifying sixteen relationships between “higher and lower needs” (p 56-58) (Figure 2). Three of these relationships are discussed below:

“The higher the need the less imperative it is for sheer survival”

Simply put; lower needs are more relevant to sheer survival. For instance, breathing, sleeping, and eating are all more pertinent for sheer survival than esteem, love, or safety needs. Obviously, if these physiological needs were to go unmet, the other higher needs would become rather redundant (analogous to removing the foundations of a building or structure).

“Higher need gratifications produce more desirable subjective results”

Higher needs (such as esteem and self-actualisation) provide the most desirable subjective results. This is akin to expressing creativity as being more subjectively rewarding than simply breathing.

Charting these two relationships onto the hierarchy (Figure 3a) reveals an inverse relationship (Figure 3b), as Maslow posits that the less required a need is for sheer survival, the more it appears to subjectively reward when satisfied (1987, p 57). This inverse relationship is reminiscent of certain tasks within audio engineering, in that plugging a microphone in is a critical task; without plugging microphones etc in, completing most tasks becomes untenable. Furthermore, while plugging microphones in is not particularly gratifying activity on its own, attaining a completed mix can be particularly gratifying.

A third relationship that Maslow identifies between higher and lower needs should be highlighted:

“Higher needs are later ontogenetic developments”

This relationship translates to lower needs emerging first chronologically, and only after cognitive development do higher needs start to be present; new-borns do not have inclinations to self-actualise yet do have immediate physiological needs. While there is no immediate ‘cognitive development’ comparison within audio engineering, an analogue could be the development of projects themselves. When starting any project, whether it be live sound, studio recording, or livestreaming – it is unrealistic to start setting up EQs or compressors until you have at least heard the sound coming from a given microphone. Perhaps then, in an audio engineering hierarchy, tasks could be placed in an order that reflects a realistic chronology of tasks, similar to the ontogenetic development that Maslow refers to.

Task and outcome orientation

With the five categories of basic needs that Maslow discusses in mind (Figure 2), it is my belief that Maslow’s hierarchy of basic needs is outcome oriented. By outcome oriented, I simply mean that Maslow is listing his needs in a way that allows for any method of need fulfilment to sate that specific need. Naturally, Maslow would be unable to specify all methods that may be taken to achieve homeostasis beyond identifying that there are mechanisms which bring us to satisfy our needs (1987, pp 15-17). Likewise, when addressing creativity, Maslow does not state all of the various methods that one can take to satisfy creative needs – and understandably so. Simply put, the focus of Maslow’s basic need hierarchy is upon the outcome (or, function) of completed tasks, and not upon the means by which one attempts to achieve an outcome (i.e. the method).

For example, ‘miking a drum kit’ in a live sound scenario largely provides the function of ‘capturing the sound of a drum kit for amplification’. This could be considered a task which when completed provides a function, with the exact methods that one decides to mic a drum kit with are derived from how to do it (Figure 1) – with methods likely to influence variables (texture, tonal balance, etc) which exist independent of functions (i.e. to achieve amplification). Thus, it is for this reason that placing tasks into their own hierarchy, may allow for a more isomorphic and universal approach to a task-based hierarchy – and one that may also need less adjustments to remain applicable to a wider range of scenarios.

Applying these principals

Borrowing from these two characteristics, we can establish a unique task-based hierarchy - this hierarchy will be entitled, unsurprisingly, the hierarchy of tasks (HoT) due to its task-oriented nature. Figure 4a shows the hierarchical structure of the HoT, which has the higher and lower regions illustrated. As discussed previously, similarly to the chronology of ontogenetic need development, tasks listed A through Z will be completed in that order (starting lower, moving through higher).

Figure 4b is a populated mock-up of an audio engineering HoT – with tasks placed in a roughly accurate order. Borrowing from the ‘sheer survival’ relationship discussed earlier, if the bottom tasks are not completed the top tasks would become redundant. For example, if a microphone or audio source is not appropriately plugged in or gained then skipping to apply EQ, compression or gating would be superfluous. Furthermore, the audio engineering analogue of Maslow’s ‘subjective gratification’ relationship is represented by the overall subjective gratification from a completed mix, compared to the subjective gratification of plugging a microphone in, or setting the input gain of a microphone.

As this research paper is primarily focused on axiological influences upon audio engineering practices, a finalised and populated HoT has not been attempted. Thus, a HoT can be populated with any number of tasks in an order that is appropriate for the scenario and field.

Having developed what to do into the HoT, the next section will cover development of how to do it. To achieve this, two areas of philosophy will be explored: (a) ontology, will cover a discussion of ‘what is sound’, and (b) axiology, will provide several concepts of value relevant to the model.

‍