# The listening habits of the people on this forum: A study



## Classical Saxophonist (Oct 11, 2013)

Hello,

I would like to conduct a (unscientific) study on the classical music listening habits of the people on this forum based on instrumentation.

Below are three groups of various instruments/ensembles/etc. used in classical music.

Group 1 (the bowed strings and piano)
-Orchestra
-String orchestra
-String quartet
-Piano trio
-Violin music
-Viola music
-Cello music
-Double bass music
-Piano music
-Any bowed string/piano ensemble not mentioned above

Group 2 (the winds)
-Concert band
-Wind instrument music (any wind instrument used in classical music, such as oboe, flute, saxophone, trumpet, etc.)
-Wind quintet
-Reed quintet
-Brass quintet
-Saxophone quartet
-Brass quartet
-Any other wind instrument ensemble not mentioned above

Group 3
-Everything not covered in group 1 or group 2. Can include sacred music, opera, choral, guitar, percussion, etc. etc. etc.

*Examples for clarification: A concerto for violin and wind ensemble would go in group 1 because the solo instrument is a string instrument. A concerto for saxophone and string orchestra would go in group 2 because the solo instrument is a wind instrument.

How much do you listen to each of the above groups? (estimate, of course)

For example, lets say you listen to the orchestra 50%, string quartet 10%, piano 10%, concert band 15%, wind quintet 5%, guitar 5%, and sacred music 5%. You would say you listen to group 1 70% of the time, group 2 20% of the time, and group 3 10% of the time.

Here are my estimates of my classical music listening habits:

Group 1 estimate: 10% overall
-Orchestra: 5%
-String orchestra: 2%
-Piano music: 2%
-Cello music:1 %

Group 2 estimate: 85% overall
-Concert band: 37%
-Reed quintet: 1%
-Saxophone quartet: 5%
-Wind instrument music: 42% (primarily saxophone, but also some others)

Group 3 estimate: 5% overall
-Sacred music: 5%


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

I listen to a wide range of instrumental genres, and can not at all imagine being busy with this sort of breakdown of percentage of time listening to one sort or another


----------



## Classical Saxophonist (Oct 11, 2013)

PetrB said:


> I listen to a wide range of instrumental genres, and can not at all imagine being busy with this sort of breakdown of percentage of time listening to one sort or another


You could just give a rough estimate total for each group without giving a breakdown. 

For example: group1= 10%, group2= 85%, group3= 5%.


----------



## musicrom (Dec 29, 2013)

These are my estimates:

Group 1: 95%
-Orchestra: 55%
-String orchestra: 5%
-String quartet: 10%
-Piano trio: 1%
-Violin music: 7%
-Viola music: 6%
-Cello music: 1%
-Double bass music: 0%
-Piano music: 10%

The remaining 5-ish percent is generally random music I accidentally listen to (on Pandora, for example).


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

Classical Saxophonist said:


> You could just give a rough estimate total for each group without giving a breakdown.
> 
> For example: group1= 10%, group2= 85%, group3= 5%.


No really, not that I don't wish to comply, I'm actually incapable of doing what you suggest -- have no sense of numbers = my time spent with music as you have put it.

I can tell you I have a general aversion to solo single-line instrumental pieces, much favor piano quartets or more vs. piano trios, don't even care much for solo piano after much time and more prefer when it is combined with several other instruments -- but other than that, I really really play the field.

I just do not 'grok' time spent here or there = X percent; it is a totally alien concept.


----------



## Selby (Nov 17, 2012)

Group 1 (the bowed strings and piano) - 65% - sq > solo piano > orchestral > misc. chamber

Group 2 (the winds) - 5%

Group 3 - 30% sacred/choral > song cycles > opera 

The number would skew more towards Group 3 because I love vocal music but my life is more conducive towards non-vocal music, aka sitting in my office and listening to music between seeing clients without irritating the clinicians across the hall/on the other sides of my walls.


----------



## User in F minor (Feb 5, 2014)

Group 1, 60% (of which 50% orchestral, 30% piano, 10% string ensembles of various sizes, 5% cello...)
Group 2, 2% (utterly unknown to me save for a handful of works)
Group 3, 38% (mostly songs and Renaissance polyphony)

(if non-classical music is part of group 3, it's more like 34%, 1%, 65%)


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

PetrB said:


> I listen to a wide range of instrumental genres, and can not at all imagine being busy with this sort of breakdown of percentage of time listening to one sort or another


Ahhhhh come on.....go ahead!


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

hpowders said:


> Ahhhhh come on.....go ahead!


Truly, no grasp on numbers or percents in that context -- truly alien concept / empty zone / missing that chip, etc.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

PetrB said:


> Truly, no grasp on numbers or percents in that context -- truly alien concept / empty zone / missing that chip, etc.


Yeah, yeah. Like you don't do your own income taxes. :lol:


----------



## rrudolph (Sep 15, 2011)

Bit o' this, bit o' that

You do percussion, voice, organ and plucked strings a disservice by lumping them all into one "miscellaneous" category.
And you left out electronic music entirely ("miscellaneous" too, I'm guessing?)


----------



## Headphone Hermit (Jan 8, 2014)

hpowders said:


> Ahhhhh come on.....go ahead!


(((Where's RevDave when you need him???)))









Will you have a cup of tea, Father Ted?

Not now, thank you, Mrs Doyle

Aaagh, go on now, Father Ted, you'll have a cup of tea now, won't you? Go on then!! Go on, go on, go on, go on, go on, go on, go on, go on, go on


----------



## Classical Saxophonist (Oct 11, 2013)

rrudolph said:


> You do percussion, voice, organ and plucked strings a disservice by lumping them all into one "miscellaneous" category.
> And you left out electronic music entirely ("miscellaneous" too, I'm guessing?)


I mainly wanted to see string/piano vs. winds. The 3rd group is to round it out. I suppose I could have done maybe 5 groups.

I'm not familiar with electronic classical music. It would go in the 3rd group as well, unless it was like a piece for violin and electronics or something like that.


----------



## rrudolph (Sep 15, 2011)

Classical Saxophonist said:


> I'm not familiar with electronic classical music.


I am pleased to introduce you to the winner of the 1970 Pulitzer Prize in music:


----------



## Incitatus (Mar 27, 2014)

About 95% of the time I'm listening to orchestral/string music (I'm including Wind Ensembles and Symphonic orchestras in here too). The rest of the time is spent listening to wind instruments and miscellaneous pieces.


----------



## Classical Saxophonist (Oct 11, 2013)

Just to clarify something: for example, an oboe concerto with orchestra accompaniment would go in group 2 since it's a wind instrument's repertoire. I just edited the OP to make it clearer.


----------



## Classical Saxophonist (Oct 11, 2013)

Incitatus said:


> About 95% of the time I'm listening to orchestral/string music (I'm including Wind Ensembles and Symphonic orchestras in here too). The rest of the time is spent listening to wind instruments and miscellaneous pieces.


What percentage of the time would you say you listen to orchestras and strings vs. wind ensembles and wind instruments?


----------



## Classical Saxophonist (Oct 11, 2013)

rrudolph said:


> I am pleased to introduce you to the winner of the 1970 Pulitzer Prize in music:


I've heard of that composer. He composed multiple saxophone pieces.


----------



## Guest (Mar 28, 2014)

The sound is really dreadful. That is, the sound is fine, but it's a far cry from what Charles made in the late sixties.

I suppose if you haven't heard that, then this won't be gagsome.


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

I don't connect with the categories offered, so I'll do it this way:

Solo - 40%
Chamber - 30%
Orchestral - 10%
Vocal - 20%


----------



## musicrom (Dec 29, 2013)

Classical Saxophonist said:


> Just to clarify something: for example, an oboe concerto with orchestra accompaniment would go in group 2 since it's a wind instrument's repertoire. I just edited the OP to make it clearer.


In that case, group 2 would have a little bit more for me - I sometimes listen to concertos for wind instruments, mostly flute though.


----------



## Classical Saxophonist (Oct 11, 2013)

Bulldog said:


> I don't connect with the categories offered, so I'll do it this way:
> 
> Solo - 40%
> Chamber - 30%
> ...


But string/piano or wind solo and chamber music?


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

Classical Saxophonist said:


> But string/piano or wind solo and chamber music?


None of your three groups makes sense to me. Orchestra and piano trios and piano music in one group? Winds have their own group? One group that has both sacred choral and guitar? As I said earlier, I don't connect.


----------



## Classical Saxophonist (Oct 11, 2013)

Bulldog said:


> None of your three groups makes sense to me. Orchestra and piano trios and piano music in one group? Winds have their own group? One group that has both sacred choral and guitar? As I said earlier, I don't connect.


I want to compare string/piano listening verses wind listening. Group 3 is just to see how much non-string/piano/wind music people listen to so that I can get a percentage of total listening from each of the first 2 groups.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

Classical Saxophonist said:


> I want to compare string/piano listening verses wind listening. Group 3 is just to see how much non-string/piano/wind music people listen to so that I can get a percentage of total listening from each of the first 2 groups.


You play saxophone, want to know how many people listen to wind family music. What a shocker .

Just ask the various instrumental players of this and that who are around you what they listen to, lol.

Wind ensembles, chamber, have a limited rep in the classical rep until the 20th century, and the inclusion of saxophones is "recent," but still rare, in orchestral music (Berg violin concerto, etc.)

You have multiple saxophones and other reeds in Steve Reich's sort of now 'generic' but eccentric minimalist band ensemble, like Music for eighteen musicians. They show up often enough in Louis Andriessen's music.

I've attended several recitals of saxophone quartet / quintet -- they were contemporary classical, the venue a specialized one for contemporary music, the hall relatively small.

Of course that I think is part of what you're hoping to find out, but I think my attending those few saxophone ensemble concerts is relatively rare compared to the average listener / concert goer, and ditto for the average classical music listener opting more consciously or regularly for 'wind music.'

I love Stravinsky, very much like his writing for the wind families, and am very keen on his _Symphonies d'instruments a vent_ a fine piece, but do not choose by instrumental family group to go to a symphonic band concert, buy a CD, etc. I like the Ibert flute concerto, but don't listen to any others, flute concerti, really. I listen to the Prokofiev Sonata for piano and flute because it is Prokofiev, not because it is for flute, and it runs very much like that for other instrumental concerti. The piece first, the genre / instrument last.

My guess would be most of those who do attend such concerts and purchase recordings are or were wind players, were in the band at some level of school, and have a fondness for it. (this is also worth including as part of the question.) I don't think there is much of that in the lives of the average classical fan.

But, maybe this semi-poll will tell you some of what you're looking to find out


----------



## Classical Saxophonist (Oct 11, 2013)

PetrB said:


> You play saxophone, want to know how many people listen to wind family music. What a shocker .
> 
> Just ask the various instrumental players of this and that who are around you what they listen to, lol.
> 
> ...


My hypothesis was that group 1 would have a much higher percentage than group 2 for most listeners on this forum, as I have observed that most classical music listeners on a couple forums I've visited seem to be more concerned with strings or piano and less concerned with winds. My hypothesis seems accurate so far. Why winds are comparatively ignored, I'm not sure. Perhaps that's a question for another thread.

I tend to choose my music based on the instrument/ensemble, as some sounds appeal to me more than others. For example, I like the sound of a concert band more than the sound of an orchestra. The sound of the ensembles are comparable, but I think the concert band sounds more powerful and a little more full. Plus I've played saxophone in concert bands for years, so I'm biased. For solo music, I really like the sound of the saxophone, oboe, euphonium, etc., so that's what I tend to listen to.


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

Classical Saxophonist said:


> My hypothesis was that group 1 would have a much higher percentage than group 2 for most listeners on this forum, as I have observed that most classical music listeners on a couple forums I've visited seem to be more concerned with strings or piano and less concerned with winds. My hypothesis seems accurate so far. Why winds are comparatively ignored, I'm not sure. Perhaps that's a question for another thread.


You hypothesis is flawed insofar as it assumes that people who listen to orchestral music do so in order to hear the sound of strings more than winds, rather than the two groups together as equals. While it may have been true in earlier eras (Baroque, Classical) that an orchestra was primarily a string-led group supplemented by a few winds for coloristic effect, this is certainly less true in the Romantic period, and often not at all true today (observe the orchestra used by Stravinsky in Symphony of Psalms, for example, which is distinguished by its lack of any violins or violas).


----------



## Classical Saxophonist (Oct 11, 2013)

Mahlerian said:


> You hypothesis is flawed insofar as it assumes that people who listen to orchestral music do so in order to hear the sound of strings more than winds, rather than the two groups together as equals. While it may have been true in earlier eras (Baroque, Classical) that an orchestra was primarily a string-led group supplemented by a few winds for coloristic effect, this is certainly less true in the Romantic period, and often not at all true today (observe the orchestra used by Stravinsky in Symphony of Psalms, for example, which is distinguished by its lack of any violins or violas).


My hypothesis doesn't assume that. Perhaps I should have clarified by saying "orchestra/strings/piano vs. concert band/winds". Sorry for not being clear enough.


----------

