# Article was wrong... my tastes have expanded greatly after I turned after I turned 33



## Albert7 (Nov 16, 2014)

I just read these articles.

http://skynetandebert.com/2015/04/22/music-was-better-back-then-when-do-we-stop-keeping-up-with-popular-music/

and

http://epicnews.tk/is-33-the-cutoff-age-for-listening-to-new-music/

Definitely wrong for me but maybe not for others.

In fact, I am 38 and I am hearing new sounds lately that at the age of 33 I would have poohed poohed.

For example, Lopez and Rihm and Feldman and Boulez and Nono and even Taylor Swift and Lindsey Stirling are all artists I would have dismissed during my early 30's as being garbage or un-listenable back then.

Now my ears are attuned to pretty much anything I get my hands on. In fact, I even recently added heavy metal to the list of things I have enjoyed.

So as you grow older have your music tastes remained static or dynamic at around 33 as the article suggested?


----------



## sharik (Jan 23, 2013)

personally i have given up on pop music five years ago and now can't stand the sound of it.


----------



## Sloe (May 9, 2014)

I think most people stays with the music they liked when they were teenagers or even younger. That is also something I have noticed from reading the posts here.
I can say that I have lost nearly all contact with modern popular music. I don´t listen to the radio channels were it is played and I have no TV so I don´t see any performances on TV. The TV programs I see are those I look for certainly so there is no casual watching.


----------



## Lord Lance (Nov 4, 2013)

Albert7 said:


> I just read these articles.
> 
> http://skynetandebert.com/2015/04/2...hen-do-we-stop-keeping-up-with-popular-music/
> 
> ...


Well, age has less to do with expansion and more with motivation. If you know me, you'd know well enough that I did not enjoy post-20th Century music a few months ago and now its a different landscape. I like Webern, Shostabear, Prokofiev, Rachmaninoff, Britten, Vaughan Williams, Malcolm Arnold, Part, Rihm, Glass, Bartok, Elgar, Ravel, Debussy [Russian bias for Twentieth century works oddly enough.]. Some are modernists and some are romanticists.

It takes an open ear. I reckon that I will go through another stage of metamorphosis within the next six months and enjoy some of the much harsher works that modernist music employs. Its been harsh from the pieces I've heard; if there exist works more in vein of balance between storm and peace, I've yet to hear them.

Now, all that remains is enjoying opera and ballet. I can certainly attest to not enjoying them for a long time because I have neither the motivation nor the energy; neither the patience nor the conviction to enjoy them. Going through hours of stressing music in hope of eventually liking it is not my thing. Too much good music exists to waste time on opera and ballet.

When I am 33, perhaps?


----------



## Nereffid (Feb 6, 2013)

But those articles were specifically about streaming of popular music. There's no indication that the results can be extrapolated to a relatively _un_popular genre like classical, where listening habits aren't driven by a constant stream of new popular artists.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

It's even less clear that a few people whose tastes do change destroy the generalization that most people's don't. 

Mine hasn't, much.


----------



## Ingélou (Feb 10, 2013)

My hey-day for listening to pop music was from twelve and a half to fourteen, when I had a crush on Paul McCartney & enjoyed jive sessions in the school hall at lunch time; by the age of sixteen, I'd lost interest. If I ever listen to pop, it will be to the Crystals or Manfred Mann or somebody, but I rarely do.

But since returning to the violin and joining TalkClassical, I am now more open to listening to new music than I ever was. I always liked early music and baroque, but hadn't explored much; and I'll now listen to (& often like) modern music too, usually to see the point of various discussion threads here. 

So what does that prove?
Not a lot!


----------



## Albert7 (Nov 16, 2014)

Nereffid said:


> But those articles were specifically about streaming of popular music. There's no indication that the results can be extrapolated to a relatively _un_popular genre like classical, where listening habits aren't driven by a constant stream of new popular artists.


As a gentleman, I would like to disagree politely with this take. Classical may be relatively unpopular relative to say country music but even within the genre there are listening habits driven by popular artists. For example, right now I'm looking at the top 10 albums on iTunes under classical music...

And we have

2Cellos
Andrea Boceeli
Yo-Yo Ma
The Piano Guys
Itzhak Perlman

We aren't getting

Luigi Nono
Enrico Caruso
Isabel Leonard
Karlheinz Stockhausen
Glenn Gould

kicking it loose on the popular top 10 classical music charts here.

Cliques do exist no matter what sub categories exist. The Piano Guys are probably going to beat Nono most given Sundays just like Faith Hill out-boxing Merle Haggard on most days.


----------



## Nereffid (Feb 6, 2013)

Albert7 said:


> As a gentleman, I would like to disagree politely with this take. Classical may be relatively unpopular relative to say country music but even within the genre there are listening habits driven by popular artists. For example, right now I'm looking at the top 10 albums on iTunes under classical music...
> 
> And we have
> 
> ...


Well, as you know I've argued before that 2Cellos, the Piano Guys and Lindsey Stirling aren't classical artists, but leaving that to one side...

Sure, people do buy classical music based on the artist involved; that's true, but the way people respond to those artists is hugely different from the way people who buy popular music respond.
People buy Katy Perry's new album because it's got Katy Perry's new songs on it. That's not why people buy, say, Hilary Hahn's new album. Some of them buy it because they like her playing in general, but others will buy it because they like Mozart and Vieuxtemps. The next Katy Perry album will probably be bought by more or less the same people as those who bought the last one, but Hilary Hahn's next album might be - I don't know - Salonen and Ligeti - and that would be a substantially different audience.
And even more obviously, ask your average classical listener (I mean proper classical listener, not 2Cellos and the like) what music they like, and they mention _composers_ or _eras_ or _genres_; your average popular-music listener tends to name _performers_.
So listening habits for popular and classical music are different, different enough I think that you can't extrapolate from the former to the latter.


----------



## Albert7 (Nov 16, 2014)

Nereffid said:


> Well, as you know I've argued before that 2Cellos, the Piano Guys and Lindsey Stirling aren't classical artists, but leaving that to one side...
> 
> Sure, people do buy classical music based on the artist involved; that's true, but the way people respond to those artists is hugely different from the way people who buy popular music respond.
> People buy Katy Perry's new album because it's got Katy Perry's new songs on it. That's not why people buy, say, Hilary Hahn's new album. Some of them buy it because they like her playing in general, but others will buy it because they like Mozart and Vieuxtemps. The next Katy Perry album will probably be bought by more or less the same people as those who bought the last one, but Hilary Hahn's next album might be - I don't know - Salonen and Ligeti - and that would be a substantially different audience.
> ...


For me, and it's personal is that I am going to pick up the Hilary Hahn less for the pieces and more for the fact that it's a new recording from Hahn and she hadn't done those pieces before. 

But that's just me.


----------



## brotagonist (Jul 11, 2013)

Like sharik, I've pretty much given up on pop music. Once in a while, I discover a new band that snags my interest for a few hours, at best a couple of days, but I haven't really gone mad over any pop music for a very long time. The last new discovery to do that to me was Rammstein, which I didn't discover until about 4 years ago—that's how out of touch I am with that world. I still like them, by the way. They kind of have everything I expect from a rock outfit: lyrics, bass, rhythm, electronics, noise, danceability...

I'm constantly listening to new stuff: just scan some of my posts on the Current Listening threads. Recently, I heard Martinů's The Epic of Gilgamesh, a piece that could be nominated for the post-'50s list, to name but one. There are LOTS of pieces from that list I want to explore and, now that I have slowed down my buying for a little while, I want to focus more on discovering new things... that could well be my purchases in the months and years to come!

I approach music acquisition differently than when I was in my 20s. Then, I just bought everything I could get my hands on and there were lots of disappointments that I sold back to shops at a tremendous loss. Today, I like to watch a composer's development for a few years, to see if we are on the same wavelength. I like to discover the kind of composers that I want to follow for years to come, not those who do one whizzbang work and nothing else that interests me. It's a mutual relationship.

So, in a sense, my exposure to new music is always expanding, but the way I go about it has changed. I suppose that fact that I'm still into classical, whether it's my recent discovery of the Baroque master Biber or the modern Rzewski, who I still haven't heard  perhaps it isn't such a big change after all. I was always pretty open to new stuff and I still am. I have gotten more critical and discerning, perhaps, since I really have heard a lot, so there has to be something special about a composer's œuvre that makes it stand out. Bizarreness worked for me when I was 20, but it's not enough for me now.

Oh, and I buy music for the composer, not the artist. That's where my pop habits and classical ones deviate. Clearly, there are artists I have a number of great albums by, so their offerings of a composer's work I am after would interest me more than another's, but I don't buy just because these artists have done a new album.


----------



## Guest (May 5, 2015)

I do think it odd that people want to go to see Lang Lang, without being concerned or interested in the composer's pieces. Don't they want to know WHAT he will be playing? Apparently not, it's sufficient to know it's Lang Lang.

I'm going to see Lang Lang.
Oh, what's he performing?
Classical stuff, he's a pianist...

At least if I go to see Alice in Chains it's because I know they'll be performing songs by, duh, Alice in Chains (one therefore can automatically see that I like the songs of Alice in Chains).


----------



## Guest (May 5, 2015)

Ingélou said:


> My hey-day for listening to pop music was from twelve and a half to fourteen, when I had a crush on Paul McCartney & enjoyed jive sessions in the school hall at lunch time; by the age of sixteen, I'd lost interest. If I ever listen to pop, it will be to the Crystals or Manfred Mann or somebody, but I rarely do.
> 
> But since returning to the violin and joining TalkClassical, I am now more open to listening to new music than I ever was. I always liked early music and baroque, but hadn't explored much; and I'll now listen to (& often like) modern music too, usually to see the point of various discussion threads here.
> 
> ...


Which modern stuff have you liked? Does it tend to feature the violin?

(A million years ago I went to a gig by Manfred Mann's Earth Band.)


----------



## GreenMamba (Oct 14, 2012)

dogen said:


> I do think it odd that people want to go to see Lang Lang, without being concerned or interested in the composer's pieces. Don't they want to know WHAT he will be playing? Apparently not, it's sufficient to know it's Lang Lang.


Tonight, he'll be performing Dillon's Book of Elements.

Seriously, people trust Lang to pick the sort of works they want to hear.


----------



## Ingélou (Feb 10, 2013)

dogen said:


> Which modern stuff have you liked? Does it tend to feature the violin?
> 
> (A million years ago I went to a gig by Manfred Mann's Earth Band.)


No. I don't look for modern music played on certain instruments - it's more the case that I *stumble across* some and find I like it, usually because, if it doesn't have a tune, I like the quality of the sound. So I looked at some of Cage's works when I was posting on The Infamous Thread, and liked the early stuff, such as Dream 



 ; and PetrB once sent me links for modern works, and I particularly liked Robert Moran's Chant du Cygne - 




I also look for composer names for the Musical Word Association, and come across modern composers with the 'right names' and give them a listen, and sometimes I think 'ugh' and sometimes 'aahhh'!

I am an old-fashioned person who generally likes modern music if I can engage with it on an imaginative level. I like a poetic ambience, something that calls up associations with words or dancing. I'm thousands of miles away from the true modern-music lovers on TC.

But the point is that I wouldn't have listened to newer music *at all*, before I joined TalkClassical.

So you *can* teach your grandmother to suck eggs - though I prefer to eat them boiled in an eggcup, with a spoon.


----------



## Guest (May 5, 2015)

How's the right name / word association thing work then?

And... Do you like any of the new old, such as Arvo Part?

(I like my eggs like my music....scrambled!)

Like you, all I have discovered in new names is through this forum...


----------



## Dim7 (Apr 24, 2009)

Doesn't apply to me either, but the fact that I turned from 34 to 33 might be relevant.


----------



## Guest (May 5, 2015)

I skipped the dull years and went straight to 55.


----------



## Ingélou (Feb 10, 2013)

dogen said:


> How's the right name / word association thing work then?


How it works: the previous poster had put Debussy, La Mer. I saw 'Deb' and thought of Debbie Reynolds - looked in the Wiki alphabetic list of classical composers, because I thought there must be someone called Reynolds. And there was - Roger Reynolds, born 1934. And he had written a piece in 1965 that caught my fancy. 





Obviously this isn't *very* new but it's 200 yrs newer than I usually listen to, and a modernistic style. It shows how playing games on TC can make me listen to things I don't know much about.

:lol: Actually, I don't know much about any sort of music, but that's why I'm here...


----------



## mmsbls (Mar 6, 2011)

Albert7 said:


> Definitely wrong for me but maybe not for others.
> 
> In fact, I am 38 and I am hearing new sounds lately that at the age of 33 I would have poohed poohed.


I'm not sure of your listening habits when you were younger, but what you describe above _does_ coincide with the article. The article does not say that listening habits always remain static after 33. It describes two reasons why people listen to less popular music as they age. One reason is:

"...listeners discover less-familiar music genres that they didn't hear on FM radio as early teens, from artists with a lower popularity rank. "

That certainly agrees with your tastes. Lopez and Rihm and Feldman and Boulez and Nono are nowhere near the top 200, 500, or 1000 based on "median artist popularity rank".

I like popular music of the 60s-early 80s (although I rarely listen to that) and classical. Both trends agree with the study.


----------



## Guest (May 6, 2015)

The thing is, while I did listen to a lot of pop/rock in my teens, I was also exploring jazz, electronic music, avant-garde, Gregorian chant. My favorite rock groups were ELP, Gentle Giant and King Crimson. I STILL listen to Crimson (cuz they're still around). But beyond that kind of stuff from my youth, I don't listen to much of any pop I listened to as a teen except very occasionally for a nostalgia buzz. While I do think the pop of my youth far better than any pop today, my favorite pop is the R&B and jump from the late 40s and early 50s which includes the very early pre-Elvis rock n roll. Best pop ever.

I mean, come on, man!










But I'm also quite hung up on the pop of the 1920s:











These were genres and styles I discovered in my 30s. I had simply stopped listening to anything mainstream by then. Still don't. Don't know who any of the bands are today and don't care. But go back to pop from 100 years ago and I'm right there!


----------



## Simon Moon (Oct 10, 2013)

The first article does not pertain to me, because I was never a listener of pop music.

Soon after I entered my teens, I discovered prog, jazz-fusion, jazz, and in my 30's I got more heavily into 20th century and contemporary classical (spurred by listening to 'avant-garde' prog, which is influenced by contemporary classical).

The second article, also does not fit me, since I am now a couple of decades past my 30's, and the thought of not searching out new music is a foreign concept to me.

I read an article about 10 years ago similar to this, but the researcher also brought up art and food tastes being set by the age of 33, along with music. 

I just can't relate to the mindset of not discovering new music (art and food).

My girlfriend and I love discovering new ethnic restaurants, new and experimental art, and new music. I'm a bit more experimental on the music than she is, and she is a bit more experimental on the art than I am.


----------



## Albert7 (Nov 16, 2014)

Indeed, I am listening to a lot of teenage pop music lately and it has been exhilarating indeed. Katy Perry is just fun but I haven't gotten around to Britney Spears yet. Someday hopefully.

Dream Theater is another good recent find.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

Simon Moon said:


> The first article does not pertain to me, because I was never a listener of pop music.
> 
> Soon after I entered my teens, I discovered prog, jazz-fusion, jazz, and in my 30's I got more heavily into 20th century and contemporary classical (spurred by listening to 'avant-garde' prog, which is influenced by contemporary classical).
> 
> ...


But if you've been doing that since before you were 33, maybe your tastes haven't changed. This is why I say mine haven't changed much.


----------



## Richannes Wrahms (Jan 6, 2014)

Nel mezzo del cammin di nostra vita...


----------



## MoonlightSonata (Mar 29, 2014)

My tastes have change massively over the past year (I can't say about when I'm 33 - that's a long way off at the moment). About three years ago, I would have been bored by Handel or Debussy. A year ago, I hated Stravinsky (and just about all other 20th century music). 
I think TC has probably had a lot to do with the changes - I've found so much new music through other people's recommendations - and also the fact that I have been playing quite a bit of 20th century music (especially Bartok) on the piano.


----------



## jenspen (Apr 25, 2015)

Richannes Wrahms said:


> Nel mezzo del cammin di nostra vita...


I think so. Most of us have to *educate* our ears and eyes, develop the neural pathways or something.

We need [I needed] till mid-life to learn how to listen closely to complex music that wasn't just of the wonderful, attention-grabbing, grand-scale variety but what are now my favourite genres and composers. I followed guides - favourite performers - though I haven't always wanted to follow them everywhere.

But "classical" music is such a huge world there's somewhere for us to explore at any age. There's not much popular music that has held my attention for very long since I was 15, though I do make an effort every now and then.


----------

