Confirming what we already know...people like music from their adolescent years*

The music that got me into music, is still the music I listen to. Along the way there has been music that appealed to me, so I listen to that music as well. Recently I’ve heard some music that I found truly amazing, so now I listen to that music too. I’m hoping that in the future I’ll hear some music that I will enjoy, so then I can listen to that music in the future.

 

There's two types of music fan really. The ones who want music that reminds them of being young and use it as a comfort blanket of nostalgia.

And the ones who want music that speaks to them now and what life is like now.

I like most of the music from when I was an adolescent, and a heck of a lot more now than I did then. I'm guessing the people here are more likely not just sticking to the stuff from when they were a teenager, insomuch as growing older with an artist. Finding new artists isn't always what this forum is good for!

 

I liked more and more different music through my twenties and thirties than I did as an adolescent. There is so much more I still don't know approaching 70. This study I guess is of people I would call casual listeners whose listening habits and predilections form in adolescence and are pretty much calcified by the time they're thirty and more consumed with career, income, family. It makes sense most people are like this. You can have thousands of titles and still be fairly narrow in your musical interest and experience IMO.

 

I would agree....I am a lifer...and I love the older rock country and jazz...50s 60s 70s....but I tried not to limit myself as variety is the spice of life...I found a way to explore new sounds...I would get a 45 of a new band and listen...and I found I could go for the lp...or cd in times when the lp was not to be!....I listewn to a lot of the same stuff....but I try to roam into the unfamiliar!

 

Ralph. I think he's talking about personality traits, not sexuality.

I also don't care what a person does with their privates or whom they are attracted to. If the music is good to me, it's good. I may care about the politics of an artist, though. If I can't identify with their socio-political opinions, i'll have a problem listening to their music.

 

I LOVE most of the music I grew up with and around from age zero to 30 ( +/- ) and not a whole lot beyond my 40's with rare exception.

now I am only wistful for those earlier sounds. I can't listen to current stuff. at all.

I always wondered at what point I would ( as the cliche goes ) say that "today's music sucks" - as most all aging folks do.

 

Someone needs to study music lovers. I'm sick of reading about what casual music listeners think.

 

The researcher is also biased.

 

"There's two types of music fan really. The ones who want music that reminds them of being young and use it as a comfort blanket of nostalgia.
And the ones who want music that speaks to them now and what life is like now."

There are two types of music fans: those who put music fans in two categories, and those who don't.

 

You're biased.

 

But you can interpret the science better, if you are not predisposed to reject the research on the face of it.

Examples are not invalid just because they conflict with your personal impressions of the norm. And exceptions don't invalidate the process.

The science and the research gives us an insight to a commonality most people may be either willing to accept from a casual recognition of the facts, or willing to challenge due to a more intense interest in the subject matter. The real culprit here is...most people don't know "most people", and only use their own perspectives as their baseline. It's easier than coming to grips with these anomalies, than accept that the people who care less, may be closer to the truth than those who care more.

 

We're all biased.

 

There are WAY more than just two types, although the two you mention are valid.

 

"Science" is a NOUN
not a verb.
Thank you.

 

And they are not mutually exclusive.

 

I'd be here forever if I listed every variation, but broadly in my experience these are the two most common.

 

I've posted about this before, it's known as the reminiscence bump.

Reminiscence bump - Wikipedia

 

Aaaaaaaah Viennaaaaaa

 

Nice clickbait thread title

 

Sure. I actually had this discussion with a journalist a few weeks back. I grew up on 80’s music… that’s what my dad listened to in the 90’s, understandably. To me, Duran Duran, Culture Club, Eurythmics etc. just hold a special place in my heart. It doesn’t mean I haven’t expanded my horizons, but this is my comfort zone. 100%

If you grew up loving jazz, then it’s likely you’ll still feel that way at 30, 40… 100.

 

Who’d have thought? Says he after listening to Tull: Aqualung and Hawkwind: Quark, Strangness & Charm.

I always say I live in 1972, so this scientific research isn’t exactly news to me .

 

I think there is something in this.

It is less true for me than for for my peers when I was a teenager, because mostly they were into Charts, or Prog Rock (also contemporary then - mid 70s) - whereas I was holed up listening to Rock 'n' Roll and Rockabilly. Nobody else my age (that I knew) did this. If I wanted to go and see Carl Perkins performing live (which I did by sneaking out of the boarding school I was at), I had to go alone.

Nevertheless there was "awakening" throughout my childhood - a lot of it unconscious I dare say. In my reckoning, some music is magnetic to me because of what I was exposed to as a child - even as a baby.

Added to all this - don't we, most of us, agree that music is strongly biographic. Music that was in the Charts when I was a teenager - that was broadcast on the radio then - reminds of stuff - what happened that summer or christmas - how I felt. It's all a narrative of my life that I constantly retell to myself - blending with music I knew in less formative (because my brain was older) but more painful (because **** happens) years.

So that's a reflection or two from the nurture side of the fence.

I often wonder why Rockabilly chimes with me so automatically. I think part of the answer is that it matches my temperament - one evidenced in my school reports. DNA highly suspect.

So that's a tidbit from the nature side of the fence.

Informed psychologists will say that every phenotype is the outcome of genotype interacting with an environment (over time). You can't have one (nature) without the other (nurture). Genes need a conducive environment in which to express themselves. You don't get developed organisms without genes.
Heritability coefficients - the relative contribution of each (genes and environment) for a given phenotype - vary.
But psychologists can't agree over IQ and personality - let alone music preferences.
So meantime sure - we like what we like - and agonising over why can be like explaining humour.

otoh - we all want to know more about who we are - why we are here - what our life means to us. Music is at the heart of that (at least for most of us on sht.tv I imagine). So I think the OP posts a worthwhile topic.

A final muse. When I was 14 yo in 1976 listening to Rockabilly 20 years before my time, that music seemed forever ago. If I think about a 14yo now in 2022 listening with enthusiasm to The Beatles (60 years ago) or Bowie/Led Zep (50 years ago), it f***s my mind. It would be like me at 14 listening to music from 1916 - the middle of The Great War.

 

Could have used this forum as a case study.

“I don’t like new music”

“New music is rubbish”

Now let’s see go and make a new Beatles thread…

 

I can't find any connection between the artists and music that I like,...the only common factor is me.

 

about the only thing I don't like is pop country.