Why do so many people listen to the same few pieces over and over again?

Question

Why do so many people listen to the same few pieces over and over again?

Answer 1

I plead guilty on all accounts your honor.



Seriously, I don't think that a definitive answer to your question is possible; we human beings, being what we are.



I recently asked a somewhat similar question - which composers wear well, and which don't - to which you responded; but I don't know whether or not you reviewed all of the responses: might find a clue there.



It might have to do with staying within one's "comfort zone"; or simply a lack of zell(I don't feel this should necessarily be characterized as "laziness") for experimenting or exploration into the unknown.



Since becoming a patron of this category, I've attempted as many users have recommended, to explore new music. Checked out various CD's from the public library, several by such as Phillip Glass. And even though you stated composers of the modern day ilk were not those you were particularly referencing, I nevertheless must say that I just don't get it: how any "music" lover can claim they can appreciate, enjoy such monotonous, endless repetitiveness, is beyond me.



As a result of recommendations given here, I have expanded my musical horizons somewhat, by becoming better acquainted with and appreciation of the music by composers of like Faure, Dvorak and Poulenc.



And finally I suspect that the degree with which one interacts socially and/or professional with others during the course of an average day, might have something to do with it; in addition to the effects of aging and the interactive isolation that often results as a conseqence.



Just my two cents worth,



Alberich

Answer 2

I have a somewhat different take on this.



I do listen to a wide variety of music, and more often than not, I'm seeking out new things to listen to. But, I have a handful of pieces that I DO give repeated, repeated, repeated listenings to. Here are some of the pieces I can listen to at any time of day and be very happy:



Mahler 2 (particularly 1st, 4th, and 5th movements)

Rite of Spring

Schoenberg op. 9

Webern op. 21 (mvt. 2)

Varese - Octandre (particularly 1st and 2nd movements)

Brahms 4 (1st and last movements)

Schubert "Auf dem Flusse"



There are probably others, but these are the ones that popped into my head. I can think of at least three reasons why I listen to these pieces frequently:



1) They're good "default" choices when I can't decide on something else

2) I ALWAYS hear something new (or hear something old in a different way) when listening to these pieces...whether or not I'm listening to the same or different recording. The flip side of this is also the reason I don't feel the need ever to listen to that darn Canon again...I understand how it works; I get it. Done.

3) Sometimes it's just nice to spend time with an old friend, rather than constantly meeting new people. When I did my master's degree in theory, I was CONSTANTLY listening to new pieces at the library. By the time I got home, the last thing I wanted to do was to hear another new piece...I could just curl up with the 1st part of the Rite and be content.



Your comparison to different art forms is an interesting one, because I find myself having the same issues there, too. Take movies, for example. Yes, I get excited about the new _____________ movie coming out. But I'd probably be just as happy to watch Casablanca again, or the Godfather. For the same reasons as above...



I have never heard this Classic FM thing, and, based on your description, I hope I never do! :-)

Answer 3

I dont know. I must seem to listen to the same thing over and over again. (I dont but I guess you could see it that way...)



But I guess I am younger than most classical listeners and haven't had the opportunity to hear all the music that is out there, although I doubt I ever will.

I think I shall tell a little story for you and maybe it will give insight into why I listen to some things a lot:



Since I was maybe five or six years old, I have been hearing classical music, as my dad took a liking to some classical music. He had a period when all he listened to was Pavarotti! and then Yo Yo Ma, then the Berlin Philharmonic, then something completely different like Miles Davis!?! At the time I HATED this music.

When I was ten, I started taking voice lessons, and I was sooo annoyed when I couldn't sing high notes. So I began looking up "high notes" and high songs, and I came across "Der Holle Rache," I looked through the music we have on the computer and found it. So I found the CD it was on and listened to Sumi Jo singing Der Holle Rache, over and over again. That was my first real experience of classical music.

My mum started to get annoyed by me playing it so often, so I listened to the other songs on the CD (It was a collection, Ultimate Opera) and I started to love other songs, like "l'amour est un oiseau rebelle" from carmen, and "ombra mai fu" from Xerses.

Because I liked these songs I decided to look up the opera's they were from. The first opera I heard was Le Nozze Di Figaro, I had a copy of the libretto and I sat for two and a half hours listening to it. Then I looked up other mozart music, and not just his operas!



and that is the story of my life, when I heard new music and I liked it, I would look up the compeser's other works, and see if I had any in my CD or LP collection, then listen to it. And of course in opera, if there is a singer who I thought was very good, like I heard Simionato, I will look for other recordings of that artist, and in that way discover new music and it is the same with ensembles and orchestras, and the conductors who conducted them.



Then really famous works, like Beethovens 3rd, I will look them up, and listen to it. If I think they are good, I will buy them and listen to them more. And if someone recommends a piece, I will listen to it.

But I only ever listen to a piece more than once, if I liked it the first time I heard it, or if I want to compare it to something else.





There are people who listen to the same pieces over and over, because they know that they like that, and that they are unwilling to look up new music. Maybe they are just not that interested in classical music?





To the Duchess:



They type like that, not because they are idiots, but because it is how they write in a non-formal situation. Like in mobile texts and online conversations. It is annoying, especially when they make up abbreviations for words that you don't understand, but surely you understood, 4 meaning for?



It does really really really annoy me though, when people are so "miseducated" that they cant even spell the composer or the instrument or title of the piece correctly. Like : how old was Mowsart when he died?



EDIT:

I think some people are really interested in hearing new music, but most are not. A friend of mine asked if I had any "classic rock" on my ipod, I said yes, so they go through all my songs until they get to Bohemian Rhapsody. (which is a good song but to me as overdone as Canon in D!) I suggest a song and they listen to it for a few seconds, then change it back to bohemian rhapsody. (I think I suggested Tangerine by Led Zeppelin, not that that is important!)



To IceXBeam -

Not every can play Fur Elise, in fact very few people can play more than the first few bars. At my school, it has been banned because teachers were so sick of the first few bars.

Answer 4

Del, I don't know that there is a real answer to your question other than that the casual classical music listener becomes comfortable with a few tuneful pieces that they like and either see no reason to add to the list (Hey, I listen to classical music - I know Fur Elise and Canon in D!), or don't want to listen to things they might not like in order to find the things they do like. Some people have just not developed the wonder and excitement of musical exploration.



I feel that our own regional FM classical music station is very good. A small sample of today's playlist includes Bruch "Swedish Dances", Rossini "La Danza", Rubinstein's "Violin Concerto in G", Fasch's "Clarinet Concerto", Purcell's "Gordian Knot Untied", and Debussy's "Sacred and Profane Dances".



Musician, composer, teacher.

Answer 5

Your comment as regards Classic fM being the "anathema to true music appreciation",I couldn't agree more.

I could just about stomach them until they spewed forth Classic FM TV.

Is there anything more perverse and loathsome.



Anyway back to your question I also find it sad how many people are so restricted by so called taste and the refusal to experience that which is unfamiliar.

For me half of the joy experienced is precisely through discovering new and wonderful works.

Why since I've been visiting this forum I've discovered several works that I was previously blind to and nothing beats the first time you hear something so amazing that you literally have the hairs on your neck stand up.

After I've then listened to and analyzed that piece to death I'll usually feel the need to replicate that initial euphoric high before too long.

Yes as the man says music is most definitely a drug.

The enormous range of classical music available means that if we devoted a whole lifetime to it there would still be great music we've not encountered.

I find that re-assuring but perhaps some who have neither the time or passion to let music consume their whole being would find it otherwise.



I don't know.

When I was much younger I was rather stunted by taste myself.

Refusing to listen to Baroque music which I had stupidly made a pre-judgment on based solely on one or two works I'd heard.

Not to mention a fear of listening to anything post 1940.

Luckily I grew up and because my love for Beethoven and the Romantic period continued to grow I eventually expanded my horizons.

I think this would naturally happen to anyone who comes to classical music through whatever means as long as they felt a passionate inquisitiveness as regards to life.

Answer 6

Music is different from those other pursuits because it lends itself to being a much more passive pursuit. People gravitate toward certain familiar favorites that they can use as aural wallpaper and/or tap their feet to, and that's the end of it.



But it's even worse than that. I'm not a musician -- just a passionate music lover -- but I am constantly looking for new pieces of music to interest, challenge, and captivate me. That's why my collection consists of somewhere around 15,000 individual pieces of music and includes everything from rock to classical to country, jazz, folk, reggae, new age, metal, and even 20 or so CDs' worth of Balinese gamelan! I devote way too much of my disposable income to music, and indeed, most people would find this a wasted pursuit. They want to know where they can download (for free, natch) the latest hit that they can dance to, and when they've tired of that in a few weeks, they dump it from their iTunes library, come back on Y!A, and ask where they can download (for free) the *latest* latest hit, because they're "bored" with the old one already.



Long story short, music is a disposable commodity to most people nowadays. So why would they want to bother expanding their horizons? Much like a Dan Brown book, music is largely considered something to consume and then cast aside -- not something to savor and enrich yourself with. Sad, but true.

Answer 7

You've got a point. Some people are lazy. They're proud of the few classical pieces they know, but don't want to take the time to sit down and listen to a forty minute piece. But then like you said, they enjoy two hour long movies. But I suppose that is because movies appeal to more than a few senses and the t.v. shows have all the drama and humor. People either don't want to take the time to enjoy a classical piece, or don't know enough to enjoy it.



As for me, I do have the habit of listening the the same piece over and over again. It all depends on my mood. (Ok, I know I say that a lot here on Answers, but it is true!) There are times when I can listen to the same handful of songs over and over again. But I'm not always like that. That's what my emusic account is for. There are times when I have this huge appetite for new music to listen to. I've discovered some great pieces of music by buying them on emusic. I'll admit, when it comes to classical music, I'm still a noob. There is just so much to listen to, and I've only gotten my feet wet.



I kind of rambled on here, sorry about that. I'll come back to it later, but right now I'm feeling kind of scattered-brained.



Edit: So as I promised, I came back to clarify and elaborate here. I spent some time in the afternoon thinking about this (when I wasn't eating pineapple upside-down cake or doing homework on Julius Caesar) and I came up with a few ideas. The first being what you said, people are lazy. Looking at my class, we're such a group of lazy bums, and I can be just guilty as them. I can't think of many people in my class who would take the time to sit down and devote all of their attention on a full symphony. They might listen to some stuff as background music though, but even that would only be a select few.



But then I think part of the reason because that "weird stuff by old dead guys" and other genres of music that are foreign to them aren't popular. People want to be "in" and listen to all the latest music. So the popularity of the music might also account for whether or not someone will listen to it.



Also, you mentioned how people do enjoy watching new movies and can't wait for the new t.v. shows. Like I said, movies appeal to more than one sense, and there is more drama involved for the t.v. shows. To them, music is just music and it goes back to them not having the attention span or the knowledge or the desire to know about classical or whatever genre of music. Why they don't want to know about it, I've no clue, except that it may have to do with it not being "in".



Going back to the popularity of classical music, classical music listeners tend to be stereotyped as nerds. And when people think of opera, they think of a fat old woman in a blonde wig with braids wearing a viking hat singing in pitches above the human hearing range. There perceptions of the music is distorted and they see all classical music as slow and boring. And some people say ignorance is bliss!



As for my listening habits. Like I said, I do go through phases where I could listen to the same five songs or pieces over and over again. And like I also said before, it all depends on my mood. Sometimes just listening to the same few songs acts as sort of a comfort food for me. Other times, I'm just in the mood. Also, when listening to my ipod during school (Ok, so I'm not supposed to, but I only do it during lunch when I'm not learning anything!) I find myself listening the same the few songs over and over again. But there are times when I go on a wild search for new music.

And it is not always classical, I enjoy listening to other people's ipods and being introduced to new songs. Now if I can just get them to listen to mine...but they don't like the idea of listening to music by "some old dead guy".



Well, if I didn't make sense before, I hope this did! Just me musing, but my thoughts tend to jump around and it shows when I just write and don't bother to really organize my thoughts. Sorry about that! Hope this helps!

Answer 8

I think there are two reasons for this:



1. A lot of people listen to one piece of music. By this I mean; if you have a million people across the United States who all like a certain composition, and besides that one piece which they all like, each individual likes there own select group of music, it makes it feel as if that one piece is way over listened to. For example let's take Pachelbel's Cannon in D. If each one of those million people loves Cannon in D (rightfully so) and whenever asked to list their top ten favorite piece of music the Cannon is named (as well as nine other random pieces for each of the individuals), the Cannon in D appears to be way over done.



Now let's say you go to a party and the host is a good one. A good host only wants the best for their guests, so they play their top ten choices for their musical selection (this includes the Cannon). Then the next day you go to another party (you sure are living the good life), with again, a good host. So again you hear (along with nine pieces you haven't) Cannon in D.

So it only appears that people listen to the same piece too many times.



2. The second reason I think that people listen to the same thing over and over is because they don't know what's out there. It's not that they're lazy, it's because the thought never occured to them; "If I like Bach's Cello Suite No. 1, I might like his Cello Suite No. 2".

So they listen to what is tried and true and never move forward in the world of classical music until, by chance, they hear something new (and they like it). Then they ad that to their play list and step back into the miry clay, until again something new comes to resue them. This cycle continues for a while, but eventually (after hearing enough new stuff) most people will venture out on their own and stop the cycle.

Answer 9

It's not just music that has this problem, it's everything. People have an aversion to things that aren't familiar, because familiar is safe. They somehow become familiar with a few pieces of music, a particular genre of books, certain foods, whatever, and they decide that these are their tastes, without bothering to explore other things. Exploring other things takes more effort than most people are willing to expend.

The aversion to change goes back to times when the unknown *was* dangerous; when straying from the familiar could get you killed. Those who were cautious when faced with the unknown would have been more likely to survive to pass their genes onto the next generation, thus perpetuating the trait even when it's no longer so useful.

New films are likely to be similar in many ways to old films (Hollywood tends to be predictable); people read novels by new authors usually because:

they like other books from that genre

they like other books by that author;

... they may go to galleries, but if the art is too different from their established tastes, they'll reject it outright.

Answer 10

It is, in part (IMHO), the fault of concert promoters who programme the same pieces over and over again, ad nauseam. It is also the 'I know what I like' syndrome and the reluctance of many people to be adventurous. I often wonder why those who listen over and over again to Tchaik 1 or Rach 2 don't explore the immense world of the 19th century romantic piano concerto which has been opened up on CD. Perhaps folk are loathe to fork out hard earned cash on something they might not like. In the UK, I lay the blame at the door of Classic FM which programmes the same stuff over and over again.



To be fair, however, there are always questions on this board from people trying to broaden their horizons - 'I like xyz, can someone please suggest other music like it' sort of questions. Perhaps we should have some kind of list of suggestions to post to the variously phrased questions of that ilk?



Perhaps it is the fear of the unknown. But I'm not sure that I equate the latest Dan Brown or Harry Potter or series of House or Heroes (ugh to all so far as I am concerned) with classical music. Surely those are the equivalent of running out to buy or download the latest album by whatever pop group or band is in fashion at the time? Calssical music isn't, and never will be, part of the mainstream of 'popular culture'. Even the heavweight press gives more space to popular music than to classical these days.



Further thoughts (following on from some listening since I wrote the above). I am bemused a little as to why some pieces gain an almost cult success and other similar works are hardly ever heard. Why The Lark Ascending, but not Howell's Second Dance for violin and orchestra. Why the Banks of Green Willow but not Moeran's Whythornes Shadow? In both cases the less wll known works are very similar to the warhorses and would appeal to the same listeners.

Answer 11

I don't know what you're talking about "Classic fM" but I do know that my local classical music station plays all SORTS of different stuff.



In fact, from my local station, I learned about Sibelius, which I really haven't gotten into before, and also Howard Hanson, Phillip Glass, Franz Berwald.



On the other hand, I had ummm....Sirius Satellite Radio once when I was truck driving. The classical station was atrocious.....yeah, I like "Ancient Airs and Dances" but not three times a day. They would play the same crap over and over again.



My local station is WKAR out of East Lansing (Michigan State Uni)

and they do their semi-annual membership drives in spring and fall. I've never got to donate before because I've never really been able to afford to, but when I can afford to, I can imagine giving them a very large grant.



My local Flint Symphony Orchestra performs some well-known pieces but they also do a lot of unknown stuff - for instance they've recently done Ibert's Saxophone Concerto.



BW

Answer 12

Del, I completely agree with you.



They are all lazy and do not want to explore the wonderful world that is classical music. They just like whatever is put in front of them, I suppose you could say. I have started to call these people 'Twilighters'. These people just like the most over-used pieces like Clair de Lune and the 'Moonlight' Sonata. Heck, I cannot listen to the beautiful Canon in D by Pachelbel anymore!! I used to love that piece and on the radio the other day, I heard a beautiful arrangement of the piece for Flute and Harp. I could not listen to the first few bars. Here I had a beautiful piece of music and a beautiful arrangement and could not even think of listening to the whole piece.



And another thing that ticks me off about the 'Twilighters'. Why can't they spell? Did they not go to school and get an education, I mean honestly! And don't ask a question if you have no idea what you're saying:



'where can i find piano sheet 4 beethoven sonata moonlight?????????????'



I am sick of these sorts of questions. I have rather drifted away from the subject of the question but these things really tick me off and it must be said!



Now that I have gotten that off my chest, I think I had better finish my answer by saying:



Here, Here, Del!

Answer 13

I wish I could go back in time and unwrite the Four bloomin' Seasons..every time i step into a lift, or get put on hold.GGGRRRRRRR



I listen to pretty much the same stuff on disc all the time, if I want new stuff I go to a concert. unfortunately the powers that be in the music world stopped programming new music on a regular basis after the war. Before the war the MAJORITY of concerts programmed music which if not new was by living composers.



there is nothing wrong with beer and cricket...my dream is a 5-day Wagneresque opera about MCC v Australia...12-tone music (11 with a sub)

Answer 14

There's a difference with listening to music and listening, that is; paying attention or having it as background noise.

Some people use music as sonic wallpaper, and like wall paper it's purpose is decorative and does not need to be changed frequently.

This also explains the easy of listening (lack of depth) the pieces used by said philistines.

It is surely unlikely that these people find something new, every time they listen, in such simple works.

There is a certain sadness knowing these people are unable or unwilling to be aware of the profound things some composers have said, or the various ways true beauty in sound has been achieved.

No need for frustration, we are kings, surrounded by wealth, and we will freely share our wealth with all.

Rejoice in your wealth, and know somewhere some one feels sorry for us for not being able to drink beer and watch an entire cricket match, with passionate involvement.



Edit: Hi hi hi there, Appy polly logies on the beer, perhaps I should have specified "a case or two of Budwiser or Miller" instead of just beer. (My preference is for things that look different coming out than they did going in, but that's just me). As for fm, I have it on now and they just finished the Adagio from Mahler's 10th. I am lucky, they are the #1 classical station in the world, but are so user friendly, that they tried to find a recording of Schubert's 8th recorded by Dietrich Fischer-Dieskau conducting, that I had only mentioned in passing in an e-mail. So unless playing too much Mahler is a negative, my local station (WQXR; also available online) is quite excellent 24/7. They list all they play on their site, you might want to check it out. I think they have the largest library of any FM, and yet I have not heard "fur elise" ever, in fact I've even heard Beethoven's piano concerto #6 in D. (I trust you are of sufficient expertise to know what I am talking about).

Sorry I prefer the old Milloko Plus to beer, (especially dark roast, with chocolate and almond), I hope you still appreciated the image intended.

Answer 15

To counter-attack the question (no I was not educated by Jesuits!) - why do so many performing groups - opera companies and orchestras, especially - PLAY the same stuff over and over and over??? We learn to eat what we are fed. My husband and I always seek out the new-to-us material - but if we wish to attend the Met, the NY Phil, the Boston SO - same old same old, unless we really dig in the crannies (alcoves? alcoves? You use that word? - sorry - saw "In Bruges" last night.). OK, once in a while something adventurous pops up - but it is hardly the norm. This is why we are SO in love with the Bard College summer festivals (right across the river from us, 100 miles north of NYC). GREAT stuff - thought-provoking, intense, programs, with fabulous pre-concert lecture - at the GRADUATE level of content. We can easily drive to Tanglewood in the summer, too - but seldom f go anymore, because we have HEARD all the "blue-haired little old lady" stuff they play. If there IS something interesting - we go. But we pretty much hang out all summer at Bard - we read the HEFTY program book all week, discuss what we heard an what we are GOING to hear - it is wonderful! I have posted about this numerous times - it is a musical transfusion for the JADED among us. No - I do not work for them - I just think that Leon Botstein is a genius. BTW - what used to be their sleepy little Department of Music is NOT a top-echelon conservatory - it bears exploration by serious students. Better have a serious INCOME too - cost top forty grand a year there.



This year is WAGNER - but check out the programming - it is NOT what you would expect!

Answer 16

I've found myself constantly listening to Rachmaninoff's Symphonic Dances, in a brilliant recording by Eije Oue and the Minnesota Orchestra, as well as many recordings by the Milwaukee Symphony Orchestra (a phenomenal orchestra overshadowed by the local Chicago Symphony, Minnesota Orchestra, and even Detroit Symphony).



http://www.mso.org/main.taf?p=9,5,1

Answer 17

Not too sure about this question...I love listening to my music repeatedly for the most obvious reason.Its because I like it.Its the same reason as to why millions of people can hear Canon in D and not get bored with it.



I,however,have a penchant for technically challenging music and thus,listen to Alkan's Allegro Barbaro or Ravel's Jeux D'eux...Just to name a few.

Answer 18

I didn't read everything. Yes the super popular pieces really annoy me like fur elise. It is one of the pieces I played when I started piano. Since its so popular and everyone knows it, even people who can't play piano and read notes can play it. I don't like it anymore. In my opinion, no offense but I think most people on y/a don't know much about music, how to play it, or any music theory. They don't know too many pieces.

Answer 19

Maybe to get to know it better, but mainly because it sounds so good you want to hear it again. Why do you eat the same meal again? Why do you listen to the same song again?

Answer 20

well i think you 'll never understand even i we make it longer so it's better to not !!!!