Have Your Musical/Artistic Tastes Changed With Age?

[Dixon Hill 4,234]

A decade ago, in the thick of intense musical study, at any given moment I could be found listening to or wading through the scores of anything gnarly/dense, with special fondness for the French and those influenced by them, written from the late 1800's onward. I was hypnotized by the sexy, smooth, impossibly sensual music of composers like Debussy, Stravinsky, Messiaen, Takemitsu, Dutilleux, Ligeti, etc., and their counterparts in Hollywood - Williams, Goldsmith, North, etc.

Just a few among countless examples:

Such modern, innovative expression appealed to me above all else, seeming to fulfill my childhood search for a way to capture/evoke/describe things that neither I nor anyone else had words for. I saw the progression of musical language as a parallel to the evolution of all art - what starts out simple, straightforward, and in accordance with natural physical consonances and inherent human understanding eventually morphs into something far more complex. Functional tonality, like any other "starting point" for different art forms, represented a direct analog of spoken language, which could express only as far as that spoken language could. Once new expression was needed, something without any relation to our primary mode of communication, new principles and aesthetics, took over. This was unexplored territory where there were no expectations, there was no vocabulary or rhetoric, where nothing was understood. Anything was permissible: experiment and see what you come up with, see how it makes you feel.

Anyway, at the time, I was far more interested in all of that, in strangeness and newness, than anything with even a hint of familiarity. But I've found that as time has gone on, my fixation has greatly faded. Not disappeared by any means, but it's fallen back down to equal ground, if not even a bit lower, with more straightforward harmony and melodic thematicism. And I mean straightforward to describe the character of such harmony and melodicism, not just its relative position to everything else; in general, a Williams tune for all its complexities and subtleties now seems to move me less than those of composers with a less florid, wrought voice.

I no longer want to be saturated by the cosmic, the bizarre, and the surreal. I no longer want to float through space on nebulous, gossamer clouds of micropolyphony and clusters. I'd prefer to gaze up at the stars, or at the surreal, from a comfortable distance, on solid ground, with some measure of warmth and humanity accompanying me. This has been reflected not only in my own compositional language, but in my listening preferences. I find myself less and less moved/affected by certain composers, their work now more of a purely musical curiosity to me than an emotional journey or something that enriches my day in some quasi-spiritual way. This change in taste has not been limited to music either, but to all art, including cinema. The film isn't out yet, but I fully expect that Nolan's Interstellar will uproot Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey as my favorite film. Why? Because it seems to exist in a very similar aesthetic space, but with the added virtue of a warm human element.

Perhaps all of this explains what some of you may consider my very strange taste in things. Do I secretly prefer Zimmer's music to Williams' now? The truth is that I might. It seems to vary. I do know that what sparked this line of thought for me today was that my computer's music shuffle function thing decided to play these two cues in succession.

After listening to both, and realizing that, in my mind anyway, they are very close to each other in their emotional meaning, their dramatic intentions, I asked myself which moved me more, which was more successful in its intention. The answer should be obvious due to the existence of this post. For all their similarities and the relative simplicity of both, one is decisively more appealing to me. One is a construct of great artistic beauty, but the other is a construct of great artistic beauty with soul. One is describing a feeling, the other is evoking it.

I'll reiterate that I'm not dismissing any music/art, nor am I saying that I no longer like certain music/art. But I've gone through a marked change in preference, in what I turn to art for, in what I want out of it. Maybe it's inevitable with age, maybe it has to do with being married or having children, maybe it's a growing need for certainty, comfort, and existential security as one edges closer to death, or some combination thereof.

What does anyone think? Has anyone else had a similar experience?

P.S. Before anyone begins hyperventilating at my attitude towards Williams here, let me present what I consider some of the finest marriages of the two musical forces I've been discussing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5VWnh1jNI0M

[Sharkissimo 1,973]

tl;dr

In all seriousness. I'm still stuck in the first stage. I'm fascinated by the surreal, the phantasmagoric, the divine mystery. Maybe in 10 years when I'm at your age (32/33) I'll be more drawn simplicity, but now after a childhood/teenage years saturated by the steamlined world of pop music, I prefer richer texture and harmonies. If I had to write a IV-V-I song, I'd do it with extended or suspended chords, inversions, polychords or rely on pedalling.

2:11 to the end (2:45 to 3:34 in particular) of this appeals to much more than the MINORITY REPORT cue you posted.

[KK 3,307]

Over the last few years, I've veered towards your first stage. I came into music enjoying more conventional music (the classics) with a more straightforward harmonic language. I started film music with good ol' fashioned neoclassical Zimmer. But now, I find a lot of the scores (and some concert pieces) I used to love, rather dull. I have more of a mind for the new and unexplored. My ears tingle for the avant-garde, the surreal and the unknown. I've become more of a fan of North, Corigliano and even Rosenman (who I used to hate). I'd take the bold and unfamiliar, over the conventional and classic.

So basically, I'd say my tastes are currently where your first stage was. But as Sharky says, that may or probably will change in the years to come too.

[Dixon Hill 4,234]

tl;dr

In all seriousness. I'm still stuck in the first stage. I'm fascinated by the surreal, the phantasmagoric, the divine mystery. Maybe in 10 years when I'm at your age (32/33) I'll be more drawn simplicity, but now after a childhood/teenage years saturated by the steamlined world of pop music, I prefer richer texture and harmonies. If I had to write a IV-V-I song, I'd do it with extended or suspended chords, inversions, polychords or rely on pedalling.

2:11 to the end (2:45 to 3:34 in particular) of this appeals to much more than the MINORITY REPORT cue you posted.

Yes, I do love those wistful, ghostly passages. I don't think this is necessarily a subject of absolutes. Perhaps the parallel of Sean And Lara in Road To Perdition (and I'm sure there is one) would be less significant to me than the Williams cue. But there are definitely general tendencies at work.

I think what I'm talking about maybe has less to do with the musical materials used and more with how they're used. It's been a long time since a "challenging" piece of contemporary concert music has moved me. But similar music in the context of a film has a better chance.

Over the last few years, my tastes have veered towards your first stage, which is where I'd say my musical tastes are at now. I came into music enjoying more conventional music (the classics) with a more straightforward harmonic language. I started film music with good ol' fashioned neoclassical Zimmer. But now, I find a lot of the scores (and some concert pieces) I used to love, rather dull. I have more of a mind for the new and unexplored. My ears tingle for the avant-garde, the surreal and the unknown. I've become more of a fan of North, Corigliano and even Rosenman (who I used to hate). I'd take the bold and unfamiliar, over the conventional and classic.

So basically, I'd say my tastes are currently where your first stage was. But as Sharky says, that may or probably will change in the years to come too.

Well, Corigliano never goes out of style.

[Glóin the Dark 1,221]

In general terms, my musical tastes nowadays seem to be pretty much the same as when I was around twenty. I've had periods of varying interest in particular composers and pieces, of course, but I can't think of a significant way in which the overall picture has changed...

[Dixon Hill 4,234]

This is also causing problems for me when it comes to writing new pieces. It's very difficult to feel like an idea is really worth it. I'm no longer very interested in just making neat sounds or trying to conjure up vague impressions. Only one person is preventing me from more or less destroying/disowning everything I've written to this point. I need the unrivaled canvas for real pathos and meaning that comes with writing for film.

[Sharkissimo 1,973]

I've been pondering on this thread. I have a hunch that this shift in preference has something to do with us being composers. Me and KK are at a earlier stage of development, and we haven't necessarily mastered that kind of dense writing yet. Maybe once you've climbed that mountain, the music doesn't have the same allure it once had.

This is also causing problems for me when it comes to writing new pieces. It's very difficult to feel like an idea is really worth it. I'm no longer very interested in just making neat sounds or trying to conjure up vague impressions. Only one person is preventing me from more or less destroying/disowning everything I've written to this point. I need the unrivaled canvas for real pathos and meaning that comes with writing for film.

Then start writing for film! Network with people your age or younger.

[Quintus 5,399]

Great OP. I remember the days when I'd reply to such a question with a substantial and considered response post, all typed up nice and neat.

Short answer now though: I'm the opposite.

Nostalgia used to keep me coming back again and again, but nowadays nostalgic feelings are soon lost to reboots. And, unavoidably, life.

Quintus: driving across the United Kingdom on an imaginary lawnmower.

[KK 3,307]

I've been pondering on this thread. I have a hunch that this shift in preference has something to do with us being composers. Me and KK are at a earlier stage of development, and we haven't necessarily mastered that kind of dense writing yet. Maybe once you've climbed that mountain, the music doesn't have the same allure it once had.

That's an interesting point actually. Composition allows us to understand how a particular type of music works. Once you've mastered a certain style, you're basically familiar with all the building blocks required to emulate it, and on a rather comprehensive level too. I suppose once you've mastered that kind of writing, the fascination you once had with it may not necessarily hold up.

[Quintus 5,399]

John Williams strongly disagrees.

The building blocks of any foundation are absolutely key to greater development - and should never be lost sight of in further learning.

Otherwise one will always be shit at writing ethos and pathos.

[KK 3,307]

Well its not like his music has stayed the same over the last few decades. The evolution in his style is likely linked to his changing artistic tastes. For instance, I'd wager he'd enjoy writing minimalist A.I.-style stuff over the old SW/Indy fanfares.

And you hear that in his concert works, where he caters to his personal preferences, not the needs of film context.

[Sharkissimo 1,973]

John Williams strongly disagrees.

The building blocks of any foundation are absolutely key to greater development - and should never be lost sight of in further learning.

You've got to remember that we're talking about listening habits here. I might not be as obsessed with Rosenman's FANTASTIC VOYAGE or North's DRAGONSLAYER as I am now in 10 years time, but that doesn't mean I'd neglect what I have learnt from those scores in my writing. To quote a cliché, it's like riding a bike. Once those synapses have formed, you won't really forget it, but of course constant practice helps.

[Quintus 5,399]

Fucking mobile browser editing woes.

[KK 3,307]

The building blocks of any foundation are absolutely key to greater development - and should never be lost sight of in further learning.

Otherwise one will always be shit at writing ethos and pathos.

Oh definitely. But you might not be as interested in listening to a particular style after having explored it in such depth yourself (as Sharky put it more eloquently).

Over the last few years, my tastes have veered towards your first stage, which is where I'd say my musical tastes are at now. I came into music enjoying more conventional music (the classics) with a more straightforward harmonic language. I started film music with good ol' fashioned neoclassical Zimmer. But now, I find a lot of the scores (and some concert pieces) I used to love, rather dull. I have more of a mind for the new and unexplored. My ears tingle for the avant-garde, the surreal and the unknown. I've become more of a fan of North, Corigliano and even Rosenman (who I used to hate). I'd take the bold and unfamiliar, over the conventional and classic.

So basically, I'd say my tastes are currently where your first stage was. But as Sharky says, that may or probably will change in the years to come too.

Well, Corigliano never goes out of style.

Indeed. Though I shamefully admit I wasn't a fan of The Red Violin in my younger film-music days (cue in joke about my age). I think it was Circus Maximus that made me re-evaluate how I felt about Corigliano, who naturally sits amongst my favourites now.

[Dixon Hill 4,234]

I've been pondering on this thread. I have a hunch that this shift in preference has something to do with us being composers. Me and KK are at a earlier stage of development, and we haven't necessarily mastered that kind of dense writing yet. Maybe once you've climbed that mountain, the music doesn't have the same allure it once had.

That's an interesting point actually. Composition allows us to understand how a particular type of music works. Once you've mastered a certain style, you're basically familiar with all the building blocks required to emulate it, and on a rather comprehensive level too. I suppose once you've mastered that kind of writing, the fascination you once had with it may not necessarily hold up.

Yes, though as has been said, ideally lack of fascination doesn't mean neglect. You may no longer be fixated on the how, but it has entered into your vocabulary, to be used as necessary while pursuing your own original ideas now that you've worked out everyone else's.

Great OP. I remember the days when I'd reply to such a question with a substantial and considered response post, all typed up nice and neat.

Short answer now though: I'm the opposite.

Nostalgia used to keep me coming back again and again, but nowadays nostalgic feelings are soon lost to reboots. And, unavoidably, life.

Quintus: driving across the United Kingdom on an imaginary lawnmower.

I do wish you'd type up a substantial and considered response!

[Hlao-roo 389]

Quintus: driving across the United Kingdom on an imaginary lawnmower.

Speaking of which, The Straight Story gets slapped with the "easy listening" moniker (the Windham Hill branding doesn't help), but I still think it's one of the best things Badalamenti's ever written for Lynch.

[Dixon Hill 4,234]

Bump. Talk about this, assholes.

[Wojo 2,453]

Mine have changed. I'm just not motivated to ponder how.

[Sharkissimo 1,973]

Mine have changed. I'm just not motivated to ponder how.

You might as well have posted 'yes' and left it that.

[Incanus 5,714]

My tastes have certainly changed from the time I started to actively listen to music but somehow the core aesthetics of what I crave from music have stayed the same and these are also the things that I find myself coming back to most often. But the more you listen the more you learn and as you learn you (to my mind at least) inevitably change. I have explored different musical expressions and styles (admittedly mostly in the realm of orchestral and ethnic music) at different times for various reasons as they spoke to me and to the situation in that period of time the best, they were needed, an outlet for something. Also these pieces of music inevitably become infused with personal meaning and tied to memories and moods from years ago, hence there can be a tremendous nostalgia factor to them. There is also music I have grown out of, a lot of it.

These days I am always on the lookout for new sounds that appeal to me in one way or the other (I have lately been taken more and more by Corigliano for example), much as I have always have yet I retain my small conservative notions of what is the best of the best in music and what still moves me to the core.

Tolkien once remarked how to him discovering new languages was like a new vintage is to a wine expert and that I guess is a good analogy for my relationship with music. Music is certainly enough for a lifetime, whether you just listen or create it, but lifetime is not enough for music.

[Dixon Hill 4,234]

What music have you grown out of, Inky?

[Sharkissimo 1,973]

HIM, The Rasmus and Lordi.

[Hlao-roo 389]

When I was growing up I listened only to classical (small c) music.

[Hlao-roo 389]

(Basically, I've become a much more inclusive listener of music as I've aged.)

[Dixon Hill 4,234]

Far better than the alternative of becoming a crotchety, closed-minded old fart.

[Incanus 5,714]

What music have you grown out of, Inky?

I know you are going to hate the answer but e.g. a lot of the old Zimmer I used to love as a teenager when I discovered soundtracks isn't that exciting anymore. In the realm of classical orchestral music some of the big well known pieces from many composers that I admired back in the day have given room to more challenging fare of more modern times. And of course I listened to a lot of pop music as a youngster in my wild teenage years from various radio stations but never bought a single album. I guess I grew out of it already in my teens.

HIM, The Rasmus and Lordi.

I have never actively listened to their music so that might make me a crotchety, close-minded old fart.

[Hlao-roo 389]

What music have you grown out of, Inky?

I know you are going to hate the answer but e.g. a lot of the old Zimmer I used to love as a teenager when I discovered soundtracks isn't that exciting anymore.

Now you're all about the new ZImmer, am I right?

[KK 3,307]

This is Inky's morning jam!!

[King Mark 3,631]

I still almost exclusively listen to film and videogame scores. Actually I didn't listen to videogame scores before so that's new

I do like a lot more composers than I used to but my mind has not changed as who the top ones are (JW,Goldsmith,Horner...)

I have always hated and still hate rock/pop music (except maybe in a nightclub setting.,but never to be listened to by itself). I think the typical person who likes pop music is more interested in the person singing (sexual fantasy/role model/idolization/ to be part of the "cool crowd") than the actual music. I hear very little of musical interest in the typical pop tune and I do not consider "rap" as a form of music

Finally classical music is boring except for a few select pieces. There's only so much Chopin piano sonatas you can listen to before dying of boredom.I see film scores as somewhat an evolutionary improvement over classical music. I grew up in a home with classical music always playing so I'm not saying this out of ignorance

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

Luv me filum scores. Been listenun to dem fa donkeys yeers. But I luv me sum rok n pop now n den

[Dixon Hill 4,234]

This is Inky's morning jam!!

Even I don't like that.

I think the typical person who likes pop music is more interested in the person singing (sexual fantasy/role model/idolization/ to be part of the "cool crowd") than the actual music. I hear very little of musical interest in the typical pop tune and I do not consider "rap" as a form of music

Finally classical music is boring except for a few select pieces. There's only so much Chopin piano sonatas you can listen to before dying of boredom.I see film scores as somewhat an evolutionary improvement over classical music

I'll leave this to Sharky. Although I'm starting to wonder if I don't actually agree with your very last sentiment.

This is probably going to turn into me typing to myself so feel free to ignore.

As I began saying in another thread, I think all of this is the result of a larger shift in artistic sensibilities that I'm in the middle of. For a few years now I've felt, knowing fully the folly of such feeling, that I had reached a point of compositional maturity, and that I clearly understood what my purpose and "style" was. But recently I've been sensing that I am of course wrong about that. I think I am far more of a minimalist than I ever realized, both musically and otherwise. What I see as "musical excess" seems to be everywhere. And that's fine, and I still love all of that music. But it's not where I belong as a producer, and it's not what I need anymore as a consumer.

I'm looking at the first movement of the saxophone concerto I just finished the other day. About 300 bars of scales, runs, flourishes, clusters, seething aleatory. A peculiar orchestral lineup complete with electric piano and electric organ, and serial techniques galore. It's probably the most maximalist thing I've ever written, and it feels completely pointless. I had one simple image in mind for that music to symbolize and conjure up... there has to be a simpler way to do it. There's unquestionably excess here, but the trick will be to figure out where.

But this actually feels refreshing. Like I said I've been a bit uneasy about what I've been writing for some time now. I can finally start to sort it out.

[Incanus 5,714]

What music have you grown out of, Inky?

I know you are going to hate the answer but e.g. a lot of the old Zimmer I used to love as a teenager when I discovered soundtracks isn't that exciting anymore.

Now you're all about the new ZImmer, am I right?

Some of them yes. Not many of the recent ones have floated my boat though. Too much sound, not enough music.

[crocodile 8,012]

"Dont create a symphony. Sometimes only use one element to create tension"

Karol

[Incanus 5,714]

"Dont create a symphony. Sometimes only use one element to create tension"

Karol

Cue the inevitable Foghorn of DOOM sound.

[Sharkissimo 1,973]

I think the typical person who likes pop music is more interested in the person singing (sexual fantasy/role model/idolization/ to be part of the "cool crowd") than the actual music. I hear very little of musical interest in the typical pop tune and I do not consider "rap" as a form of music

Finally classical music is boring except for a few select pieces. There's only so much Chopin piano sonatas you can listen to before dying of boredom.I see film scores as somewhat an evolutionary improvement over classical music

I'll leave this to Sharky. Although I'm starting to wonder if I don't actually agree with your very last sentiment.

Heh. I began typing a reply then I just thought 'ah fuck it.'

[Incanus 5,714]

This is Inky's morning jam!!

I take orange marmelade on my toast thank you very much!

[Sharkissimo 1,973]

Too much sound, not enough music.

But where do you draw the line, between sound and music?

[Incanus 5,714]

Too much sound, not enough music.

But where do you draw the line, between sound and music?

The line is where I draw it and no further.

[A24 4,333]

I don't think people change that much after they have been shaped and formed (adolescence) and that includes their taste for music. - Alex

[Incanus 5,714]

I don't think people change that much after they have been shaped and formed (adolescence) and that includes their taste for music. - Alex

So you would say e.g. new music people learn to appreciate or love just contains some of the familiar elements picked up in the formative years when the earliest tastes were formed?

[A24 4,333]

Not the earliest taste per se (although it's possible) but the taste that you develop during the coming of age years. It's then when we are most susceptible to influences. We want certain things and the music we like (whether it's new or old) is giving us what we want.

[Dixon Hill 4,234]

Alex I think you cling to absolutes far too much for your own good. At least, your forum persona does.

[crocodile 8,012]

Alex is absolute.

Karol

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

Absolutely.

[A24 4,333]

Well, what doesn't make sense to you?

[Dixon Hill 4,234]

The notion that people don't change past some given point.

[A24 4,333]

In their taste of music? Not too much, no. I haven't seen anyone here change, neither do I know anyone who has changed. I've noticed that most people even give up exploring after a while and they are just happy to love the music they loved when they were young (and when music had the strongest of impact on them).

[Dixon Hill 4,234]

That's a shame then. But I think that anyone actively involved in music, myself included, will never stop exploring new material. The place where we always end up after a journey might reach a point where it remains the same, as I think it has with me, but I'm not saying that I'm totally done with anything new.

[BLUMENKOHL 1,068]

I remember reading that science mostly agrees with Alex. Musical and aesthetic tastes seem to mostly freeze around 18-22 years old.

[Dixon Hill 4,234]

Does that account for the radically different phases of someone like Stravinsky's output?