Scientists say: people who are open to new challenges listen to blues?

[casper]

Session Date: June 13th 2015

Music is such a powerful medium. Powerful in that it accesses the imagination, the mind and the emotions and the body - all the lower centers, for sure. Thus it is no wonder that the PTB would seek to use this medium to their advantage since manipulation, by any means, is their middle name. If they go to such great lengths to control mainstream media news, TV programming, and movies, certainly the music industry is not immune to their manipulation and control. This should be self-evident by now, I would think.

Perhaps because music can access the emotions directly (and thus bypass the rational mind), dive into the sub-conscious mind, AND influence the body, I believe it provides a fertile ground for 4th way self-observation and study. One of the things Gurdjieff said early on as relayed by Ouspenski in “In Search of the Miraculous”, was that we are subject to a series of 'likes' and 'don't likes' by all the little I's: petty, subjective, egoistic tastes (my words). Certainly music is a vast playground for subjective likes and dislikes. Furthermore, it could be argued that what and who we like or dislike may even be reflective of our state of development, awareness and being.

(L) Does a person's taste in music reflect their state of awareness, development, and being?

A: Yes, more or less, though there is a range of preferences at various "levels".

Q: (L) Okay, next question:

Does a person's taste in music reflect their personal aim in life?

A: It can be strongly affected if only subconsciously.

Q: (L) Okay:

What is more important in determining a song’s value: the lyrics or the sound/mood/feeling?

A: The sound opens the door for the lyrics to enter for good or ill.

Q: (L) Does that mean that a song that sounds really horrible and mechanical and like somebody just beating on a pot or clanging on the hood of their car or something, and if that's the kind of music the person likes, but it also has good lyrics, then that's okay?

A: Not exactly. The sound can open gates at - or of - different levels and parts of the internal makeup.

Q: (L) Okay, next forum question:

Is the NSA using musical tastes and downloads to track and identify certain 'types'?

A: Of course.

Q: (L) Next:

Is the song "Somewhere Over the Rainbow" really used as a mind-control programming tool like Catcher in the Rye?

A: Sadly, in some circles, yes.

Q: (Galatea) So, if people like anarchy music about hating the government and law, then they're gonna stir up some trouble?

(L) I dunno. Maybe they would track somebody like that and think that they could turn that person to their own uses.

(Perceval) They said there are some types of music that are listened to by certain types of people... Certain types of emo music or whatever that certain types of young people listen to, like outsiders or loners and that kind of thing, and those people could be tracked as candidates for "use"...

A: The 70's were the time of development of such concepts and technologies. The 80's were the period when implementation became more widespread. At present 90 percent of broadcast music has corrupting elements.

Q: (Pierre) So we have to listen to old music. Music from before the 70's. Or classical music.

(L) Obviously we need to be paying much closer attention to our musical tastes, and analyzing what it is about songs that we like. And obviously, we need to pay a lot more attention to what we listen to in the background. But that means I'm safe since I only listen to old classic rock like Bob Seger, whose music is the best! [laughter]

Quote from the article:

People who are open to new challenges more like blues, jazz and classical music.
According to research published by PLoS ONE, empathetic people - those who are more likely to focus on the emotions of other people, prefer a lighter, soft music, and 'systematizes' - people who analyze the rules and forms, favored by punk, heavy metal and more complex music.

Link:
https://translate.google.hr/translate?sl=hr&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=hr&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.telegram.hr%2Fzivot%2Fistrazivanje-pokazalo-da-ljudi-koji-su-otvoreni-prema-novim-izazovima-slusaju-blues-a-ekstroverti-pop-glazbu%2F&edit-text=


I believe that with age, taste in music is changing, whether in this way we change it and your personality, or whether they are thereby changing the very genetic structure of our body?

 

[Perri475]

Q: (Pierre) So we have to listen to old music. Music from before the 70's. Or classical music.

(L) Obviously we need to be paying much closer attention to our musical tastes, and analyzing what it is about songs that we like. And obviously, we need to pay a lot more attention to what we listen to in the background. But that means I'm safe since I only listen to old classic rock like Bob Seger, whose music is the best! [laughter]

Quote from the article:

People who are open to new challenges more like blues, jazz and classical music.
According to research published by PLoS ONE, empathetic people - those who are more likely to focus on the emotions of other people, prefer a lighter, soft music, and 'systematizes' - people who analyze the rules and forms, favored by punk, heavy metal and more complex music.

Link:
https://translate.google.hr/translate?sl=hr&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=hr&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.telegram.hr%2Fzivot%2Fistrazivanje-pokazalo-da-ljudi-koji-su-otvoreni-prema-novim-izazovima-slusaju-blues-a-ekstroverti-pop-glazbu%2F&edit-text=


I believe that with age, taste in music is changing, whether in this way we change it and your personality, or whether they are thereby changing the very genetic structure of our body?

Very interesting stuff here.. Really since the 80s (IMO) music has progressively gotten more mechanical and manufactured sounding so reading what the C's had to say put that in context!. Though I do think that it's very easy to tell if a song was written with actual expressive intent.. For example, I fully believe that mainstream music is hyper sexualizing our youth with what's on the radio (via lyrics, in-studio tricks, subliminal frequencies, etc.), but that sort of manipulation isn't going to happen from some local band or musician that puts there own stuff out. Basically everything on the radio nowadays just feels like it's meant to cloud the brain with desire and usurp the energy created.. The music industry is a vile and soulless machine.

In america there's been a growing DIY (do it yourself) punk scene since the 80s that has only gotten more and inclusive towards other styles and artists. This has been a great thing for lesser known artists. one can book a tour across america playing at DIY venues (no ticket master or any other company involved) and house shows pretty easily (especially because of the internet)!

IMO anything on the radio 95℅ of the time doesn't constitute as art or music, but rather a soda flavor? Any who I'm glad there's still a plethora of amazing music from DIY artists and independent record labels!

Hmm interesting that jazz and blues have similar implications.. Blues is a lot more simple (in it's structure and execution) while jazz, to me, is almost next density sounding. Basically I feel that blues is tangibly expresses emotions (is this song is about my feelings) while jazz deconstructs the emotion felt and turns it into something else entirely. You can tell where a blues song is going to go for the most part (verse chorus verse chorus bridge chorus, or any variance maybe no bridge or less choruses), but jazz can go anywhere!

But then you have musicians such as Sun Ra and Miles Davis (for example) that can take jazz and still tangibly express the emotion in all the chaos. Just my thoughts on the topic!

 

[Buddy]

This may not relate directly to the discussion's point, but I agreed with the topic title (Scientists say: people who are open to new challenges listen to blues?) just by reading it. IMO, "people who are open to new challenges" are also the creators of the bluesy sound. When I'm hearing the good stuff, I always feel like I'm hearing the sound of the various rhythms of all those emotional ups and down that are produced by being involved with life. It feels like connecting with people with whom you've shared similar experiences.

Thanks for posting that!

 

[wanderer]

I play my original music in a bluesy, soulful style and my audience is just as described, empathetic and open to feeling emotions. They're predominantly women, as young as 6. This little girl (in the attached photo) came up on stage, handed me flowers and told me how much she likes my music. I had to tell my wife I was in love with a younger woman ;)

 

[Seppo Ilmarinen]

IMO anything on the radio 95℅ of the time doesn't constitute as art or music, but rather a soda flavor? Any who I'm glad there's still a plethora of amazing music from DIY artists and independent record labels!

I agree, most of popular music in radio and tv has same function as fast food: it's a product made from unhealthy ingredients only to make money for the industry, leaving the consumer totally malnourished.

Hmm interesting that jazz and blues have similar implications.. Blues is a lot more simple (in it's structure and execution) while jazz, to me, is almost next density sounding. Basically I feel that blues is tangibly expresses emotions (is this song is about my feelings) while jazz deconstructs the emotion felt and turns it into something else entirely. You can tell where a blues song is going to go for the most part (verse chorus verse chorus bridge chorus, or any variance maybe no bridge or less choruses), but jazz can go anywhere!

But then you have musicians such as Sun Ra and Miles Davis (for example) that can take jazz and still tangibly express the emotion in all the chaos. Just my thoughts on the topic!

Jazz was born from slave songs and spirituals like blues, and blues is inseparable part of jazz tradition, so these music styles have more features in common than not - they're like close relatives. Actually jazz song structures (form) in so called standards (most common jazz tunes) are usually quite simple, AABA etc. Instead harmony in jazz is usually much more complex than in blues (altered chords, modulations, unusual chord changes etc). Yet when listening for example Charlie Parker improvising bebop lines, it's very ordered and predictable - a bit like in Bach's baroque melody lines, creating a very recognizable sound.

But yeah, some jazz sounds pretty chaotic too, especially free jazz. I prefer songs like Blue in Green (Miles Davis) and Infant Eyes (Wayne Shorter) more than those really uptempo and "chaotic" tunes which are harder to follow.

I found more info about the study:
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0131151

Findings across all of the samples converged to suggest that a robust five-factor structure underlies musical preferences, and that each of the five dimensions are defined and differentiated by configurations of their perceived musical attributes.

These dimensions (coined the MUSIC model after the first letter of each dimension label) are:

Mellow (featuring romantic, relaxing, unaggressive, sad, slow, and quiet attributes; such as in the soft rock, R&B, and adult contemporary genres);
Unpretentious (featuring uncomplicated, relaxing, unaggressive, soft, and acoustic attributes; such as in the country, folk, and singer/songwriter genres);
Sophisticated (featuring inspiring, intelligent, complex, and dynamic attributes; such as in the classical, operatic, avant-garde, world beat, and traditional jazz genres);
Intense (featuring distorted, loud, aggressive, and not relaxing, romantic, nor inspiring attributes; such as in the classic rock, punk, heavy metal, and power pop genres);
and Contemporary (featuring percussive, electric, and not sad; such as in the rap, electronica, Latin, acid jazz, and Euro pop genres).

There was four groups in study with different number of participants: rock, jazz and two mixed music groups. In all groups empathic people preferred Mellow and Unpretentious music (in mixed music groups also Contemporary).

Findings from Study 1 revealed that across genres, empathy levels were positively correlated with preferences for Mellow music (R&B/soul, adult contemporary, soft rock genres) and negatively correlated with preferences for Intense music (punk, heavy metal, and hard rock genres). Study 1 also tested if these results could be replicated within preferences for a single genre of music. Findings from two additional samples who received musical stimuli from only a single genre (rock and jazz, respectfully) revealed that similar correlational patterns emerged. [...]

Study 2 extended findings from Study 1 by examining how musical preferences were differentiated by empathizing-systemizing brain types. Type E preferred Mellow music and type S preferred Intense music. Analyses of detailed psychological attributes revealed that type E preferred music with low arousal, negative valence, and emotional depth. Type S preferred music with high arousal, and aspects of positive valence and cerebral depth. In terms of sonic attributes, type E preferred music with strings, while type S preferred music that was dense, distorted, loud, percussive, fast, and that featured brass and electric guitar. As in Study 1, the results in Study 2 remained significant after controlling for sex. These results confirmed our initial predictions that empathizers would prefer music from the Mellow dimension and systemizers would prefer music from the Intense dimensions. However, to our surprise, our prediction systemizers prefer music on the Sophisticated dimension was not supported.