Musicians like it louder

[Analogous]

A recent study discovered that the Preferred music-listening levels of musicians were significantly higher than non-musicians.
(I thought “good that the mastering is done by audio engineers” even if they are accused of other crimes like compressing, using too much reverb and occasionally of having poor taste). Here is the study in case you want to read and make sense of it:

Preferred music-listening level in musicians and non-musicians

The purpose of this study was to establish whether preferred music-listening level differed between musicians and non-musicians, and whether preferred music-listening level was related to music genre preference and lifetime noise exposure. Seventeen musicians (mean age = 29.06 years, SD = 4.74...

journals.plos.org

 

[sachinchavan 15865]

Wonder if the results would have been any different if the musicians were say from classical (esp. Indian) or soul genres who aren’t exposed to as much sound & noise levels as the rock and jazz musicians!

 

[Analogous]

Wonder if the results would have been any different if the musicians were say from classical (esp. Indian) or soul genres who aren’t exposed to as much sound & noise levels as the rock and jazz musicians!

I think they did try to segment by genre too. But I did not see any mention of Indian or other eastern cultural music.
It’s a small sample and probably first attempt at research on this issue. I’d say interesting but to be interpreted within the limits of the study design and parameters

 

[Kannan]

In my opinion, musicians are exposed to live concerts and recordings which are usually at high spl levels and even learning stages are such.
So guess their tolerance and general listening levels are higher.
With classical it will be more so as the frequency bandwidth can move from very low to very high pitch in short bursts.

 

[sachinchavan 15865]

I’d say interesting but to be interpreted within the limits of the study design and parameters

Thar’s not what scientific experiments are supposed to do. The study design and parameters (including statistically relevant sample size) are expected to explain phenomena in the universe outside, not just within the sample size. Anyway!

 

[Analogous]

Thar’s not what scientific experiments are supposed to do. The study design and parameters (including statistically relevant sample size) are expected to explain phenomena in the universe outside, not just within the sample size. Anyway!

Maybe I wasn’t clear. I am saying it would be better to interpret the findings of this study and extrapolate to the “universe outside” with care and caution given the limitations of the study design. I don’t think the researchers have stated if the sample size is calculated to be representative of any sub group or population. The sampling technique also seems to a “convenience sample” not a random and unbiased one. They state: “Participants were recruited using flyers advertising the research, around the University of Manchester campus and at the ‘Futureworks’ campus (i.e., higher education setting for music performance and audio engineering). The musicians ranged from guitarist/bassist, drummer to saxophonist. They played in rock and jazz bands.”

I would call it exploratory research that points to the need for better designed studies on the topic that can result in findings that are more generalised. Hope they get support and funding for this in the future.

As @Kannan has pointed out the hearing levels are affected by professions; those exposed to loud and noisy environments over long periods are more likely to have hearing loss. Maybe the next study will measure a wider range of study participants’ hearing and analyse preferences of loudness in relation to this. I have a feeling airport runway staff would be playing their music loudest.

The authors state: “The purpose of this study was to establish whether preferred music-listening level differed between musicians and non-musicians, and whether preferred music-listening level was related to music genre preference and lifetime noise exposure.” The technique used to assess lifetime noise exposure was through structured interviews.”
So elements of subjectivity.

 

[Analogous]

I found these findings interesting: (quoting from the study):

Overall, musicians preferred to listen to music at a higher sound level [dB (A)] than non-musicians. Thus, the hypothesis that musicians prefer to listen to music at higher sound levels can be accepted. The difference in preferred music-listening level may be the result of an intrinsic effect of other differences found between the two groups such as musicians having a stronger emotional experience when listening to music [24] and/or the differences in brain anatomy in areas that process motor, sensory and cognitive performances [25]. Previous studies into differences between musicians and non-musicians have also revealed that musicians have significantly stronger activation of some brain areas, such as the left inferior parietal lobe (IPL), than non-musicians [24, 26]. The IPL has a key role in sensory and emotional perception [24, 27].

The present study also assessed individual musical preference and its effect on preferred music-listening level, as previous research has indicated that sounds that are enjoyed are perceived as being quieter [16, 28]. Irrespective of group, participants listened to music they preferred at a level approximately 11 dB higher than music they liked less.

Furthermore, analysis of the descriptive statistics for the dB(A) level which participants preferred for music compared to the bird song, revealed that participants preferred to enjoy the music at a higher level than the bird song. These data are broadly in line with the findings from Cullari & Semanchick [28] and Fucci [16], who assessed loudness perception and music preferences, and their findings support the hypothesis that when an individual does not perceive a sound as ‘noise’, such sound is perceived to be quieter and therefore could be listened to at a higher listening-level.

This leads to the third aim of the current study, which was to assess whether there was a correlation between estimated lifetime noise exposure and preferred music-listening level. A moderate positive correlation was found, demonstrating that individuals with greater noise exposure preferred to listen to music at higher levels. Additionally, statistical analysis also revealed that musicians had greater life-time exposure to noise compared to non-musicians.”

 

[sachinchavan 15865]

Maybe I wasn’t clear. I am saying it would be better to interpret the findings of this study and extrapolate to the “universe outside” with care and caution given the limitations of the study design. I don’t think the researchers have stated if the sample size is calculated to be representative of any sub group or population. The sampling technique also seems to a “convenience sample” not a random and unbiased one. They state: “Participants were recruited using flyers advertising the research, around the University of Manchester campus and at the ‘Futureworks’ campus (i.e., higher education setting for music performance and audio engineering). The musicians ranged from guitarist/bassist, drummer to saxophonist. They played in rock and jazz bands.”

I would call it exploratory research that points to the need for better designed studies on the topic that can result in findings that are more generalised. Hope they get support and funding for this in the future.

As @Kannan has pointed out the hearing levels are affected by professions; those exposed to loud and noisy environments over long periods are more likely to have hearing loss. Maybe the next study will measure a wider range of study participants’ hearing and analyse preferences of loudness in relation to this. I have a feeling airport runway staff would be playing their music loudest.

The authors state: “The purpose of this study was to establish whether preferred music-listening level differed between musicians and non-musicians, and whether preferred music-listening level was related to music genre preference and lifetime noise exposure.” The technique used to assess lifetime noise exposure was through structured interviews.”
So elements of subjectivity.

Appreciate your effort in enunciating the details and explaining your position.

If all the study points to is the correlation between exposure to high levels of sound and preferred loudness, then it is but obvious. I’d not even call it a preference then - it’s more of a compulsion for the inflicted guys - whether musicians or airport runway operators - also not limited to music listening, but even for conversations etc. What’s more interesting is to look for correlations between preferred loudness levels for musicians and listeners of various genres… and also see if they are the same/diffeeent for the two sets. An ideal study will have to normalise the listening ability/loss of the subjects to arrive at this.

 

[Analogous]

Appreciate your effort in enunciating the details and explaining your position.

If all the study points to is the correlation between exposure to high levels of sound and preferred loudness, then it is but obvious. I’d not even call it a preference then - it’s more of a compulsion for the inflicted guys - whether musicians or airport runway operators - also not limited to music listening, but even for conversations etc. What’s more interesting is to look for correlations between preferred loudness levels for musicians and listeners of various genres… and also see if they are the same/diffeeent for the two sets. An ideal study will have to normalise the listening ability/loss of the subjects to arrive at this.

Agree, This study does include audiometry of all participants using two reliable methods. Their inclusion and exclusion criteria for study participants is also rigorous..as is the statistical analysis.
I feel given the limitations in the sampling it still has interesting findings: loud listening habits and preferences in loudness of music listening among musicians as compared to non musicians.
The question whether this applies to non musicians who work in loud environments for long periods is not part of this study. But is a pointer for future exploration.
Good to remind ourselves that correlation does not prove causation (even if it implies) Hence the difficulty in extrapolation of the findings to general population.