After listening to Pandora and last.fm for a while, I've realized that there's a pretty serious distinction in my frame of mind when listening to music I do and don't own. This difference is interesting, because it's becoming less and less important due to internet music... yet also it's highlighted more and more by the prevalence of this music.
To me, the difference really highlights the Adorno "exchange value" argument. I get antsy about music I don't own because I feel less control over it, even though upon reflection I realize that I can have a really enjoyable experience (probably more enjoyable) simply listening to the things that come over my stream.
Hopefully, continuing to listen to last.fm a lot will revise my relationship to the music itself; make me more open to the uniqueness and contingency of the listening experienced, as opposed to a little bit neurotic about managing my collection of music and my style of listening to it. To those of you that don't listen to aleatory streaming music online: do it.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
this seems like much less a distinction between own/not own as between on demand vs. stream. thoughts?
* The idea that you don't enjoy music played by others because you cannot control it is interesting. However, I'm not really sure that streaming music really alters my relationship/anxiety surrounding music that doesnt "belong" to me. Both Pandora and Last.fm have "ban" buttons - you still have control over the content. It's pretty distinct from.. sitting in a friend's room while they play music. I think Eli has an interesting point about demand/stream, but I think that, while the influx of new music certainly changes your tastes as it satisfies them, there is still a feeling of control that prevents confrontations with sounds that are most unlike "yours"
Here's a thought -- The combination of social networking with last.fm's music tracking produces a new "profile" or identity made of sounds, not words. i. This seems to provide a fascinatingly more complex, affective understanding of subjectivity; ii. opens space for new connections. a specific example - in college students, to a certain extent, self-select their groups of friends based on area of study (SS), proximity (dorm), and areas of interest (religion, drug/alcohol use, etc) - with the increasing permeation of music into daily life, it's neat to think about potential bonds formed solely through the mutual resonance of particular sounds - perhaps music is only one example of the multiplication and alteration of the meaning of 'community.'
Random thought: What to make of the serious permeation of music into everyday life? (i.e. I listen to music at LEAST 50% of the time I'm awake) How does this affect the way individuals live and view the world around them? Hmph.
Eli - is there a difference? Ownership really consists in degrees of demandability. The only difference between people having music on their computer and having to get it elsewhere is the ease with which they can demand it.
Music search engines like seeqpod.com are going to fuck with this... a lot.
Ralph - music tagging is also an interesting thing, because it reinroduces a linguistic relationship, but web2.0 style, which means there's a lot more awesome anarchy effects happening than usual.
I've also thought a lot about music in everyday life. Hard to say exactly what's going on there, but one thing for sure is that it definitely structures the experiences I have while listening. Note the importance of movie soundtracks!
life soundtrack.. life as cinema..the increasing importance of AFFECT in a society of high-speed technology..
Post a Comment