Music preference and intellectual maturity

[ToddRyler]

Hello fellow INTPs!
I needed some opinion about this idea that i had a few days ago.
Considering that one measure of intellectual maturity could be taken as the amount of sensory stimulus a person requires to elicit a thought response, is it reasonable to conclude that people who listen to loud (?and harsh) music are intellectually less mature than those who prefer milder and more subtle music?
While i give the example of music, i also would like to know if you think this idea is valid and applicable on a wider array of stimuli.
Thank you.

 

[ToddRyler]

Other examples, i think, would be of the following type:
1. they would have no problem with smaller text size (lots of people complain, btw)
2. they would need less pictures on a page to understand concepts,
3. they probably would speak quite softly
4. they would get annoyed very easily, etc.

PS: I hope what i mean by "intellectual maturity" is implicit here..
(way) Above average IQ, i think would be a more technical version

 

[Hadoblado]

I strongly doubt it.

Music isn't about listening to the smallest amount that will elicit a response. I feel pretty happy to speak for the majority here and say that that is very rarely anyone's goal.

Rather, you need to look for the reason why they listen to the music they do. For example, I listen to very loud, very dense music because I want to block the noise of everyone else out. I also want to feel energised. The volume of my music is the only 'silence' I can attain without listening to white noise.

I also listen to vocalists who for the most part I can't understand. This is because I don't want people telling me what to think. Because a large part of what lyrics are designed to do is to shape the listeners thought. It's like advertising but for ideals, and singing tends to be a limited medium when it comes to communicating rational reasons to form an opinion.

This kind of music is often more experimental too, often compared more to classical than to rock. It's more complex than most other music and if I do want to focus on it, I can without feeling like it's repetitive or predictable.

I mean, do you actually require sensory stimulus to think? You would be thinking anyway. The stimulus has just replaced your thoughts with someone else's. For me the stimulus is intrusive, and the thoughts it pushes are unwanted.

This kind of thing has been studied a little? I can remember seeing some psypop articles about what your musical taste says about your IQ. But it's dangerous territory to tread if you're not prepared: Most articles that talk about IQ without talking you through an experiment are clickbait af. IIRC the article I'm referring to had zero control for socioeconomic factors, so of course classical music listeners would have higher IQ's than hipperyhoppeters.

 

[Cheeseumpuffs]

lol no.

Who even listens to only one style of music?

If you don't listen to and can't appreciate music that falls under both of your absurdly broad categories then your tastes are wildly closed off and lacking, imo. (Also one could argue that refusal to challenge oneself to understand and appreciate sounds of a musical nature that one isn't necessarily comfortable with is a sign of being, in your words, "intellectually less mature.")

 

[Reluctantly]

I don't think so. But if it's really monotonous, basic patterns constantly repeating with little variation or levels of spontaneous change, I do think it says something about what goes on in someone's head. Most rap is really annoying because of this. Though don't get me wrong, some of it is really stimulating, affective, and poetic. But most of it is so bland and boring and just trying to convey some stupid image of a ghetto tough guy or girl.

 

[Happy]

I make possibly unfair assumptions of people's intellect when I observe them listening to certain styles of pop music.

Outside that, I don't think there's a great correlation between music taste and intellectual maturity. It's more a matter of *why* they're listening to something than *what* they're listening to.

"Loud and harsh music" - as you put it - can be complex as fuck, and require a good amount of musical and/or cultural intelligence to comprehend and appreciate.

 

[TheManBeyond]

You sound like one gf i had, damn she was full of shit for sure

 

[Hadoblado]

Keep it civil.

 

[Cognisant]

 

[Ex-User (11125)]

Classical music(or noble art if you will) is dead boring and the majority of pieces sound uninspired. I doubt interesting people will be into that

Anyway who cares just listen to whatever. Geez. I listen to almost all genres, what does that make me? -_-

 

[TheManBeyond]

Keep it civil.

yeah maybe was too harsh unnecesarilly
it just reminded me of how angry she would get me with her non sense when i used to show her songs i was into, she used to say: "too noisy! i used to listen to that music when i was 17! you'll see how i'm right after some years, your taste will evolve"
it doesn't evolve, it just changes from day to day, minute after minute, i listen tons of different music.
volume is really important for me, it really energises you. i mean i cannot listen anything below 8/10

 

[Happy]

Classical music(or noble art if you will) is dead boring and the majority of pieces sound uninspired. I doubt interesting people will be into that

Anyway who cares just listen to whatever. Geez. I listen to almost all genres, what does that make me? -_-

Gotta disagree with you there. Classical music is generally wonderful. The complexity of form and order is scarcely heard in music of more recent times. The deliberacy of every note and every silence is something worthy of striving to dissect. Classical music can take us on a journey through a whole spectrum of human emotion that doesn't seem to translate in most other musical styles. Nothing boring or uninspired about it...

Granted, it may be an acquired taste.

 

[ToddRyler]

I apologize if i have been inconsiderate in my usage of words, or rather, for the selection of the topic for discussion itself (especially to TheManBeyond, i feel you, bro). But, i would like to clarify that my motives were quite different, and while music was the only aspect that was taken up as the matter to debate on, there are other things, which i feel, are also interesting here.
If, for example, Sherlock Holmes is celebrated for being very perceptive and for his ability to pick up clues from objects and events that would not raise another's eyebrows, would not, was my doubt, a similar thing be said for music as well.
I tend to listen to a lot of different kinds of music too (although I'm not very music literate)..! I was just bewildered by the strong feelings and biases music raises. For example, i had discovered a song, not very long ago, that i happened to enjoy very much. I wanted a friend to hear it out, and when i offered him my earpieces, he could not listen to it for 5 seconds (literally..!). And he did not say that he did not like that song, he said he didn't like such songs. It confused me, because a lot of other people seemed to like it anyway.
That was a silly detail.
But the question holds; could this not be compared to, in a visual sense, requiring a stronger stimulus to catch attention? Or in an olfactory sense, a stronger aroma to be perceived?
I understand that it matters why you are listening to a certain piece, or when, for example, but i do find myself liking similar kind of songs (and i do listen to languages i don't understand a word of too). Do you think there is something we can find here?
Again, I'm just curious

PS: Maybe it would not contribute much to the IQ per se, but could it tell us anything about the person itself?

 

[Kuu]

I'm not sure auditory intensity thresholds have much of a relationship with intelligence. If it's too loud you just turn down the volume...

Breadth of interest is probably more indicative of a developed intellect. Said the INTP.

The complexity of form and order is scarcely heard in music 'art' of more recent times.

 

[Hadoblado]

Sensory != Perception

When you listen to music, you're listening to particular things. Another person can have no appreciation for those elements, but find something else in it. For example, a guitarist might like the technical guitar solo, while a drummer might like the rhythm and structure. It's just preference (though that can be quite complex in itself).

I think one of the reasons listening to music while high is so good is that you're able to overcome the filter by which you would normally perceive the music. You discard your habitual appreciation and find another one, and that's awesome.

 

[Black Rose]

Nightcore - Whatever I Want​

https://youtu.be/bq2PhoH6hjs

 

[AndyC]

Sufjan Stevens is great if you pay attention to the lyrics, although most people wouldn't be able to decipher the meaning.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lJJT00wqlOo This isn't his best work.


My favourite song: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d2FYvVgFqeo

I listen to pretty much all genres except those I haven't exposed myself to or are grossly culturally oriented like country and pop.



Oh and I love jazz.

 

[Cognisant]

Nightcore - Whatever I Want​

Spoiler

https://youtu.be/bq2PhoH6hjs

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rggAHm71OQw

 

[ToddRyler]

When you listen to music, you're listening to particular things. Another person can have no appreciation for those elements, but find something else in it.

This is what i am actually referring to
I frequently ask doubts to my teachers, and sometimes, they don't really understand that doubt, but begin to answer anyway, because they have a pre-fixed idea of what doubt a student might get in a particular topic (why, i do that myself so many times ). Here too, would you not say, that the teacher is listening to only particular things (or i, who had a particular doubt, probably heard only that part of the lecture well , and maybe, the answer was more subtly evident in another part of the lecture..?).
I tend to believe that one aspect of intelligence is the length of time you can focus on a given task at will. This might not be universal to intelligence, or even genius, but it makes sense to think that a structured approach to processing any information is key to processing it correctly.

I think one of the reasons listening to music while high is so good is that you're able to overcome the filter by which you would normally perceive the music. You discard your habitual appreciation and find another one, and that's awesome.

Again, this is what my question is about
If an uninitiated, say, a kid, listens to some music and quickly discovers many more aspects of the piece than me, who has been listening to it for a while now, i would think that person to be smarter than me (and that would boost my awesome inferiority complex..!)

Being able to pick up everything (? most things), without effort, how would you guys interpret it?

Discovering a new facet to something gives a high in itself. Combine that with its inherent awesomeness, and i already envy them who can experience the world in such an intense way.

But, this, imo, would also leave them open to the irritation that would come along with any wrinkles that were not ironed out in the music, inconsistencies among its various elements and that would create strong opinions regarding music of different types, which would now be based on reason and not on the emotional reaction that the music itself inspires.


Thanks for sharing your favorites
Enjoying them as i type..!
I appreciate it very much and encourage you all to share your favorites

P.S: I'm not trying to force my opinions, i'm genuinely interested in this.

 

[The Gopher]

P.S: I'm not trying to force my opinions, i'm genuinely interested in this.

NO You must be an evil elitist that things the music you like is the best for a high IQ.

You could listen to simple music as background noise to think or complicated music to mentally challenge yourself... somehow... The problem is the shear amount of different styles and reasons makes it hard to quantify.

 

[TheManBeyond]

lately i'm not being able to create a normal rock song that i can say it's catchy and just weird enough sounding for da people
cuz i can only come up with strange pieces doing experimentation with orchestral instruments and tons of effects, actually when u are used to play so much and listen to such a wide variety of music, strange harmonies are rather the easy thing to do.

 

[INTPmetalhead]

Hello fellow INTPs!
I needed some opinion about this idea that i had a few days ago.
Considering that one measure of intellectual maturity could be taken as the amount of sensory stimulus a person requires to elicit a thought response, is it reasonable to conclude that people who listen to loud (?and harsh) music are intellectually less mature than those who prefer milder and more subtle music?
While i give the example of music, i also would like to know if you think this idea is valid and applicable on a wider array of stimuli.
Thank you.

Just because some music is loud and harsh does not mean that the individuals who listen are less intellectually mature and here Is my reasoning for disagreeing:

It's logical to assume you're talking about metal since you said harsh. Let us look beyond the decibel levels to reveal that music of this nature is much more complex than easier going music (in general). What I mean by this is that easier going music generally follows a simple formula and structure pattern (like ABAB), where as a lot metal (I say a lot because there are band's out there in metal that use formulas and structures in a common manner, but are generally still stimulating because they're not simplistic) is complex as it derives from a heavy influence from Classical music, where the structure is more like ABAC and can go even further than that and often comes from motifs.

The stimulus does not lie in the decibels or "harshness" but rather in the structure; there are some "easier going" band's that are complex as well, which are more of the "progressive" or "alternative" styles (example is The Dear Hunter). Most music of today that's accepted in mass is meant to keep you in a hypnosis of verse chorus verse chorus with a "hook" that get stuck in your head simply because of its repetition and one slight change of inflection.

 

[Intolerable]

I think it's a solid theory.

A young ear is not a nuanced ear. Many of the sounds would be lost and the brain would interpret them as 'boring.'

A young mind needs strong, in fact bold markers. Why? The same reason young legs need to first test their limits before establishing a stride. We need to know our limits and bold markers help us find our limits. The brain is ultimately testing for sound barriers and through that testing establishes over time a preference. This can obviously take millions of experiences over many, many years.

This often culminates with an older individual who prefers violins which have an octave range double that of many other instruments. It also has a higher octave range than the standard guitar.

Add in the fact most pop music is aimed at the young ear (repetative, bold beats and rythmns) and I think you're onto something.

 

[QuickTwist]

I'm not sure auditory intensity thresholds have much of a relationship with intelligence. If it's too loud you just turn down the volume...

Breadth of interest is probably more indicative of a developed intellect. Said the INTP.

I actually think this is something worth discussing, because you bring up a good point.

Is it that the more interests you have the more intelligent you are, or is it that the more complex your interests are the more intelligent you are? To me, its a mix of both and on a 3 dimensional scale. One variable is how complex the interest is, another how many interests you have and third is how serious you are about those interests. So the number of combinations with this is actually quite diverse. You can dabble in everything on a shallow level or only focus on one very complex thing super seriously. So there might be a correlation here, but it still doesn't account for the OP's actual question which is how subtle or strongly the stimulus is felt in these interests. So its not really a direct correlation, no. I will say that having many interests definity makes one more sophisticated, but I don't think this is the same thing as intelligence. Again, not a direct correlation because someone can be extremely intelligent and be a specialist in something that is immensely complex and be absolutely brilliant.


When it comes to music and how this relates, it also matters how you view the piece.

Take this song for example:

https://youtu.be/unrpho37rYE

To some people it might just sound "chuggy" and repetitive while others may think this song is really rich and complex. Both are valid outlooks of the song and I don't think having one perspective over the other means someone is intelligent or not.

I also think something must be said for complexity of musical taste and how intelligent someone is. Someone who is really smart might really crave the most complex music they can get ahold of to satisfy their need for that kind of thing while another person who is equally intelligent might just like the simplest shit they can find because it caters to the desire to see resolution in the mundanity of life.

beauty is in the eye of the beholder and different stroke for different folks is my conclusion.

My favorite song is this ftr:

https://youtu.be/fj-10lIrboM

 

[Artsu Tharaz]

I think once my primary listening material is Classical, I'll know I've musically matured.

I've liked that sort of music for a long time, but never really delved into it. Y'know?

 

[ToddRyler]

I actually think this is something worth discussing, because you bring up a good point.

To me, its a mix of both and on a 3 dimensional scale. One variable is how complex the interest is, another how many interests you have and third is how serious you are about those interests.

This is a very interesting way of looking at this problem. Intelligence is diverse, that i think, we can all agree upon. If there is some way of grading complexity of various tasks, we could make use of this ideology in assessing our own intelligence. It's kinda cool

... but I don't think this is the same thing as intelligence. Again, not a direct correlation because someone can be extremely intelligent and be a specialist in something that is immensely complex and be absolutely brilliant.

This, here, is interesting too. Would you call Kim Peek intelligent?

 

[bvanevery]

Music isn't about listening to the smallest amount that will elicit a response. I feel pretty happy to speak for the majority here and say that that is very rarely anyone's goal.

In fact it begs the joke about playing "the world's smallest violin for you". This is performed by rubbing the thumb and 2 forefingers together. Idiomatically, it means someone's grousing and complaining isn't worth anything. Think of sad, sad music played on the violin, like the Holocaust just happened or something. Now think of that being itty, bitty, teeny, tiny music...

I did have a Sesame Street record, in my childhood, which had a singing game about singing LOUDER and then softer. I'm pretty sure this was partly to build some capability in a child, of actually being quiet. Of course it wasn't trying to be repressive about it, hence the LOUDER part of the game.

 

[redbaron]

 

[QuickTwist]

Hard to argue with that rb.

 

[onesteptwostep]

Remember how we flamed that one guy to death after he posted that topic?

Yeah...

/I listen to instrumental music only now these days, and try to feel what the artists were feeling when they're playing it. It's sort of like roleplaying musicians in a way, but you're playing several of them at the same moment.

Being able to pick up everything (? most things), without effort, how would you guys interpret it?

Tbh, and personally speaking, I'd interpret it as you being really really weak. I've found that I pick up more elements in a piece as my mental/physical state has been weakened (I'm talking about for months on end).

What kind of music do you listen to? I could (and several others here I guess) can make use of some new music. We could even trade if we want. !

 

[bvanevery]

Regarding Musicthatmakesyoudumb, I'm not dumb enough to use Facebook, and I don't think I'd be dumb enough to express a particular "favorite music". This could explain the absence of high SAT scores in the graph. It's not natural to expect that smart people, as measured by the SAT, simply don't like music.

 

[2babylon]

I'm inclined to think people who affiliate music with intelligence (or high IQ) are elitist.

I like music with lots of stimulation; complicated orchestration makes for a more enjoyable, repeatable song. This goes for everything from metal to hip hop... to EDM. Sometimes the backbeat fighting the rhythm is the best part of a song, esp when stressed on the bass, rhythm guitar, vocalist's inflections, or drum... makes songs that sound very basic become very deep on an aural level. That's one reason I can tolerate much pop - I may not like Justin Bieber as a person or symbol, but if he's got a good producer, it can be great. Drake has good producers; Kanye IS a good producer. Megadeth does a good job layering electric guitars also, but their music is pretty loud.

 

[ChainsofAssery]

Megadeth does a good job layering electric guitars also, but their music is pretty loud.

Megadeth was great until Dave became a neurotic Christian.

 

[2babylon]

Megadeth was great until Dave became a neurotic Christian.

valid

 

[QuickTwist]

This is a very interesting way of looking at this problem. Intelligence is diverse, that i think, we can all agree upon. If there is some way of grading complexity of various tasks, we could make use of this ideology in assessing our own intelligence. It's kinda cool



This, here, is interesting too. Would you call Kim Peek intelligent?

Sorry for not getting back to you on this sooner. I am not used to people quoting me pointing out I made a good post.

I have no idea who Kim Peek is. On a cursory Google, I see he was the supposed rain man.

I think the conclusion here is that intelligence has different facets to it and you can't just assume someone who is bad at one thing is not good at another.

It fits nicely with the specialist vs. generalist dichotomies. People are complex. This almost has me convinced that there is different forms of intelligence... almost.