Are you still excited by music?

[A Lark Ascending]

Probably one for older folks...

I've just noticed quite a few posts of late where listeners of long experience comment on how hard it is to get excited by music in the way they once did. Natural, I suppose - everything loses its novelty impact with time.

I don't think I get as excited as when it was all brand new (though I'm suspicious of the telescoping of the past there - all the highs roll into one whilst the periods of boredom get deleted).

I'm 58 and very much in the still excited camp; new music, playing old favourites, rediscovering old music, discovering old music that I've never previously known.

Edited October 23, 2013 by A Lark Ascending

[imeanyou]

The day I'm not excited by music is the day they bury me. I'm not gonna be hearing Monk's Blue Notes for the first time ever again or Hendrix or any of Mahler's symphonies but good music of any stripe still gives me a thrill. I'm 50, if that means anything.

[7/4]

I sure am!

[BillF]

Somewhere in Art Pepper's autobiography he mentions something that excited him musically in his later years like when he was young. (Can't recall what it was - someone will probably remind us.) So decline in the excitement factor is a pretty general phenomenon.

Perhaps raw excitement is replaced for the continuing listenener in later years by the mature savouring of the connoisseur. Just speaking of myself, of course!

But something akin to the excitement of youth can still happen. Surprisingly, I was blown away by a local big band and a strict harmony vocal quartet a few months ago. The standard of musicianship was very high and sitting on the front row and hearing the sound coming from 22 different sources was something else!

[A Lark Ascending]

Back in August I went to the Vortex to hear Keith Tippett in various situations. Wonderful all round. But the totally free quintet he did with Julie Tippetts and three young string players had me on the edge of my set from start to finish. I can't believe I was any less excited than listening to Henry Cow in a teaching room at Reading University back in 1973 (mjazzg was there at the Tippett and can vouch that it wasn't just my befuddled brain!).

I also find listening to the younger folk singers very exciting (might have something to do with the fact that some of them are very pretty!) - people taking music that has often been done time and time again yet giving it a totally personal stamp.

And then there was watching Wizz Jones live again back in August - only knew him in passing but again I was utterly engaged in that concert.

I suppose the excitement I recall from my early days was the sense of something totally new unfolding as new records came out. Now, in retrospect I can see a lot of that was less new than I imagined it, but it was part of the thrill of being in your late teens. Don't often get that sense now. Though, to take one example, hearing Alex Hawkins records emerge, never quite knowing where they are going to go next, can put me back in that mindset.

Edited October 23, 2013 by A Lark Ascending

[jazzbo]

Yes. I think it's often fueled by my attempts to make music as well as enjoy playback.

[king ubu]

So I'm not really allowed in here ... but still: at 34 I've been heavily into music for around 20 years ... and surely there have been periods of fatigue (linked to general periods of well ... not quite depression, but ...), but there are also moments of intense joy and the notion of true discovery, both when listening to music at home or in concert. I sure hope that will never end (and knowing myself, I think it won't for me ... curiosity most always gets the better and I don't think that will change too soon, rather be dead before!)

[TedR]

I don't want to sound like a shill for Chuck Nessa's catalog but earlier this year I started to buy a number of his titles. Before then I was getting to be a "lazy" listener. But I found every Nessa label title I purchased to be at the very least fascinating and, for me, different than anything I currently have on cd. I started listening more openly to everything I've been playing recently. So, yes, I would say I'm excited listening to music again.

(There are five Nessa cd titles I don't have yet, one being the Bradford/Stevens. Since Lark mentioned Julie Tippetts, I may have to spring for that one soon too. I guess I'm becoming a collector again. :-). )

[John L]

I'm still excited, although sometimes I work hard to mix it up, change genres, etc. so that I don't start to feel fatigue.

There are certain artists, however, who used to excite me, but for whom I now have a difficult time getting excited. I find that very frustrating. For example, there was a time when Stan Getz really excited me. I bought almost all of his records. Now I still enjoy listening to Getz, but I can't get back the real excitement that I used to feel. I listen and think that I should be enjoying this more than I really am.

[Bright Moments]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jofNR_WkoCE

get excited!!

[AllenLowe]

it may be the result of my 17 years up here in the Gulag, but all I do is think about music; I listen to it, compose it constantly, and play whenever and wherever I can (which is few and far between, unfortunately).

[BillF]

it may be the result of my 17 years up here in the Gulag, but all I do is think about music; I listen to it, compose it constantly, and play whenever and wherever I can (which is few and far between, unfortunately).

But do you dig it like when you were young?

[John Tapscott]

Perhaps raw excitement is replaced for the continuing listenener in later years by the mature savouring of the connoisseur. Just speaking of myself, of course!

Pretty much describes it for me, too Bill. But you're a much more mature connoisseur than I am! And of course we could say this about many things in life.

[A Lark Ascending]

What you do get the more music you listen to - I'm not sure that it's necessarily an age thing - is a wider context for your listening. So things you know well take on a different perspective in the light of other things you hear.

What I hope to avoid is the cliche of the wise old man slimming down his choices to 'the essentials', the "things that really matter" (always seems like the dreaded 'Wine Club' territory, visions of Frasier and Niles).

I'd much rather keep exploring and hear what younger musicians are trying out. That too can refresh your pleasure in the things you are more familiar with.

Edited October 23, 2013 by A Lark Ascending

[xybert]

33 here and still excited by music, although i do go through phases where i feel in a bit of a funk. Despite my general attitude that there's just too much amazing stuff coming out to hear or afford, plus decades of back catalogue to explore, last month i was looking to order a CD and for the life of me i just could not summon the enthusiasm for anything... the feeling passed but i do go through short phases like that occasionally. I've discovered some of my all time favourite albums in recent years.

[AllenLowe]

I actually like it more intensely than when I was young; not to drop names, but once you've been either on a stage or in a recording studio with people like Julius Hemphill, Roswell Rudd, Gary Bartz, Ursula Oppens and Matt Shipp, it just makes you hungrier for more.

[The Magnificent Goldberg]

Yes.

Oh, all right...

No.

Sometimes.

When I want to be.

When I don't want to be, stuff turns my head anyway.

While all those answers are correct, when I want them to be, I guess since the sixties I've always found music to be interesting rather than generally exciting. It's more interesting to me to explore someone's work, to find interest in the good bits and the trashy bits, than to get excited about the good bits and ignore the trash. So being excited by music is not my normal expectation. Mind you, when I DO get excited by music, I don't try to keep calm

MG

[ejp626]

Sometimes but not as much as in my (relative) youth. I definitely am questioning whether I need to have so many tangible manifestations of music in my house, though I haven't actually stopped buying CDs completely.

[jeffcrom]

Yes. And when I'm not, I have to have it anyway. Music is a necessity of life for me, like food and air.

[danasgoodstuff]

Yes, it comes and goes, but has been on an uptick recently...don't know why. Just turned 59.

Edited October 23, 2013 by danasgoodstuff

[JSngry]

Erections are scary at first. Then you learn what they are and they're kinda cool. Then you learn what you can do with them, and they get really exciting. Then you learn what happens when you do those things and you can go batshit crazy with delirium and dread (separately or together). Then you get to where the erection is not as thrilling in itself, but what causes it is. Then you get to thinking about why some things cause them, and other, seemingly identical, things don't, and some totally opposite things also do, and then well, how much of that is me and how much of that is those things? Then you get to thinking, no, I should have an erection about anything and everything, just because, who am I to judge? And that's kinda thrilling while it lasts, but, really, how long, not very, right? So at some point, you decide that you can have an erection anytime at any place, it's ok, but by the same token, can d/n = will d/n = should, so then an erection becomes something to be simply enjoyed but not just about or for one same things always, nor acted upon the same way every time. Then you can have an erection all the time, and it's ok, because then, finally, you understand that an erection is just an erection, not a mandate. Mandates come from elsewhere.

So, embrace the erection, avoid the illusion of its seeming mandate, because that's just the short game, and the long game is what lasts (is until is no longer, correct?). That's what I say about it at this time.

[danasgoodstuff]

Erections are scary at first. Then you learn what they are and they're kinda cool. Then you learn what you can do with them, and they get really exciting. Then you learn what happens when you do those things and you can go batshit crazy with delirium and dread (separately or together). Then you get to where the erection is not as thrilling in itself, but what causes it is. Then you get to thinking about why some things cause them, and other, seemingly identical, things don't, and some totally opposite things also do, and then well, how much of that is me and how much of that is those things? Then you get to thinking, no, I should have an erection about anything and everything, just because, who am I to judge? And that's kinda thrilling while it lasts, but, really, how long, not very, right? So at some point, you decide that you can have an erection anytime at any place, it's ok, but by the same token, can d/n = will d/n = should, so then an erection becomes something to be simply enjoyed but not just about or for one same things always, nor acted upon the same way every time. Then you can have an erection all the time, and it's ok, because then, finally, you understand that an erection is just an erection, not a mandate. Mandates come from elsewhere.

So, embrace the erection, avoid the illusion of its seeming mandate, because that's just the short game, and the long game is what lasts (is until is no longer, correct?). That's what I say about it at this time.

Not directed at me, I trust...

[TedR]

Two things come to mind. Maybe three.

1. I'm all for using analogies but............

2. Jim the moderator, please make Jim stop. :-)

3. "anytime at any place" ????

[JSngry]

Erections are scary at first. Then you learn what they are and they're kinda cool. Then you learn what you can do with them, and they get really exciting. Then you learn what happens when you do those things and you can go batshit crazy with delirium and dread (separately or together). Then you get to where the erection is not as thrilling in itself, but what causes it is. Then you get to thinking about why some things cause them, and other, seemingly identical, things don't, and some totally opposite things also do, and then well, how much of that is me and how much of that is those things? Then you get to thinking, no, I should have an erection about anything and everything, just because, who am I to judge? And that's kinda thrilling while it lasts, but, really, how long, not very, right? So at some point, you decide that you can have an erection anytime at any place, it's ok, but by the same token, can d/n = will d/n = should, so then an erection becomes something to be simply enjoyed but not just about or for one same things always, nor acted upon the same way every time. Then you can have an erection all the time, and it's ok, because then, finally, you understand that an erection is just an erection, not a mandate. Mandates come from elsewhere.

So, embrace the erection, avoid the illusion of its seeming mandate, because that's just the short game, and the long game is what lasts (is until is no longer, correct?). That's what I say about it at this time.

Not directed at me, I trust...

OMG, no!

[danasgoodstuff]

Maybe he should take his own advice re analogies - just because you can doesn't mean you should...