Romancing the mouse click A qualitative analysis on distinction
Luuk van Dijk 10253467
luuk.vandijk@student.uva.nl Master’s Thesis
Cultural Sociology Marcel van den Haak Alex van Venrooij 15-08-2017
1
3 Summary
In this thesis I will be looking into the differences and similarities between users of online music consumption (streaming and downloading) and consumers of vinyl. Bartmanski and Woodward’s (2015) book on vinyl will be taken as a starting point to gain insight in to the degree to which these groups actually differ in the way they experience their interaction with their preferred musical device and how they speak about other musical devices. In doing so, the theories put forth by Bourdieu (1984), Hennion (2001) and other related articles will be used as a theoretical framework. Through the interviewing of 15 respondents in the age category 20-29 a clearer picture of the differences and similarities between the users of the device of preference will emerge. The interviews show that the group designated as ‘cultural omnivores’ when it comes to their music taste, also seem to be cultural omnivores in their choices of musical device, due to the observed fact that almost all respondents use streaming services whilst simultaneously regarding vinyl as an authentic experience. The interviews show that distinction, as put forth by Bourdieu and those who comment on him, is apparently still very relevant. The way distinction is described is largely akin to the mode in which Jarness (2015) does so. Respondents generally do not distinguish themselves based on “what” is culturally consumed, but more so through “how” it is used. Nevertheless, there are also signs of ingroup distinction and in this context what seems to be prevalent is the more traditional understanding of distinction: entailing what kind of record player or streaming platform is used by others.
4 Table of contents
1. Introduction 5
2. Theoretical framework 8
2.1 Distinction mechanism in taste 8
2.2 The experience of music 11
2.3 Narcissism of minor collecting differences 13
2.4 Contemporary music consumerism 15
3. Methodology 19 3.1 Research population 19 3.2 Operationalisation 20 3.3 Shortcomings 21 3.4 Analysing process 22 4. Analysis 23
4.1 Tangibility during digitalisation 23
4.2 Vinyl as a distinction mechanism 32
4.3 The digital in the tangible age 39
5. Conclusion 45 6. Discussion 50 7. Literature 52 8. Appendix 55 8.1 Topic list 55 8.2 Respondents 56
5 1. Introduction
“Re-issue! Re-package! Re-package! Re-evaluate the songs
Double-pack with a photograph Extra track and a tacky badge
A-list, playlist
"Please them, please them!" "Please them!" Sadly this was your life”
(Paint a Vulgar Picture, The Smiths, 1987)
In 1987 the British band The Smiths released “Paint a Vulgar Picture”, a song in which they deliver a critique on the former state of “record companies” and the latter’s motives to keep on pleasing fans of the band with every possible trick in the book, using, for instance, physical material such as badges, photographs and re-releases, but also auditory material such as unheard takes of songs and bonus tracks. In the last three lines of the quote, the band clearly emphasises what they consider to be a negative interaction between record companies and consumers, and maybe even the artists themselves. The addition of the sentence “sadly this was your life” adds even more normative value, but whose life is defined as sad is not fully clear. It could be the industry, the consumers, or even the artists themselves. What is apparent in this fragment of popular culture is an ethical judgement and certain social friction in the process of buying and selling records, and other music related products.
Since the release of this song in 1987 a lot has changed in the music industry when it comes to the interaction between artist, consumer and record companies. Perhaps the most striking example of developments in the last few decades is the radical alteration of listening methods and the enhanced use of electronic devices. In “Vinyl: The Analogue Record in the Digital Age”, Bartmanski and Woodward (2015, p. 19) write extensively about the changes in popularity of different sound carriers. The most important development is rooted in technology: in instances of sudden technological advancement, it became all the easier to carry portable music around, from vinyl to CD, from CD to mp3 player, with the iPod as the most
6
popular example, to contemporary sound carriers integrated into mobile phones for our convenience.
The increasing ease technology provided for music consumption, led to a decrease in sales of the former formats, such as vinyl, cassette and CD. A development strongly tied to the fact that CDs were cheap to manufacture and could be sold with a higher profit margin than the expensive-to-produce vinyl records (Bartmanski & Woodward, 2015, p. 19). Vinyl sales dropped fast in the 1980s and 1990s resulting in the 2005 all-time low of 900,000 vinyl sales measured in U.S. record sales (flatlandkc.org). However, quite unexpectedly, the decline of vinyl sales stagnated, followed by an exponential growth of sales observed in the period between 2009 till 2015, which ended with 11.9 million U.S. sales in 2015. Here we have one of the most unexpected developments in music industry history, so one must ask, what could have caused this seemingly illogical booming increase?
The answer to that question can be approached through the use of different sources and can be explained through an integrative account drawing on different disciplines. For example, the British magazine “The Economist”, published a short article in October 2016 concerning the rise of vinyl sales. The writer of the article mentions that this increase is due to individuals in the age group of 25 – 35, referred to as “the millennials” (economist.com). 2015 was not only the best-selling year for vinyl records since 1988, the record player was also the bestselling device after the iPhone, with higher sales than handsfree headphones and Bluetooth speakers. Later in the article, the author gives a social explanation for the rise of interest in vinyl among this group; he states that it can be understood as a “mark of individuality and a willingness to go the extra mile of supporting an artist”. This short explanation concerning the idea of individuality and supporting artist raises multiple questions about what this “mark of individuality” concerns exactly and why “millennials” desire to support artists through buying vinyl. Especially in a time of legal streaming services that, in fact, do support the artists financially (though still at debatable rates) - considered by most a great development for the music industry compared to the illegal peer-to-peer services that did not support artists financially at all. Online music consumption has become more and more supportive towards artists, thus an exponential growth in physical vinyl records is not necessarily a logical assumption to put down in one short phrase. The article either shows why the generation of millennials prefer to support artists more than other generations.
decision-7
making narratives of, “millennial” consumers in regard to their approach to music consumption. During the interviews I conducted with a broad array of these consumers, a number of motives came to light, which can roughly be divided into four categories. These include preferences directed at format, listening experience, aspects considered audiophilic pros and social interaction. Interestingly enough, the individual reasons formulated for preferring some devices and formats over others can generally be framed in terms of these four motivational categories.
The return of vinyl in a digital age will be approached with the question: “What are the differences and similarities between usage of online music consumption and usage of vinyl, with regard to the reasons behind the choices of consumers in their twenties, in the ways of listening and distinction practices?”. Through three sub-questions: 1) “Why do music consumers in their twenties make the decision to switch to vinyl in the ‘digital age’?”, 2) “How do music consumers in their twenties describe the role of music and music genres in their choice for a certain device?” 3) “To what extent is the preference of a certain device a distinction mechanism?”. By delving deeper into these three questions, I hope to add a socio-scientific contribution to the discussion surrounding the contemporary state of social motives in music consumption, and also to the distinction mechanisms that may play a role in these motives.
The relevance in the scientific debate is how theories such as Jarness (2015) are translatable to other cultural objects, such as sound carriers and music platforms. The objects could be placed in the same field as the taste patterns, but different patterns and decisions may underpin the status of the object. In their book, Bartmanski and Woodward (2015) provide great insights into the status of vinyl, but they do not demonstrate how the digital sphere has failed to maintain a high status among a group that grew up within the digital sphere. This study attempts to provide a bigger picture of the interactions between different cultural objects, based on perspectives that touch the individual level, the social level and an institutional level and the interactions between these levels.
8 2. Theoretical framework
In the theoretical framework of this thesis I will initially be looking into the existing theoretical narrative concerning the social interactions and functions of cultural products. This will be done by focusing on how people in their twenties come to the decision to prefer a certain sound carrier and what kind of motives and social interactions are part of these decisions. Bourdieu’s influence through his theory on cultural distinction is vital to this narrative. Bourdieu’s theory concerns the social mechanisms that are at work behind the taste patterns that decide what individuals like and dislike. In this theoretical framework it is not particularly the music taste of consumers that is vital, but how these theories on musical taste fit into the process of decision process in sound carriers. Taste in music and taste in musical devices are seen as loose from each other, but the influences could overlap because of the influence of the taste patterns on the field of music. The decision-making process at work in the minds of music consumers, defining their musical device of preference, seems to be strongly linked to aesthetic preferences and social experiences. It is for this reason that Bourdieu and a wide range of other researchers concerned with distinction theory are of relevance to my current endeavour.
After looking into distinction theory I will turn to those narratives that are primarily concerned with the phenomenological experience of consumers. The theories of Hennion and De Nora are closely tied to the personal experience music listeners have during the usage of different devices.
Finally, I will consider the literature concerned with social interaction surrounding analogue music consumption, and theories insightful in regard to the fluidity of online music consumption.
2.1 Distinction mechanism in taste
Bourdieu’s book Distinction (1984) provided significant insight into understanding connections between cultural taste and social classes. Of notable value is his contribution to the understanding of the importance of cultural capital, in addition to economic capital, to the well-educated upper classes of his native France’s society to gain status in certain fields. By conducting a quantitative analysis of 1217 respondents, Bourdieu demonstrates the link between cultural practices and educational capital and therefore shows how taste patterns are
9
produced by social and cultural class, rather than, for example, by mere intelligence. By comparing cultural products, such as different musical works and the professions of respondents, appreciation of certain products was proved to be in correlation with class structures (1984, p. 9). This also entailed different approaches amongst different classes to cultural products (1984, p. 27). According to the research of Bourdieu, the working class, for example, will judge a piece of art based on emotions and moral principles, whereas higher educated classes have a more refined appreciation of abstract meanings; the appreciation of content over form. For example, a picture of a rope would be considered an aesthetically interesting object to the upper classes, while the lower classes exhibited a higher degree of appreciation for a picture of the “first communion” (1984, p. 51). These observations are not done to make a value judgement of art in a sense regarding what can be defined as good or bad art, or the idea that a certain group of people could have the right notion of art. Moreover, the theory shows how someone’s cultural appreciation is not objectively self-created, independent from other notions of art, but could be explained by social positions, such as educational degree.
In Bourdieu’s theory on distinction, class structures are correlated with the appreciation of specific cultural products. Responding to Bourdieu, Peterson and Kern (1996, p. 900) observe a different, later trend in upper-class cultural appreciation described as a shift from a ‘snobbish’ taste to a more eclectic taste, that they dub as omnivorous (1996, p. 900). Whereas snobbism is associated with a taste for a specific, predefined direction, the cultural omnivores are defined precisely by their width of range when it comes to appreciation of cultural products - directed even at those products described as lowbrow culture (1996, p. 901). Peterson and Kern identify the source of this shift in changes in status-group politics. For example, broader scope education and presentation of arts through media that make elite aesthetic taste increasingly accessible to larger segments of the population therefore devalue the arts as markers of exclusion (1996, p. 905). Geographic migration and social class mobility are also described as an influence on the so-called paradigm switch from “snob” to omnivores.
The idea of the omnivorous taste pattern amongst the middle and upper classes became a core idea in cultural sociological studies and seem to be useful to reflect consumer patterns based on surveys (Holt, 1997, p. 115). Holt argues that this method lacks the nuance of the conception of taste, because it does not offer the possibility to research patterns of embodied tastes. His criticism is that the focus came to lie too much on the idea of the cultural object and
10
did not really address the socio-historical (1997, p. 115). The relevant context of Bourdieu’s concept of habitus (1990) contains the deeper embodied behavioural skills that ‘go without saying’ for people. In order to expose the habitus of respondents, the research should lie within the everyday practices and specific contexts. By doing this there should be a shift to a less object-centred analysis (Holt, 1997, p. 115).
Cultural capital can exist in three forms: the embodied state, which concerns the long-lasting dispositions of the mind and body; the objectified state in the form of cultural goods, such as pictures and books, which are defined as the trace or the realisation of cultural capital; and the institutionalized state. For example, the importance of class and previous invested education by family in the acquisition of cultural capital, which is eventually used in the school system (Bourdieu, 1986, p. 17). To Holt (1997) it seemed essential to mention what state of capital is discussed in taste patterns; this is also explained clearly with examples given by Jarness (2015).
There is a wide range of research (Atkinson, 2011; Prior, 2011; Savage and Gayo, 2011; Rimmer, 2012; Jarness; 2015) that shows how cultural omnivorousness could be conceptualised in different ways when the focus lies more on the embodied state. Jarness (2015, p. 65) suggests that in research into taste patterns and cultural stratification, and therefore into the understanding of contemporary social inequalities, it is very important to investigate ‘how’ people approach cultural products and not only the question ‘what’ they prefer or consume. Jarness (2015, p. 76) provides different modes of consumption that seem to overlap with the social background of the respondents. An example is the intellectual mode of consumption where the ‘aesthetic uniqueness’ and appreciation for the sake of art is shown (Jarness, 2015, p. 70), or, on the other hand, the more practical mode of consumption where the consumer uses the cultural product more to make a certain experience pleasant, for example dinner with the family, or washing the car. As Jarness (2015, p. 74) sees it, this approach to cultural products is more prevalent in individuals with a lower educational background. Another mode of consumption that Jarness mentions are the luxurious mode (2015, p. 71) and the educational mode (2015, p. 72). Where the latter focuses on people educating and cultivating themselves and the luxurious mode focusses on exposing a luxurious lifestyle with the usage of certain objects.
Experience-based descriptions of culture consumption are also essential to the research into contemporary diversity of devices. Awareness of the current state of changes in the
11
analysis of taste patterns provides an opportunity to give a more precise analysis of how people use their device, rather than what they prefer; whether analogue or digital listening. Nevertheless, it is necessary to see the use of devices as a fundamentally different matter than what kind of music people actually listen to. The theories on cultural omnivores are not by definition translatable to all other fields of cultural production. This is, for example, shown by Friedman and Kuipers (2013) in their analysis on taste in comedy. Comedy taste can communicate more distinction and cultural superiority compared to other cultural fields where consumers are described as cultural omnivores (2013, p. 192). The take on cultural omnivores as proposed by Jarness (2015) is concerned with how people talk about the cultural product itself. The analysis of distinction in musical devices is interesting because there is clearly the objectified state, but also the embodied state of music consumption that influences the social aspect of musical devices.
In the next chapter I will move away from the distinction literature and take a closer look at the intrinsic experience people have during the consumption of music. This study concerns the devices people prefer to listen to, which, as we will see, is interrelated with the intrinsic individual experience of music consumption.
2.2 The experience of music
Whereas the previously discussed literature primarily concerns the connection between taste patterns and social class, other literature considers the musical experience more as a thing in itself, and focuses on the influence it has on an individual level. DeNora (2000, p. 53) described music as an instrument for individuals to order emotional states and inner subjectivities. Related to this, Hennion (2001, p. 1) conducted a study on a group defined as ‘music lovers’ and what kind of practices and experiences were attached to their listening patterns. By analysing the experiences of this group, he stressed the importance of the aesthetic experience, which cannot merely be reduced to a social tool (2001, p. 3). To Hennion (2001, p. 5) it seems that people are too socially influenced when it comes to music consumption. For example, when people are asked about their preference of music, they seem to start talking about their social background, but this does not explain why they are passionate about acts, knowing complete CDs by heart and singing the full lyrics at a concert. Hennion (2001, p. 9) still sees this process as a strong personal experience where people find comfort in music, or, as he
12
puts it, find different paths to pleasure. The phenomenological approach of Hennion (2001, p. 9) has similarities to the approach to vinyl records maintained in the book by Bartmanski and Woodward (2015). The sound carrier is described as ‘the chosen medium for transmission and ritualised contemplation of music experiences’ (2015, p. 167). The iconic power of the sound carrier is described in the book as the holy script for music aficionados (2015, p. 165), a holistic artwork that is a totem for modern tribes called music scenes (2015, p. 33). The book focuses closely on relatively older, essential figures in the Berlin techno/house scene, vinyl shop owners, producers and label owners. This is a group of respondents closely tied to a subculture that historically has always had a strong connection with the sound carrier; producer Wolfgang Voigt calls it the “king format”. Bartmanski and Woodward point out the irony in the fact that it should be precisely this electronic music scene that kept the analogue sound carrier alive (2015, p. 22). Another quote that is mentioned in the book by an artist that feels strongly connected to vinyl stems from Jack White and puts forth a critique on the digital listening methods: “There is no romance in a mouse click” (2015, p. 19). The experience of music through a mouse click cannot give the same experience as the romanticism found in the vinyl listening experience. Furthermore, the writers of the book state that, based on the interviews, “there’s no glory or merit to having your iPod stuffed with millions of electronically cloned files because no serious sacrifice stands behind obtaining them. There is no selection factor involved if a young person boasts of having hundreds or thousands of albums. And there is little sense of adventure either.” (2015, p. 19).
Bartmanski and Woodward’s (2015) approach focuses mostly on the historical impact of vinyl and why it is still alive in modern society. In so doing, they seem to maintain a critical stance in regard to Bourdieu’s approach toward the role of cultural products in society. In the epilogue they deliver a critique on Bourdieu’s claim that “it is not sociology’s aim to reintroduce any form of what is called ‘lived experience’, but to move beyond the abstract relationship between consumers with interchangeable tastes and products with uniformly perceived and appreciated properties to the relationship between tastes” (Bartmanski and Woodward, 2015, p. 168). In their opinion, Bourdieu takes a step too far in his notion that there is always a disposition in taste when it comes to economic spaces, and should this be approached in a more flexible manner, because the objects ‘objectively inspire lasting ‘subjective’ attachment (2015, p. 169).
13
to Bartmanski and Woodward (2016, p. 1) vinyl offers immersive engagements of the consumers and also works via entanglements with related objects such as turntables, speakers, mixers and rituals of object care. These engagements place the vinyl object historically, culturally, spatially, and also politically, especially in the context of digitalisation and leads therefore to an iconic status with totemic power in music communities (2016, p. 1). This totemic power is maintained by the underground during a period, round 2007, where the vinyl record seemed critically endangered by the internet, and eventually kept it alive and got picked up again by the mainstream (2016, p. 2).
Bartmanski and Woodward (2015) provide a broad notion of what vinyl means today as a cultural emblem and what kind of function it could have for people and groups. They speak about the essence of a ‘thick description’ in the approach towards the subject. The focus lies primarily on the group that is involved with the object for many years and grew up with it: a group for whom the digital experience of music never had a real charm or romance. Therefore, to me, it seems interesting to analyse the motivations of a group of people that grew up in a time where digital music consumption was the norm and to see how some conclusions drawn by Bartmanski and Woodward are reflected in their experience. Furthermore, it will be interesting to see how Bourdieu’s cultural distinction is reflected in the way they talk about music consumption.
2.3 Narcissism of minor collecting differences
In order to gain a deeper understanding about the usage behaviour of vinyl owners and people who consume music digitally, we will look into literature that delves deeper into the experience surrounding the purchase of vinyl records and digital music consumption, and also the profile of those individuals that hoard and collect in the field of record collecting. In what way do these group differ?
First and foremost, we will be looking at what Shuker (2004, p. 311) defines as the “high fidelity” stereotype, the record collector that, as it is usually described, is an obsessive male who has a “trainspotting passion” for collecting. In his research, “the vinyl collector” is split up into smaller segments of characteristics, such as their love for music, obsessive-compulsive behaviour, a yearning for accumulation and completism, but also selectivity and discrimination, and self-education (Shuker, 2004, p. 311). Already, this shows the diversity of reasons people
14
cite when asked to give an analysis of their own behaviour. The collecting of records can be defined as an intrinsic process of creating an autobiographical history, a link to the past (2004, p. 327). Although, the role of “selectivity and discrimination” in, for example, the differences between economical collectors and the self-proclaimed “lover of music” shows that there are clearly social and distinctive factors at work in the field of record collectors (2004, p. 319). In this case the group of economical collectors is criticised by the other record collectors, because the focus does not lie on the music, but on the value of the collectors, a group that distance themselves from hoarding or completism. It reminds one of the concept of “the narcissism of minor differences”, explained by Anton Blok (1998, p. 49) where social identities are found to lie in differences, and these differences are established, reinforced, and defended against what is closest – and what is closest represents the greatest threat. Although Blok (1998, p. 37) uses this theory primarily to point out differences found in physical conflict, this is not a necessity (1998, p. 49); the starting principle has similarities with cultural scenes such as the cultural niche of record collecting. In addition, the principle of “narcissism of minor differences” could be reflected in contemporary differences between physical collectors and online collectors. In Shuker’s (2004) article minor differences between record collectors is already shown, but are similar processes to be observed in the contemporary field of music consumption. In the analysis we will focus on “how” different music collectors differ in their consumption and “how” they describe this and in what way it differs from other ways of consuming music.
Other articles concerning the motivations behind buying records address the influence of the music industry and demonstrate the friction between big companies and smaller indie record stores. This friction has, in turn, also affected decisions consumers make and how different decisions are judged negatively. Plasketes (1992, p. 110), for instance, provides an account where the music industry is “blamed” for the rapid pushing of the CD as the dominant and most essential sound carrier, by adding bonus tracks and highlighting mobility. Even though bigger record companies fully embraced the new sound carrier, the smaller niches in the industry, like indie record stores, saw a rise of support for vinyl. Due to the rapid decline of prices of second hand records, the vinyl scene found a new safe haven (1992, p. 116), keeping the cult around vinyl alive. One record collector described how it “sort of feels like the CD is being forced on me” (1992, p. 118). Some interviewees distinguish themselves quite literally from CDs and have a clear opinion on the choices of CD buyers: “… sampled scanned, and coarse, missing huge chunks of information. If your CD player sounds better than your
15
turntable, you have a lousy turntable… If you want fake, processed, artificial, lifeless, dimensionless sound from all your music [...] go spend 15 dollar for the privilege and buy CDs”. Plasketes’ article (1992) shows how decisions made at the highest level in the industry influence the status of a cultural product and therefore also affect the way in which they perceive other users connected to the cultural product. The CD, the starting point of the age of digital music consumption, was received with the same criticism back then as some streaming services are received nowadays. Another thing that might be derived from Plasketes (1992, p. 120) is the historical essence of the record. “The revolution [of vinyl] embodies meanings that are social, cultural, historical, personal, and now with vinyl’s passing, sentimental”. The stressing of the historical, biographical, cultural and subcultural (1992, p. 121) character of the sound carrier is understandable coming from an article written just after the full take-over of the CD, at a time when it unclear whether this new, other, sound carrier would have a similar effect. However, the recycling of cultural memory is also backed by more recent studies into vinyl consumption (Vaher, 2008, p. 352). Tangibility is seen as crucial, even for younger consumers (Styvén, 2010, p. 1088). An important footnote is that 2010 was the year of the birth of Spotify in the rest of Europe (bright.com), therefore a new generation could have another point of view on the importance of tangibility during the process of music consumption.
2.4 Contemporary music consumerism
The rise of vinyl consumption among millennials, is, just like the article mentioned in the introduction, linked to a craving for authenticity. The essence of authenticity in contemporary times, by so called ‘urban culture scenes’ is linked to hipster culture (Michael, 2015, p. 163). ‘The hipsters’ is a group strongly representational of ‘the cultural omnivore’ when it comes to taste in music and fashion (2015, p. 177). This study shows that the all-round narrative upheld in this group ‘likes all kind of people and things’ and that it is not so much about taste itself (what is liked), but moreover about what is perceived as authentic (how it is liked) (2015, p. 178). Hence the separation of ‘how’ and ‘what’, the theory could be seen as a fusion between Jarness (2015) and a specific group of middle-class youngsters (2015, p. 169). The narrative in regard to the ‘how' seems more important than the cultural product in itself, but Michael (2015, p. 178) states that this is nevertheless connected to Bourdieu’s distinction theory, because it still concerns authenticity: its naturalness, openness and individuality are still linked
16 to cultural capital and social positions (Michael, p. 178).
In other fields, such as the fashion industry (Mackinney-Valentin, 2010) and “craft consumption” (Campbell, 2005) are examples in which one can find how authenticity is pursued in the 21st century and how objects are received by consumers. Mackinney-Valentin (2010, p. 78) provides findings in line with Michael (2015): contemporary retro trends are influenced more so by how certain styles are mixed instead of what kind of styles are mixed. Campbell (2005, p. 23) conducted a study into the niche of consumer taste that can be seen as a “postmodern identity-seeker” preferring crafts with a background in decommodification, for example through crafts made and designed by the same person, thus to be separated from market dependency. At first glance this might not seem related to vinyl, because vinyl is not a single artisan product and is very market dependent. Although, Plasketes gives an example of records declared unusable by the old shops and owners, but which found a new place in second-hand stores and gained an unexpected new appreciation (Plasketes, 1992, p. 116). This shows how records retained a certain status in themselves. Even though the product was de-institutionalised, the cult maintained them.
A parallel can be drawn with the digital world where complete albums were dumped free of charge on piracy sites and peer-to-peer programmes, but became commodified by YouTube and streaming services. Zhou et al (2010, p. 409) state that YouTube has a huge influence on the recommendation system of users and therefore has a great impact on the decisions users make in their process of music consumption. People are clearly tied to this platform in a different way than they were to piracy websites that did not have these kinds of algorithms. Chander (2016, p. 1024) points out that there is a great amount of criticism directed towards these kinds of algorithms used by powerful institutions like Google, Facebook and YouTube, who market cultural products to their customers in a smart way, creating a loop where people only see and hear what they have already heard. Chander's (2016, p. 1026) social critique of these algorithms is concerned with the keeping in place of racism due to a stream of biased news - but the same type of critique could also be applied to platforms such as YouTube and Spotify. These algorithms input depends on what has already been consumed and therefore take away a certain randomness. Based on Campbell’s (2005) research, music consumers might be looking for more decommodified ways to consume their music. Also, in economic theory, there is the importance of factual ownership and subjective feelings of ownership. This is called the endowment effect, where consumers are willing to pay more for
17
something they will actually own (Reb and Connolly, 2007, p. 107). This could have an affect on how people perceive buying vinyl in a thrift shop, or streaming a song on Spotify.
Studies into tribal experience in online music communities are not as widely observed as is research on the image of the obsessed record collector. The social aspect of music services, such as Spotify, was studied by Komolainen et al (2010, p. 4). In their work on teenagers, it becomes apparent that sharing music files is a common practice online; 84% use Spotify, YouTube or other streaming services to share links with each other (2010, p. 3). Baijm (2007, p. 1) describes websites that give users the opportunity to start online communities revolving around music, an example being last.fm, a website that tracks what you listen to and introduces you to people with the same taste in music. Again, however, users of these platforms are very dependent on the decisions company owners make. For example, when last.fm was taken over by CBS (techcrunch.com), the goals of the site changed and social functions disappeared, displeasing users that then had to find a new way to meet likeminded music fans (drownedinsound.com). These kinds of disappearances of social music networks show how hard it is to keep online communities in place after the commodification of websites, because company goals keep changing. The disappearances of online communities and the corresponding social interaction are not discussed in articles, but a brief look on internet forums, such as on drownedinsound.com, shows that people are displeased with these changes and that it has seriously affected their social network. These changes show how it is harder to define online communities, even though similar institutionalised processes such as dominance of bigger companies differ not that much compared to the situation described by Plasketes (1992) where customers received CDs as something that was forced on them.
Guberman (2011) provided research into new listening methods of people in the post-fidelity times, or music consumption in the time of widespread internet usage, where the downgraded CD sound of MP3 became the standard and therefore the CD quality became acceptable for a new generation of music consumers. An essential point is that Guberman (2011, p. 436) shows that online music communities are possible: “Winamp’s users options created communities around the product that were based on musical or even extra-musical interests (such as Star Wars themes). Parallels may be drawn with the iPod, first through user-made versions of the famous silhouette commercial, and more recently through the application store”. Guberman (2011) shows that in the new age of music consumption there are examples to be found that give people a sense of community when they can create and share with one
18 another.
In this segment of the theoretical framework an attempt has been made to show how physical music consumption and digital music consumption had historically seen similar obstacles to maintain their cultural products. The problem, and also a scientific problem, is that digital communities do not leave a trace when they disappear. This is different for the vinyl records. Eventually this closer look on both groups offers a better starting point for the analysis.
19 3. Methodology
3.1 Research population
It was decided that in this study of contemporary consumption in music devices and platforms a qualitative analysis would be conducted of the interviews with the group that fits the description of ‘music lovers’ as provided by Hennion (2001). A group that is analysed widely within many studies in the theoretical framework. Bartmanski and Woodward (2015) also provided an analysis of contemporary vinyl users, but in this analysis the focus was mostly on groups that were closely involved in the music industry, such as producers and record storeowners. Therefore, the connection with vinyl was not only for the musical experience, but also part of their livelihood. This thesis is an attempt to find out why music consumers in their twenties, who grew up in a time where internet was the principal starting point for their music collecting, chose to consume vinyl again.
The literature concerning changes in distinction in music taste (Jarness, 2015) gives a good background on why it is essential to not only focus on the choices of what people choose to consume, but also how people consume it and the precise way they talk about it. In this thesis the choice is made to approach music devices the same way, because initially the choice for a certain device could be asked easily, but for a more closer look how people use their devices it seems to be useful to have a qualitative interview structure. This seemed to be to most useful to provide a clear outline of the usage between the tangibility and the digital and what their thoughts are on their usage of certain devices. Using this method I hope to capture not only the manner of speaking of the objectified state of cultural capital, but also the embodied state of respondents.
The data collection was conducted with the use of snowball sampling, which means I mostly started asking people I knew from music forums or music quizzes if they could introduce me to acquaintances that were highly involved in music consumption. This was easier than expected, as respondents seemed to enjoy the subject and almost always reacted with a positive attitude, many pointed out to enjoy talking about the subject. This ended with a respondent group of 5 females and 10 males that were heavily involved with the consumption of music. The nationalities of the group varied though were very European centred (6x Dutch, 3x English, 3x Turkish, 2x Italian, 1x Austrian). All respondents resided in the Netherlands at the
20
time, with their “nationality” being based on their place of birth. Even though, snowball sampling was used, I tried to keep the snowballs as small as possible. When I interviewed somebody, I mostly tried to get one other person through them, not more. I would also stop after interviewing the new respondent, because otherwise I would run the risk of only interviewing people that were connected to only one scene. The involvement of the people I interviewed varied from DJs, small label owners, people who go to thrift shops for cheap vinyl, people who had a huge amount of terabytes of music on their computers, and also somebody that collected all the first pressings of her favourite band, Belle and Sebastian. Eventually, I think the group of people I interviewed shows many facets of what a “music lover” could be. In the beginning I was very fixed on the idea of having a 50%-50% ratio of vinyl users and people that use streaming services. I soon discovered there was too much overlap and that differences between different music programmes and the way they use it were also important for respondents, which influenced the process of data collection.
3.2 Operationalisation
For the operationalisation of the discussed theoretical framework, it was essential to not already frame the discussion along a narrative of a certain distinction between different listening methods. The interviews were split up into four segments. The interviews started off with some background information about the respondents themselves, such as age, education and family background. The reason for this was to get a bit more of a sense of the social background of the respondents and “how” and “what” kind of culture products played a role in their younger years. After that I tried to start the conversation off lightly with questions concerning the influence of music in their youth and how actively they remember the act of listening to music. After this there were mostly questions about how they remembered the interactions concerning the listening of music. For example, how private the listening of music was and if family members and peers had any influence on this process. In this segment I also examined how the respondents recollected interactions with music in their youth. Questions like this showed their manner of speaking about music: whether it was a social interaction or if they remembered it as a private interaction. By asking these kinds of questions, responses could be defined more in terms of how Hennion (2001) considered music, or more closely related to the idea of music as a social tool. Or if they switched between both notions of music. The
21
function of the internet was also discussed to see how they perceived interactions on different online platforms. This was done to get a better idea about how these online platforms were remembered, if they were still used, or if they had been abandoned for vinyl.
In the third segment of the interview there were more questions about their choices in devices and how they used them. Very important in this section was also to question why they did not choose another device, or why they had abandoned another listening method. Other questions involved how social they considered the interaction with their devices to be. Eventually, to see if there were processes of distinction involved, they were asked how people that listened differently were missing out on a certain experience with a certain device. In the fourth segment the questions focused primarily on the taste patterns of the respondents. Themes such as hoarding, collections and the biographical role of collecting were also highlighted in the last section of the interviews. In doing so, I hoped to get a clearer idea of how the group of respondents in their twenties resembled the standardised image of the behaviour of the ‘high fidelity stereotype’ sketched in the articles of Shuker (2004) and Bartmanski and Woodward (2015). The topic list is added in the appendix.
3.3 Shortcomings
Eventually, there were shortcomings in the interviews. In theory, it was not really expected the differences between the user experiences of streaming services (mostly Soundcloud, Spotify and Youtube) would be so stark among internet users. Also some influences such as the essence of algorithms and the lack of randomness in some of the streaming services were unexpectedly mentioned more in the interviews than expected. Therefore, some interviews focused more on this subject, while some of the first interviews focus chiefly on taste to see how cultural omnivores were connected to the device of choice. Ultimately, this seemed to be less relevant to the choices people made in their device of choice.
The reason for ascribing less importance to cultural omnivores’ music taste, and even music devices, is because regarding taste literally all the interviewees defined their taste as “broad” or “eclectic”. In music devices people also used a broad range of listening devices, but sometimes had quite clear opinions on how these services influence your musical biography.
Another thing the study lacks is the backing of quantitative research that perfectly fits the same theoretical framework and that is truly up to date. With a mixed-method approach
22
more could be said about the usage of devices in a broader group. In this research, the focus lies on a group defined as “music lovers” that were defined by themselves as very involved in music. It also concerns only highly educated people, thus no statement can be made about the “music lovers” that are not highly educated. Therefore, the interpretation of “music lovers” could be very subjective, with the most important criterion being if they defined themselves as being very involved in music.
3.4 Analysing process
After transcribing the interviews, the transcripts were analysed using the coding programme Atlas.ti. By assigning codes to all essential sentences, the quotes were grouped along a certain theme, for example, “vinyl positive opinion”, “streaming negative opinion”, “tangability”, or “algorithms”. This was done after typing out all the interviews. After this, all sentences and key words were highlighted and put together afterwards. What started with over 100 “tags” was distilled to a smaller list of 20 ‘tags’ that were categorised and linked to theory. This was a very useful process, because it showed the essence of some themes that did not get much attention in the theoretical framework my questionnaire was based on, but eventually were quite important, such as the code “algorithms”. By going through the process of coding, the theoretical framework was also restructured.
23 4. Analysis
To get a better idea of what the differences and similarities between the usage of online music consumption and the usage of vinyl are, different reasons and motivations of respondents will be lined up and compared. Bartmanski and Woodward (2016, p. 1) stated how the iconic status of the object derives from the material experiences. Also, the importance of the historical, cultural, spatial and political are related to the existence of the cult status of the object. To Bartmanski and Woodward (2016, p. 1) the need to feel, experience, project and share became more essential, especially in times of digitalisation.
The aim is to see if these reasons are also essential to the vinyl consumers in their twenties and in what way they differ. The reasons why digital consumers do not feel attracted to these kind of motivations to buy vinyl will also be observed. Eventually the influence of the objects on the social dispositions of respondents and interactions will be discussed.
After focusing on the motivations of respondents for their preferred ways of listening to music. There will be a more in-depth analysis of the distinction mechanisms between different listening methods. After that we will look more closely at the attitude towards the everchanging digital music consumption sphere and how it differs from the iconic power of vinyl as described by Bartmanski and Woodward (2016).
4.1 Tangibility during digitalisation
The importance of the tangible (Bartmanski and Woodward, 2016; Styvén, 2010) in maintaining vinyl as one of the most popular sound carriers has already been mentioned frequently. For the group of respondents I interviewed, tangibility was also cited as one of the most important reasons to buy vinyl, even more so than factors such as sound quality.
The comparison with digital was also almost always made. The decision and reasons to buy vinyl always had some connection with the digitalisation the group of people in their twenties grew up with.
All respondents use multiple, digital and physical, platforms to consume their music, based on this it seems like the respondents are cultural omnivores (Petserson and Kern, 1996). Almost all respondents use a streaming service, mostly Spotify, to get in touch with new music. Although vinyl is clearly the most glorified sound carrier among the respondent. The
24
glorification of vinyl happens also among respondents who use vinyl less compared to their streaming usage, or do not even own a vinyl player. At first glance it looks like the “what” (Jarness, 2015) is not important when it comes to sound carriers, because everybody uses everything, but during the interviews the respondents cited many reasons describing what was wrong with digital consumption of music, even though they used it the most. It sometimes looked like they were locked in a paradox of online music consumption they could not escape. Because of this it could be debated whether the “what” is indeed less important now. 29-year-old Respondent 1 gives an example how he experiences this:
“I think, there’s a general disaffection or that people feel alienated from MP3s and that process takes time, first you’re like, this is so convenient, well actually I like to look at stuff and hold it and enjoy it, so it’s just a wider cultural thing and uhm it’s a bit like people realising taking their time and investing more in music has new rewards, when you realise that MP3s are so disposable or your computer breaks and it’s all gone, you know, and maybe some people see it as an investment, that’s not really my,… it did occur to me, when I started vinyl when I was 20, that I could resell them for the same amount that I bought them, where CDs became nothing after you bought them, and an iPod full of music is worth less than an empty one, so that’s weird. The economics of it.” - R1, 29, M, R1, 29, M, Teacher and doing a second Master’s in International Relations
Respondent 1 described himself as an “early adopter of the internet” and remembers discovering music on the internet as one of his favourite things to do in his younger years. Although the internet was an important influence on his taste and his wide appreciation of different genres, he also started collecting records. To Respondent 1 it seems that there is a certain alienation from MP3s, due to the fluidness and how easy it is to lose the files. Therefore the tangibility of vinyl gives the opportunity to have a longer enjoyment of the product. But that is not the only reason Respondent 1 gives. The economic capital is, to Respondent 1, also one of the key reasons why vinyl has a longer durability. Even though it was not his first reason to start collecting records at one time it occurred to him that vinyl rises in value after the purchase, because of the scarcity of the product. While those kinds of influences do not play a
25
role on the illegal download market, where there is actually no economic value to the product, it is important to note that, according to Bourdieu (1986, p. 16), cultural capital is convertible into economic capital. This being said, the cultural capital of, the tangible, vinyl in its objectified state can have a better transition to economical capital – a feature that is missing in the process of downloading music.
Besides tangibility, Respondent 3 cites vinyl as a status symbol as a reason why people buy vinyl.
“I think it is also a generational thing. People want to have something to hold. Just like analogue cameras. I recently heard that e-reader sales are going down again, physical stuff is becoming more popular again. I think it all has to do with tangibility. You can put these things in your room, there are also people that hang record covers on their wall. It also becomes some kind of status object.”
- R3, M, 28, Works at an university
An essential aspect in this quote is how Respondent 3 describes how vinyl could have a certain meaning to others. The idea of vinyl in its objectified state is approached as an object that could be interpreted as an influence on someone’s cultural capital. In the following quote Respondent 3 speaks about his own motivation for collecting vinyl. Something he mostly did in the past, but stopped doing because of financial reasons and because he mostly started listening to music he downloaded via the peer-to-peer programme Soulseek.
“Still, I think, vinyl is my preferred way to experience listening to music. I listen to it most concentrated. When I’m listening to MP3 I’m switching more easily between songs, but on the other hand it costs way more effort to put on a LP. MP3’s are also very pleasing, because you have the ability to walk around and listen to music.”
26
The effort argument was also cited by Respondent 1. Many respondents associate digital consumption with less effort, which is something that was also strongly reflected in Bartmanski and Woodward (2015). While vinyl shows that the consumer puts effort into searching for and buying the record. On the other hand, Respondent 3 does give a reason for why he uses more digital music: It is practical. This is one of the most frequently cited reasons during the interviews, the practicality argument. This argument is mostly shortened to one sentence and is not attached to a certain social interaction. Something that is seen more in the reasons favouring vinyl usage in the next quote.
“I prefer vinyl, definitely, it gives me the ability to just sit still and really enjoy the record and everything that comes with it. You can really sit down and relax and read the lyrics in the gatefold, you have an artwork you can look at and you can also experience the music as it is meant by the artists. For example, many albums contain ‘interludes’, that bind the album together. When you go to Spotify you immediately see a top 5 of most catchiest songs on the album, the whole idea of the original album disappears and that is kind of sad.”
- R2, 22, F, Philosophy student
Respondent 2 goes deeper into the argument of the tangibility of vinyl. The artwork is bigger and the lyrics are attached in the gatefold. Eventually Respondent 2 also sees vinyl as the best way to experience the art form in itself. To her, the online experiences does not give the same experience and gives people a false representation of the intended art. In the next quote an active user of Spotify gives his experience process during his time on the streaming service.
“I think eventually I prefer just listening music on my computer. Mostly I check albums or the music charts and then, during this process, I look up the lyrics or just read something about the history of the artist or the genre. […] In the past I also used to buy a lot of vinyl, I like to have some of those things physically, but I stopped buying them, because it is too expensive and eventually I did not play it that much. Sometimes I played
27
it when people came over, then it was more decorative and in the background. So yeah, now it is only Spotify and Youtube.”
- R9, 26, M, Musicology student
In this quote it is noticeable how the description of online music consumption given by Respondent 2 differs from the experiences Respondent 9 reflects on during the use of the streaming service. Both respondents read the lyrics, but Respondent 2 does this in the gatefold of the record and the Respondent 9 looks for them on the internet. Even though both used vinyl and streaming, the ways of listening to music, do not differ, only the device is different. Respondent 2 associates the streaming services with misinterpreting the art as it meant to be and sees vinyl as the real experience where tangibility has an essential role, such as Styvén (2010) described the essence of tangibility for younger generations. Respondent 9, in turn, describes vinyl as something that is nice to have and something he uses when he invites people over. To Respondent 9 the social function is more attached to vinyl, while for Respondent 2 it is a more private act. The interesting thing about this quote is that there seems to be a right and a wrong way of consuming an artwork and to Respondent 9 this is detached to vinyl. While the interview data shows that the ways of consuming music digital and physical do not differ that much. The quote from Respondent 9 shows how there could be a concept of the true, and better, experience of music that is detached to vinyl. Similar arguments about ‘no romance’ of digital music consumption could be found in Bartmanski and Woodward (2015, p. 19). The quote of Respondent 9 shows how tangibility, the objectified state, of music consumption cannot be adopted by digital consumption, but this does not mean the experience of the music is less intense or always means the artwork in itself would be misinterpreted. The embodied state (Bourdieu, 1986) of the cultural capital received could eventually be the same, but differences could be found in the objectified state (Bourdieu, 1986). Consuming music digitally or physically differs in objects, but does not have to be different in terms of musical experience.
In the next quote, Respondent 2 explains more precisely what her relationship with digital music consumption and physical music consumption is.
28
“Most music I discover on the internet. Most of the time this happens by clicking on recommendations on YouTube, or the ‘Discover Weekly’ section on Spotify. I really like that option in Spotify, by looking every week to that list I get fast updates about genres I really like. YouTube is just very enjoyable in a way that it is very random, but it became less random. But yeah, vinyl is also really a hobby thing for me. That is what I actively enjoy the most, streaming is the standardised way. It is more the way to fast consume some music, to hear a song people are talking about.”
- R2, 22, F, Philosophy student
Even though Respondent 2 previously reasoned why digital consumption has a negative influence on the art itself, she also recognises the pros of the fluid consumption methods. The digital method of music consumption is described as her main source for getting in touch with music, especially Spotify and YouTube, are popular methods in this process. Nonetheless, she describes the use of those mediums more as practical and she describes vinyl as a hobby. Respondent 13 (27, F, Urban Studies) and Respondent 14 (23, M, Business Studies) both did not own a record player, but still perceived it as the best listening method. Although, Spotify was the most used programme, still the image of vinyl was glorified by the non-vinyl owners. The aura around the high fidelity culture as described by Shuker (2004) and Bartmanski and Woodward (2015) goes beyond the owners of vinyl and is even considered as the right way of listening to music outside of that domain.
Shuker (2004) also described the identity of the high fidelity collector, such as the urge of completism and creating an autobiographical history. Both points of recognition were reflected in the interviews with music collectors in their twenties.
“I think that a little bit of O.C.D. [Obsessive–Compulsive Disorder] in how I organised, but that’s quite common among music fans, that they you know, that they want to be able to find what they’re looking for. Uhm, I kind of wished that I’d spent more time out meeting people, instead of organising music.”
29
Respondent 1 is referring to the time when he would obsessively organise his iTunes interface, a memory that surfaced in many interviews. The idea of completism and organisation surfaced multiple times when it came to digital collecting. When it came to vinyl collecting these elements were discussed less and were not really cited as a motivation for collecting vinyl. Only one person seemed to be quiet precise in her completism. Her goal was to have all the Belle and Sebastian LPs, CDs, EPs and singles in their first pressing. She only had the re-release of ‘Push Barman to Open Old Wounds’, but still wanted the original 2005 pressing. A mint pressing on Discogs.com, an online selling point for vinyl, would cost her €150, but she was still thinking of buying it.
“But I think it all started with Belle and Sebastian, I do not remember what I bought first from them, but after that everything became physical. It had this feeling that I just wanted to own everything of them. A bit unaware I started to buy more records and CDs. I just really love their aesthetics, I always dream of becoming their cover girl one day, haha. After that I got a boyfriend, he also had a lot of CDs and LPs, it all became easier then, it was a shared passion. Also essential was the discovery of second-hand vinyl, it became so easy to get your favourites.”
- R8, F, 25, History student
In this quote, completism is cited as an important reason to collect as well as the shared passion with her boyfriend. It shows vinyl as the shared passion. Vinyl really could take the role of a social totem in the way Bartmanski and Woodward (2015, p. 19) describe, as an iconic power where the meaning thrives further than the object in itself.
Shuker’s (2004, p. 319) notion of completism as a characteristic for the high-fidelity stereotype is still seen in the lives of record collectors in their twenties. The same goes for his description of the characteristic of hoarding. The idea of hoarding in one quote was connected to the idea of ‘building a history of the self’, something that was also reflected in some of the literature as a point of recognition for contemporary times in other fields (Campbell, 2015; Vaher, 2008).
30
“Plus, the whole idea of collecting music, just like, just like a bookcase, it is a reflection of who you are… I have quite a broad taste, so when somebody stands before my record shelf, they will see that, you could get an idea of who I am. I really like that to have for later. On one moment my grandfather gave me his old record collection. It changed my idea of him, it was so intriguing to get an idea how he was when he was younger. Then you’re thinking; how funny is it that he was just listening to this.”
- R2, 22, F, Philosophy student
This quote shows how the respondent sees her vinyl collection as something that goes beyond the object in itself. Her idea of a bookcase that represents her life. Multiple respondents returned to this reason, which was cited more than that of good sound quality. This is in line with Gubberman´s (2011) notion of a decrease in importance of sound quality in the 21st
century.
Interestingly enough other respondents who used to hold a digital library also find ways to keep track of their ‘personal history’.
“Yes, I collected records for a few years, but I discovered that I was just collecting and never really listened to the records. Or at least, I listened to the records, but just on my computer. I know there is this discrepancy between being used to making playlists and the switching from side A to side B, the latter felt like a different world to me… but I appreciate that others have the patience for this. […] But about the collecting and hoarding… well I still have my website [last.fm] where I keep track of everything I listen to and also one for the albums I really appreciate [rateyourmusic.com]. Of course I would like to have everything physically, but that is simply not possible, financially, I also sold the lion’s share of my LP’s and CD’s because of that”.
- R7, M, 27, English literature student
Respondent 7 describes how he uses the digital sphere to keep track of his personal biography with the use of the website Last.fm in a similar way to Respondent 2. The website remembers all the songs he ever played through Spotify, YouTube or iTunes and in so doing he gets an
31
overview of all songs and records he listened to in the past. This could be seen as the digital equivalent of “holding a personal biography”, where the differences lies in the tangibility and the fact that keeping a physical record case shows what you bought and the digital website Last.fm shows what you actually listened to. By comparing the two ways of hoarding, the physical version shows more clearly the economic investment a collector made, while the digital equivalent lacks that aspect, but maybe shows a clearer representation, with the use of graphics, and actual play counts, of someone’s listening history.
This comparison of two quotes shows how the status of vinyl leads to a coat rack for people in their twenties for more than “just a sound carrier”, such as ‘a way to show your identity’ and ‘keeping track of your past’ and how these things are linked to the tangible character of the object. Although the quote of Respondent 7 shows how these characteristics are falsely linked to the object when it comes to the comparison to digitalisation. The theory of Blok (1998) concerning the narcissism of minor differences could be seen in the way physical and digital music consumption are placed against each other as, but there are similar interactions and behaviours in both ways of consuming music. Respondent 7 also establishes the interaction between the outside world and the digital sphere:
“Don’t underestimate the influence of the social factor on Spotify, and in the past also Last.fm. People tell you like: ‘Hey I saw that you listened to this and that’. It is social, but probably in a different way, it is still not physically.”
- R7, M, 27, English literature student
Where Bartmanski & Woodward (2016, p. 1) describe why some of the characteristics of vinyl, such as feeling, handling, experiencing, projecting, and sharing are seen as essential part of music experience. In the interviews the tangibility argument returns, but also many different things about the experience of music, although these kinds of arguments also return in the interviews where digital music consumption is the point of discussion. Later in the analysis, there will be looked more closely at why digital music consumption does not receive, in the interviews, the same iconic status as vinyl and also why these reasons go further than tangibility.
32 4.2 Vinyl as a distinction mechanism
In the previous chapter the different arguments of vinyl and digital music consumption were discussed and compared. In one of the quotes, Respondent 2 speaks about her taste, her identity and how her vinyl collection is a reflection of who she is: “[…] just like a bookcase, it is a reflection of who you are… I have quite a broad taste, so when somebody stands before my record shelf, they will see that, you could get an idea of who I am.”.
As I mentioned earlier all respondents defined their taste in the same manner as Peterson and Kern (1996) would have predicted. The higher educated group of respondents identifies their taste in music, without any exception, as “eclectic” or as a “broad taste”. Respondents speak about “how” they experience and not particularly ‘what’ (Jarness, 2015). This is also seen in the next quote from Respondent 7.
“I'm no longer occupied with genre definitions or styles for music. I'm really watching what it sounds like for me and to the intentions of the band. I think if you listen to many things, you first look at whether it sounds good or not, so that could be in every genre. But secondly, I think it's important that it's kind of authentic. That does not mean that it has to be new, because I think that much has been done, but what is still possible and important is the intention that it has been made genuine and creative. The intention how it is made. There is not really a criterion attached to that, you just look at this, and think, yes this has a place in the music world and that’s fine... that's a bit.”
- R7, 27, M, Student in English literature
In the quote we see how Respondent 7 approaches music with the question of “how” music is brought to the consumers. This is in line with Jarness’ (2015, p. 70) notion of higher educated cultural consumption and how the “aesthetic uniqueness” is a more important criterion. The theory seems to fit the approach of the respondent group and their approach towards different methods of consuming music. There was one respondent that had a clear aversion to the rising popularity of vinyl.
