Age and Perceptions of Time and Speed of Music

[Teasing the Korean]

For those of us who have hit, say, age 50 or older:

Have you ever in recent years put on an album that you had from your childhood or youth, and were amazed at how quickly the thing flew by?  The tempos, and the length of tunes?

As a kid, I would listen to Beach Boys and Beatles US LPs, and I would totally get lost inside them.  All of these albums clock it an under 30 minutes.  Some of those Beatles sides are as short as 12 or 13 minutes.

I very rarely listen to rock/pop from my youth, but one Friday night a few years ago, I put on side 1 the US Rubber Soul - in mono, of course - went to kitchen to mix a few cocktails, and by the time they were ready and I brought them out into the family room, it was time to flip the record.

Bernard Herrmann's late-career recordings of his earlier scores have been criticized for their sluggish tempos.  I wonder if he was experiencing the phenomenon I am talking about.

Anyone experience this? 

[JSngry]

Mystery takes longer than familiarity because you're not yet sure about exactly where you are and what that is.

Same thing with driving.

[Teasing the Korean]

I don't think so.  Based on that logic, an album that I knew since I was 2 years old should have been flying by when I was 13, but I was still getting lost in those albums at that time.

Conversely, I haven't listened to the Beatles in decades, so playing one of their albums top to bottom would have become a fresh experience.

And I think there is certainly a phenomenon about how we perceive time as we age, because each second we experience represents a successively greater percentage of the time we have remaining.

[sgcim]

We definitely perceive music in a different way than when we were kids. I'd just listen to music as a kid over and over for hours every day. and can't imagine doing that as I age. When you were a kid, you were trying to bathe yourself in it, because it was doing something to you that was an essential part of who you were. Time just didn't exist when you were in that state. But it's different now.

[Stompin at the Savoy]

Our access to music 50 or 60 years ago was limited.  It was not really possible to have as many records then as today.  For one thing it depended on what your local record store had in stock.  No internet stores and no streaming.  If you wanted to listen to new music without buying it you had to listen to whatever your favorite radio stations happened to be playing.  There was no way to listen on demand except perhaps at some record stores.  Naturally as a kid I listened to the few records I  had over and over.

[JSngry]

3 hours ago, Teasing the Korean said:

I don't think so.  Based on that logic, an album that I knew since I was 2 years old should have been flying by when I was 13, but I was still getting lost in those albums at that time.

Conversely, I haven't listened to the Beatles in decades, so playing one of their albums top to bottom would have become a fresh experience.

And I think there is certainly a phenomenon about how we perceive time as we age, because each second we experience represents a successively greater percentage of the time we have remaining.

From 2-13 is hardly working with a fully developed adult mind.

And pop music is not, mostly, deeply substantial. Nostalgia becomes content. Content itself remains unchanged, and there's only so much there to figure out.

The last time I got remotely engaged with Beatles music was with the Mono box, especially on The White Album. Other than that, time flies because I'm just not paying attention because...who cares? It's not like there's any new music in there.

If anything, it's annoying as fuck waiting for it to be over.

One of the rare exceptions to this personal rule is Pet Sounds. I bought the sessions box but decided not to listen to it because...there goes the discovery.

It's pop music. The game is different.

[soulpope]

In my youth time was flying by with music as soundtrack .... there was virtually no time for (e)valuation ....

[JSngry]

I remember playing pencil drums to Beatles records when I was 12 or so. That took time, trying to hang on every beat and fill.

Now I know that Ringo was the shit, so, work finished. 

Onward.

[Gheorghe]

Well I don´t really remember. I started listening to jazz at an early age and it is possible that nothing before did hit me as much as jazz. I remember there was one pop tune that I liked that was shortly before I got to hear jazz like Miles or Mingus or who was alive, and it was somethin´ called "Tie a yellow ribbon round the old oak tree" and I still like it. My piano colleage that great Oliver Kent once performed it and memories came back. I must have been 13 or so and it was the age when you began to look at girlies....,

[jazzbo]

Hormones.

[Teasing the Korean]

6 hours ago, JSngry said:

If anything, it's [The Beatles] annoying as fuck waiting for it to be over.

One of the rare exceptions to this personal rule is Pet Sounds. I bought the sessions box but decided not to listen to it because...there goes the discovery.

This is exactly my experience.  When Ms. TTK and I got together, circa 1997, she had the middle volume of the Fabs' Anthology, covering 1965-67.  I remember I was off from work one day, and I couldn't wait to spin it.  I put it in, and couldn't get through more than about 20 seconds of a track before I skipped to the next one.  I don't think I ever listened to it top to bottom.  While the Beatles still fascinate me as a sociocultural phenomenon, their music wore out its welcome a long time ago.

And I agree about Pet Sounds.  The Beach Boys are the only pop/rock group of my youth that I have continued to listen to over the decades, and that's because Brian Wilson IMO towers above all the others.

What about my Bernard Herrmann example from above?  Could the age/time thing play a factor in how he perceived music as he aged?

[gvopedz]

There have been some related studies:  "We often plan our activities based on the clock out of necessity, so that we can coordinate with friends or show up at the right time to a dentist appointment. But when it comes to how you would ideally plan your days, the research suggests that people differ, with some more drawn to clock time and some more to event time."

https://psyche.co/ideas/is-it-better-to-live-in-clock-time-or-event-time

 

[Dub Modal]

4 hours ago, gvopedz said:

There have been some related studies:  "We often plan our activities based on the clock out of necessity, so that we can coordinate with friends or show up at the right time to a dentist appointment. But when it comes to how you would ideally plan your days, the research suggests that people differ, with some more drawn to clock time and some more to event time."

https://psyche.co/ideas/is-it-better-to-live-in-clock-time-or-event-time

 

Great link 

[danasgoodstuff]

I do find myself getting lost in the music, any music, less often and for less time per episode, but while there is a time standing still aspect to that to me the differing perception of time is not the main thing happening (or not happening) there - it's more surface v. deep, not getting into it.

[rostasi]

Hearing fresh sounds stops me in my tracks.
That happens more when you're younger,
simply because of general mathematics.

[JSngry]

8 hours ago, gvopedz said:

There have been some related studies:  "We often plan our activities based on the clock out of necessity, so that we can coordinate with friends or show up at the right time to a dentist appointment. But when it comes to how you would ideally plan your days, the research suggests that people differ, with some more drawn to clock time and some more to event time."

https://psyche.co/ideas/is-it-better-to-live-in-clock-time-or-event-time

 

Retirement has definitely liberated my natural inclination for event time. Loving it!

[JSngry]

13 hours ago, Teasing the Korean said:

What about my Bernard Herrmann example from above?  Could the age/time thing play a factor in how he perceived music as he aged?

Old people get better at ballads. Meaning trumps proof.

[hopkins]

On 5/14/2024 at 3:45 AM, Teasing the Korean said:

I don't think so.  Based on that logic, an album that I knew since I was 2 years old should have been flying by when I was 13, but I was still getting lost in those albums at that time.

Conversely, I haven't listened to the Beatles in decades, so playing one of their albums top to bottom would have become a fresh experience.

And I think there is certainly a phenomenon about how we perceive time as we age, because each second we experience represents a successively greater percentage of the time we have remaining.

I think it has to do with evolving tastes and how we experience music.

I don't enjoy listening to the Beatles any longer, but I can still "get into" a lot of the music I grew up with, especially things with a good "groove"...

As a teenager, discovering music was a "holistic experience".  Nowadays, I dont't think my world view is going to be shattered and transformed by listening to a new artist. So naturally experiencing music in my teens and today are very different and as a result our perception of sound may be different.

Edited May 15 by hopkins

[hopkins]

Some inspiration for all you (us) geezers