On 21/5/25 16:57, Will Godfrey wrote: Same. None of my family play instruments, although my Mum liked the occasional stage musical and Swan Lake.

I have been practicing music all my conscious life. My father was basically unmusical but not averse to it. He probably enjoyed that I enjoyed it. My mother did not show much interest in music except for a few (about 10-20) singles from the 60s. I played at her 50th, 60th and 70th birthdays and she seemed happy and content with the way it sounded. I get a pretty high score on the Barcelona Music Reward Questionnaire. Maybe there is something further back in my family or I'm just a mutant. What might make me raise my eyebrows in the referenced study is that there are >9000 twins. According to statistics, there are about 45000 twins aged 37-64. A little more than 20% of all twins of that age in Sweden participated in the study. -- /bengan

On 5/21/25 05:02, Len Ovens wrote: I think the point of the study wasn't how many people had parents/ancestors that played music, or that they themselves played music. The study was more about some people have an emotional response to music while others lack that response. I do agree that recording technology has changed how non-musician people think of music. I think this affects musicians, too. The ability to record tracks in multiple takes means music production can now go through tracks note-by-note and basically pick the 'perfect' note for every time in the finished track. I think that does two things. First, it produces "perfect" final releases. It fuels the idea that "real musicians" play perfectly. The final release of a song doesn't include or even mention the fact that there may have been hundreds of takes for every track in the final release, that what is presented as a single instrument performance (for example)  may actually consist of dozens of bits from other takes. It fuels perfectionism that can discourage musical people, that don't think they're perfect musicians, from even trying. Second, it carries the message that only a few, rare, special, "gifted" people can be musicians. They play perfectly, effortlessly. Add in the lies the Romantic Movement popularized, that creative people are special, troubled, 'touched-by-the-gods'. Then consider this against the background that most popular/commercial music is produced and distributed through a few big companies that focus on promoting only a few artists while basically ignoring everyone else. I like to keep in mind that for every big name commercial solo artist I hear on the radio, there are 10000 other artists that are better and more gifted, just not as lucky. Or they had more integrity and resisted industry pressure to be someone else. I think that many times the difference is the featured artists went into selling sex, not music, but that could just be me. I think all of this conspires to build fences that keep people out, not invite them in or empower them to make music. Fortunately, the tools of music production are readily available now... -- David W. Jones gnome(a)hawaii.rr.com authenticity, honesty, community http://dancingtreefrog.com "My password is the last 8 digits of π."

On 5/20/25 20:57, Will Godfrey wrote: You got the gift of responding to music. They didn't. And I for one thoroughly enjoy your gift of music! -- David W. Jones gnome(a)hawaii.rr.com authenticity, honesty, community http://dancingtreefrog.com "My password is the last 8 digits of π."