This is broken in so many ways. Of course the music listened to by the largest number of people is going to correlate to a more average SAT score. The children that regularly listen to classical are those with parents who either intentionally expose them to it at home (which means that they are likely well-educated) or have them take music lessons (which indicates both a concern for their child's mental development as well as above-average financial status). So music and SAT scores are largely influenced by the same factors: education and money.<p>Also, as someone who spent over a decade of my childhood playing classical piano, I'd suggest that the vast majority of college-age kids who have Beethoven on their "favorite music" list are smart kids just trying to appear to be even smarter. Notice how no other composers, modern or classical, are listed; Beethoven is to classical music what the Beatles are to classic rock and Jay-Z is to hip hop: a generic name for someone to pull, the Java of composers. If I was listing what instrumental music I <i>do</i> listen to, I'd be putting up names that define the styles I like. Philip Glass? Branford Marsalis? Ludovico Einaudi? Sure. Beethoven? Negative.<p>The only thing I can possibly attest to is the lyrical / instrumental dichotomy. Sometimes it takes a certain kind of mind to appreciate some instrumental music; you have to be able to sit and analyze it, recognize the patterns / progressions, etc. That's why I could see popular bands like Radiohead, U2, and even RATM to a certain extent, doing better than other groups in their genre.
Not directly related but Bob Brozman has some interesting thoughts on music -<p>"African-based music normally has as the fundamental meter: both 2 and 3 at the same time. This opens the door to syncopation, polyrhythms and musical creativity, which occurs on a more primal level in the brain than harmony. It is acknowledged that Europeans developed harmony further than any other culture; but rhythmically their culture is among the planet's most primitive."<p>"Put simply, marching (colonizing) cultures see the downbeat as something to follow, and the "marched-upon" (colonized) cultures see the downbeat as something to react to, using the backbeat."<p><a href="http://www.bobbrozman.com/tip_rhythm.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.bobbrozman.com/tip_rhythm.html</a><p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7oPXRWRxda8" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7oPXRWRxda8</a><p>Additionally, the majority of western music is now performed in equal temperament which adds to the blandness. As hackers you may find the math of music interesting..<p><a href="http://www.kylegann.com/microtonality.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.kylegann.com/microtonality.html</a><p><a href="http://music.case.edu/duffin/" rel="nofollow">http://music.case.edu/duffin/</a><p><a href="http://www.larips.com/" rel="nofollow">http://www.larips.com/</a>
Considering every musical genre is at or below my final SAT score (1380/1600), it could only mean:<p>1. SAT's are not an indication of intelligence.
2. There is no correlation between type of music and SAT scores.
3. All music, including Beethoven, makes people dumber.<p>Author claims this is funny? What's funny? People that listen to Soca, Jazz, Hip-Hop, and Gospel make the dumbest students? Here's a correlation, which diaspora pioneered all four of those musical genres?<p>This is inaccurate. I love Lil Wayne. I don't remember the last time I enjoyed Beethoven.
That's nonsense. I know at least 50 people with 1400+ SATs (on a 1600 scale) and only one of them is really into classical.<p>That statistic is wrong on so many levels. In particular, SAT scores correlate to the level of education, which correlates to the wealth of the family, the area they live and, therefore, the music they would be exposed to.
High SAT = lying to impress others, Low SAT = truthful.<p>I actually, factually enjoy classical music, to the point that I voluntarily listen to it of my own free will. I've participated in a lot of musical conversations with high-SAT people. People either don't like classical and make no bones about it, or give a nod to Beethoven but cite other people they like better. (In my case, Schubert and Rachmaninoff would be the ones I cite.)<p>Excepting perhaps the Ninth Symphony, which if listened to properly really is a tour de force. ("Properly" is listening to the whole thing straight through with no distractions and at a decent volume level; the Ninth is designed to be a bit loud. This is not something you can do very often.)<p>But then, I'm conversing with adults, not adolescents trying to impress me.
that title is just mean. that reminds me to download that album right now.<p><pre><code> Weeeee Ooh Weeeeee Ooh Weeeee,
Weeeee Ooh Weeeeee Ooh Weeeee,
Weeeee Ooh Weeeeee Ooh Weeeee,</code></pre>