How Often Do You Listen To Music?

I find if I don't, I tend to get dry and forget about why I do music in the first place. Oddly, with so much of my spare time devoted to getting better at music, I do find I don't take enough time to continue exploring and actually just listening.

That said, I've heard people say they almost never listen to it. I have a hard time understanding that. That's like an author never reading.

How often do you veteran composers actually listen to music, as opposed to listen to it purely for the purpose of transcribing?

 

Is it just me, or do people that need to do music as opposed to do it for a gig not get sick of it? The musical artists I most respect in any genre listen to music like crazy, which leads me to:

Yes. Authors and artists stagnate all the time. So do musicians. Technically, perhaps not, but they'll likely not gain the ability to say something in a new way, and the content of what they say will be nonexistent. Often, they'll say what they've been interested in saying and inspired to say (as their repertoire allows them to -- we're all a sum of our influences), and then they'll either repeat it as their gimmick or slow waaaay down. I've heard a number of prolific musicians, who have a very distinct style but who also span many genres, talk about this. The ones who keep staying interesting are the ones who don't let their tank deplete.
Perhaps they begin to find inspiration elsewhere; I'm not sure. Tolkien sure read an awful lot of mythology. George R.R. Martin reads a lot. Stephen King reads a lot. Steven Wilson listens to boatloads of music and that guy has well over 50 records under his belt and he's still winning awards.

If music becomes purely about the gig, I'll probably quit doing gigs (assuming I get one, haha).

Definitely true. It can be hard. We have a two year old but I take her to as many concerts as I can afford and as many as she's able to stay up late enough to attend. Perhaps it was because we started early, but she'd sit through an entire hour of Vivaldi and 1-1/2. Can be difficult to find concerts that are set up for kids to attend properly, 7pm start times don't work well.

Thanks, I'll have a read! I always like hearing from masters in other fields.

 

There's really nothing wrong with this; hobbyists (if that's an appropriate term) are often better off than paid professionals, considering they do it because they like it and are free because of it. Their interest is often far less adulterated.

I'm not sure fame really has anything to do with it. Mike isn't proportionately famous when his skill level is considered. I see what you mean though.

I think part of the problem with the modern day composing landscape is that "regular professional craftsmen" are considered to be in a separate category than "artists" as people who simply do music, take a paycheque and come home. That certainly didn't use to be the case. The fact that this type of composer dominates the "professional composer" landscape is troubling, nevermind that they share the same title as the Goldsmiths, Herrmanns and Williams' of the world. It explains a lot of what we hear in media. This of course doesn't mean the elites should be the only ones who are considered "composers", but at the very least there should be separate titles for people that care about their craft as an end in itself.
Fortunately, the nature of this forum tends to draw people on opposite ends of the horseshoe, from "passionate professional" to "passionate hobbyist".