Is there a best era for music? The science and psychology behind musical taste

Overview

In this episode, Michael Stevens and Hannah Fry debate whether there is a single best era for music. They recall personal picks, discuss subjective versus objective measures of quality, and examine how memory, nostalgia, and context shape our musical tastes. The conversation spans cultural anecdotes from the 1990s to modern streaming, explores psychological biases like rosy retrospection and the reminiscence bump, and considers how technology and gatekeepers influence what becomes popular. While they acknowledge studies suggesting trends toward simpler lyrics and more negative themes, they emphasize that music’s value lies in human connection rather than an absolute score.

Ultimately, the hosts conclude that music is driven by personal experience and social context, not a universal metric, closing with lighthearted banter about PJ and Duncan and even a playful nod to ancient sounds.

Introduction

The Rest Is Science episode features Michael Stevens and Hannah Fry discussing whether there is a best era for music. They acknowledge the topic is highly subjective while probing what counts as “best” and how data can or cannot settle the debate.

Subjectivity and Objective Measures

The conversation covers attempts to rank decades by data such as lyrical complexity, emotional tone, and popularity, but reveals no consensus. They reference classic stories like the Joshua Bell subway performance to illustrate how context can override perceived quality, highlighting the limits of objective scoring in music.

Memory and Nostalgia

The pair explains rosy retrospection and the reminiscence bump, arguing that memories from adolescence disproportionately shape our sense of what was best. They explore how personal milestones—from first concerts to first crushes—embed certain songs in our long-term memory.

Technology, Gatekeepers, and the Zeitgeist

Discussion turns to the democratization of music making through laptops, home studios, and streaming, which changed who creates and who decides what becomes popular. They discuss 1990s marketing bets like Vanilla No Way No Way Mana Mana and contrast them with later shifts toward AI and online platforms, noting that while production has broadened, taste remains socially shaped.

Studies and Patterns

They review research linking pop music to macroeconomic mood and cultural zeitgeist, noting that negativity and self-referential language have risen in lyrics over time. They caution about sample sizes and contexts, arguing that music reflects the era’s social signals rather than a universal standard of quality.

Conclusion

Ultimately the hosts argue that music is defined by human connection, empathy, and communication rather than a timeless objective metric. They suggest AI can assist but cannot replace the social and emotional meaning of music, finishing with a humorous nod to PJ and Duncan as the best era, before acknowledging the broader point that taste evolves with each generation.