Freedom of Choice: Examining Music Listening as a Function of Favorite Music Format

Abstract

With so many formats available for individuals to use to listen to music, the present research adopted a uses and gratifications approach to investigate why people prefer particular formats. Specifically, the present study considered six formats: physical, digital file, free-streaming, paid-for streaming, radio, and live music. A sample of 396 people (Mage = 34.53) completed an online survey, detailing the reasoning for their favorite format via a free-text response. Live music and digital files were the most popular formats. A thematic analysis of the uses and gratifications pertaining to each format highlighted how participants were attuned to the advantages (and disadvantages) of different formats, demonstrating an awareness of, and consideration relative to, rival formats. Findings suggest that choosing to listen to music across different formats may satisfy different needs and that people demonstrate an awareness of their preference relative to the other available options.

Full text

FAVOURITE MUSIC FORMAT
!
1!
Note:&
This%is%an%accepted%manuscript%(pre-print%version)%of%an%
article%published%in%Psychomusicology:-Music,-Mind-and-
Brain%on%16%January%2020,%available%online%at:%
https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2020-02972-001%%
%
©%2020,%American%Psychological%Association.%%
This%paper%is%not%the%copy%of%record%and%may%not%exactly%
replicate%the%final,%authoritative%version%of%the%article.%
Please%do%not%copy%or%cite%without%authors’%permission.%
The%final%article%will%be%available,%upon%publication,%via%its%
DOI:%10.1037/pmu0000254.%
You%may%download%the%published%version%directly%from%the%
journal%(homepage:%
https://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/pmu/).%%
Published%citation:%
Brown,%S.%C.,%&%Krause,%A.%E.%(2020).%Freedom%of%choice:%
Examining%music%listening%as%a%function%of%favourite%music%
format.%Psychomusicology:-Music,-Mind-and-Brain,-
advanced%online%publication.%
https://doi.org/10.1037/pmu0000254%

FAVOURITE MUSIC FORMAT
!
2!
Freedom of choice: Examining music listening as a function of music format preference
Steven C. Brown1,2 and Amanda E. Krause3,4
1School of Philosophy, Psychology and Language Sciences, Edinburgh, Scotland
2Independent Scholar, Glasgow, Scotland
Email: stevencaldwellbrown@gmail.com; Tel: 0141 548 2367
3School of Psychology, Curtin University, GPO Box U1987, Perth, WA 6845, Australia
4Melbourne Conservatorium of Music, The University of Melbourne, Gate 12 Royal Parade,
Melbourne, VIC 3010, Australia
Email: Amanda.Krause@unimelb.edu.au; Tel: +61 (0)3 9035 6134
Acknowledgments
The authors wish to thank Sonja Karlsson for her assistance with interpretation of the
qualitative data. The authors also would like to thank the Society for Education and Music
Psychology Research for their support.

FAVOURITE MUSIC FORMAT
!
3!
Abstract
With so many formats available for individuals to use to listen to music, the present research
adopted a Uses and Gratifications approach to investigate why people prefer particular
formats. Specifically, the present study considered six formats: physical, digital file, free-
streaming, paid-for streaming, radio, live music. A sample of 396 people (Mage = 34.53)
completed an online survey, detailing the reasoning for their favourite format via a free-text
response. Live music and digital files were the most popular formats. A thematic analysis of
the uses and gratifications pertaining to each format highlighted how participants were
attuned to the advantages (and disadvantages) of different formats, demonstrating an
awareness of, and consideration relative to, rival formats. Findings suggest that choosing to
listen to music across different formats may satisfy different needs, and that people
demonstrate an awareness of their preference relative to the other available options.
Keywords: music preferences, listening, music format, everyday music listening, digital
revolution

FAVOURITE MUSIC FORMAT
!
4!
Freedom of choice: Examining music listening as a function of favourite music format
When choosing to listen to recorded music, consumers now have many options.
Traditionally, recorded music has been accessed via a variety of physical formats – namely
vinyl, cassette, and CD. However, with the digitisation of music, digital mediums have grown
in popularity (e.g., mp3 files). Moreover, with the advent and increasing popularity of
streaming, consumers can listen to music without owning it – ownership is increasingly being
replaced by access (Wikström, 2012). The ever-expanding list of legal digital services offers
vast libraries of music, yet physical formats continue to shift high volumes of units (IFPI,
2016). In some territories such as UK, the radio remains enduringly popular, demonstrating
that many consumers enjoy having the music they listen to chosen by others. In contrast,
music subscription services such as Spotify (the so-called market leader in UK and Northern
Europe) empower listeners to take control over what they hear. Contemporary music
listening, therefore, is complex: “The recording industry is a mixed-format business, offering
music fans a diverse range of formats, including hundreds of streaming services, and
everything from downloads to CDs and vinyl” (IFPI, 2016, p. 13). This study was concerned
with how consumers evaluate what their favourite music format is, given the wealth of
options available. Specifically, it aimed to establish what appeals about particular formats to
consumers.
The Impact of the Digital Revolution on Contemporary Music Listening
As a direct result of the digital revolution, people are now listening to more music
than at any other point in history, due to the ease with which it can be accessed; streaming,
for instance, provides the ability to listen to more music, more often (Hagen, 2016).
However, while the ubiquity of music is recognized and evidenced by research, questions
concerning how music is being listened to are relatively new. Such questions of access

FAVOURITE MUSIC FORMAT
!
5!
necessarily demand an understanding of which devices are being used (Krause, North, &
Hewitt, 2015). Recent uses of the Experience Sampling Method, where participants’
experiences are documented in real time, has provided valuable data concerning people’s
everyday music behaviours (e.g., Greasley & Lamont, 2011; Krause, North, & Hewitt, 2015;
Randall & Rickard, 2013). Findings demonstrate that the principal means of music listening
occurs via computers (Greasley & Lamont, 2011), a trend found elsewhere and even earlier
(Bahanovich & Collopy, 2009). More recently, research has demonstrated the popularity of
using mobile devices (mp3 players and smartphones – Krause, et al., 2015; Krause & North,
2016; Randall & Rickard, 2017). Indeed, it has been noted that younger adults are more
likely to listen to music on computers, mp3-players and mobile phones (Avdeeff, 2014),
listening to more music than older adults (Bonneville-Roussy et al., 2013). Older adults
typically seek out the same music from when they were young (Bonneville-Roussy et al.,
2017), and so may be less inclined to draw from new technologies to discover new music,
instead drawing from their own collections.
The implications of widespread access to music across a diversification of platforms
cannot be understated – it allows consumers the ability to create private environments
(Skånland, 2011), offering control over what is heard even in public places (Krause, North &
Hewitt, 2016). Consuming music is not just about listening, but how it relates to both
personal and social lives (O’Hara & Brown, 2006). Accordingly, an understanding of how
individuals consume music in the everyday context must account for technological
advancements (Gaunt & Hallam, 2009). As Avdeeff (2012) argued, music listening is
technologically dependent.
Conceptualising Different Methods of Contemporary Music Listening
Given the varied options for how to listen to music, breaking them down
meaningfully can be troublesome. Different approaches include a focus on legal versus

FAVOURITE MUSIC FORMAT
!
6!
illegal and free versus paid-for options. Yet, individuals engaging in illegal downloading also
‘mix and match’ with other, legitimate services (Sinclair & Green, 2016). Scholars have also
conceptualized music listening as passive versus active; however, such a neat distinction has
been criticised by Clarke, Dibben and Pitts (2010) as a theoretical simplification—that people
shift between the two. A related, and less contentious, approach is to think in terms of private
and group listening, where it is evident that, for the most part, music listening is now very
much a solo activity. Schäfer et al. (2013) argue that: “People today hardly listen to music for
social reasons, but instead use it principally to relieve boredom, maintain a pleasant mood,
and create a comfortable private space” (p. 7). Such observations further support considering
how and why people listen to music.
The brief review above helps capture the myriad ways in which music listening can
be conceptualised: the examples indicate they are often dichotomous, failing to fully take into
account how music is being accessed – the central concern of the present study. As a result of
recent technological advancements, there are now multitudes of ways in which music can be
accessed, but little is known of why listeners favour particular music formats, or listening to
music on particular devices. Employing a Uses and Gratifications approach (Katz et al.,
1973; Katz et al., 1974) as a conceptual framework, the present study aimed to enhance our
understanding of music listening and build theory around format usage in today’s complex
music listening landscape.
Uses and Gratifications theory (Katz et al. 1973; Katz et al. 1974) is used to study
how media is selected and used (Rayburn & Palmgreen 1984; Ruggiero 2000; Stafford et al.
2004). The theory distinguishes between different types of media based on the needs that they
satisfy as a result of their use (Katz et al. 1973). Media use is considered goal-directed:
people are conscious of their needs, and actively seek out and use media to satisfy them.
According to the theory, needs are “The combined product of psychological dispositions,

FAVOURITE MUSIC FORMAT
!
7!
sociological factors, and environmental conditions” (Katz et al., 1973, p. 516–517), with
gratifications the perceived fulfilment of needs as a result of a particular activity, including
media use (Rayburn & Palmgreen 1984).
The theory has been used to consider music behaviours, such as the reasons for
listening to music (Lonsdale & North, 2011), downloading music from the Internet (Kinnally,
Lacayo, McClung, & Sapolsky, 2008), using streaming services (Mäntymäki & Islam, 2015),
and Facebook music listening applications (Krause, North & Heritage, 2014), as well as
engaging in music piracy (Brown & Krause, 2017). Previous research has also considered the
use of mp3 players (e.g., Ferguson, Greer, & Reardon, 2007), radio (e.g., Albarran et al.,
2007; Bentley, 2012; McClung, Pompper, & Kinnally, 2007), and media use in adolescence
and young adulthood (Arnett, 1995; Coyne, Padilla-Walker, & Howard, 2013). Given the
approach’s purpose is to consider why people elect a particular medium relative to
alternatives (Cheung, Chiu, & Lee, 2011). In this way, the theory helps understand
psychological motives and functions of individuals’ particular media choices (Anderson &
Meyer, 1975; Lin, 1996).
With particular reference for the current study, previous research has found particular
advantages are associated with how music is accessed. For instance, digital music is favoured
due its storage utility (Kinnally et al., 2008), and engagement in music piracy is predicted by
utilitarian motives related to cost and availability (Sang et al., 2015). Mäntymäki and Islam
(2015) found that enjoyment is the main reason for continuing to use Spotify. Indeed,
preferred devices appear “to align with the intuitive advantages of those devices” (Krause &
North, 2016, p. 139). A device, though, can accommodate multiple formats. For example,
smartphones can be used to listen to mp3s as well as to stream music and to listen to radio.
Thus, while previous research has considered devices (and sometimes a single one in

FAVOURITE MUSIC FORMAT
!
8!
isolation), it is important to consider multiple formats more broadly via a single open
enquiry.
An overview of six different music formats.
For the purposes of the current research, this study aimed to conceptualise music
listening in terms of format by broadly considering the uses and gratifications that particular
formats may satisfy. Format refers to the medium of playback, across six particular formats:
physical (i.e., CD, vinyl, cassette); digital file (i.e., mp3); streaming (free); and streaming
(paid-for); radio; and live music. These are briefly conceptualised in turn, below, with
reference to their respective salient features.
Physical. Traditionally, recorded music was purchased as a physical product (namely,
vinyl, cassette, or CD). Physical music has been in steady decline since the turn of the
millennium (IFPI, 2017), yet most people still possess a physical music collection (Liikanen
& Åman, 2015). Vinyl, which was the dominant physical format throughout the 60s and 70s
is currently enjoying an unprecedented rise in popularity, thought to be inspired by music
streaming (see below), though it appears that the music itself might not be listened to on vinyl
(Savage, 2016), suggesting it serves other functions.
Digital file. The advent of the mp3 in the 1990s gave rise to the omnipresence of the
digital file as a preferred listening medium for those with computers. Apple’s iTunes
provided a suite of digital files which could be easily purchased online, on a track-by-track
basis and this kick-started an emerging emphasis on songs – and subsequently playlists –
over albums; this has empowered consumers to assume more control over their music
listening, including deviating from pre-determined listening episode durations via the album
format
Streaming. Music subscription services dominate the current digital climate, with
streaming now responsible for 59% of digital revenues (IFPI, 2017). Originally envisioned as

FAVOURITE MUSIC FORMAT
!
9!
music discovery platforms, motivating consumers to enjoy music and then make informed
purchases, music streaming services are clearly substituting other forms of paid-for music
(Hardy, 2012); and Marshall (2015) argued that it is likely that streaming will replace
downloading in the long-term. Wade and Powers (2015) argued that control is the
overarching selling-point of streaming services, and control is surrendered with free versions
of streaming services where advertisements commonly disrupt the flow of listening, giving
consumers less control over what is heard. Free streaming can therefore be likened to radio.
Paid-for streaming, often billed monthly, provides control over what is heard and a core
feature of music streaming is the ability to create playlists, a dominant mode of music
listening – as of May 2016, playlists accounted for nearly one-third of total listening time,
nearly 1.5 times that of album listening (Savage, 2016). Streaming services also emphasise a
social side of music listening by highlighting and sharing users’ listening histories.
Radio. Radio revolutionised popular music, allowing consumers to hear music that
they did not own. Critically, the music selected via radio stations is not selected by the
listener, but a Disc Jockey (DJ). During the depression in the 30s, radio emerged an
affordable way of listening to music, and it still does – in some territories such as UK, radio
remains popular, demonstrating that many consumers enjoy having the music they listen to
chosen by others. Radio is synonymous with music discovery, representing, for many, their
window into the world of new music.
Live music. The history of recorded music has been emphasised as a mere blip in the
longer timeline of ‘music’ (Cloonan & Williamson, 2016), with live performance the original
means with which music was consumed and enjoyed. Live music has never been more
popular, a likely result of the digital revolution (Jones, 2015) and widespread music piracy
(Brown & Knox, 2017). Spotify have recently struck a deal with Ticketmaster (Gumble,
2016) with major implications on the live music sector, emphasising how intertwined

FAVOURITE MUSIC FORMAT
!
10!
different music formats can be. Live music attendance has been found to be about ‘the
experience’ (Brown & Knox, 2017; Packer & Ballantyne, 2011).
Research Question
To examine people’s preference for particular music formats, the present study
considered six different formats: physical; digital file; free streaming; paid-for streaming,
radio; and live music. In particular, this research asked, What are people’s favourite formats,
and what are the reasons they provide for their choice of favourite format? As previously
stated, little is known as to why people favour a particular format; therefore, in this initial
exploration, the formats were considered in isolation (i.e., with the focus on selecting one
format rather than mixing and matching). Because this question aimed to capture why people
prefer particular formats without relying on researcher assumptions, an open-ended,
qualitative approach was employed to gather a greater understanding through the
participants’ own words. Given the multitude of ways in which people can now listen to
music, it was considered necessary to be as open as possible to gain insight into a range of
approaches to music listening.
Method
Participants
A total of 396 people who resided in Australia (N = 138), the United States (N = 153),
and the United Kingdom (N = 105) completed the questionnaire; excluding responses from
individuals who did not reside in those three countries or complete the questionnaire (N =
44). The final sample consisted of 111 males (28.00%), 281 females (71.00%) and 4
participants who identified themselves as ‘custom’ (1.00%). The mean age of the sample was
34.53 (Mdn = 20.00, SD = 8.98), with an age range of 16–71. Just over a fifth (20.70%) of the

FAVOURITE MUSIC FORMAT
!
11!
sample held a University degree. The sample listened to music for an average of 3.66 hours
daily (SD = 2.87).
Individuals participated as part of a wider study concerning everyday music listening
practices (Brown & Krause, 2017; Krause & Brown, 2019). The present research details the
data concerning the formats that people prefer (that is people’s favoured format). In this way,
the data considered in Brown and Krause (2017) and Krause and Brown (2019) is excluded.
Participants were recruited from University participant pools (in Scotland and Australia),
online research websites (e.g., socialpsychology.org), and social media appeals. Participation
was voluntary, and other than students who received course credit for taking part via the
participant pools, individuals received no compensation for their participation.
Materials and Procedure
The University of Edinburgh granted ethical approval for the study (60-1516-2). Data
was collected in the first quarter of 2016. Qualtrics, an online research tool, was used to host
the questionnaire. After providing consent, individuals completed the questionnaire as a
series of separate pages.
Preference for music format. Respondents were asked which of six formats—
namely, physical (i.e., CD, vinyl, cassette), digital files (i.e., mp3), free digital streaming,
paid-for digital streaming, radio, and live music—was their favourite. The authors devised
this closed list of six options for the present study, such that the list was both short and
comprehensive in accommodating various listening practices. This list was developed
through consideration of how both research and industry address music access (e.g., IFPI,
2016; IFPI, 2017; Krause & North, 2016; Krause et al, 2015, Krause et al, 2014).
Importantly, this concise set of options did not conflate format usage with any associated
selection behaviours (e.g., playlist behaviours) which were outside the scope of the present
study.

FAVOURITE MUSIC FORMAT
!
12!
Participants were asked, “Why is this your favourite format?”, to explain their
favourite format selection via an open-ended response. This qualitative approach afforded a
detailed understanding of the varied approaches to music listening, considered essential in
terms of developing new theory. This survey methodology is particularly well-suited for
realist questions seeking to learn about what really happens, and facilitates data collection
from a diverse sample (Terry & Braun, 2017).
Demographic information. Before concluding the questionnaire, participants
reported their age, gender, country of residence, and whether they had a university
qualification. Participants were also asked to report the mean number of hours they listen to
music daily.
Results
Favourite format nomination frequencies (see Table 1) indicated an emphasis on both
live music and digital files as the most favourite formats, with a negligible difference in both
paid-for and free streaming and physical formats. Radio was the least favourite. While no one
format was singularly the sample’s favourite, both live music and digital files were more
popular than the other formats.
-Table 1 about here-
Thematic Analysis of the Uses and Gratifications by Format
A qualitative approach was adopted to address participants’ reasons for their
nominated favourite music format. The 392 open-ended responses provided were sorted by
corresponding format. Coding took place across three stages. Adopting a directed approach
(see Hsieh & Shannon, 2005), the first stage involved grouping together different responses
on the basis of what was considered the dominant feature of each response. Both authors
worked together to generate codes for each format, one at a time in a cyclical manner,

FAVOURITE MUSIC FORMAT
!
13!
revisiting the data several times. (Note, while previous uses and gratifications taxonomies
exist from previous research examining uses and gratifications [e.g., for music listening,
streaming and illegal downloading: Krause & North, 2016; Mäntymäki & Islam, 2015; Sang
et al., 2015], the present research concerned format use from the users’ perspectives and so
the authors did not work from pre-existing taxonomies but rather adopted a bottom-up
approach, relying solely on the responses provided to inform coding.) One author maintained
a codebook, whilst the other took extensive notes on the coding process. In the second stage,
an independent qualitative researcher (from a different discipline, and isolated from the
research area) was asked to verify the first stage coding. This involved carefully reviewing
the codes produced for each format separately, with discussion concerning on those codes not
believed to have been coded well. Subsequently, all three researchers engaged in negative
case analysis, demanding revision of some codes across the corpus. The majority of the re-
coding took place in the live music format, and the codebook was updated throughout this
process. The final coding stage involved working closely from the codebook to search for
both similarities and differences within the data corpus, in accordance with the constant
comparative method.
In order to retain the nuances of the responses, the researchers adopted a conscious
‘splitting’ approach (Saldana, 2014), and as a result, between seven and 20 themes were
created for each format. Table 2 highlights the resulting, finalized themes, including example
excerpts for each (the Appendix details the process of moving from original codes to
resulting themes). These themes represent the uses and gratifications experienced regarding
each of the six formats.
-Table 2 about here-
Physical.

FAVOURITE MUSIC FORMAT
!
14!
For physical formats (i.e., CD, vinyl, cassette), 11 themes were identified: nostalgia;
total engagement – primary activity; user control; habit; accompaniment; collecting; sound
quality; richness; narrative; aesthetics; and tangible. Though with this physical format
category participants were discussing all physical formats, the vinyl record was a particular
focal point. In terms of vinyl, its superior audio qualities were noted by many participants,
including how it is “better” (Male, 19) “richer” (Male, 17), and that it has “warmth” (Male,
43). Though this speaks of the perceived benefits of the format over others, many participants
explained plainly that they are simply in the custom of collecting; which may speak to simply
habit, but could also link to reasons connected to one’s identity. For instance, Nuttall et al.
(2011) drew on the symbolism of a physical collection in that it allows others to see your
music collection. That is, there is a social dimension.
Additionally, participants made specific reference to listening to songs in the order in
which an artist “intended it to be heard” (Female, 30) and that the track listing can tell a
story. Listening to an album in sequence is the default position of albums, but the story
telling element appears tied to physical properties of the physical format, just as the “album
artwork has no better canvas than the sleeve of an LP” (Male, 21) allowing to connect with
the music in a more meaningful way. The insistence by many participants that the music be
listened to as it was intended to be heard jars with the frequent responses concerning how
physical music provides listeners with control. The two approaches to listening could be said
to be in competition with one another, given listening to music in a pre-determined order
would rob listeners of controlling the order in which songs are listened to. As compared with
other formats, such as radio, there is no doubt that control is a core feature of physical;
listeners are capable of choosing the music they want to hear, opting to listen to an album in
sequence or not. In terms of the track listing of an album, it was noted that:

FAVOURITE MUSIC FORMAT
!
15!
“You have to listen to songs in the order the artist decided, which makes it a more authentic
experience” (Female, 20)
This notion of authenticity crops up when considering how the physical format was
perceived to encourage a focused listening experience, eliciting nostalgia by engaging with
music in the way in which it used to be – as a primary activity. There was a clear emphasis on
engaging with music via physical formats, and that engagement is aided by the physicality:
“It’s a great feeling to hold what appears to be an artefact from someone else’s mind in your
hands” (Male, 27)
The apparent benefits of the physical format then appear to be directly as a result of
the physicality of the format. The tangible nature of physical formats provides listeners with
an enhanced sensory experience, facilitating a more immersive listening experience. This
certainly echoes the sentiments of artists, such as Nine Inch Nails’ Trent Reznor, who, upon
reissuing Nine Inch Nails albums on vinyl, explained in a statement that: “Digital formats and
streaming are great and certainly convenient, but the ideal way I’d hope a listener experience
my music is to grab a great set of headphones, sit with the vinyl, drop the needle, hold the
jacket in your hands looking at the artwork (with your fucking phone turned off) and go on a
journey with me” (2016).
Though this level of focus may appear antiquated, it is clear from the results that there
is still a strong interest in dedicated music listening. Whilst responses surrounding nostalgia
and collecting habits signpost a preference for physical formats amongst older populations,
Osbourne (2012) explained that younger people are buying music on vinyl now too.
Capturing the overall aims governing this study, Osbourne explained that vinyl is both a
complement to and alternative to digital formats. That is, the data from the present study
suggest that listening to music via physical formats – and especially vinyl – helps to create a
different, more engaging listening experience.

FAVOURITE MUSIC FORMAT
!
16!
Digital file.
For digital file, 13 themes were identified: unrestricted access; ownership;
accompaniment; private listening experience; ease of use; affordability; variety; user power;
portability; storage; brand affinity; and ease of access. Overall, the functionality of digital
files was immediately striking, with digital files providing participants control over their
music listening. This included which songs were listened to, when, and where. This extended
to the ability to “listen to whatever music you want without the fear of being judged”
(Female, 20). Though this would be assumed in the case of many other formats which offer
control, closer inspection reveals not. Except in the case of buying online, purchasing
physical formats demands demonstrating to others your musical preferences. With streaming,
your listening history can appear to others, as well as being shared with subscription services
to facilitate personalised recommendations. Thus, digital files appear uniquely capable of
empowering users to create music collections which can be listened to privately; this may in
some way be tied with the conventional mode of playing digital files on a dedicated music-
playing device (e.g., mp3 player) which is portable, enabling music to be listened to on-the-
move, with headphones. The convenience and functionality of the digital file were paramount
to the majority of the sample, perhaps best captured by the following:
“Allows you to listen to whatever you want, whenever you want” (Female, 16)
When choosing to pay for music, a comparison of different formats appears to take
place (Brown & Knox, 2016). In the case of the present study, it is clear that digital files were
evaluated in reference to other formats, and especially streaming – once more, control
appears paramount. For instance, “I can access it without wifi” (Female, 20) and “can get it
offline too” (Female, 18) demonstrate the functionality of digital files over streaming services
in that music can be accessed easily and conveniently. Similarly, the ability to create playlists
was of also of interest to many participants, demonstrating the functionality of the digital file

FAVOURITE MUSIC FORMAT
!
17!
in allowing to manipulate playback. Furthermore, “there are no ads” (Female, 20) as with
free-streaming, and the ability for music to be kept forever signpost other advantages. This is
compelling, given recent observations that streaming services may lead to feelings of
psychological ownership (Sinclair & Green, 2017; Stewart, 2017).
Free streaming.
Nine themes were identified concerning free streaming: ease of use; ease of access;
unrestricted access; user power; discovery; variety; amount of music; serendipity; and
affordable. Free streaming is principally different from paid-for streaming on the basis of
price – free streaming costs nothing in financial terms, but comes with the burden of reduced
functionality and unavoidable advertisements. Nonetheless, being free was often cited by the
sample as the main driver in choosing this format as their favourite.
“It’s my favourite format because it’s free” (Male, 19).
Additionally, a frequent reason concerned how this format enables discovery of a
wide variety of music. With “new music being added” (Male, 22), free streaming “lets
anyone enjoy music and lets them experience more” (Female, 25). Free streaming is thought
of as democratizing music listening, unburdening users both in terms of time and money.
Free streaming was found to be both easy to use and access.
Serendipity was highlighted:
“I get a surprise every time I listen to music because songs come on that I haven’t even
thought of in a long time” (Female, 20)
The surprise element of music listening on free streaming also stemmed from the use
of playlists not created by the user. Participants noted how services such as Spotify “creates a
playlist for you” (Female, 19), comprising “songs that I don’t choose” (Male, 17). This is in
contrast with the power offered to users of free streaming services to choose what they listen
to, creating their own playlists. It appears that despite this option, some participants enjoyed

FAVOURITE MUSIC FORMAT
!
18!
having music selected for them as it led to chance encounters. Whereas digital files were
singled out for their ability to provide user control, the lack of control appears to be another
valuable feature of free streaming.
Paid-for streaming.
For paid-for streaming, 14 themes were identified: discovery; quality; where the
money goes; no adverts; cost; brand affinity; ease of use; ease of access; user power; full,
unrestricted access; amount of music; enjoyment; storage; and legal. A clear overlap was
found between free streaming and paid-for streaming, which is intuitive as they differ in so
few ways. The core difference is of course price, with data demonstrating novel concerns
about paying for music, including that paid-for streaming is “fair to musicians” (Male, 20)
and that “I am getting the songs I want but also contributing to the artist” (Female, 47). Thus,
the payment for music via streaming services is not a barrier or a limitation, instead it poses
an edge for the ethical consumer, an emerging topic of interest amongst scholars (Green,
Sinclair & Tinson, 2016; Weitjers, Goedertier & Verstreken, 2014). That is, in this instance,
payment enhances the user experience. Further, several participants noted the lack of
advertisements as a benefit to a paid subscription.
Other practical benefits included “customizable options” (Female, 18) such as
creating playlists, the “ability to save music to listen to offline” (Female, 18), and the “best
quality sound” (Male, 18). The notion of audio quality is compelling, given enhanced audio
features in the paid-for versions of many music subscriptions. Such observations highlight the
core advantages of paid-for streaming over free streaming, and that such examples are clearly
considered by the sample to be worth paying for. Full, unrestricted access to music was noted
by several participants to be important to them and notably, it appears that making the most
of the large databases of music leads to a perception of good value for money. One
participant explains:

FAVOURITE MUSIC FORMAT
!
19!
“I wouldn’t be able to afford all the music I listen to if I had to pay for each album and song
individually” (Male, 21)
Radio.
While radio received the fewest nominations as a favourite format, the responses
indicated varying reasons (though the small sample size should be acknowledged when
interpreting the provided reasons). Seven themes were identified: variety; serendipity; ease of
use; ease of access; brand; routine; and hip. Found to be easy to use and to access, the radio
was also specifically singled out as being frequently listened to in the car, thus acting as an
accompaniment to driving and providing stimulation. A principal benefit of radio appears to
be the unpredictability of which songs will be played, with participants noting that how
listening to the radio can result in “nice surprises” (Female, 37), and how it is good to “just
turn it on and see what plays” (Female, 50). Further, one participant explained that radio is:
“Easy to have on in the background, good for finding out about new songs” (Male, 22)
This is in stark contrast to other formats such as physical, which are marked by
providing listeners with control. In effect, the lack of control is perceived to be a dominant
perk of the radio format, leading to serendipitous encounters with both known and unknown
music; the capability of radio in facilitating discovery of new music was also found amongst
the sample, and this is intuitive. Radio then, can be said to satisfy curiosity, by enabling
discovery of new music, and provide a low level of stimulation to accompany commuting by
car. These two factors appear to be in direct contrast with one another, as it would be familiar
music which would be expected to be provide lower levels of stimulation to accompany tasks
(See Ward, Goodwin & Irwin 2014).
Live music.
For live music, 20 themes were identified: connecting with bands; connecting with
fans; communal connection; connecting with the music; physically present; experiencing

FAVOURITE MUSIC FORMAT
!
20!
personal connection; support/fandom; sound richness; feeling; atmosphere; thinking;
appreciation; emotional; organic; unique experience; entertainment; experience; immersion;
stimulation; and differentiation of live music from other formats in survey. Responses from
the participants nominating live music as their favourite format were generally more detailed
than other formats, many emphasising the authenticity of live music settings as a way of
experiencing live music, with likeminded others. Social aspects of music listening did not
feature in any other format. One participant explained how they “Love listening to my
favourite music with my favourite people” (Female, 18), highlighting the desire to not only to
listen to live music, but to do so with known others.
In much the same way that the perks of physical formats appeared to stem directly
from their physicality – allowing for a more engaging listening experience – being physically
present at concerts appears to be the catalyst for the resulting benefits of live music
attendance, in that it “has a lot more to offer” (Male, 19), “being amongst other people and
the music makers” (Female, 20), with concerts being “unpredictable” (Male, 45), in nature.
The notion of unpredictability has been found to be a central driver of attending live
performances (Brown & Knox, 2017)—people are excited by the unknown elements of a live
music experience. This appears tied to an awareness that live music events are unique, one-
off experiences. To be “In a moment with everyone else there” (Female, 42) is to be connect
with the music meaningfully, sharing an experience. The central role of live music providing
an experience mirrors other research (i.e. Packer & Ballantyne, 2011).
It was stated that “Being at a concert brings out a whole different emotion” (Female,
18) with this aiding connection not only with the self via the music, but with the musicians
and other music fans. Live music was variously described as intense, raw, exciting, energetic.
It was these perceived qualities that appear to underscore the capacity for live music to elicit
strong emotions, facilitating connection. In summary, live music was found to be

FAVOURITE MUSIC FORMAT
!
21!
multifaceted in its ability to stir strong feelings. The findings corroborate Holt (2010) who
noted that live music is a unique experience, measurable in terms of its atmosphere,
performance and social interaction.
In sum, the qualitative results enhance understanding of the goal-oriented nature of
contemporary music listening format preferences. In fact, the participants’ reasons
demonstrate a conscious awareness of preferring a specific format to listen to music in the
face of many alternatives. This reasoning appears to be grounded in knowledge concerning
the unique uses and gratifications particular formats afford, such that preferences suggest
selecting a particular format in order to satisfy certain needs. Conscious listening format
preferences based on meeting goals and needs suggest that there is scope for further theory
development concerning everyday music engagement behaviours by drawing on Uses and
Gratifications (elaborated on further in the general discussion below).
General Discussion
Given the myriad choices available for music listening, the present study examined
people’s preferences for different formats. As expected, the frequencies reiterated the
dominance of favouring digital music formats. Interestingly, the uses and gratifications
motivating the particular format preferences do not support the varied conceptualisations of
music listening introduced earlier (i.e. passive versus active listening) but suggest that format
preferences reveal an active use of music. That is, people favour different formats that help
them accomplish certain goals.
Importantly, when asked to explain their format preference, individuals demonstrated
a clear awareness of different uses and gratifications associated with particular formats.
Although participants were asked to respond about a single, favoured format, many
participants expressed their reasoning via a contrast to one or more of the other formats (i.e.,

FAVOURITE MUSIC FORMAT
!
22!
pros and cons). Such conscious reasoning that concerns both the benefits and motivations
behind certain preferences directly references comparing the uses and gratifications
associated with multiple formats. Indeed, the reasons why people might favour one format
rather than another become clear when examining formats side by side.
Findings illustrate that the benefits of physical formats are related to their physicality:
that they provide a more focused and potentially immersive listening experience, enhanced
by hearing the music as it was intended to be heard with accompanying artwork. Digital files
are highly functional, affording listeners convenience, accessibility, and portability (as
Krause & North, 2016 noted with regard to format advantages). Digital files also allow
listeners to do things with the music, such as create playlists; this is contrast with physical
albums. Price separates free and paid-for streaming, but they both boast levels of unrestricted
access given the amount of music on offer which is a large draw for some individuals. Radio
was found to be easy to use, facilitating discovery of new music, with discovery also found in
both paid-for and free streaming (Hagen, 2016). The largest separation was apparent for live
music versus the others – with reasons aligned to the social and emotional experiences of live
music. Live music still holds a special captivation over listeners as a unique and organic form
of entertainment (Brown & Knox, 2017).
While these differences help distinguish format preferences, the findings also
illustrate some key similarities. Most obviously, free and paid-for streaming are quite similar.
Additionally, however, streaming has elements typical of the radio, including advertisements,
directed marketing, and, as noted, the ability to discover new music. Further, while perhaps
engaging in different ways, participants spoke about the authenticity and engaging experience
by way of listening to music via both live and physical format. These two formats have of
course existed for the longest period of time. Thus, multiple formats may afford users the
same, or at least similar, gratifications.

FAVOURITE MUSIC FORMAT
!
23!
It is logical that some of the uses and gratifications pertaining to the favoured formats
mirror those highlighted in previous work concerning musical media. For example, previous
work has highlighted advantages such as storage utility for digital formats (e.g., Kinnally, et
al., 2008; Krause & North, 2016), and cost and value for money continue to play a role
(Brown & Knox, 2016; Curien & Moreau, 2009; Sang, et al., 2015). Further, ubiquity,
variety, and discovery of new music continue to drive streaming platform use, as has been
indicated previously (e.g., Hagen, 2016; Mäntymäki & Islam, 2015; Sang, et al., 2015;
Waldfogel, 2014). Additionally, the present identified uses and gratifications also align with
previously put forward media taxonomies (e.g., McQuail,!Blumler,!&!Brown,!1972). In addition
to the themes highlighted above, examples of correspondence include brand affinity as
personal identity, accompaniment as illustrating personal relationships, and aesthetics
reflecting affective needs (Blumler & Katz, 1972; Katz, Hass, & Gurevitch, 1973; McQuail,!
Blumler,! &! Brown,! 1972).! While evident across themes pertaining to all six formats, it is
interesting that the themes concerning live music appear to match all five of Blumler and
Katz’s (1972) categories. Beyond linking the present work to the larger body of scholarship
on media uses and gratifications, it raises interesting questions concerning the consistency of
media preferences.
Further, we interpret three important uses and gratifications themes highlighted in the
present study that have been implicated in previous work concerning music listening
practices (e.g., Krause et al, 2015; Mäntymäki & Islam, 2015; Sang et al., 2015) in greater
depth – namely value for money, control, and social motivations. Value for money
underscored many of the comparisons made by participants, corroborating recent findings by
Brown and Knox (2016) who found that when choosing whether or not to pay for music, an
appraisal of value for money takes place. The findings of the present study suggest a similar
decision-making process occurs in relation to simply selecting one’s favourite music format.

FAVOURITE MUSIC FORMAT
!
24!
In the case of free streaming, participants noted that their financial situation prevented them
from using the other formats, whilst in the case of paid-for streaming, there was evidence of
how ethical consumers construct value for money by reflecting on how musicians are
compensated for use of paid-for subscription services, and that consumption via this format is
fair. Both examples once more highlight how comparisons are made (in the latter case,
presumably when compared with illegal music consumption). The observations made on the
ethics of paid music consumption supplement recent findings (Green, Sinclair & Tinson,
2016; Marshall, 2015) and offer insight into how to music subscription services may be able
to attract customers; with seemingly constant controversy over the royalties which musicians
receive via subscription services, such an approach appears dubious.
In terms of control, ease of use and access were highlighted with regards to the
digital, both streaming formats, and the radio. It is not surprising that people prefer formats
that are familiar and easy to use, with continued use springing from self-efficacy and habit
(Krause & North, 2016). Digital files were favoured for being able to control which songs
were heard, including an emphasis on specific songs, whereas with physical formats many
participants demonstrated a clear affinity for not having control over the song selection by
adhering to the tracklisting of a particular physical release. Listening to an album in sequence
rather than picking and choosing between different songs, perhaps creating a playlist with
them, are very different approaches to listening. Ultimately, radio is the only format where
listeners have no control; even with free-streaming did the choice of what to listen to come
across from the data. Sinclair and Tinson (2017) explain that streaming allows listeners to
feel empowered by the ability to control music. It was radio which scored low on engagement
measures as compared with other formats and this may stem from the lack of control.
Social motivations were scarce, aside from in the live music format. The fact that
mention of social motivations was not as prevalent is in line with Schäfer et al.’s (2013)

FAVOURITE MUSIC FORMAT
!
25!
suggestion that people now rarely listen to music for social reasons. Spotify has made some
effort to integrate sharing functions; however, social features have not been found to add
value for customers (Mäntymäki & Islam, 2015) and research into sharing features on Spotify
finds that most users share music selectively (Hagen & Lüders, 2017). Nevertheless,
choosing to listen to music in a particular way, via a favoured format, may serve social
functions by emphasising to others the type of music listener you are. This is especially likely
in the case of vinyl, where, as noted earlier, it appears that much vinyl purchased is not in fact
listened to (Savage, 2016). Further, Schurig (2017) found that wearing headphones
communicates ever-changing impressions to others (i.e., not solely the message to be left
alone). Accordingly, the hardware associated with preference for specific formats may
communicate social cues to others.
The identified uses and gratifications in the present study align with additional
psychological theories. It is perhaps unsurprising to see alignment with theories concerning
technology use: including the Theory of Planned Behaviour, which states that people’s
intentions and behaviours are shaped by attitudes, subjective norms, and perceived
behavioural control (Ajzen, 2002). Indeed, previous research on music behaviours has
incorporated Theory of Planned Behavior (e.g., Bolduc & Kinnally, 2018; Kwong & Park,
2008; Sang, et al., 2015; Yoon, 2011). Additionally, price value, hedonic motivation, and
habit feature in the revised Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology
(Venkatesh, et al., 2012); and the presence of ease of use and routine/habit is explained by
the Lazy User Model, which states that a person will select a solution that involves the least
amount of effort (Tétard & Collan, 2009). However, a theory of motivation, the Self-
Determination Theory (and its Basic Psychological Needs framework which states that
optimal functioning and growth is the result of satisfying three needs – competence,
relatedness, and autonomy [Deci & Ryan, 2000; Ryan & Deci, 2002)]), also quite aptly

FAVOURITE MUSIC FORMAT
!
26!
frames the uses and gratifications, linking the findings to a wide body of scholarship. The
uses and gratification themes around control (i.e., user control/power; ownership; unrestricted
access) clearly speak to autonomy, just as those concerning social aspects (i.e.,
accompaniment; connecting with bands/fans; communal connection; fandom) concern
relatedness, and autonomy is reflected in other themes (i.e., easy use and access). Given Self-
Determination Theory has been applied to many domains, and is supported by a growing
body of research (including that pertaining to music – see e.g., Evans, 2015; Krause et al.,
2019), future research could consider format preferences and usage using the Self-
Determination and Basic Psychological Needs frameworks.
Limitations and Future Directions
Amongst the variety of ways in which music listening can be conceptualised, the
present research adopted the approach of considering music formats, or delivery modes.
Though not focusing on the popularity of different formats, the results suggest disparities are
present. With the sample overwhelmingly favouring digital music, the resulting small sample
sizes for formats such as radio demonstrate the need for improved sampling in future research
to reveal both demographic differences in music listening and how format preferences relate
to wider music engagement practices.
Additionally, the conceptualisation of music format in the current study is also not
without its shortcomings. In particular, participants were restricted in their capacity to
disclose information about their music listening preferences, in that the options were devised
by the researchers and presented as a closed list. Thus, while chosen as a short yet
comprehensive list to accommodate various music listening practices, attempting to avoid
conflating device and selection method, the six-option list could be considered incomplete.
For instance, the current study is unable to unpack YouTube listening, a dominant mode of
music listening (YouTube has more than 10 times the 65 million paying subscribers to

FAVOURITE MUSIC FORMAT
!
27!
subscription services – IFPI, 2016) or unpack the physical format option into its components
(which could facilitate richer insight into the unique perks of vinyl, CD, and cassette).
Furthermore, while providing rich data from participants on their favoured single format, the
study design cannot speak to reasons behind mixing and matching, or distinguish the relative
differences between a single listener’s format preferences. Additionally, we acknowledge that
while preference is tied to frequency of use, they are not necessarily the same when it comes
to music listening. Yet, we argue that the uses and gratifications identified in the present
study underpin both preference and usage.
Given the ever-changing digital music landscape, the findings of the study run the risk
of becoming quickly out-dated. Hence, the need for further theoretical development in order
to create a suitable framework to account for musical choices. We reassert the usefulness of
Uses and Gratifications theory (Katz et al. 1973; Katz et al. 1974) as a viable framework,
with the findings of the current study worthy of replication. With Luck (2017) finding a
relationship between music taste, music consumption and cultural background, more effort to
account for the broader socio-technical context in which music listening takes place will
enhance our understanding of contemporary music listening practices.
It falls on future research to act on the present study’s limitations to explicitly explore
not only why people prefer (and use) one format over another, but how and when multiple
formats are used. That is, further research could actively seek to identify the conditions under
which people choose to listen to music via one format, rather than another, and perhaps
quantify the relative amount of time music is listened to via these different formats. In
particular, Experience Sampling Methodology, which has been used to examine everyday
listening (e.g., Greasley & Lamont, 2011; Krause et al., 2015; Randall & Rickard, 2013),
could be very useful in undertaking such research. An added benefit to using the Experience
Sampling Methodology is that it would address contextual format choices, acknowledging

FAVOURITE MUSIC FORMAT
!
28!
the recent research highlighting the important role of situational variables in listening
behaviours (e.g., Greb, Schlotz, & Steffens, 2018; Greb, Steffens, & Schlotz, 2019; Krause,
North, & Hewitt, 2014). It would be insightful to learn if delivery mode (i.e. choice of
format) impacts on enjoyment, and to enhance understanding of goal-directed approaches to
choosing which format to rely upon for a given music listening episode. To further
understand listener engagement styles and goal intentions, future research might also
consider how to empower people to select particular formats to help them achieve particular
goals, such as certain mood states for well-being benefit. This could advance related research,
such as that concerning how individuals highly engaged with music for cognitive and
emotional regulation are more likely to experience positive mental health outcomes (Chin &
Rickard, 2014).
Additional qualitative research would be beneficial to better understand choices and
changes from one format to another. Focus groups, for example, could build on research
which has effectively unpacked consumers into different categories based on preferences for
listening to music in particular ways (see Nuttall et al., 2011; Parry, Bustinza & Vendrell-
Herrero, 2012), with a specific focus on the formats used. For instance, using qualitative
interviews, Weitjers, Goedertier and Verskstreken (2014) found that consumers of all ages
prefer and legal and ethical music consumption methods, where available. Additionally, diary
studies could explicitly trace how and why preferences for different formats evolve over
time, especially given the observation that the music selected to listen to in daily life are
motivated by time-varying factors concerning both the situation and the function of music
(Greb, Schlotz & Steffens, 2017). Such qualitative lines of enquiry for future research will
help crystallise theoretical explanations of format use, but music practices that contextualize
listener choices in everyday life.

FAVOURITE MUSIC FORMAT
!
29!
Author Note
Some of the material presented in this article has been previously disseminated in
presentations made at the 2017 Conference of the Australian Music & Psychology Society
and the 2016 International Conference on Music Perception and Cognition, as well as a book
chapter (Krause & Brown, 2018). Moreover, as noted in the manuscript, this research is part
of a wider study concerning everyday music listening practices (Brown & Krause, 2017;
Krause & Brown, 2019).

FAVOURITE MUSIC FORMAT
!
30!
References
Albarran, A. B., Anderson, T., Bejar, L. G., Bussart, A. L., Daggett, E., Gibson, S., . . . Way,
H. (2007). “What happened to our audience?” Radio and new technology uses and
gratifications among young adult users. Journal of Radio Studies, 14(2), 92–101.
Anderson, J. A., & Meyer, T. P. (1975). Functionalism and the mass media. Journal of
Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 19(1), 11-22. doi:10.1080/08838157509363766
Arnett, J. J. (1995). Adolescents’ uses of media for self-socialization. Journal of Youth and
Adolescence, 24(5), 519-533.
Avdeeff, M. (2012). Technological engagement and musical eclecticism: An examination of
contemporary listening practices. Participations: Journal of Audience & Reception
Studies, 9, 2, 265–285.
Avdeeff, M. (2014). Young people’s musical engagement and technologies of taste. In
Bennett A., & Robards B. (Eds.), Mediated youth cultures: The internet, belonging
and new cultural configurations (pp. 130-145). Hampshire, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
Ajzen, I. (2002). Perceived behavioral control, self-efficacy, locus of control, and the theory
of planned behavior. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32(4), 665-683.
Bahanovich, D., & Collopy, D. (2009). Music experience and behaviour in young people.
London, UK: UK Music.
Bentley, J. M. (2012). A uses and gratifications study of contemporary Christian radio Web
sites. Journal of Radio & Audio Media, 19(1), 2–16.
doi:10.1080/19376529.2012.667025
Blumler, J.G., & Katz, E. (1972). The uses of mass communications: Current perspectives on
gratifications research.
Bolduc, H., & Kinnally, W. (2018). Examining the impact of social identification with music
on music streaming behavior. Journal of Radio & Audio Media, 25(1), 42-61.
doi:10.1080/19376529.2017.1362893
Bonneville-Roussy, A., Rentfrow, P.J., Xu, M.K., & Potter, J. (2013). Music through the
ages: Trends in musical engagement and preferences from adolescence through
middle adulthood. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 105, 4, 703–717.
doi:10.1037/a0033770
Bonneville-Roussy, A., Stillwell, D., Kosinski, M., &Rust, J. (2017). Age trends in
musical preferences in adulthood: 1. Conceptualization and empirical investigation.
Musicae Scientiae, advanced online publication. doi: 10.1177/1029864917691571
Brown, S.C., & Knox, D. (2016). Why buy an album? The motivations behind recorded
music purchases. Psychomusicology: Music, Mind, and Brain, 26, 1, 79–86.
doi:10.1037/pmu0000134
Brown, S.C., & Knox, D. (2017). Why go to pop concerts? The motivations behind live
music attendance. Musicae Scientiae, 21, 3, 233–249.
doi:10.1177/1029864916650719
Brown, S.C., & Krause, A.E. (2017). Psychological predictors of engagement in music
piracy. Creative Industries Journal, 10, 3, 226–237.
Cheung, C. M. K., Chiu, P.-Y., & Lee, M. K. O. (2011). Online social networks: Why do
students use facebook? Computers in Human Behavior, 27, 1337-1343.
doi:10.1016/j.chb.2010.07.028
Chin, T.-Y., & Rickard, N.S. (2014). Beyond positive and negative trait affect:
Flourishing through music engagement. Psychology of Well-Being: Theory,
Research and Practice, 4: 25. doi:10.1186/s13612-014-0025-4
Clarke, E., Dibben, N., & Pitts, S. (2010). Music and mind in everyday life. Oxford, UK:
Oxford University Press.

FAVOURITE MUSIC FORMAT
!
31!
Cloonan, M., & Williamson, J. (2016). Crisis what crisis? The music industries, hype,
technology and research. The University of Stirling, Stirling, 18 November 2016.
Coyne, S. M., Padilla-Walker, L. M., & Howard, E. (2013). Emerging in a digital world: A
decade review of media use, effects, and gratifications in emerging adulthood.
Emerging Adulthood, 1(2), 125–137. doi:10.1177/2167696813479782
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and
the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11, 227–268.
doi:10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01
Deci, E. L., and Ryan, R. M. (2008). Facilitating optimal motivation and psychological well-
being across life’s domains. Canadian Psychology, 49, 1, 14–23. doi:10.1037/0708-
5591.49.1.14
Evans, P. (2015). Self-determination theory: An approach to motivation in music education.
Musicae Scientiae. 19, 1, 65–83. doi:10.1177/102986491456 8044
Ferguson, D. A., Greer, C. F., & Reardon, M. E. (2007). Uses and gratifications of MP3
players by college students: Are iPods more popular than radio? Journal of Radio
Studies, 14(2), 102-121.
Gaunt, H., & Hallam, S. (2009). Individuality in the learning of musical skills. In Hallam, S.,
Cross, I., & Thaut, M. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of music psychology (pp. 274–
284). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Greasley, A.E., & Lamont, A.M. (2006). Music preference in adulthood: Why do we like the
music we do? 9th International Conference on Music Perception and Cognition (pp.
960–966).
Greasley, A.E., & Lamont, A.M. (2011). Exploring engagement with music in everyday life
using experience sampling methodology. Musicae Scientiae, 15, 1, 45–71.
doi:10.1177/1029864910393417
Greb, F., Schlotz, W., & Steffens, J. (2017). Towards a model predicting music selection
behavior by functional, situational, and person-related factors. In E. Van Dyjk (Ed.),
Book of Abstracts of the 25th Anniversary Edition of the European Society for the
Cognitive Sciences of Music (ESCOM), Expressive Interaction with Music, (pp. 59–
60). Ghent, Belgium: Ghent University.
Greb, F., Schlotz, W., & Steffens, J. (2018). Personal and situational influences on the
functions of music listening. Psychology of Music, 46(6), 763-794.
doi:10.1177/3057561772483
Greb, F., Steffens, J., & Schlotz, W. (2019). Modeling music-selection behavior in everyday
life: A multilevel statistical learning approach and mediation analysis of experience
sampling data. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, :390. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00390
Greenberg, D.M., & Rentfrow, P.J. (2015). Rules of engagement: The structure of musical
engagement and its personality underpinnings. In Proceedings of the Ninth Triennial
Conference of the European Society for the Cognitive Sciences of Music (p. 408).
Manchester, UK.
Green, T., Sinclair, G., & Tinson, J. (2016). Do they Know it’s CSR at all? An exploration of
socially responsible music consumption. Journal of Business Ethics, 138, 2, 231–246.
doi:10.1007/s10551-015-2582-8
Gumble, D. (2016). Spotify loosens ties with Songkick to make way for Ticketmaster.
Retrieved from http://www.musicweek.com/live/read/spotify-loosens-ties-with-
songkick-to-make-way-for-ticketmaster/06659 (accessed 30 July 2017).
Hagen, A.N. (2016). music streaming the everyday life. In R. Nowak, & A. Whelan (Eds.),
Networked music cultures: Contemporary approaches, emerging issues (pp. 227–
246). London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.

FAVOURITE MUSIC FORMAT
!
32!
Hagen, A.N., & Lüders, M. (2017). Social streaming? Navigating music as personal and
social. Convergence, 23, 6, 643-659. doi:10.1177/135856516673298
Hardy, P. (2012). Download! How the internet transformed the record business.London, UK:
Omnibus Press.
Hargreaves, D.J., & North, A.C. (2010). Experimental aesthetics and liking for music. In
Juslin, P.N., & Sloboda, J.A. (Eds.), Handbook of music and emotion: Theory,
research, applications (pp. 515–546). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Holt, A. (2010). The economy of live music in the digital age. European Journal of Cultural
Studies, 13, 2, 243–261. doi:10.1177/1367549409352277.
Hsieh, H.F., & Shannon, S.E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis.
Qualitative Health Research, 15, 9, 1277–1288. doi:10.1177/1049732305276687
International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (2016). Global music report: Music
consumption exploding worldwide. Retrieved from
http://www.ifpi.org/downloads/GMR2016.pdf (accessed 27 November 2017).
International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (2017). Global music report 2017.
Retrieved from http://www.ifpi.org/recording-industry-in-numbers.php (accessed 27
November 2017).
Jones, A. (2015). What’s my scene: festival fandom and the application of the Big Day Out
Stage. In Jones, A., Bennett, J., & Bennett, R.J. (Eds.), The digital evolution of live
music (pp. 29–40). Oxford, UK: Chandos Publishing.
Katz, E., Blumler, J.G., & Gurevitch, M. (1974). Utilization of mass communication by the
individual. In J.G. Blumler, & E. Katz (Eds.), The uses of mass communications:
Current perspectives on gratifications research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Katz, E., Haas, H., & Gurevitch, M. (1973). On the use of the mass media for important
things. American Sociological Review, 38, 2, 164–181.
Kinnally, W., Lacayo, A., McClung, S., & Sapolsky, B. (2008). Getting up on the download:
College students’ motivations for acquiring music via the web. New Media and
Society, 10, 6, 893–913.
Krause, A.E., & Brown, S.C. (2018). The social and applied psychology of engagement in
music piracy. In Brown, S.C., & Holt, T. (Eds), Digital piracy: A global,
multidisciplinary account (pp. 83-107). Abingdon, UK: Routledge.
Krause, A. E., & Brown, S. C. (2019). A uses and gratifications approach to considering the
music formats that people use most often. Psychology of Music, advance online
publication. doi:10.1177/0305735619880608
Krause, A.E., & North, A.C. (2016). Music listening in everyday life: Devices, selection
methods, and digital technology. Psychology of Music, 44, 1, 129–147.
doi:10.1177/0305735614559065
Krause, A.E., North, A.C., & Davidson, J.W. (2019). Using self-determination theory to
examine musical participation and well-being. Frontiers in Psychology, 10:405. doi:
10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00405
Krause, A.E., North, A.C., & Heritage, B. (2015). The uses and gratifications of using
Facebook music listening applications. Computers in Human Behavior, 39, 71-77.
doi:10.1016/j.chb.2014.07.001
Krause, A.E., North, A.C., & Hewitt, L.Y. (2014). Music selection behaviour in everyday
listening. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 58, 2, 306–323.
doi:10.1080/08838151.2014.906437
Krause, A.E., North, A.C., & Hewitt, L.Y. (2015). Music-listening in everyday life: Devices
and choice. Psychology of Music, 43, 2, 155–170. doi:10.1177/0305735613496860

FAVOURITE MUSIC FORMAT
!
33!
Krause, A.E., North, A.C., & Hewitt, L.Y. (2016). The role of location in everyday
experiences of music. Psychology of Popular Media Culture, 5, 3, 232 –257.
doi:10.1037/ppm0000059
Kwong, S. W., & Park, J. (2008). Digital music services: consumer intention and adoption.
The Service Industries Journal, 28(10), 1463-1481. doi:10.1080/02642060802250278
Liikanen, L.A., & Åman, P. (2016). Shuffling services: Current trends in interacting with
digital music. Interacting with Computers, 28, 3, 352 – 371. doi:10.1093/iwc/iwv004
Lin, C. A. (1996). Standpoint: Looking back: The contribution of Blumler and Katz's uses of
mass communication to communication research. Journal of Broadcasting &
Electronic Media, 40(4), 574-581. doi:10.1080/08838159609364379
Lonsdale, A.J., & North, A.N. (2011). Why do we listen to music? A uses and gratifications
analysis. British Journal of Psychology, 102, 108–134.
doi:10.1348/000712610X506831
Luck, G. (2017). From preference to consumption: How musical taste shapes listening habits.
In E. Van Dyjk (Ed.), Book of Abstracts of the 25th Anniversary Edition of the
European Society for the Cognitive Sciences of Music (ESCOM), Expressive
Interaction with Music (pp. 171). Ghent, Belgium: Ghent University.
Mäntymäki, M., & Islam, A.K.M.N. (2015). Gratifications from using freemium music
streaming services: Differences between basic and premium users. Thirty-Sixth
International Conference on Information Systems, Ft. Worth, Texas, December 2015.
Marshall, L. (2015). Let's keep music special. F—Spotify’: On-demand streaming and the
controversy over artist royalties. Creative Industries Journal, 8, 2, 177-179.
doi:10.1080/17510694.2015.1096618
McClung, S., Pompper, D., & Kinnally, W. (2007). The functions of radio for teens: Where
radio fits among youth media choices. Atlantic Journal of Communication, 15(2),
103–119.
McQuail, D., Blumler, J., & Brown, J. (1972). The television audience: A revised
perspective. In D. McQuail (Ed.), Sociology of mass communications (pp. 135-165.
Middlesex, UK: Penguin.
Nuttall, P., Arnold, S., Carless, L., Crockford, L., Finnamore, K., Frazier, R., & Hill, A.
(2011). Understanding music consumption through a tribal lens. Journal of Retail and
Consumer Services, 18, 2, 152–159. doi:10.1016.j.jretconser.2010.12.007
O’Hara, K. & Brown, B. (2006). Consuming music together: Introduction and overview. In
O'Hara, K., & Brown, B. (Eds.), Consuming music together: Social and collaborative
aspects of music consumption technologies (pp. 3–17). Dordrecht, The Netherlands:
Springer.
Osbourne, R. (2012). Vinyl: A history of the analogue record. Farnham, UK: Ashgate.
Packer, J., & Ballantyne, J. (2011). The impact of music festival attendance on young
people’s psychological and social well-being. Psychology of Music, 39, 2, 164–181.
doi:10.1177/0305735610372611
Parry, G., Bustinza, O., & Vendrell-Herrero, F. (2012). Servitisation and value co-production
in the UK music industry: An empirical study of Consumer Attitudes. International
Journal of Production Economics, 135, 320–332. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2011.08.006
Randall, W. M., & Rickard, N. S. (2013). Development and trial of a mobile experience
sampling method (m-esm) for personal music listening. Music Perception, 31(2), 157-
170.
Randall, W. M., & Rickard, N. S. (2017). Reasons for personal music listening: A mobile
experience sampling study of emotional outcomes. Psychology of Music, 45(4), 479-
495. doi:10.1177/0305735616666939

FAVOURITE MUSIC FORMAT
!
34!
Rayburn, J.D., & Palmgreen, P. (1984). Merging uses and gratifications and expectancy-
value theory. Communication Research, 1, 4, 537–562.
Reznor, T. (2016). Vinyl mission statement. Retrieved from
https://store.nin.com/collections/music (accessed 26 November 2017).
Ruggiero, T.E. (2000). Uses and gratifications theory in the 21st century. Mass
Communication & Society, 3, 1, 3-37.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2002). An overview of Self-determination Theory: An
organismic-dialectical perspective. In L. Deci & R. M. Ryan (Eds.), Handbook of
Self-Determination Research (pp.). Rochester, NY: The University of Rochester
Press.
Saldana, J. (2014). The coding manual for qualitative researchers (2nd edition). London,
UK: Sage.
Sang, Y., Lee, J.-K., Kim, Y., & Woo, H.-J. (2015). Understanding the intentions behind
illegal downloading: A comparative study of American and Korean college students.
Telematics and Informatics, 32, 333–343.
Savage, M. (2016). Playlists 'more popular than albums. Retrieved from
http://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-37444038 (accessed 30 July 2017).
Schäfer, T., Sedlmeier, P., Städtler, C., & Huron, D. (2013). The psychological functions of
music listening. Frontiers in Psychology, 4: 511. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00511.
Schurig, E. (2017). Re-performing everyday life through music. In E. Van Dyjk (Ed.),
Book of Abstracts of the 25th Anniversary Edition of the European Society for the
Cognitive Sciences of Music (ESCOM), Expressive Interaction with Music (pp. 49-
50). Ghent, Belgium: Ghent University.
Sinclair, G., & Green, T. (2016). Download or stream? Steal or buy? Developing a
typology of today’s music consumer. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 15, 1, 3–14.
doi:10.1002/cb.1526
Skånland, M.D. (2011). Use of mp3 players as a coping resource. Music and Arts in Action,
3, 2, 15–33.
Sloboda, J.A., & Juslin, P.N. (2010). At the interface between the inner and outer world:
Psychological perspectives. In Juslin, P.N., & Sloboda, J.A. (Eds.), Handbook of
music and emotion: Theory, research, applications (pp. 73–97). Oxford, UK: Oxford
University Press.
Stafford, T.F., Stafford, M.R., & Schkade, L.L. (2004). Determining uses and gratifications
for the internet. Decision Sciences, 35, 2, 259–288.
Teddlie, C., & Tashakkori, A. (2003). Major issues and controversies in the use of mixed
methods in the social and behavioral sciences. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie
(Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (pp. 3–50).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Terry, G., & Braun, V. (2017). Short but often sweet. In V. Braun, V. Clarke, & D.
Gray (Eds.), Collecting qualitative data: A practical guide to textual, media and
virtual techniques (pp. 15–44). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Tétard, F., & Collan, M. (2009). Lazy User Theory: A Dynamic Model to Understand User
Selection of Products and Services. In Proceedings of the 42nd Hawaii International
Conference on System Sciences, 1–9. doi:10.1109/HICSS.2009.287
Venkatesh, Viswanath, Thong, James Y. L., & Xu, Xin (2012). Consumer acceptance and use
of information technology: Extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of
technology. MIS Quarterly, 36, 1, 157-178
Wade, J., & Powers, D. (2015). Control, curation and musical experience in streaming music
services. Creative Industries Journal, 8, 2, 106–122.
doi:10.1080/17510694.2015.1090222

FAVOURITE MUSIC FORMAT
!
35!
Ward, M.K., Goodman, J. K., & Irwin, J. R. (2014). The same old song: The power of
familiarity in music choice. Marketing Letters, 25, 1, 1–11. doi:10.1007/s11002-013-
9238-1
Wikström, P. (2012). A typology of music distribution models. International Journal of
Music Business Research, 1, 1, 7–20.
Wingstedt, J., Brändström, S., & Berg, J. (2008). Young adolescents' usage of narrative
functions of media music by manipulation of musical expression. Psychology of
Music, 36, 2, 93–214.
Yoon, C. (2011). Theory of Planned Behavior and Ethics Theory in digital piracy: An
Integrated Model. Journal of Business Ethics, 100(3), 405-417. doi:10.1007/s10551-
010-0687-7

FAVOURITE MUSIC FORMAT
!
36!
Appendix
Codebook Summary and List of Themes, by Format
PHYSICAL
DIGITAL FILE
Original
Codes
Action
Revised themes
Excerpt example
Non answers
Retained
Non answers
[Blank + not sure (two responses)]
Nostalgia
Retained
Nostalgia
When listening to a vinyl I feel I’m
in a time machine going back to the
time when music was only on vinyl
Total
engagement –
primary
activity
Retained
Total
engagement –
primary activity
Forces me to sit down and listen
rather than merely have it in the
background
User control
Retained
User control
I can choose exactly what I want
Habit
Split into three
Habit
All I’ve got
Accompaniment
Because I buy it and I can always
enjoy it in my car which is where I
listen to the majority of my music
Collecting
I’ve been collecting records for 25
years and cannot stop!
Sound quality
Split into two
Sound quality
Good sound
Richness
Because on vinyl the sounds are
more clear and it is analog so it
sounds richer
Narrative
Retained
Narrative
I like to listen to an album as the
artist intended it to be heard
Physical form
Split into four
Aesthetics
I like having all the art and lyrics that
come with the CD and records
Tangible
I like the physicality of the whole
experience
Original
Codes
Action
Revised themes
Excerpt example
Continual
personal
access
Split into
five
Unrestricted access
I can access it without Wi-Fi
Ownership
Because you own a copy and can
listen at any time
Accompaniment
It is always there I can turn on my
computer and while I work I can
listen to music
private listening
experience
It means I can listen to music
anywhere and I can plug my
earphones in so other people don’t
know what I’m listening to –
freedom to listen to whatever
music you want without the fear of
being judged. Although it music
normally sounds better over
speakers than through earphones

FAVOURITE MUSIC FORMAT
!
37!
FREE STREAMING
Original
Codes
Action
Revised themes
Excerpt example
Easy / ease of
use
(convenience)
Split into
three
Easy to use
It’s easy to use and also for new
and old artists
Easy access
Easy to access and can be done at
home for free
Unrestricted access
You can access it anywhere
User driven
action
Items
moved, +
new
name
User power
I can control what I’m listening to
Discovery
Options to find new artists
Variety (the
amount of
music on offer)
Split into
two
Variety
All my favourite music in once
Amount of music
A lot of choice to choose from
Passive
New
theme
and
moved
Serendipity/surprise
I get surprise every time I listen to
music because songs come on that
I haven’t even thought of in a long
time
No answer
--
No answer
[One blank response]
Free (money)
Renamed
Affordable
I’m poor so I don’t have access to
many other formats
PAID-FOR STREAMING
Easy / ease of
use
(convenience)
Split into
four
Easy use
Ease of use
Affordability
Easy, less expensive than live
shows
X unclear
Retained
Uncertain /unclear
responses
[Three responses]
User control
Some items
shifted,
added
variety,
renamed to
user power
Variety
It’s easier to access a specific song
User power
I have total control over the playlist
and there are no commercials
Portability
Retained
Portability
Allows me to put all my songs on
my iPod
Storage
Retained
Storage
Very versatile and easy to store
No response
Retained
No response
Two answers
Brand affinity
Retained
Brand affinity
iTunes
Easy access
Renamed
and split
Easy access
It is convenient
Original Codes
Action
Revised themes
Excerpt example
I don’t know
Retained
I don’t know
[Two answers]
Discovery
Retained
Discovery
Opportunity to discover new
music/artists
Quality
Retained
Quality
Best quality sound and best selection of

FAVOURITE MUSIC FORMAT
!
38!
RADIO
Original
Codes
Action
Revised themes
Excerpt example
Variety
Kept
Variety
It’s got a variety
Discovery
Deleted
--
--
Passive
experience of
listening
Split
Serendipity /
surprises
Like to just turn it on and see what plays
Easy/ease of
use
Split
into
two
Easy to use
Ease
Easy access
Easy access
Brand
Kept
Brand
YouTube playlist
Routine /
habit
Kept
Routine/habit
I’m old
Hip
Kept
Hip
Cool
LIVE MUSIC
music
Where the
money goes
Retained
Where the money
goes
Accessible and fair to musicians
No adverts
Retained
No adverts
Streaming is unlimited without adverts
Money / free
Renamed
Cost
Free
Brand affinity
Retained
Brand affinity
I love my Spotify
Easy / ease
(convenience)
Split into
two
Ease of use
Easy to use
Easy access
Easy access
Customizable
use
Renamed
User power
Gives me the power to make my own
playlist
Full,
unrestricted
access
Retained
Full, unrestricted
access
Allows you to listen to whatever you
want whenever you want
Choice (variety
of what’s on
offer)
Renamed
Amount (volume
of music)
Huge range of music available
New
Enjoyment
I can enjoy my music but also pay for
the enjoyment fairly
New
Storage
Ease of use, breadth of music available
to me, no storage issues
New
Legal
Legal, cheap and easy to access
Original Codes
Action
Revised themes
Excerpt example
Connecting with
other people
(including band /
audience)
Split into
four
Connecting with
bands
You get to interact with the artists
Connecting with
fans
It is the realist form of the music,
a very different feeling than
listening to a recording, you feel
much more in touch with music
and other fans
Communal
connection
I enjoy the interaction that often
occurs plus it’s a joy to see it

FAVOURITE MUSIC FORMAT
!
39!
live, a pleasure not everyone
experiences
Connecting to the
music
I play live music, and I feel a
stronger connection to the
feelings of the musical piece
when listening to it live
Visual
Split and
renamed
Physically present
Music has a lot more to offer
when you see it taking place in
front of your eyes
Experiencing
personal connection
Nothing beats getting to see your
favourite band play right in front
of you playing your favourite
songs
Support/fandom
Retained
Support/fandom
Because I get the full experience
and I get to show my support for
the bands (one answer)
Sound quality
Split into
three
(organic)
Sound Richness
You can hear all the different
sounds in a more natural way and
you can even feel the music more
Feeling
The immersion and the way the
sounds feel
Atmosphere
Retained
Atmosphere
The atmosphere that comes with
listening to music live
Cognitive
Renamed
one item,
moved one
item
Thinking
Easier to analyse it (one item)
Appreciation
Live music shows talent and
energy
Emotional
Retained
Emotional
You don’t get the same feeling
when just listening to the music.
Being at a concert brings out a
whole different emotion
X non response
Retained
Non responses
[Two items]
Organic / one
time experiences
Split into
two
Organic
It’s raw and real
Unique experience
I like knowing that that unique
performance is something that
hasn’t been heard before until
that moment
Energy
Moved
items
Entertainment
It’s the most entertaining
Experience
Moved
items
Experience
The total experience
Immersion
You can feel the music in you
Stimulating
I enjoy the energy involved
Differentiating live
from the other
formats in survey
Different experience to the others
stated above

FAVOURITE MUSIC FORMAT
!
40!
Table 1.
Participants' Nominated Favourite Format (N = 393)
Format
Frequency
Live music
118
Digital file (i.e. mp3, iTunes)
115
Paid-for digital streaming (i.e. Spotify, Pandora)
56
Free digital streaming (i.e. Spotify, Pandora)
49
Physical (i.e. CD, vinyl, cassette)
43
Radio
12

FAVOURITE MUSIC FORMAT
!
41!
Table 2.
Uses and Gratifications Themes per Favourite Format.
Uses and gratifications theme
Example response
Physical (N = 43)
Nostalgia
When listening to a vinyl I feel I’m in a time machine going back to the
time when music was only on vinyl
Total engagement – primary
activity
Forces me to sit down and listen rather than merely have it in the
background
User control
I can choose exactly what I want
Habit
All I’ve got
Accompaniment
Because I buy it and I can always enjoy it in my car which is where I
listen to the majority of my music
Collecting
I’ve been collecting records for 25 years and cannot stop!
Sound quality
Good sound
Richness
Because on vinyl the sounds are more clear and it is analogue so it
sounds richer
Narrative
I like to listen to an album as the artist intended it to be heard
Aesthetics
I like having all the art and lyrics that come with the CD and records
Tangible
I like the physicality of the whole experience
Digital file (N = 115)
Unrestricted access
I can access it without Wi-Fi
Ownership
Because you own a copy and can listen at any time
Accompaniment
It is always there I can turn on my computer and while I work I can
listen to music
Private listening experience
It means I can listen to music anywhere and I can plug my earphones in
so other people don’t know what I’m listening to – freedom to listen to
whatever music you want without the fear of being judged. Although it
music normally sounds better over speakers than through earphones
Easy use
Ease of use
Affordability
Easy, less expensive than live shows
Uncertain /unclear responses
[Three responses]
Variety
It’s easier to access a specific song
User power
I have total control over the playlist and there are no commercials
Portability
Allows me to put all my songs on my ipod
Storage
Very versatile and easy to store
Brand affinity
iTunes
Easy access
It is convenient
Free digital streaming (N = 49)
Easy to use
It’s easy to use and also for new and old artists
Easy access
Easy to access and can be done at home for free
Unrestricted access
You can access it anywhere
User power
I can control what I’m listening to
Discovery
Options to find new artists

FAVOURITE MUSIC FORMAT
!
42!
Variety
All my favourite music in once
Amount of music
A lot of choice to choose from
Serendipity/surprise
I get surprise every time I listen to music because songs come on that I
haven’t even thought of in a long time
Affordable
I’m poor so I don’t have access to many other formats
Paid-for digital streaming (N = 56)
Discovery
Opportunity to discover new music/artists
Quality
Best quality sound and best selection of music
Where the money goes
Accessible and fair to musicians
No adverts
Streaming is unlimited without adverts
Cost
Free
Brand affinity
I love my Spotify
Ease of use
Easy to use
Easy access
Easy access
User power
Gives me the power to make my own playlist
Full, unrestricted access
Allows you to listen to whatever you want whenever you want
Amount (volume of music)
Huge range of music available
Enjoyment
I can enjoy my music but also pay for the enjoyment fairly
Storage
Ease of use, breadth of music available to me, no storage issues
Legal
Legal, cheap and easy to access
Radio (N = 12)
Variety
It’s got a variety
Serendipity / surprises
Like to just turn it on and see what plays
Easy to use
Ease
Easy access
Easy access
Brand
YouTube playlist
Routine/habit
I’m old
Hip
Cool
Live music (N = 118)
Connecting with bands
You get to interact with the artists
Connecting with fans
It is the realist form of the music, a very different feeling than listening
to a recording, you feel much more in touch with music and other fans
Communal connection
I enjoy the interaction that often occurs plus it’s a joy to see it live, a
pleasure not everyone experiences
Connecting to the music
I play live music, and I feel a stronger connection to the feelings of the
musical piece when listening to it live
Physically present
Music has a lot more to offer when you see it taking place in front of
your eyes
Experiencing personal
connection
Nothing beats getting to see your favourite band play right in front of
you playing your favourite songs
Support/fandom
Because I get the full experience and I get to show my support for the
bands

FAVOURITE MUSIC FORMAT
!
43!
Sound Richness
You can hear all the different sounds in a more natural way and you
can even feel the music more
Feeling
The immersion and the way the sounds feel
Atmosphere
The atmosphere that comes with listening to music live
Thinking
Easier to analyse it
Appreciation
Live music shows talent and energy
Emotional
You don’t get the same feeling when just listening to the music. Being
at a concert brings out a whole different emotion
Organic
It’s raw and real
Unique experience
I like knowing that that unique performance is something that hasn’t
been heard before until that moment
Entertainment
It’s the most entertaining
Experience
The total experience
Immersion
You can feel the music in you
Stimulating
I enjoy the energy involved
Differentiating live from the
other formats in survey
Different experience to the others stated above