Audience Guides Music Evolution

A study makes the case for the public's taste exerting Darwinian selection pressure on music composition. Evelyn Lamb reports

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

[Music] That’s Generation Zero of DarwinTunes. It’s a Web site researchers are using to study how listener preferences affect the evolution of music.

A new study claims that the taste of the public exerts a force on music similar to natural selection. The findings support the theory that culture and art are shaped not only by their producers, but by consumers too. The report is in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. [Robert M. MacCallum et al., "Evolution of music by public choice"]

Researchers created short tunes and allowed them to procreate—that is, they’d combine aspects of the parent tunes to produce a new generation of music. User ratings on the DarwinTunes site provided the evolutionary selection, with only the most appealing tunes allowed to create progeny.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


The researchers found that quality increased quickly at the beginning: the random sounds rapidly gave rise to something an awful lot like music. Here’s generation 600. [Music]

But after a while things stagnated. The researchers plan to update the program to drive evolution further. Meanwhile, here’s DarwinTunes generation 3000.

—Evelyn Lamb

[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe