Switched on Pop - How to Listen to Music in 4 Easy Steps

Episode Date: December 1, 2016

50 episodes in, hosts Charlie and Nate take a step back to think about how they listen to music and try to define what might be called The Switched on Method™. "Hallelujah," by the late, great Leonard Cohen, acts as a perfect test case for breaking down listening into four key layers: 1) The Liner Notes, 2) The Needle Drop, 3) The Scratch, and 4) The Remix. Through this patented process, artistic revelations are all but guaranteed, with Cohen's opus no exception — his modern classic is not all it appears to be.  Featuring: •Leonard Cohen - "Hallelujah" Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Convierte your passion in a business with Shopify and bathe records of with the form of pay with a better conversion of the world. You've heard of the best.

The Mereverion of the world. The incredible system of Pago of Shopify facilita the on your site web, in the social and

in any place. That is music for your ears. No, you do more your business will be

a super-exit with Shopify. Empeas to start your period of month in Shopify. coms. Barra Records.

If you're tired of endless scrolling to figure out where to eat, same. I'm Stephanie Wu, editor-in-chief of Eater. We've just launched the new-ish and way better Eater app. It has all the restaurants we love, gives you personalized

picks wherever you are, and serves up smarter search results just for you. You can find my list of the best places for martinis and fries in New York City. And save your favorite spots, share lists, follow editors, and book write in the app. Download the eater app at eaterapp.com. It's free for iOS users.

Charles, this is a momentous episode for us. It is. I'm very excited. This is the big 50th show. It's extraordinary. What do you get someone on their 50th wedding anniversary? Do you know? I actually, I have no idea. I don't, it's not diamond I think is 60th. I don't know. The first is paper and then wood. I mean, it's all nonsense of course, but I just thought of it. Maybe for the 50th anniversary, you produce your partner or podcast. Oh, yeah, that is the traditional 50th anniversary. So this is entirely appropriate.

50 episodes deep, it has been quite a journey over the last, what, two years and change. Yeah, it also marks just about our two-year anniversaries producing Switched on Pop. I've learned more doing this show than just about any other aspect of my musical career, including seven years of graduate. school in historical musicology. So I hope we can keep doing this for a long, long time. I'm with you. But I wanted to take this opportunity to step back and get a little meta on us. Kind of have an out-of-body experience, as it were.

I'm never afraid to go there. And talk about what we do in a more kind of macro sense each week, maybe divulge some of our secrets. Go inside the fruit roll-up factory. and see how the musical sausage gets made. Let's call this one How to Listen to Music in Four Easy Steps. It's great. All right, I'm excited to do this with you.

Welcome to Switched on Pop. I'm musicologist Nate Sloan. And I'm a songwriter Charlie Harding. And today on our 50th episode, we reveal the Switch on Method. How we listen to music. Not the way to listen to music by any means, millions of ways. to listen to music. Upside down,

underwater, in a plane. Inside out. Yeah, of course. The primary way I listen to music is on a subway through iPhone, headphones interrupted by the cries of conductors and various mechanical failures.

However, you listen to music is totally fine and great. And not that we all listen to music the same way. Right. Right. Not that I hear the same thing that you hear.

Right. And definitely not that we hear the same thing as, I don't know, Mongolian yak farmer or an 18th century Viennese composer like Ludfish von Beethoven. Right. We all hear differently, but this is nevertheless R switched on method of listening. It consists of four steps.

And let's just go through those together, Charlie. We've given them names reflective of our favorite medium of listening to music, the record player. Yes, yes. Let's use the metaphor of the record to kind of take us through the four steps of this listening, beginning with the liner notes. The text on the back of an LP that tells you what it's about and who's on it and when and where and what is made. And then we'll follow that with dropping of the needle.

So we'll just listen to the record. Just listen. And then we'll follow that up with scratching. A little record scratch that moment in the song when you go, whoa, stop right there. I got to hear that again. Scratch back. Yeah, scratch it back. And then finally, the remix.

Making it your own, yes. Exactly. Four steps of listening. And in order to illustrate and take us through this method, I thought we should use a song that can sort of perfectly exemplify how you might go about doing this. Great. There's one that seems unavoidable at the moment,

given that its composer passed away just a few weeks ago. November 2016. It would be Leonard Cohen's Hallelujah. I'm so glad you chose that. I think it's a really great choice. And many listeners have written in and said, hey, you've got to talk about hallelujah. So this is great. Yeah. And it's kind of in some ways a song about songwriting. So anyway, we'll come back to that. Let's take Leonard Cohen's Hallelujah and apply these four steps to it. So see what we can uncover, how we listen to Hallelujah, given this method. The first again is liner notes. Yes.

So this is sort of looking at the big overarching structure of what's going on. What's their instrumentation? Who's playing what? In the classical realm, it might even say what key it's going to be in and what speed it's played at, these sort of big meta-structural elements of the song.

Yes. And what we also might call very objective information about the song. Maybe what in art would be called the tombstone info. The who, what, where, when. That is all present on the liner notes of an album or on the little circular decal that is in the center of the record. This tells you what is going on in a very basic sense. And so let's apply the liner notes to Leonard Cohen's

Hallelujah. This song, let's see, we've got a date, right? 1984. And instrumentation is drums, bass, guitars, synthesizers, gospel, choir. A lot going on here. So we definitely want to establish all that. We want to maybe say the key,

which is C major. The people's key. Yes, the people's key. And the time signature, which is uniquely in 12-8. Oh, interesting. D-da-da-da-da-da-da-da. Yeah, precisely. So these are just some of the things that you might want to identify in this initial liner note stage

before you really get into it. You can also think about the genre of the piece. This one is very hard to identify, like what genre is this song in? Like alt-rock folk crossover. Okay, that works. Yeah. So these are what you first want to establish, right?

Just the bare facts of the song, right? The things that are indisputable. Why do you think this is important? Because, frankly, all the information you just shared with me is kind of boring and could describe. a lot of other songs. Right. And that's why it's step one, I think.

If that's all you did and then walked away from this song, that would not, I think, be a very satisfying listen. I feel like it primes our listening. Yeah, that's very well said. This is like the foundation on which you erect your listening experience. Well, I think erect is an interesting word to use considering the sexual metaphors throughout the song. Let's say install or built.

Great. I'm still working off the trip to fame here, Charlie, so I might not always make the best choice of words today. Okay, so we establish what is going on on a very basic level in this song. And then we move to the next level of listening. That is something we're just going to call dropping the needle. And then you hit playback. Exactly. And this is, in some ways, I think, the most fun step, because this is just...

Listening. Listening to the song. I don't know what else to say. You just listen to it over. and over again. Yeah. And you experience it in different ways, I think,

as you listen. Sometimes you listen with your right brain, and sometimes you listen with your left, sometimes you're listening very analytically, and sometimes you're listening very just viscerally and emotionally, and you become acquainted with the song, almost like an old friend. Or to continue my ill-advised sexual metaphor is like a lover, perhaps.

You become aware of the grain and the gradients and the, feel in the peaks and valleys of the song and you know it almost in this intimate way. Okay, I'm definitely going to stop not before I go any further. What are some of the ways that you approach listening just for the first time? What's important to keep in mind?

I try and listen without any preconceptions as though you were hearing this song in a vacuum. Again, that's not the only way to listen, but I think sometimes it's helpful to just kind of brush aside as much as possible everything you think

you know about that song, about that artist, about that genre, and really try and hear it almost as if you were an alien encountering it on the Voyager gold record that was sent out to space in the 70s without any preconceptions or biases, like an isolated oral object. Does that makes a lot of sense? So maybe that's what we should do next is actually just sit and listen to the song. Okay, let's drop the needle. Playback. Hit playback. And turn into an alien.

Take it away, Leonard. Now I've heard there was a secret and it pleased the Lord. But you don't really. So just first reactions to that. Free associate with me here for a second. What do you feel listening to the first verse and chorus of that song? The first thing that comes to mind is obviously I'm deeply exposed to this song. and embarrassingly had never heard the original.

So the first thing that happens is even in trying to listen to it as its own separate form, all I can hear is, of course, the Jeff Buckley version that most people are familiar with because it really popularized the song or the recent Pentatonic's cover or the hundreds of times that I've heard at a campfire. So this is a hard one to separate from. But the thing that I think stuck out most for me was this sort of laxadaisical approach to the lyrics. Leonard Cohen's sense of melody is well interpretive

maybe is the word to use sure building on that I'd say one of the things that that really strikes me in just this initial listening session this drop the needle session is what a powerful contrast there is between his sort of parapetetic interpretation of the lyrics in the verse and then this incredible kind of explosion

of very gospel like full choruses in in the the chorus section in the hallelujah section that's such a sharp contrast that when i was listening to it for the first time it kind of like blew me out of my seat it was yeah it's really cool that difference grabs your attention it seems to be a very intentional choice having the singular voice later awash in a massive chorus yeah it says pay attention to this this is the central piece of the song yeah lyrically this song is entirely beguiling to me on the first listen and frankly on the hundredth listen as well.

Yeah, no doubt. These lyrics are at once incredibly specific and incredibly kind of elusive in their true meaning. Oh, yeah, because there's deep biblical references where unless you're immensely familiar with the not most popular pieces of scripture, you would miss them. And then there's just what is sort of seemingly references

to a relationship. It is a rich poetic piece. Yeah, all of a sudden in that second line, this character enters who's not, it's not clear. It's second person. You don't care for music, do you? And you're like, are you talking to me? Are you talking to some other character, some fictional character? It's very, I mean, that's not something we're going to really be able to answer.

And I think that's part of the power of this song. Okay, so first listen, dropping the needle, a lot going on in this track. Yeah. And I would say that what we've just gone through, I think, is fairly representative how my ear works when I listen. Something will grab me like a bass line. I'll pay attention to the bass. And then the second time I go through, maybe I'll listen to the chords. And then the third time I go through, it listen to the lyrics.

And then the fourth time through, I'll start to listen to the song form and how the chorus and the verse contrast. And then eventually I'll listen back and they all start to mel together. And I can hear the interplay between all the pieces. Ooh, I like that. So it's like you're listening in almost like layers, like a cake? Yes, like cake or I was going to say like sedimentary rock. And you're an archaeologist. But let's go with your cake metaphor.

That's a lot stronger actually and a lot tastier. Yeah, especially like a multi-layered cake with different elements. It tastes best when you have them all together. But sometimes you have to try them individually to get a sense of what this functional. chocolate peanut butter, raspberry, cheesecake is going to taste like. Yeah, that's so true because each one has their own flavor, but then each one also combines with the others and all these different permutations of flavor.

Whoa, Charlie, you just knocked this out of the park with that cake line. All right. All right, thanks. So that's the first listen. That's dropping the needle. And then already, I think we're hinting at the next section. We're already kind of racing to get there, you and I. And that is what's scratching the record.

Yes. And this is not something that it's necessarily advisable to do to your vinyl. Don't do this to your nice record collection, especially if it's somebody else's, don't go to your friends or parents' records and start scratching them. They will not be happy with you. Yes, precisely. But in terms of the import here,

this is the idea that after you've done your drop-the-needle and listened again and again, then those moments that really grab you. you that get under your skin, that there's something that you, like an itch you can't quite scratch, literally try and scratch it. Dial that back, bring the record back and just listen to that section over and over. Put it under the microscope, turn it over and really try and decode what is happening there. So what in the song is capturing your ear? What is that thing to continue our metaphor?

The needle jumps, you pay attention and you just want to keep scratching it back hearing it over and over. The chorus of this song is just so mesmerizing to me. Great. And it's something I feel, you know, that's the moment where, just to be clear, this is the part where he's singing Hallelujah just over and over again. The part that I always come back to, there's something that I don't quite understand about it. And that's what makes me want to listen to it closer.

Okay. I think that's a really good cue is if there's something there that is both appealing but maybe confusing, as you say, or you don't know how it's working, that's the thing you've got to scratch back to. Yeah, and after listening to it a few times, I think I may have put my finger on what I find so kind of mysterious and compelling about it. I think a lot of it has to do with the rhythm of this line.

And in this case, I think it's important to listen to the original because in covers of this song, a lot of them change the rhythm of this chorus. In a very subtle way that might not even be noticeable if you're not looking as obsessively as we are at it. You know, in that penitonics version, for instance, which is currently like racking up 60 million views as we speak, they don't do exactly what Leonard Cohen does. Because Leonard Cohen sings two slightly different rhythmic versions of that word, Hallelujah. So the first one is like this, hallelujah. And the

second one is hallelujah he emphasizes a different syllable each time he emphasizes a different syllable each time and again this is like such a subtle thing that maybe it doesn't matter at all and has no significance but i can't help but feel something when leonard cohen sings those rhythmic variations that i miss when pentatonics leave them out because they just sing hallelujah oh hallelujah yeah they leave out the first rhythm. I love that any of these syllables. I love that any of these syllables could be equal candidates for emphasis. Ha, le, lu, yeah.

Any one of those four could be the spot to emphasize. And as you change the emphasis, it has a different flow and sound to it. Yes, yes, I totally agree. Like radically different. and I think especially beginning the chorus on this version of that word that's very syncopated and kind of almost like staggered. I almost picture someone like almost falling down as they say it. It's very unexpected. Hallelujah.

Oh yeah. You missed the first step. A quick rhythm and then a long holdout and then another statement. I don't know. It's like there's something very captivating about it to me. So, okay, this is neat. What does it all mean? Okay.

Well, this is the final step of listening. So we've scratched our itch over and over again. We've listened to that one part that stood out to us and tried to understand what it was that was like really captivating us. And then now we have to remix it. We have to essentially create our own version, our own maybe interpretation of what that means. This is, I think, the most fun part for us.

Okay, so you're using a remix as a metaphor. We're not literally going to cover the song and make it our own, but rather through our listening, our interpretation in some ways changes the meaning of the tune. Yes. Or at least kind of brings out another latent meaning that is buried in this roiling mix of... Yeah, so like how a great DJ will take a breakbeat, put it over something new, a new baseline or something, and it develops a new meaning. And so here we're going to listen to something a dozen times

and then start to apply our own scaffolding around it to say what it means to us. Yes. Oh, my God, Charlie, let's just let it. We're letting it all hang out. We are mixing metaphors left and right, 50th episode. Rules are out the window. When we return, we will remix this section of Hallelujah. Beautiful.

Stick around. Maria, you have a podcast now and you need to start acting like it. What's the first step as a podcaster? Well, you have to ask lots of questions. I'm Maria Sharpova, and I'm hosting a new podcast called Pretty Tough. Every week, I'm sitting down with trailblazing women at the top of their game to discuss ambition, work ethic, and the ups and downs that come on the path to achieving greatness. I have a few pretty tough questions for you. Okay.

Ready? Do not sugarcoat something for me. No, no. We'll dive into their stories and get valuable insights from top executives, actors, entrepreneurs and other individuals who have inspired me so much in my own journey. Pretty tough is your front row seat to the women who have demonstrated the power in being unapologetic in their pursuits. I hope you'll join us. New episodes drop Wednesdays on YouTube or in your favorite podcast app. Immigration may be Donald Trump's signature issue.

President Trump is now targeting predominantly democratic cities for ice raids and deportations. Dozens of protesters clashing with immigration and customs enforcement agents in Minneapolis Tuesday. We will begin the process of returning millions and millions of criminal aliens back to the places from which they came. But what we want to do in this space is talk about America and politics beyond the current president. So what do most Americans think about deportation and border security, period? I think that Americans are definitely against the kind of violent displays that we've seen in

the street from ICE. When it comes to the question of deportation, the answer is more complicated. My sense is that people want border at the border. They don't like the idea of having no idea who's coming into the United States at any given time. The view on immigration from the bottom up instead of the top down. That's this week on America Actually. Every Saturday in your audio and video feeds. Welcome back to Switch on Pop.

When we left, we had gone through the liner notes of Leonard Cohen's, Hallelujah, the who-what, Why, when, and where. Or not the why, sorry. What, where and when? The why we can never answer. No, never. God, no. Then we dropped the needle and listened to the song over and over again.

And then we scratched the record focusing in on those moments, those wrinkles, those sections of the song that we couldn't get out of our head for some reason. And finally, we take that record scratch section and inscrime. and inscribe some kind of meaning to it, some kind of interpretation. This is the remix, the final step. What does this mean? What the remix?

So what does this mean in Leonard Cohen's Hallelujah? These two different rhythms, these two different ways of saying Hallelujah going back and forth, back and forth. I don't know, frankly. And that should be probably a caveat that we append to every single one of our episodes. Your guess is as good as mine,

but I will nevertheless essay to construct some meaning here. What I'm hearing from you is that it's almost impossible to know the composer's intent unless they have specifically told it to us in an interview. And so this act of remix is very much an act of interpretation. Yes, and I would even go so far as to say the composer's intention may in fact be irrelevant.

Oh, tell me more. Now we're kind of getting into an existential aside here, but that's perfectly fine because, again, it's our 50th anniversary. We can do whatever we want. Yes. You know, what Roland Bart would call the death of the author, I think is something I ascribe to when listening to music. A composer certainly has a set of goals and intentions, as does a performer of music. Right. But what we take away from them does not always necessarily align with those goals and intentions.

Right. In a way, I think we create our own meaning and the validity of our interpretations is measured in how convincingly we present it and argue for it and use and martial evidence in support of it. That is really, I can't think of any other way to determine whether one meaning of a song versus another is better or worse. that feels so appropriate given that I read that Leonard Cohen worked countless hours on this song and had multiple versions that he performed that included some verses, excluded some verses, had some new material, which has then allowed cover artists to continue to interpret the piece, and we get to do the same thing even in our own listening to just one version of it. Yes, and I wonder, in fact, coming back to this rhythmic variation of the word,

Hallelujah in the chorus of this song. In some ways, this is what Cohen was actually trying to capture, the indeterminacy and the elusiveness of music and in some ways of the act of creation itself, of composition, of putting lyrics to paper and hands to guitars and vocal chords to vibrations, that there's some element of control and there's some element of what, I don't know, divine inspiration into it. Yeah, something, some elemental force guiding you. So in the course of the song, Cohen gives us two ways to sing the word hallelujah. Yeah.

But not only that, he gives us two harmonies to undergird this hallelujah. It's constantly going from major in the first version, in the hallelujah. That one's major. Followed by the other version, hallelujah. That's minor. So two rhythms, two harmonies. and it goes from one to the other, from one to the other, and then finally seems to settle back in the home key of C major.

So he's going back and forth musically just as he is metrically. Yes, and so why do this? Why go back and forth like this? Why not just stick to one version of the Hallelujah? Certainly, Pentatonic's Justin Timberlake, 100 other cover versions of the song do just that. but I find I prefer the original, especially in light of what comes before in the verse.

So if we look at this mysterious verse for a second, I heard there was a secret chord that David played and it pleased the Lord, but you don't really care for music, do you? And then there's this fascinating series of lyrics here because he goes, it goes like this, the fourth, the fifth, and as he says, the fourth and the fifth,

the music moves to the fourth chord of the scale and then the fifth chord of the scale. Right, right. And then following that, he says, the minor fall, we go to a minor chord, and then the major lift, we go to a major chord. Oh, and then he says the baffled king composing, hallelujah. That word baffled stands out so much in this stanza.

It's perfect because I think it captures something about what it's like to write a song where you're constantly feel like you did something on purpose and then you did something that you had no idea where it came from. But there it is and it works perfectly and again it's just like something

you almost drew out of the atmosphere or the ether. And so at first it sounds like he's in control. It goes like this, the fourth, the fifth, the minor fall, the major lift. But then all of a sudden, the baffled king composing Hallelujah, who's in control really at all?

Yeah, as a god's. hand or is it King David in the biblical reference that he's making here or is it him the composer is it Leonard Cohen? Yes exactly all these characters kind of collapse into one and then exploding out of that admission in a way is this at once a very declarative and powerful statement of this age old declaration of joy hallelujah yeah and yet something a little uncertain about it that first rhythm is not very confident. It's got that broken feel, that staggered feel. Oh, the broken hallelujah.

He sings that later on. He does, exactly. The brokenness is in the rhythmic misstep of the first time he sings it. Right, it's embedded right in there. Because it's like, he's tripped, right? Halle, yeah. Yeah. I fell over trying to say it.

Yeah. And then immediately after we get the more kind of natural sounding rhythm, Hallelujah Yeah But it's undercut It's on the minor chords Exactly Just as he's getting confidence

And singing it The music raises doubt Yes And then back to the Major Broken Version And then finally Some kind of resolution In the smooth

elongated version Resolving harmonically To the original key of C major It feels like we've finally reached some sort of stability or some kind of certainty over how this Hallelujah is meant to be sung, meant to be composed, but it doesn't feel, somehow it doesn't feel that solid to me.

Forcing us to continue back into more verses of exploration about faith, composition, relationship, divine intervention. Exactly. Yeah. The ambiguity is always there. And I think that's kind of the central dissonance in this song that makes it such a perennially exciting composition is the fact that you're singing

one of the most unqualified words of praise going back millennia but he's singing it in this way that's always kind of undercutting that confidence. Always bringing some doubt, some uncertainty into the equation.

You know, I've read these lyrics, I've heard this song so many times and I've heard these different narratives from is he speaking to a lover or is he speaking about God and David's relationship to God and the biblical narrative. There's so many readings. And I had never understood this, I think it's the third verse.

And it makes so much sense now. He says, do you say I took the name in vain? I don't even know the name. I don't know the name. Kind of like he doesn't even know how to say the thing properly. Of course, he's referencing the name of God, which only, I believe, the Israelites, to know the correct name of God and can say it aloud. But then he continues, he says, but if I did, well, really,

what's it to you. There's a blaze of light in every word. It doesn't matter which you heard, the holy or the broken. Hallelujah. Whoa. So the holy hallelujah and the broken hallelujah are both represented in the way

that he sings the word. Yes. Yes, exactly. Ah. And so now thinking about, I'm really glad you just highlighted that line because I think that speaks to why so many different artists are able to sing this song and bring out seemingly a very different meaning each time.

I don't think there's any consistency in the way this song has been played from, right, Cohen's original version to John Cales, to Jeff Buckley's, to Rufus Wainwrights, to who else, Justin Timberlake, Pennatine, I mean, it goes on and on and on. Right. You forgot a very important cover version, which is everybody who's ever learned to play the guitar. Right, and every contestant on American Idol or The Voice ever. Exactly. And every character in a TV or movie whose emotional exit scene has been scored to a non-diagetic cover of this song. I think Cohen, and again, whether he was trying to do this or not, whether he was baffled or not in the process, has created something that is, like you said, kind of sacred and profane at once.

And depending on how you perform it, you can bring out either side of that. duality. As much as we can make fun of the different ways that it is covered, easily learned, I think it speaks to the song's indelible nature. The lyrical content is so perfectly matched to the music that it invites so many different interpretations, both of listening and playing. It just is a brilliant composition. And there is much more to be said, which is part of the fun of this way of listening. It kind of goes on and on and on. But let's stop there.

We've had a great four-step process of the switched on method of listening to this song, from the liner notes to dropping the needle to scratching the record to finally just now remixing the meaning of this song. That was a lot of fun. Wow, thanks, Charlie. That's a beautiful thing. And rest in power, Leonard Cohen. Absolutely. For a final act on our 50th anniversary, I thought we could have a little banquet.

Get a caterer, maybe, I don't know, maybe like a magician or something. Definitely some music. Maybe have a mariachi band in one corner. Have some ambient noise in memory of Pauline Oliveros in another corner. Maybe some heavy metal in another. And lastly, to recognize our collective roots, a nice bluegrass ensemble in the last corner of the room. Surely, surely. And what would a anniversary celebration be without some toasts?

Yes. So I have prepared a little something. Charlie, do you have anything that you want to say to everyone, everyone gathered here? Yes, I do have a toast to give at a little celebratory 50th episode Banquet. I first met Nate in a class about esoteric 15th century music. He was wearing a wool blazer and a very fashionable thin linen tie. but I did not think him to be as pretentious as he looked because the second time I met Nate

we were both in a mildewed basement it was probably around 2 a.m. at the peak of a college party and he was behind the electric keyboard playing free jazz with an ensemble of musical wizards and I was blown away one of the three people dancing on the dance floor because I'm not sure everybody else enjoyed

this avant-garde sound but I thought it was just, yes, utterly brilliant. His musical prowess was intimidating and inspiring, and I would seek out his band in small venues, in Providence, each performance usually with the same ensemble, but under a different name. There was Metropolis, there was Spank City, there were many names. Some more regrettable than others.

And in a show right around graduation, Nate and his band played a formal recital in which they made free associate, interpretations of flying musical animations directed by our designer Luke Harris. This was high art. Then we graduated and I was sure Nate was off to great things. And I was very surprised that when I moved to California, my old bass player Andrew invited me to a jam session in his friend's apartment.

And there he was. Sans Tai, in a newly adopted California get-up, Nate was playing the banjo in the band. And in that jam session, I couldn't believe, I was the one playing instead of listening and one of the three people dancing. I tried to spin all my guitar tricks to convince this group to let me stay around. And one jam session turned into, well, about three years of playing music together. And we started to build a name for ourselves.

First, as simpler times, then as the Stowaways. We played bars around San Francisco. And just when everything was starting to click, I had to move to L.A. to be with my partner, Bess, and Nate had to move to Nune. New York City to be with his partner Whitney, and so we entered into the Skype era of our romance. Due to the lag of video chat, of course, it is nearly impossible to play music together, so instead we started switched on pop. We spent a year producing pieces about musical listening as a way to celebrate our friendship

and mutual love for deep listening. And now, two years later, we've built a whole movement with tens of thousands of supporters around the world. Thank you, Nate, for joining me. me on this journey. Oh my God, Charlie. I am feclypt. I am

Covelling. It's a Shonda. What a mess I am right now. That was beautiful. Wow. Thank you. Thank you. That's a really hard act to follow.

But let's all raise a glass. I didn't know a toast was a competition. Oh, it's all a competition, Charlie. Well, first, let's just take a moment to thank all our friends. and family gathered here. And especially big thanks to Bill, Mikey, Susan, and Pergo, to Luke Harris, to all the guests that have appeared on our show and all the listeners who have written to us and offered their interpretations of songs.

It's been, in some ways, the best part of this experience. And I think one probably totally unexpected to each of us. Definitely. But also, let's raise a glass to my co-host, Charlie, the consummate, Otto, didact the simply best person in the world full of good cheer and endless love for those around him possessor of a brilliant musical mind and the most meticulous and immaculate editor I have ever worked with thanks for making my writing and thinking so much better over all these years I want to get philosophical for a moment sorry I know you're not supposed to do this

that in an anniversary toast, but it can't be avoided. I've been thinking a lot about our 50th anniversary here, and I wanted to share with you a quote from a book that's been very inspirational to me, very kind of foundational. Is it a Dr. Seuss book? This is a book by Christopher Small. He's an ethnomusicologist, and it's called simply Musicking. That is M-U-S-I-C-K-I-N-G. Great. And this is at once a very simple concept, but also one, like most things, that's very, very complex. Basically, Small proposes that we have to kind of eliminate the dichotomy between performer and listener, between composer and audience, between kind of the sender and receiver. In fact, we have to think about music not as this divided noun, but a constantly active verb that requires participatory.

and that everyone involved in the act of music is doing this verb, is musicking. That whatever role you have, whether you're listening, whether you're performing, whether you're setting up the piano in the concert hall, you are musicking. That is the only way that music exists is from all of us participating in it. And if you kind of eliminate some of that hierarchy, it's really exciting. I might just deploy one quote from Small here. He says, the act of musicing establishes in the place where it is happening a set of relationships, and it is in those relationships that the meaning of the act lies.

And I think that's just what I want to raise a glass to today, because this show has cemented our relationship in so many ways, and not just our relationship, but in general, I listen to music as like almost a social act now. I see how music has a meaning within our society, has a meaning for me and for my friends and for my family. And I start to wonder if small isn't right in that. You know, the meaning that I derive isn't as important as whatever anyone else is. And I guess I just want to conclude by saying that I think when we interpret a piece of music,

any music, right, from Mozart to Britney Spears, whatever it is, that we kind of become part of that piece of music in some small way. And... Hallelujah. Yeah, right? And our hearing of it and our meaning of it is important. It's almost like another little line of counterpoint added to the piece. And maybe invisible to most, but it's there.

Music is only as real as we all make it. And let's all drink now. It's a beautiful, transient, interpretative act of musicing. I love it. Thank you, Nate. Thank you, Charles. And next week, Alvin and the Chipmunks. Number 51.

Well, it gets better. Should we do some credits? Yes, we should. This episode was produced by me, Nate Sloan. And edited by Bill Lance and me, Charlie Harding. Our design, as always, is by the brilliant Luke Harris. But Luke Harris is also a phenomenal DJ, and he puts out a monthly playlist that can be found at soundcloud.com slash Luke Harris full of the music that you must be listening to. It is so good.

His monthly playlist are extraordinary. That is on heavy rotation right now. Switchdown Pop is a proud member of the Panoply Network. You can find more episodes of the show at switchdownpop.com. you can find it on any podcatcher wherever you get your podcasts. If you leave a review of our show on iTunes or whatever podcatcher app you use, Google Play, etc. It makes it so much easier for people to find our show. Every review just increases the chance that someone else will start listening to Switchedon Pop.

So if you're so inclined, please just head over there and give us as many stars as you think appropriate and as many words as you think we deserve. other things that you want to share. Please do. You can find us on Twitter at Switched on Pop or on Facebook as well. That's about it. See you for years to another 50 episodes, Charlie.

Absolutely. All right. We'll be back again in two weeks. Thank you so much for listening. Thanks for listening. Euforia of Calvin Klein. The new collection Elixir. Three new elixires perfume intense.

Solar. Magnetic. Bowl. Pulsan the banner. Make a quick and discover your fragrance euphoria.