I read this NYTimes article, and decided to go ahead and read a lot of the study. It's very interesting stuff, and I certainly prefer sad music to happy music.
Very interesting. Sad and/or melancholic music has always been more appealing to me. For one reason or another it just always feels more genuine. Happy music often just seems so devoid of life, vapid, and incredibly cliché. In sadness the artist bares the core of their being in way that is beautiful and profound. I think Steven Wilson, one of my all-time favourite songwriters, sums it up beautifully here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-GlC7uJ53ZM Here's a transcript for those that would prefer:“The suffering or the bad memories are as important as the good memories, and the good experiences. If you sort of, can imagine life as being 99% of the time quite linear, and most of the time you're in a state of neither happiness nor sadness. And then that 1% of the time you experience moments of very crystalised happiness, or crystalised sadness, or loneliness or depression. And I believe all of those moments are very pertinent. It's like I said to you, that for me it's mostly those crystalised moments of melancholy which are more inspirational to me. And in a strange way they become quite beautiful in their own way. Music that is sad, melancholic, depressing, is in a kind of perverse way more uplifting. I find happy music extremely depressing, mostly - mostly quite depressing. It's particularly this happy music that has no spirituality behind it - if it's just sort of mindless party music, it'd be quite depressing. But largely speaking, I was the kind of person that responds more to melancholia, and it makes me feel good. And I think the reason for this is, I think if you respond strongly to that kind of art, it's because in a way it makes you feel like you're not alone. So when we hear a very sad song, it makes us realise that we do share this kind of common human experience, and we're all kind of bonded in sadness and melancholia and depression.”