Markets change, tastes change, so the companies and the individuals who choose to compete in those markets must change. —An Wang
What we hear affects how we taste. So, one beer is providing its own soundtrack
Most mornings I sit here trying to be as quiet as possible so as to not wake everyone else in the house, especially the little ones. Fortunately, everyone sleeps rather soundly, so I’m able to grind beans and make coffee without disturbing anyone other than the dog, who doesn’t mind as long as I feed him first. I enjoy sitting down with that first cup of coffee in the peace and quiet of the morning. I’ve never given any consideration as to whether music might actually change how my coffee tastes. However, I’m certainly thinking that way now.
Beer maker Stella Artois released a couple of YouTube videos this week aimed at changing how we experience their beer. Partnering with The Roots, aka the band from Jimmy Fallon’s Tonight Show on NBC, the brand is throwing some science at its customers by demonstrating how music alters how their beer tastes. No kidding. This is real science. In fact, it’s just part of a larger multi-sensory project called Le Savior. They’ve already thrown multi-sensory events in Montreal and New York where the videos take center place. Unfortunately, the rest of us just have to try and re-create the experience on our own.
Do we really care enough about the subtle tastes of a beer to change our playlists? If you drink Budweiser, you could probably care less. For Stella drinkers, though, that difference can be a huge factor in their drinking experience. Turns out, sound affects our entire culinary experience. Perhaps we should investigate.
Yes, This Is Real Science
While science has taken some hard knocks among those who refuse to believe the earth is hotter than ever, the science of auditory effects on tastes is pretty solid. Yes, we actually looked it up and did some reading. I mean, just because a beer company tells us something doesn’t mean we’re going to believe it, right? Please, tell me you don’t take these campaigns at face value. What we found is that not only is the auditory impact on food tastes a serious area of study, the volume of research on the various aspects is considerable.
At the core of all this research is how sound affects our concept of sweet and salty tastes. A 2011 study,  Effect of Background Noise on Food Perception, looked at how perceptions of food differed based upon whether diners ate in silence, quiet background noise, or loud background noise. As it turns out, noise, “diminishes gustatory food properties,” ultimately affecting the tastes we perceive from the food and drink we think we’re enjoying.
In the real world, that means we need to be eating in environments that are actually quieter, not louder, if we want to really enjoy our meals. Televisions need to be shut off. Dining al fresco at a sidewalk cafe bordering a busy street probably isn’t enhancing the tastes of the food as much as we might think. All that loud kitchen noise and clanging and overly loud conversation? That’s great if a restaurant is trying to keep you distracted from how the food actually tastes. Quieter is always better.
But Silence Drives Us Nuts
Additional research, however, shows that some sounds, specifically music, can change how we feel about certain spices and especially regarding alcoholic beverages such as wine. A 2012 study published by The British Psychological Society demonstrated that subtle background music changed how subjects responded to the same wine. Think about that. Without being told they were drinking the same wine each time, subjects rated the wine differently four different times according to changes in background music. Interestingly enough, the subjects were so concentrated on the wine, they didn’t even notice cognitively that the music had changed!
With that knowledge in hand, Stella Artois employed food scientists Bompas & Parr and then worked with The Roots to come up with two different soundtracks to emphasize either the fruity sweetness or the hoppy bitterness, depending on which one might prefer. While I’ve not seen a full menu for the four-course meal severed at the Le Savior events, I assume food choices complimented whichever soundtrack was being played.
What this raises is whether dining and/or drinking experiences can be tailored based on music choices. If a restaurant plays a brass-heavy soundtrack, for example, Â are the more exotic and perhaps bitter tastes of the food going to come through more than if a lighter sound were chosen? Stop and think about it for a minute. Would knowledge of what music was playing ever impact or possibly even change your choice of where to dine?
Side A Or Side B?
Getting down to the actual videos one might find the difference between the two soundtracks almost insignificant. That theme comes up often in the comments below each video and while that source is far from being authoritative on any level we cannot ignore that we’re talking about more subtle difference that not everyone notices or appreciates. No two people approach tastes in exactly the same way. Our culinary traditions and experiences color every dish and every drink we consume. Some people care about subtle difference in flavor, some don’t. That’s cool.
Below, you’ll find both videos. Unfortunately, there’s nothing visually attractive here. The video is simply a vehicle for the soundtrack. What you’ll find, though, is that side A, which is supposed to bring out the fruitier elements of the beer has an emphasis on steel drums in the midst of the rapid-fire lyrics for which the group is known. There’s less direct melody and more percussion in this track. Side B, however, which is supposed to bring out the bitterness in the beer, is heavy on brass counter-melodies. Personally, the two tracks are obviously and completely different. However, I can see where someone not specifically tuned in on the musical elements might miss the difference. Again, one’s own tastes influence the experience.
Changing Minds
The question remains is whether this gimmick is enough to change anyone’s opinion about Stella Artois. For all the noise about craft and premium beers in the market, there are still a lot of people who just want something cold and alcoholic. One also has to wonder how a restaurant might serve music that meets the variety of tastes among the customers. Does every meal come with its own soundtrack? How would that even work?
Still, the test is an interesting one. Listen to the soundtracks during your next snack or drink. Who knows, they might just change your mind.
The News In 140 Characters
It’s amazing that the amount of news that happens in the world every day always just exactly fits the newspaper. —Jerry Seinfeld
Does anyone read the news anymore or do they just look at the tweets and the headlines?
I saw an interesting editorial cartoon yesterday, which, of course, I didn’t have the foresight to actually save so that I could accurately reference this morning. The cartoon lamented the fact that when historians look back at the exchanges of this presidential election, it will be candidates 140-character tweets they’ll examine rather than anything like the Lincoln-Douglas debates.
The comparison is stark. How news and information is delivered has changed not only in terms of media, but the brevity with which news is delivered. Sure, there will be debates during this campaign cycle, Â but even those will ultimately be reduced to sound bites of 140 characters or less.The Twitter limit applies not only to the application, but to the reduced size of our attention spans.
Once upon a time, the details of the news and the excellence of reporting and writing were honored. Winning a Pulitzer prize was an exception because of talent and skill. Now, winning a Pulitzer is an exception because someone actually put in more than 300 words worth of effort. Long-form reporting still happens at places such as the New York Times and Washington Post, but then the media departments of both newspapers instantly find ways to reduce thousands of words to a 140-character tease.
Even here, I create a 140-character excerpt that appears in social media links to the article. Hundreds of people view that excerpt, but only a fraction of those read the article. We frequently use nude imagery not because it has anything to do with the article, but because it is a quick way to get attention.
Tweeting The News
Almost every newspaper of any size now has a media department. That staff is responsible for not only creating 140 character descriptions of articles, but managing and measuring the responses they get to those descriptions. Read through the comments on almost any provocatively written tweet or  Facebook post and it becomes evident that many of the most volatile remarks are made by people who never actually read the article; they’re just responding to their interpretation of what the article might say based on the structure of that tweet.
Great tweet writing is a skill and in today’s media it is just as important as headline writing and copy editing. A well-constructed tweet can bring thousands of eyes to a topic, or can leave one totally ignored. Knowing which hashtag to include, the precise verbiage that is easily understood, is not something that was traditionally taught in journalism schools. Rarely does anyone notice when a tweet is done well. Let a newspaper or politician miscommunicate online, though, usually through a poor choice of words, and watch the shit hit the fan.
To illustrate my point, let me share some of the most recent news tweets across a variety of topics. There’s more information behind each tweet, but how many people will actually bother to click through and read the articles? I’m betting not many. Fewer than 10 percent of readers ever click a link, here or anyplace else on the Internet. Let’s see how you do.
Politics
Information
Society
Putting Things In Perspective
How many of those articles did you click through to investigate? Any? Consider that a few short years ago those nine stories would have been enough to fill a 30-minute television newscast (sports and weather aside). In print, they would have dominated the A section of any newspaper. Yet, here you have it all in 140 characters and some well edited GIFs.
I’m old, so it is difficult for me to see this shift as anything other than a loss of information and understanding. Reading through a flurry of tweets, we might come away feeling more intelligent and informed, but we don’t actually know enough about any of those stories to speak knowledgeably and authoritatively. Not that such a lack of information ever stops us. We’re quite willing to go ahead and open our mouths anyway, facts be damned.
What probably bothers me most about this change in how we receive information is that without all the details we are more likely to react harshly, sarcastically, and with suspicion. We don’t trust the tweet because we don’t allow ourselves to gain enough information to understand the full story. We lack compassion. We lose the opportunity to learn. We fail to consider different perspectives. We wander around so ignorant that we don’t recognize ignorance.
If you’ve made it this far into today’s article, you likely already understand. Of the few people who started the article, less than five percent finish. Again,that’s not just true here, but for most any online reading.
Perhaps one day the pendulum will swing back the other direction and we’ll appreciate well-written and ardently-reported stories again. This 140-character world doesn’t work for me. We need more information, not less. I suppose that’s every individual’s choice, though, isn’t it?
Sigh. At least there’s a nude picture at the top.
Share this:
Like this: