Several years ago, I read the book “Blink” by Malcolm Gladwell. This book is on the idea that for the areas we are each experienced in, often the first reaction is pretty correct. But for areas we are less experienced in, our first reaction is often not correct, and is missing a lot of nuance.
In one of the chapters they discuss the history of the Pepsi vs Coke taste test.
The Pepsi Challenge
Now, for those of you too young to remember, once upon a time Coca Cola was about the only game in town. Then Pepsi came on the scene.
What Pepsi was known for was the “Pepsi Taste Test”. This was (surprise surprise) a taste test, where participants blindly tasted Coke and Pepsi, and had to say which one they preferred. The overwhelming result of this was that people seemed to prefer the taste of Pepsi in these blind tests.
As the results of the taste tests became more and more widely known, it was expected that Pepsi would overtake Coca Cola as the most bought soft drink.
Yet that day never actually arrived. Despite all the taste tests saying otherwise, the market buys far more Coca Cola than Pepsi. This means that despite all the taste tests saying more people prefer Pepsi, reality says more people actually prefer Coca Cola.
So what gives? Why should the tests show this?
In Gladwell’s book, he points out the answer may lie in how the taste tests are conducted, versus how people actually drink soft drinks.
In the taste tests, the participants are given unlabelled cups containing Pepsi or cola, with only a small amount in each. Pepsi is actually much sweeter than Cola, which results in that INITIAL taste of Pepsi coming across as much more exciting and impressive than Cola, which may taste a little bland in comparison. The participants are then asked which they prefer, and they answer accordingly.
Sure, some may prefer the less sweet one, but for the most part it’s a lot like getting to briefly hear a first quiet hi-fi, then a second much louder one – more often than not, you’ll leave with the impression that the louder one is better. That’s just how our brains are naturally wired.
Returning to Pepsi and Coke
But how do we drink such drinks in the real world? We are rarely just taking one singular sip of such a soft drink; we typically have large cup. We sit and drink it with friends over a longer period of time. As a result, what tastes good or impressive in that first moment, tends to be over-sweet and saccharin over extended periods.
Gladwell goes on to discuss how experienced taste testers actually develop a more robust internal sense of what they are looking for in taste tests. That initial novelty no longer holds the same sway over their own preference, and they can look beyond to what they are actually tasting underneath it all. This point tessellates well with this article a few weeks ago.
What about voice?
The simplest point is that people are often swayed by something that seems impressive at first, but is actually something we wouldn’t wish to indulge in for more than 10-30 seconds. A “musical sip“, if you will.
Moreover, we live in the era of Tik Tok, X factor, the Voice, YouTube Shorts, and decreased attention spans. Every singer out to be heard has to deliver the MOST of whatever they’ve got inside of 10-30 seconds. That’s all they’ve got to grab attention in these bite size moments. This incentivises singers increasingly resorting to things that are the equivalent of the Pepsi extra sweetness… but that people don’t want to consume for more than a sip or two. This then informs and affects aspiring singers, and the circle becomes self-perpetuating.
I’ve had conversations along these lines with artists I work with, who say this constant battle to produce content that grabs people’s attention is at odds with producing real art of lasting musical value. It’s made all the worse by the consuming populace being unaware this battle for their own ears and taste is going on behind the scenes.
One further point to consider…
Many untrained tasters may not even be able to tell the difference between Coke and Pepsi (or other things), which makes any indicated preference somewhat meaningless. For example, I’ve served exceptional coffee and top-shelf whisky to people who enjoy both, but they couldn’t tell that it was any different to the instant coffee or cheaper whiskies they often partake in.
It takes SOME experience to learn that there is A difference, a little more experience to discern the nature and degree of that difference, and a lifetime to be able to identify ALL the differences between separate things. We have to develop sensitivity to the existence of those differences, and develop an objectivity (like the professional taste testers) to look past the novelties that may sway us.
Conclusion
Someone once said to me “to be a student of singing, you must be a student of the history of singing“. Now at the time, I thought it was either a pointless distinction, or an attempt to sound more lofty about the study of the voice… but I now realise how true this is.
Like those professional taste testers, it takes time to develop that taste and sensitivity to what you are tasting. And it’s only by immersing yourself for long periods in the quality of great singers that the differentiation between them and other singers becomes apparent. Even the differences BETWEEN great singers starts to become a whole field of study in and of itself.
If this is a journey you’d like to embark on in your own voice and music, then you are welcome to book in via my booking form right here.