Music as a mechanism for social distinction is well established. Yet, perhaps more than any other form of cultural expression, it is music which has been systematically transformed by emerging technologies. From the gramophone, radio, cassette and CD, through to portable devices and shared through social media, music is in constant flux. To separate taste for music from its various acquisitional forms is to undermine its role in society. In this article, our aim is to integrate within taste and cultural consumption analysis a salient dimension, such as technologies to acquire music, conceptualized as modes of musical exchange and formats used to listen to music. We argue that these are components of musical consumption practices which enhance our understanding on how symbolic boundaries are shaped today. Using multiple factor analysis, this study provides a simultaneous analysis of musical tastes and technological engagement in Chile. We find that uses of technologies share a unique relationship to musical taste. Musical taste remains a relevant process of distinction, but modes of exchange prove to be an emerging property. They, however, do not create new symbolic boundaries; rather, they are important in reinforcing those that exist.
AttewellP (2001) Comment: The first and second digital divides. Sociology of Education74(3): 252–259.
3.
Bartmanski D and Woodward I (2013) The vinyl: The analogue medium in the age of digital reproduction. Journal of Consumer Culture. Epub ahead of print 31 May. DOI: 10.1177/1469540513488403.
4.
BennettT (2011) Culture, choice, necessity: A political critique of Bourdieu’s aesthetic. Poetics39(6): 530–546.
CrisellA (2002) An Introductory History of British Broadcasting, 2nd edn. London: Routledge.
14.
CrisellA (2003) More Than a Music Box: Radio Cultures and Communities in a Multi-Media World, New York: Berghahn Books.
15.
Crossley N and Bottero W (2014) Music worlds and internal goods: The role of convention. Cultural Sociology. Epub ahead of print 15 September. DOI: 10.1177/1749975514533209.
16.
Daenekindt S and Roose H (2014) Ways of preferring: Distinction through the ‘what’ and the ‘how’ of cultural consumption. Journal of Consumer Culture. Epub ahead of print 10 October. DOI: 10.1177/1469540514553715.
17.
DiMaggioP (1987) Classification in art. American Sociological Review52(4): 440–455.
French-DavisR (1999) Macroeconomía, comercio y finanzas para reformar las reformas en América Latina, Santiago, Chile: McGraw-Hill Interamericana.
22.
FrithS (1996) Performing Rites: Evaluating Popular Music, New York: Oxford University Press.
23.
GansHJ (1999) Popular Culture and High Culture: An Analysis and Evaluation of Taste, New York: Basic Books.
24.
GayoMTeitelboimBMendezML (2009) Patrones culturales de uso de tiempo libre en Chile. Una aproximación desde la teoría Bourdieuana. Revista Universum24(2): 42–72.
25.
GonzalezJP (2011) Posfolklore: Raíces y globalización en la música popular chilena. ARBOR Ciencia, Pensamiento y Cultura187(751): 937–946.
26.
HanquinetLRooseHSavageM (2014) The eyes of the beholder: Aesthetic preferences and the remaking of cultural capital. Sociology48(1): 111–132.
27.
HesmondhalghD (2009) The digitalisation of music. In: PrattACJeffcutP (eds) Creativity and Innovation in the Cultural Economy, New York: Routledge, pp. 57–73.
28.
HoltDB (1997) Distinction in America? Recovering Bourdieu’s theory of tastes from its critics. Poetics25(1): 93–120.
29.
HoltDB (1998) Does cultural capital structure American consumption?Journal of Consumer Research25(1): 1–25.
KarmyE (2013) También yo tengo mi cumbia, pero mi cumbia es chilena: Apuntes para una reconstrucción sociohistórica de la cumbia chilena desde el cuerpo. Resonancias32(1): 93–110.
32.
KeightleyK (1996) ‘Turn it down!’ she shrieked: Gender, domestic space, and high fidelity, 1948–59. Popular Music15(2): 149–177.
33.
LahireB (2008) The individual and the mixing of genres: Cultural dissonance and self-distinction. Poetics36(2–3): 166–188.
34.
LamontM (1992) Money, Morals, and Manners: The Culture of the French and the American Upper-Middle Class, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
35.
LêSJosseJHussonF (2008) FactoMineR: An R package for multivariate analysis. Journal of Statistical Software25(1): 1–18.
36.
LebaronF (2010) How Bourdieu ‘quantified’ Bourdieu: The geometric modelling of data. In: RobsonKSandersC (eds) Quantifying Theory: Pierre Bourdieu, Berlin: Springer, pp. 11–29.
37.
LeguinaA (2015) Musical distinctions in England: Understanding cultural homology and omnivourism through a methods comparison. Bulletin of Sociological Methodology126(1): 28–45.
38.
LehtonenT-K (2003) The domestication of new technologies as a set of trials. Journal of Consumer Culture3(3): 363–385.
LizardoOSkilesS (2012) Reconceptualizing and theorizing ‘Omnivorousness’: Genetic and relational. Sociological Theory30(4): 263–282.
41.
López-SintasJCebolladaAFilimonN (2014) Music access patterns: A social interpretation. Poetics46(1): 56–74.
42.
López-SintasJGarcía-ÁlvarezMEFilimonN (2008) Scale and periodicities of recorded music consumption: Reconciling Bourdieu’s theory of taste with facts. The Sociological Review56(1): 78–101.
43.
López-SintasJZervaZGarcía-ÁlvarezME (2012) Accessing recorded music: Interpreting a contemporary social exchange system. Acta Sociologica55(2): 179–194.
44.
MagauddaP (2011) When materiality ‘bites back’: Digital music consumption practices in the age of dematerialization. Journal of Consumer Culture11(1): 15–36.
45.
MagauddaP (2014) The broken boundaries between science and technology studies and cultural sociology: Introduction to an interview with Trevor Pinch. Cultural Sociology8(1): 63–76.
46.
MularskiJP (2012) Mexican or Chilean: Mexican ranchera music and nationalism in Chile. Studies in Latin American Popular Culture30(1): 54–75.
47.
NationMaster.com (2014) International statistics at NationMaster.com, International Telecommunication Union, World Telecommunication/ICT Development Report and database, and World Bank estimates. Aggregates compiled by NationMaster. Available at: http://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/stats/Media (accessed 20 June 2014).
PetersonRA (2005) Problems in comparative research: The example of omnivorousness. Poetics33(5–6): 257–282.
50.
PetersonRASimkusA (1992) How musical tastes mark occupational status group. In: LamontMFournierM (eds) Cultivating Differences, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, pp.152–186.
51.
PinchTBijsterveldK (2004) Sound studies: New technologies and music. Studies of Science34(5): 635–648.
52.
PinchTTroccoF (2004) Analog Days: The Invention and Impact of the Moog Synthesizer, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
53.
PrieurASavageM (2013) Emerging forms of cultural capital. European Societies15(2): 246–267.
54.
PriorN (2013) Bourdieu and the sociology of music consumption: A critical assessment of recent developments. Sociology Compass7(3): 181–193.
55.
PriorN (2014) The plural iPod: A study of technology in action. Poetics42(1): 22–39.
56.
R CoreTeam (2013) R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing, Vienna: Foundation for Statistical Computing.
57.
ReckwitzA (2002) Toward a theory of social practices: A development in culturalist theorizing. European Journal of Social Theory5(2): 243–263.
58.
RiveraPR (2011) ‘Tropical Mix’: Afro-Latino space and Notch’s reggaetón. Popular Music and Society34(2): 221–235.
59.
RooseHSticheleAV (2010) Living room vs. concert hall: Patterns of music consumption in Flanders. Social Forces89(1): 185–208.
60.
RösselJ (2011) Cultural capital and the variety of modes of cultural consumption in the opera audience. The Sociological Quarterly52: 83–103.
61.
SavageMGayoM (2011) Unravelling the omnivore: A field analysis of contemporary musical taste in the United Kingdom. Poetics39(5): 337–357.
62.
SavageMSilvaEB (2013) Field Analysis in Cultural Sociology. Cultural Sociology7(2): 111–126.
63.
SchatzkiT (1996) Social Practices: A Wittgensteinian Approach to Human Activity and the Social, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
64.
SeznevaO (2012) The pirates of Nevskii Prospekt: Intellectual property, piracy and institutional diffusion in Russia. Poetics40(2): 150–166.
65.
SterneJ (2003a) Bourdieu, technique and technology. Cultural Studies17(3–4): 367–389.
66.
SterneJ (2003b) The Audible Past: Cultural Origins of Sound Reproduction, Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
67.
SterneJ (2012) MP3: The Meaning of a Format, Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
68.
TampubolonG (2008) Distinction in Britain, 2001–2004?European Societies10(3): 403–428.
69.
Taylor T, Katz M and Grajeda T (eds) (2012) Music, Sound, and Technology in America: A Documentary History of Early Phonograph, Cinema, and Radio. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
70.
TepperSHargittaiE (2009) Pathways to music exploration in a digital age. Poetics37(1): 227–249.
71.
TorcheF (2007) Social status and cultural consumption: The case of reading in Chile. Poetics35(2–3): 70–92.
72.
TorcheF (2010) Social status and public cultural consumption: Chile in comparative perspective. In: ChanTW (ed.) Social Status and Cultural Consumption, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 1–28.
73.
TsatsouP (2011) Digital divides revisited: What is new about divides and their research?Media, Culture & Society33(2): 317–331.
74.
Van DijkJAGM (2006) Digital divide research, achievements and shortcomings. Poetics34(4–5): 221–235.
75.
Van DijkJAGM (2008) One Europe, digitally divided. In: ChadwickAHowardPN (eds) Routledge Handbook of Internet Politics, New York: Routledge, pp. 288–304.
WardeA (2005) Consumption and theories of practice. Journal of Consumer Culture5(2): 131–153.
78.
WardeA (2011) Dimensions of a social theory of taste. In: WardeA (ed.) Cultural Consumption, Classification and Power, Oxon: Routledge, pp. 78–93.
79.
WardeA (2014) After taste: Culture, consumption and theories of practice. Journal of Consumer Culture14(3): 279–303.
80.
WrightD (2011) Making tastes for everything: Omnivorousness and cultural abundance. Journal for Cultural Research15(4): 355–371.
81.
YaishMKatz-GerroT (2012) Disentangling ‘Cultural Capital’: The consequences of cultural and economic resources for taste and participation. European Sociological Review28(2): 169–185.
