Hell is other people, Sartre famously wrote.
But not in my life, and certainly not on this blog. When I posted my estimates yesterday of how much — in real numbers — the classical music audience has increased or declined between 1982 and 2008, I needed to know the 2008 adult (18 and over) population of the US. I couldn’t find that figure, so I used 2004 numbers instead, figuring they’d be close enough. Using those numbers, I calculated a five percent drop in the size of the classical audience. See yesterday’s post for details.
But then I thought I could do better. I asked both here and on Twitter and Facebook if anyone could find a 2008 number for the data I wanted, and several people did. Thanks, all of you! The page I wanted, with the U.S. Census Bureau’s 2008 population estimates was here. If you want the data yourself, download the second of the Excel files they offer. That’s the one that breaks out the age of the population from 18 up.
So now I know that — at least according to the Census Bureau’s best estimate — the 18 and up population of the US in 2008 was 230,117,876. That’s a 41% increase from 1982. During that period, the percentage of adults 18 and over going to classical music performances declined 30% (from 13.3% to 8.3%). But the increase of population almost wiped out that decline, so the absolute number of adults attending classical music events — the size, in other words, of the adult classical music audience — declined only 1.3%, quite a bit less than the 5% drop I wrongly calculated yesterday.
Which would explain why the rate of attendance could drop so steeply without causing panic at the box office. See my last post for various footnotes and qualifications. This is very rough data. And see the post before that for my theory about the longterm trends at work here, which — if they continue — should eventually lead to shrinkage we can see and feel.
Hey, Greg, haven’t you heard? Down 30 is the new flat.
Now that is interesting. It’s so easy to see different statistical snapshots when you work with a completely different set of numbers.
Factor in what is surely the increase of more community based and non-professional groups and who knows–there might actually be an absolute increase in classical music audiences if, albeit, the audiences are more distributed over an [supposed] greater number of ensembles/events. Who knows?
Greg: I think there are two major flaws in your implication that a modest 1.3% reduction in the number of people attending classical music performances between 1982 and 2008 does not represent a major box office problem. I do not have macro classical music data (and could not find it in the NEA reports), but I believe that in the last 25+ years:
1. the total number performances has increased dramatically and
2. the average frequency of attendance by classical music audience members at performances has decreased substantially
As a result, I believe that average attendance has probably decreased substantially for many (though obviously not all) classical music groups. Unfortunately, absent the complete data, it is difficult to make much use of the overall audience size statistics.
Is it possible to make any meaningful conclusions based on this data? My guess is not.
If ‘classical audiences’ (whatever that means) actually are getting smaller in the US, does this mean the death of classical music? Again, probably not.
Is anecdotal evidence relevant? Consider: if you are Lincoln Center subscriber, you might notice that the audiences are getting smaller (theoretical example). What does this tell you? It tells you that Lincoln center audiences are getting smaller. You might give other examples of audiences getting smaller. Other people might give examples where they are getting bigger. What does this tell us? That anecdotal evidence is next to useless and cannot be extrapolated to other situations.
Let’s leave the music to the musicians, and the stats to the statisticians!
Hi Greg,
I covered this issue quite thoroughly in my PhD thesis.
There are some problems with looking at the data the way you have. You haven’t taken into account the change in the age make-up of the population over the period in question, for example. The NEA’s own data shows that attendance is much higher in certain age ranges, notably the 55+ range. I don’t have the latest data to hand but I suspect the proportion of the US population in that age range might have increased since 1982.
Secondly you haven’t taken into account the change in socio-demographic make-up of the population in the period. The NEA 2002 data I analysed for my PhD for example shows that there was a much higher classical music attendance record in what we in the UK call demographic class “AB” at 61% attending at least once in 12 months (this class made up, in 2002, 34% of the US population) compared to the lowest class “DE” at 17%, which made up 36% of the US population. The problem with this data supplied by the NEA is that they don’t tell you how often each class attended. “Once in 12 months” is really not very often, and I would be very interested to learn the average attendance within each age band. At home in London I know of people in every age group who go more than once a week, it’s not something confined to retired folks!
I actually concluded, in the chapter concerned with this issue, that there really wasn’t an audience crisis, not least because the decline (if any) in concert attendance was more than made up for by a number of other factors including the “attendance” at live streaming events (for example The Met got 170,000 to watch La Bohéme and 80,000 to watch Peter Grimes). Bayreuth (admittedly not in the US!) even got 10,000 people to pay €49 for a 6-hour Meistersinger riddled with technical glitches (if reports are to be believed, I didn’t see it myself).
Anyway, there are of course as Disraeli said, lies, damned lies, and statistics! But they are very interesting to study.
That’s truly amazing. I thought maybe it was religious in nature. It always amazes me how much time and effort you pour your time and effort into this awesome post.