After complaining bitterly for months about the performance of his old iPhone, my husband finally broke down and upgraded to a snazzy iPhone 4 3G. To mark the occasion (and to encourage him to get out and run more regularly), I made a gift of an armband for his new phone and downloaded tons of music onto the thing. This morning however, he came to me and said, “I’ve come to the conclusion that I really don’t like running with music.” When I questioned him further, he explained that it made him feel shut out from the experience of his run. “I can’t hear the birds tweeting, or the wind. I can’t stand it.”

Ever since I can remember, runners have been hitting the roads with tunes. First it was the bulky Sony Walkmans, then the portable CD players that invariable mis-tracked every time you jumped a crack in the sidewalk. Apple changed all that for sure nearly 10 years ago when it brilliantly figured out the efficacy of dropping mp3 formatted data on to a mini hard drive – Voila! The iPod! And running to music was never the same.

There has been a lot of controversy over the use of mp3 players in races – and some USATF sanctioned races will still disqualify you  if you are caught competing with one. For the most part however, race directors look the other way. I know a lot of runners that absolutely will not work out without their tunes – claiming that listening to a solid beat simply makes them run better, faster harder. But I started wondering, is it all an illusion, or does listening to music while you run actually improve your performance?

 Last summer The New York Times reported the following:

For a study published last year, British researchers asked 12 healthy male college students to ride stationary bicycles while listening to music that, as the researchers primly wrote, “reflected current popular taste among the undergraduate population.” Each of the six songs chosen differed somewhat in tempo from the others.

The volunteers were told to ride the bicycles at a pace that they comfortably could maintain for 30 minutes. Then each rode in three separate trials, wearing headphones tuned to their preferred volume. Each had his heart rate, power output, pedal cadence, enjoyment of the music and feelings of how hard the riding felt monitored throughout each session. During one of the rides, the six songs ran at their normal tempos. During the other rides, the tempo of the tracks was slowed by 10 percent or increased by 10 percent. The riders were not informed about the tempo manipulations.

But their riding changed significantly in response. When the tempo slowed, so did their pedaling and their entire affect. Their heart rates fell. Their mileage dropped. They reported that they didn’t like the music much. On the other hand, when the tempo of the songs was upped 10 percent, the men covered more miles in the same period of time, produced more power with each pedal stroke and increased their pedal cadences. Their heart rates rose. They reported enjoying the music — the same music — about 36 percent more than when it was slowed. But, paradoxically, they did not find the workout easier. Their sense of how hard they were working rose 2.4 percent. The up-tempo music didn’t mask the discomfort of the exercise. But it seemed to motivate them to push themselves. As the researchers wrote, when “the music was played faster, the participants chose to accept, and even prefer, a greater degree of effort.”

The interplay between music and response to exercise is not fully understood, but it is currently believed that one of the primary benefits is music’s combined ability to distract attention away from the physical exertion while at the same time actually increasing heart rate and muscle response. This interplay between the brain and the physical body is pretty fascinating.

Researchers has postulated that what is probably happening here is that it is the body that first responds to the beat – your heart rate increases as a result – followed by normal biochemical reactions that join with the music to exhilarate and motivate you to move even faster. All good, right? Well, not quite.

It seems that the benefits of music actually decline during exercise at an intense level. For example, a 2004 study of runners found that during hard tempo runs, music was of no benefit at all. The hard realities of working out at a 90% effort simply couldn’t be improved upon by the addition of a fast beat. Also, a 2009 review of research published in The Sport Journal noted that the realities of effort level during hard exercise overrode the potential impact of music – that the physiological responses of fatigue dominated any benefit from psychological feedback.

It appears as though the primary benefit of music during moderate exercise is the “distraction factor” – diverting attention away from any fatigue you may be feeling during your run…as long as that fatigue does not become too great.

According to Nina Kraus, a Northwestern University professor of neurobiology, humans and songbirds are the only creatures on Earth that automatically “feel the beat” of a song. “Our bodies,” she says “are made to be moved by music.” It’s what makes us tap our toes and move our hips…or feel energized to go just one more mile.  We’re like biological metronomes, moving to a beat.

As for me, I go through alternate periods of donning the iPod and leaving it behind. I’ve gotten into the habit of listening to my breath and the pat, pat, pat of my running shoes on the ground. All this is blocked out when I’m rolling down the highway listening to Temple of the Dog. When I’m feeling un-motivated, I whip out the music, but for the most part I run without the buds.

What about you?

• Currently 3.0/5 Stars.

Tags: iPod, iPhone, music, effects of music on running, fatigue, effort level, USATF rules, psychology of running

LOL - I know I was laughing about that with Steve. I told him he would look like Princess Leah running down the street with the big doughnuts on the side of his head! ;-) Posted by: bmoore on Nov 23, 2010 at 09:31 AM

"I wonder if "headphones" will ultimately go the way of the phonograph needle?" I really hope not! They've been taking up less and less of the headphone section in the stores recently. I was at Meijer the other day, and they only had one pair of the old type of headphones. (Plus the really fancy $50 kinds with the huge ears that I've never seen anyone wear outside of a recording studio...not a practical choice for runners!) Posted by: MMarie on Nov 23, 2010 at 09:25 AM

Wow that is so weird - my husband has the same complaint about earbuds - that they don't stay in. We have a coupla old "walkman style" headphones still in the house and when he listens that's what he uses. I wonder if "headphones" will ultimately go the way of the phonograph needle? Posted by: bmoore on Nov 23, 2010 at 09:08 AM

I do about half and half. Running with music is distracting, sometimes, motivating, and keeps me from getting bored on long runs. I also sometimes listen to audiobooks on long runs. No beat or anything, but the distraction/entertainment factor holds. Every time I go to the store and see earbuds taking over the entire headphone section though...I have this fear that one of these days I won't be able to run with any sort of music at all. I can't wear earbuds (something to do with the shape of my ears...they just don't stay in), and if everyone else's taste keeps going the way it has been going, there'll be nothing but earbuds on the market! Posted by: MMarie on Nov 23, 2010 at 05:44 AM