You lost me at conjecture. It was empirical research.

He also wouldn’t have said that because he wouldn’t have wanted to admit it or admit to rejecting anything with vocals. And for example, we sold free jazz (amongst other things) alongside but it was never played in the office because it’s too distracting.

“There's no shortage of ambient electronic music labels, and it's not because CEOs need to use their music to concentrate to their business and marketing” - this general case of the existence of other ambient labels where the owners aren’t selling ambient music so they can focus on marketing doesn’t negate the verisimilitude of my specific case, or of my specific experience which you don’t have access to.

Yet you’re saying I’m not only incorrect so deliberately peddling falsehoods, my years of observation within the music industry and eventual conclusion is wholly wrong, and furthermore, you’re saying this in a thread about a paper which proposes that “music with lyrics interferes with cognitive tasks”, an example of which I am affirming.

Keep on with your hubris if you must though:

>You lost me at conjecture. It was empirical research. He also wouldn’t have said that because he wouldn’t have wanted to admit it

Yes, aka, mind-reading. Aka conjecture.

>* and furthermore, you’re saying this in a thread about a paper which proposes that “music with lyrics interferes with cognitive tasks”, an example of which I am affirming.*

Which is irrelevant. Nobody argued that music with lyrics doesn't interfere with cognitive tasks. Or that your label boss didn't prefer ambient while working, because he felt it didn't interfere with his cognitive tasks.

What I disagreed with was the mind-reading part:

"we released almost entirely ambient electronic music and eventually I figured that it was because he was also a business terminator and workaholic alongside, and any music with too much going on like vocals or complexity would have distracted his concentration away from the important task of getting it sold and out of the door. So a whole swathe of music buyers were convinced that this cutting edge music was hip and where the avant garde was happening when in reality it was mostly so he could concentrate on marketing to them. Any music out of that limited remit was rejected because he could listen and think about other things at the same time if the music was minimal and free of lyrics".

The Occam's razor explanation is that there's no big conspiracy: he had a label focusing on instrumental music (like countless others), and he happened to prefer one specific genre (ambient music) while working for focus. Doesn't mean he didn't also liked it artistically, or that he duped people selling it as art, while he only cared for it as focus music.

Maybe you just don't like ambient, and you made up the whole thing (which "he wouldn't admit" anyway), because you couldn't fathom somebody genuinely liking that genre artistically AND also preferring it as focus music, as opposed to merely advocating it as focus music.

Especially as you now added the little detail that he also sold other genres:

"we sold free jazz (amongst other things) alongside but it was never played in the office because it’s too distracting"

So, he sold other styles too. The only factual observation is that we prefered ambient music himself to focus while working. Not that he solely sold ambient because it was the only thing he could listen at at the office.

Sorry, the idea that he sold ambient only because it was all he could listen to while working, and duping buyers that thought it was hip and artistic choice while he only appreciated for focus purposes, still sounds bogus.

And that he sold other styles too, even though he didn't listen to them as focus music, already negates the "any music out of that limited remit was rejected because he could listen and think about other things at the same time if the music was minimal and free of lyrics".