Speakers on a treadmill console, wireless headphones and playlist-driven exercise bikes all rest on one assumption: that music makes cardio easier or better. That assumption can be tested. This article summarises two recent meta-analyses, one published in 2026 that examined performance, effort and physiological measures during aerobic exercise, and one published in 2025 that examined how exercise feels, and states how strong each finding is. It is about training and equipment choice, not injury prevention or treatment, and it is general information, not medical advice.
Performance and effort: the 2026 meta-analysis
Yang and colleagues, in Frontiers in Sports and Active Living (2026), searched eight databases up to 3 March 2026 for experimental studies that compared music with no-music or other non-musical conditions during aerobic exercise in physically active adults. They pooled 15 studies with 339 participants and rated certainty of evidence with the GRADE system. The results, with standardised mean differences (SMD) or mean differences (MD) and 95% confidence intervals (CI), were:
- Fixed-duration performance was better with music (SMD 0.39; CI 0.08 to 0.70). GRADE certainty was low.
- Time to exhaustion was longer in the primary analysis (SMD 1.89; CI 0.44 to 3.33), but with very high heterogeneity (I² 95%), meaning the studies varied widely in what they found, and very low certainty.
- Rating of perceived exertion was lower (SMD -0.36; CI -0.67 to -0.04), with moderate certainty, the highest of the outcomes reported.
- Blood lactate was lower (MD -0.86 mmol/L; CI -1.45 to -0.26), with low certainty.
- Heart rate was not significantly affected (MD -1.16 beats per minute; CI -3.57 to 1.26).
The authors concluded that music appears most consistently associated with reduced perceived exertion, and that performance and physiological effects were more outcome-dependent and should be interpreted cautiously. The evidence is drawn from 339 people in 15 studies, which is a small base, and the certainty ratings for most outcomes are low or very low.
How exercise feels: the 2025 meta-analysis
He and colleagues, in Applied Psychology: Health and Well-Being (2025), pooled 507 effect sizes from 59 studies using a multilevel meta-analysis of music’s effect on affective responses to a single exercise session. Music had a positive effect on affective valence (how pleasant the exercise felt; g = 0.403; CI 0.317 to 0.489) and on arousal (g = 0.391; CI 0.252 to 0.530). Exercise intensity, music tempo and motivational quality moderated the effect on both valence and arousal, and exercise habits moderated the effect on valence. Sex, type of exercise, whether the music was selected by the exerciser, and the way it was delivered were not significant moderators. The 507 effect sizes came from 59 studies, so several outcomes were taken from each study, which is why the authors used a multilevel model. The authors suggested that music may help create conditions for long-term exercise engagement, which is a proposal for further study, not a demonstrated outcome of that review.
What the two reviews cannot show
- They do not show better fitness over weeks. The first review analysed short-term performance and physiological measures, and the second analysed responses to acute exercise.
- They do not rank products. Neither compared machine speakers with headphones or one brand with another, so equipment choice cannot be drawn from them.
- They do not cover strength training. The 2026 review is restricted to aerobic exercise.
- Delivery mode and selection were not significant moderators of affective response in the 2025 review, which means the evidence does not favour either headphones or room speakers or self-chosen playlists.
Practical reading for a home cardio setup
The clearest finding, lower perceived exertion, links to the guides on perceived effort scales and console metrics: if perceived exertion is used to judge intensity, music may lower the rating without a change in heart rate, which the 2026 review found was not significantly affected. That is worth knowing when using effort to set training zones; the guides to zone 2 cardio and age-based maximum heart rate formulas discuss heart-rate-based approaches.
For noise, the guide to decibel claims on fitness equipment explains what a machine’s noise rating measures.
Frequently asked questions
Does music make cardio workouts more effective?
The 2026 meta-analysis found better fixed-duration performance and lower perceived exertion, with low to moderate certainty, and no significant effect on heart rate.
Does the type of music matter?
The 2025 meta-analysis reported that music tempo and motivational quality moderated the effect on how exercise felt.
The bottom line
A 2026 meta-analysis of 15 studies found that music during aerobic exercise was most consistently linked to lower perceived exertion, with moderate certainty, while performance and blood lactate results were low certainty and heart rate was not significantly changed. A 2025 meta-analysis of 59 studies found that music made acute exercise feel better and more arousing. Music is a low-cost addition to a cardio setup with modest, short-term effects, and neither review supports choosing equipment by its speakers.
Sources
- Yang et al., “Effects of listening to music during aerobic exercise on performance, fatigue, and psychological responses in physically active adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis”, Frontiers in Sports and Active Living (2026)
- He et al., “Effects of music on affective responses to acute exercise: A meta-analytic review and multilevel meta-analysis”, Applied Psychology: Health and Well-Being (2025)