River of Music: 12 hrs Non-stop Music: Sunday 30 October

[Serial_Apologist]

Too much information ah.

I am happy to imagine that for the earlier years of the River of Music at least the Team will be arrayed in proper Third Programme formal wear.

As for the event itself, I'll be happy to tune in from time to time as is my Sunday wont, and if it grabs me at any point I'll linger a while. But I warn all concerned, I don't get up early. No Breakfasteer am I. Nor a twitterer nor any othererer. The Music better be good! Happy listening,

But how then will you know what you're catching up with?

[french frank]

These are not contradictory statements.

Not completely, no, but in the context of a description of what was to come, one described it as 'refreshing', the other saw it as negative.

In the end, I suppose it depends whether one is being asked to tolerate something which is an unwelcome, permanent state of affairs (in which case I'm all for keeping up the pressure ) or whether it's something that's one off, which after all one doesn't have to tolerate at all.

I want playlists to study in advance. I told the controller a few weeks back that 'people want playlists in advance'. This River will not, I presume, have playlists in advance (unless they're very quick about it). What I would do is tune in, have a listen, and if it doesn't make satisfying listening go away and do something else.

[Padraig]

But how then will you know what you're catching up with?

I'm sure I'll recognise a piece or two, maybe a pattern or thread. It's a good way of catching up with pieces you haven't heard for ages. It's a jigsaw puzzle where some will have many pieces, some a few, some none. But of course, it has not started yet so who knows what it will be like. I'm prepared to be pleasantly challenged in some way.

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

Maybe it'll be a stream of river music: Vltava, Water Music, Die schöne Müllerian, Das Rheingold, Song of the Volga Boatmen, etc.

[Serial_Apologist]

Not completely, no, but in the context of a description of what was to come, one described it as 'refreshing', the other saw it as negative.

In the end, I suppose it depends whether one is being asked to tolerate something which is an unwelcome, permanent state of affairs (in which case I'm all for keeping up the pressure ) or whether it's something that's one off, which after all one doesn't have to tolerate at all.

I want playlists to study in advance. I told the controller a few weeks back that 'people want playlists in advance'. This River will not, I presume, have playlists in advance (unless they're very quick about it). What I would do is tune in, have a listen, and if it doesn't make satisfying listening go away and do something else.

Mr GG, if I read him correctly, seems to welcome this approach on the Cageian principle that the only option when faced with new music is to listen without preconceptions of any kind. One problem with that is that some kinds of music carry underlying preconceptions are part of the package. There is also the problem of the preconception that is needed to rid oneself of the spoiler.

[Daniel]

Then you're very lucky, iimss, Daniel. I fall into the category of people who, when listening "blind" to something they haven't been exposed to before, find themselves comparing the music to what they are already familiar with. I do this all the time, particularly with 18th century music - ah, is this Haydn or Mozart? - for instance. My other "problem" consists in wanting to know something about the composer - when and in what circumstances did s/he write this piece of music, etc etc - since this always helps thicken the plot, so to speak.

But finding out all those things afterwards allows you a certain time when you don't know them, a time to me, that can be quite valuable. An innocent ear is a precious commodity.

[doversoul1]

Mr GG, if I read him correctly, seems to welcome this approach on the Cageian principle that the only option when faced with new music is to listen without preconceptions of any kind. One problem with that is that some kinds of music carry underlying preconceptions are part of the package. There is also the problem of the preconception that is needed to rid oneself of the spoiler.

I think the problem with that principle where this programme is concerned is that the programme is said to be ‘curated’ in that the music is played within a specific context the descriptions of which are supplied to be accessed. Of course, one can ignore all that and just hear it as an 'acoustic phenomenon', according, also, to Mr GG.

70 handpicked pieces that reflect the diversity of styles championed by the Third Programme over its 70 year history.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/articles/20jDL514GP8wjzcLlMzJrxx/five-ways-to-dive-into-radio-3-s-river-of-music

[french frank]

Mr GG, if I read him correctly, seems to welcome this approach on the Cageian principle that the only option when faced with new music is to listen without preconceptions of any kind. One problem with that is that some kinds of music carry underlying preconceptions are part of the package. There is also the problem of the preconception that is needed to rid oneself of the spoiler.

Though not the only option, surely? Apparently when Words and Music started, one aspect that was enjoyed was the 'blind tasting' experience.

What I would see this as is an 'experiment'. If it doesn't work for most people, it could be considered a 'failure'. Is that such a big deal? If listeners positively resent being stripped of their preconceptions they will probably consider it a failure.

I would rather equate it to doing a crossword puzzle or quiz without cheating (don't turn over the page to check an answer if you're stuck): you have to fall back on your own resources.

[soileduk]

Whenever I refresh the web page for the River of Music the little red window at top right that shows the piece "now playing" reads "THE HORROR!".

[Bryn]

Whenever I refresh the web page for the River of Music the little red window at top right that shows the piece "now playing" reads "THE HORROR!".

When I switched back to the River's home page it did very briefly flash up "THE HORROR!" but literally just for a split second, then it displayed the title of the relevant item being played. As I just emailed them, "All a bit CFM so far. I do hope it gets rather more BBC Radio 3 as the day progresses."

[The attributions seem to be getting more and more asynchronous with what is playing.]

[ardcarp]

I haven't read any of the above, but I'M IN FAVOUR of today's River. Was it an extremely clever ruse on the part of R3 management to precede this experiment with the utterly incompetent, tongue-tied, stumbling, bumbling Tom McK ? It makes the absence of presentation totally welcome..

[Richard Tarleton]

[The attributions seem to be getting more and more asynchronous with what is playing.]

I was just going to remark, will anyway, the website is lagging two pieces behind what's on, which rather defeats the object.

[PJPJ]

When I switched back to the River's home page it did very briefly flash up "THE HORROR!" but literally just for a split second, then it displayed the title of the relevant item being played. As I just emailed them, "All a bit CFM so far. I do hope it gets rather more BBC Radio 3 as the day progresses."

[The attributions seem to be getting more and more asynchronous with what is playing.]

I'm listening to a nice performance of Alassio which doesn't seem to be on the menu....... I wonder who's playing. Sir Nev......

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p04d7mw4

[Bryn]

I was just going to remark, will anyway, the website is lagging two pieces behind what's on, which rather defeats the object.

They appear to have caught up, for the moment.

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

So far this has confirmed my doubts. Breakfast without the chat - single movements and bleeding chunks playing a significant part.

And no playlist.