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

[kernelbogey]

Frances, I got to it via the R3 schedule page and links, as usual.

[french frank]

the link doesn't work for me - where is it actually based - I presume as per FF my security settings prevent access

Otherwise you just scroll down the page.

'Wallpaper' is what a large number of people want. If Radio 3 were to ignore that at all times it would halve its listening figures - and probably halve the amount of money it was allowed. We would be back to gramophone records ("No expense spared"). Ignoring all developments in the media/broadcasting and listener habits would be a far quicker way to get the station shut down. At least this way eople have the choice not to listen.

As a concept, I think it's very imaginative. It's not an ordinary day's broadcasting - it's designed to incorporate the various kinds of music that the Third/Radio 3 has played over the 70 years (jazz, world, classical, contemporary) - not what was 'best' at the time I first started listening.

The only 'gimmick' is the 70 pieces in each half, which limits the number of full length pieces

[Beresford]

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..

You mean he sounds like a normal person?
I do get the impression that R3 presenters have recently become slightly more free to say things about their personal tastes, which could sound unprofessional, but I think it is a breath of fresh air. They must have to present some music that they don't like.

[oddoneout]

how do you locate the playlist ? eg for this morning - I followed Brynn's link but just got the usual bbc junk intro - no playlist - do I need javascript,, flash or what ?

I've just had a similar problem, but via the R3 website. The Part 1 playlist(which I had looked at this morning) had gone and had to be accessed via the play it again sam widget, which meant a quick scramble for the shut-up button to avoid hearing the part1 soundtrack over the part 2 'live' on the radio. I would have appreciated a separate playlist, clearly signposted, rather than that faff. But then I cling to the now outmoded view that the website is there to provide information quickly and easily, so I appreciate that the fault is all mine.

[Maclintick]

Is this anything more than a day-long "Spot-the-Tune" ? Surely R3's USPs ( to adopt a dread marketing-type term) are that the programmes are carefully-crafted & presented by people who know what they're talking about ( I don't care whether they called "trusted guides" as long as they display the requisite knowledge e.g. Jon Swain & James Jolly on Sun morning, missed today) & that there's a thread of live music-making. To abandon both these principles seems perverse. It would have been a damn sight more interesting if the mostly ancient recordings were interspersed with some live offerings of contemporary performers dotted around the country. Let's face it, an uninterrupted stream of presentation-less recorded music is what you get on any number of internet channels....

[Beresford]

....

To my mind, one of the things that art can do (and I include music) is to intrigue, perplex and baffle. People seem fine with this in other artforms but often not in music.

I agree, and "People" includes many professional musicians (but I only know a few).
I would love to know why - but maybe that's because I like being intrigued, perplexed, and baffled, sometimes.

[oddoneout]

I think the whole thing would be so much better (for THIS day) if there was no playlist at all
If people were then really inspired then they will have to use their ears and curiosity to find out what music was being played.

I'm slightly puzzled as to what you mean by this. How would I go about finding out what the bit of music I heard sometime between 3 and 4 this afternoon was if there were no playlist at all. Sorry if I'm being obtuse here.

[teamsaint]

It's definitely worth a go sometimes (SOMETIMES) ... I've just been on a very long journey and randomly turned on the radio to hear a massive orchestral piece with shades of Gamelan BUT not Britten, Mc Phee or anything I knew already. So having completely forgotten about this river thing listened to the end to find out what it was half thinking I might investigate but then it was something completely different. Which got me musing on the desire to own, classify and possess. So then I thought that it was perfectly fine on this occasion not to know for once.



Music is an 'acoustic phenomenon' (amongst other things) and it's fine to experience it as such.



Depends on what you mean by 'work'.
To my mind, one of the things that art can do (and I include music) is to intrigue, perplex and baffle. People seem fine with this in other artforms but often not in music.

Perhaps" people "are perplexed and baffled enough in their day to day lives ?!
And I'm not sure that your generalisation is any more true of music than ,say, literature.
Anyway, as Beresford suggests, those who like being preplexed by music will find what they want, the rest will have to wait for that state to happen to them. Or not.

Anyway,I heard about half an hour. It didnt intrigue,perplex,or baffle really. I wish it had.

[Beef Oven!]

I want to get my knickers in a twist about today’s broadcasting, but I’m just no good at it.

[visualnickmos]

I think the whole thing would be so much better (for THIS day) if there was no playlist at all
If people were then really inspired then they will have to use their ears and curiosity to find out what music was being played.
It would also be a bit of a change from the urge to categorise, list and possess.

How exactly would that be possible if one has no point of reference?

[Beef Oven!]

How exactly would that be possible if one has no point of reference?

The point of reference is the music 'you just heard’. The rest is down to the limits of your enthusiasm and tenacity. There’s a long track-record of people identifying bits of music from the flimsiest of leads.

[MrGongGong]

How exactly would that be possible if one has no point of reference?

Don't know
which is why it would be an interesting challenge
There could be unlabelled downloads (one idea) which would then have the positive effect of folks who were really interested communicating with others and asking questions etc

I'm not in charge of anything and don't even want to be
but there's much to be discovered listening and discussing rather than reading

[kernelbogey]

Others have made the comparison with visiting a gallery and needing the descriptive labels.

Following the lead of a friend, when recently visiting an art exhibition I experimented with just looking carefully at the pictures before reading the accompanying text - which inevitably dictates a certain 'view'. There is a certain freedom in doing this.

[MrGongGong]

I'm slightly puzzled as to what you mean by this. How would I go about finding out what the bit of music I heard sometime between 3 and 4 this afternoon was if there were no playlist at all. Sorry if I'm being obtuse here.

Why do you want/need to know?
Is one question to ask

How is the experience of hearing music changed by knowing who created it?
Is the experience diminished by not knowing?

and so on



Of course, if I (or RB, AH etc) had written it then the reason to know is so you can go and buy it

[Alison]

No Beethoven?