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

[Flay]

Splendid ending - in flames!

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

Splendid ending - in flames!

And the Rhine.

[gurnemanz]

Rounded off (a pedant writes) with Rod announcing Gottlob Frick's participation - "lob" rendered as if it were a tennis shot.

[french frank]

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

and so on

On the other hand, what is the purpose of restricting the information the brain is given to process?

Different people listen to music in different ways. Different brains need different stimuli.

[doversoul1]

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.

But ultimately, wouldn’t like to know who painted it and what the subject is if you find the painting interests you? The rest (the views etc.) isn’t essential and can be added by various means. That was the point of the gallery analogue.

[kernelbogey]

In the end I was hooked, despite my earlier post, and listened to the last four hours; and found the juxtapositions exciting. (The intervals could have been extended just a little - Mahler 9/IV segued into Boulez rather alarmingly quickly!

But somehow the Immolation scene from Goetterdaemerung seemed a triumphant conclusion to an interesting project.

(The blog was less interesting than the music itself, although some posts added to the experience, notably giving the context for the Dvorak Cello Concerto as the month in which Russia had invaded Prague.)

[kernelbogey]

But ultimately, wouldn’t like to know who painted it and what the subject is if you find the painting interests you? The rest (the views etc.) isn’t essential and can be added by various means. That was the point of the gallery analogue.

In fact it was a single-artist show. But I agree if we refer to a mixed show.

My point really is to look first, not through the eyes of the curator(s). Compare and contrast today's broadcast.... and the 'innocent ear'.

[ARBurton]

I heard only bits here and there but hats off to Radio 3 for a truly enterprising event. I agree that sometimes a slight interval between pieces would have been nice, but that`s a minor point. And ending with the end of the Immolation by my beloved Wagner. I wonder if the entirety is on Listen Again.....

[Frances_iom]

I think the whole thing would be so much better (for THIS day) if there was no playlist at all
.

maybe unlike others I prefer to listen rather than have it played as aural wallpaper in hope I might like a snippet or two - and again unlike it seems many on this board I have other things to do than spend 12 hours listening to partial works but then I guess others can spare 12hrs (I wonder what Ravel would have thought in of just one movement used as wall paper?)

[MrGongGong]

On the other hand, what is the purpose of restricting the information the brain is given to process?

Different people listen to music in different ways. Different brains need different stimuli.

I think it can be a good thing sometimes to take away some information
So concerts in total darkness can be wonderful (someone I know works in a restaurant where dinner is served in a totally dark room)
I think that sometimes there are too many words

Different people do listen in different ways which is why this was a good idea

and what George Michael said

[MrGongGong]

maybe unlike others I prefer to listen rather than have it played as aural wallpaper

Why does not knowing the name of the composer or work make it "wallpaper" ?
It doesn't do that for me
I can listen to all sorts of things intently and sometimes for hours without knowing these things
A few days ago I made a 1 hour recording of the wind in a reed bed, a wonderful listening experience without title or opus number
the same can be true of "music" or even MUSIC

[kernelbogey]

Rounded off (a pedant writes) with Rod announcing Gottlob Frick's participation - "lob" rendered as if it were a tennis shot.

One could argue that the destruction of Valhalla was a 'Gottlob'....

(I'll get my Tarnhelm....)

[french frank]

(someone I know works in a restaurant where dinner is served in a totally dark room)

I won't make the obvious comment … but presumably this is entirely voluntary, like concerts in total darkness. There's no one removing the information from people who want it?

[Beef Oven!]

Three cheers for Radio Three!!!

Like Kernelbogey, I got hooked - what a way to end it, but it felt strange hearing the credits for Solti ua!

Perhaps my earlier suggestion of once a week was a bit rash, but R3 should do this once a month IMV.

Only one bad moment for me was being left high & dry on the Rite (as peterthekeys has already said).

[MrGongGong]

I won't make the obvious comment … but presumably this is entirely voluntary, like concerts in total darkness. There's no one removing the information from people who want it?

I didn't realise that Radio 3 was compulsory
I'm not suggesting (nor even think that a mainstream radio station would do such a thing) that ALL broadcasting of music should have NO information
just thinking about it a bit more than getting irritated that the "normal" things aren't there.

It also (as Dahlhaus talks about) involves questions of what we mean by "the information"

I was gripped by one of the things I heard at random today and stopped the car to listen to the end of it, in the spirit of the event I'm not going to find out what it was.
Sometimes listening to music can be like watching the sun going down, you don't have to have a record of it for it to be significant.