A Lark Ascending

They can be terribly precious. They go into raptures over a potato seedling as if it's...well...Schnabel! The only one I watch irregularly is Gardeners' World. The woman on there who looks like she might have been a punk 30 years ago drives me nuts. I throw things at the TV. Old plastic plant pots, withered weeds etc.

And all these years I've been playing the plants Delius and Debussy! http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2013/apr/19/black-sabbath-radio-gardener-chris-beardshaw I must try some Albert Ayler in the greenhouse.

The posters on Amazon UK got well worked up about that. Wonder if it's the same poster with an axe to grind! http://www.amazon.co.uk/Wagner-Overtures-London-Classical-Players/dp/B000002RVJ/ref=sr_1_1?s=music&ie=UTF8&qid=1366522749&sr=1-1&keywords=wagner+norrington

Sony are ready for the box set addicts:

Not instrumental, but this is a very enjoyable recent disc of vocal bleeding chunks:

"I don't believe it!" I liked this bit. Any sign of the Euro Free Improv cruise yet?

Not sure of the day but I think the number one that month was "Sumer is icumen in, (Lhude sing cuccu)" Possibly the Benedictine remix.

I 'did' that for 'A' Level back in the early 70s. Didn't much care for it. Reread it a few years back and enjoyed it a bit more. Well, that's one that hasn't stood the test of time. It was on my 20th Century Literature reading list at Leeds University in 1962, along with giants like Lawrence, Eliot and Yeats. In a seminar with Geoffrey Hill (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geoffrey_Hill) when I said that while Lawrence described his characters' state of soul, Snow was concerned with whether or not they got promoted, Hill responded by describing Snow's novel as "Whitehall gibberish". I seem to recall Snow was obsessed with the division between the 'arts' and the 'sciences'. Apparently people worried about that sort of thing then.

I don't remember.

I 'did' that for 'A' Level back in the early 70s. Didn't much care for it. Reread it a few years back and enjoyed it a bit more.

EA 216 Aluminium Group Soft Pad Lounge Chair Designed In 1969 By Ray & Charles Eames For Herman Miller, Inc., Zeeland Michigan. You're welcome. Clever clogs!

Could be if you entered for "Mastermind" Heretic!

Buying records.

I know there used to be a viewpoint at the more extreme end of the UK avant garde that music only counted at its moment of creation. Recording it, even for documentary purposes, lost most of its meaning. I've always felt that the frisson you can get at a live event is not necessarily just about the music; lots of other things come into play. Personally, I like the ability to unravel music on successive plays that you get from recordings.

Yes, hairs on the back of the neck are not restricted to new listening. I probably buy far too many recordings to get the intensity that I experienced as a kid; but I remember the general pattern for me with a strong new record was: 1. First listen: Getting your bearings, responding to novelty, sometimes a 'wow' impact but rarely. 2. Second listen: A sense of having heard parts before; getting the shape of the music; starting to realise this was a record I was going to really like. 3. Third listen: That's when it really kicked in - the hairs on the back of the neck. In particular, striking harmonies really made their effect. There seems to be not just an element of 'new' happening there but also the benefit of familiarity. Perhaps the survey would reveal different responses if it monitored reactions on a third or fourth hearing rather than assuming that conclusions could be drawn from first hearing. Of course, a fair bit of live music only ever gets a first hearing. And, pre-recording age, that's all much of it ever got.

Windy

Haven't heard that. Oddly my brain never gets rewarded by Catholic hymns - 'Mary so mild, star of the sea etc'. Yet I get an immediate rush from Anglican hymns. Now, I was brought up going to Catholic churches. So why does the Anglican stuff reward me? Is it because of the weird overlap into English 20thC classical music and even (in the case of tunes put in by RVW in the early 20thC) the echo of folk music? Or is it just the 'intellect' rebelling - I remember being very worried about stepping into an Anglican church around age 12 as I though I was committing some huge sin? Actually, I suspect that it's just because Catholics hymns (like modern Anglican hymns) are just too slushy!

But what is interesting (in respect to this thread) is why your brain should react that way to that unfamiliar music and not other unfamiliar music? I don't think it's because of the 'greatness' of the music. In 1978 I bought a 3 LP set called 'The Age of Ellington' - within a few plays I was instantly smitten. I had no obvious context for it apart from hearing a few Ellington tunes in arrangements by Mike Westbrook. Maybe I'd subconsciously picked up on things played at home as a kid but I didn't live in a jazz-friendly household. My listening context was 70s prog-rock, jazz-rock, some early 20thC classical and a few jazz records I'd started picking up over the previous two years. To misuse my cod-Freudianisms, I'd say a lot of my early jazz buying was 'super-ego' driven (things I'd read were worthy) before they hit the brain pleasing stage. But for some reason Ellington made that journey very quickly. Even odder is the fact that it would be another 15 years or so before much else from that era connected. And yet...this morning I was listening to the BBC CD review programme exploring versions of Liszt's 2nd Piano Concerto. Now I may not have the technical knowledge but I think I've got enough listening context to take that in. Yet still Liszt (and most mid-19thC classical music) eludes me. Why does my brain consistently fail to reward me for listening to Liszt, Chopin et al when it clearly has a direct emotional effect on others? Has my 'intellect' decided in advance that I'm not going to like Liszt and blocked it out. All very strange.

Can vary. In most cases listening to new music that I have absolutely no context for just provokes boredom. Japanese court music, for example. But occasionally something can come completely out of the blue and make me go wow! Though I suspect even there my brain is subconsciously connecting things in the new music that relate to music I already know. Interesting example - I discovered gagaku (Japanese court music) in Kyoto and was instantly captivated. But I suspect that the mental connections you mentioned were working, to an extent; I remember telling a Japanese person there that it reminded me of the blues, with the bent notes of the wind instruments. After MG's thread on West African kora players a couple of years ago, I started exploring that music. I enjoyed it right away, but it took awhile to get past the stage where it all sounded alike to me. I'm still not an expert, but I have a little bit of context when I listen now, and it doesn't all sound alike anymore. Your comment reminds me of the first time I heard Albert Ayler, when I was about 16. I had a sampler album from Arista/Freedom with Ayler's "Saints" on it. The first time I heard it, I was just horrified - but also fascinated. I couldn't believe that someone would want to create music like that, but I wanted to know why someone would. So I played the track again. On the third spin, I could hear the structure of the piece - it was an improvised rondo, with Ayler returning to the same melody at various points throughout the piece. Once the piece "made sense" to me, I could start getting into the emotional message - before I "understood" it, at least a little, it was just noise to me. Yes, I've had many experiences like that. I think it was having them very early in my listening life that kept me wanting to try out new things. I'm intrigued by what it is we respond to with (for want of a better expression) avant garde music that deliberately eschews emotionalism. Maybe I've got this wrong, but I get the impression that a lot of post-WWII classical music deliberately rejected music that directly manipulated the emotions - partly out of a desire to constantly create from the new, partly out of a suspicion of how the hyper-emotionalism of late-Romantic music seemed to have supported the political catastrophes of the earlier part of the century. For years I, like most people, have found that music forbidding but in the last ten years or so have been working round to it. Partly a result of reading I've done, partly just hearing more but also the influence of the second long series of the German TV saga 'Heimat' that revolves round a Boulez/Stockhausen like figure in the 60s. Hearing all manner of music of that era in the soundtrack really got my interest. But I don't hear it like I hear Sibelius or Mahler. It doesn't bring those tingling spine moments that I'd associate with the 'brain rewarding' idea of the article. It does bring a more abstract kind of engagement. Which again makes me wonder if it is appealing to something quite different in the brain. And maybe that is what is intended. Maybe its the old Dionysus/Apollo dichotomy at work.

I'm sure you are right. A bit like the excitement you can get heading for the shops; then when you've spent your money the attraction of the goods diminishes and you start thinking of your next visit. I'm wondering where classicists get their kicks from if it is the 'new' the brain rewards most. Maybe that's just an over-developed super-ego pulling the id firmly into line! (Apologies for amateur psychology). Though that super-ego can also be telling you that you ought to be listening to Anthony Braxton when your id is craving Jimmy Smith.

Can vary. In most cases listening to new music that I have absolutely no context for just provokes boredom. Japanese court music, for example. But occasionally something can come completely out of the blue and make me go wow! Though I suspect even there my brain is subconsciously connecting things in the new music that relate to music I already know. I think I get the greatest excitement from new music when there are clearly things I can relate to alongside elements that leave me at sea. At that point there's that feeling I recall from my teens of the promise of entering new realms of discovery. It's fascinating how we do relate to new music we hear. There's that elemental reaction you get (like/dislike) but at the same time your 'intellect' is consciously at work, attempting to decide if you ought to be liking it or not. A long time since I read any Freud but ids, egos and superegos come to mind. ******************* There's also the issue of why, as people get older, most prefer to live with their existing music rather than carry on exploring. If the brain 'rewards' new listening, why are most people content not to go down that path?

Half way through season 9. I just love these programmes.

Well look on the bright side. It would seem to justify our endlessly buying new records (though maybe not reissues).

New music 'rewarding for the brain' Not sure I really understand this. Why should new music excite those parts of the brain anymore than familiar music that thrills you when returning to it after a while. The shape of things to come, baby.

Interesting article, 7/4