# Do visuals take away from your focus on music?



## eljr (Aug 8, 2015)

I have read that when some people listen to music they prefer closed eyes in order to more fully appreciate music. To help focus. 

OK, I get it. Remove other stimuli and more resource is devoted to the stimuli you wish to concentrate on.

I would submit however that although a fruitful and necessary approach in science, in a sensory rich endeavor like enjoying art, music in particular, this approach it takes away from having a fuller experience. 

Is this fairly common ritual more of an outgrowth of how recorded sound has evolved? 
In other words why did we continue to separate sound from sound and vision when sound and vision became available in unison? 
Because it suited radio? 
Because there are lots of activities that we can do while listening to music that we can't with our eyes occupied?


So, has the ability to enjoy sound when sound and vision is not possible shaped our ideas of musical enjoyment? 
or
Is there truly a higher enjoyment possible by depriving oneself of our dominate sense, vision? 

......We don't turn sound off to enjoy movies. :devil:


----------



## Guest (Mar 25, 2018)

Well, to state the obvious: listening to recorded music only involves hearing, whereas watching a film requires hearing and sight.

When listening to a CD, my enjoyment is not increased by staring at the gas fire.


----------



## Biffo (Mar 7, 2016)

The majority of my listening is from CDs and downloads so there is no visual content and unless I am reading a text I do it with my eyes shut; there is very little of interest to look at, not even a gas fire. The same goes for radio broadcasts. Various orchestras now have streaming services where you can watch live (or recorded live) concerts. On the rare occasion I listen to them I set the concert up on my PC and stream it through my hi-fi; I rarely bother with the visual content. Often, when watching TV broadcasts of concerts I find myself closing my eyes as the visual content is rarely of any interest.

Most of my music DVDs are of operas or documentaries; I very rarely buy DVDs of concerts; again, I find the visual content of little interest and what there is doesn't bear repetition.


----------



## eljr (Aug 8, 2015)

Biffo said:


> The majority of my listening is from CDs and downloads so there is no visual content and unless I am reading a text I do it with my eyes shut; there is very little of interest to look at, not even a gas fire. The same goes for radio broadcasts. Various orchestras now have streaming services where you can watch live (or recorded live) concerts. On the rare occasion I listen to them I set the concert up on my PC and stream it through my hi-fi; I rarely bother with the visual content. Often, when watching TV broadcasts of concerts I find myself closing my eyes as the visual content is rarely of any interest.
> 
> Most of my music DVDs are of operas or documentaries; I very rarely buy DVDs of concerts; again, I find the visual content of little interest and what there is doesn't bear repetition.


I understand.

But is that because we are conditioned to listen to music without visuals?


----------



## Guest (Mar 25, 2018)

Biffo said:


> The majority of my listening is from CDs and downloads so there is no visual content and unless I am reading a text I do it with my eyes shut; there is very little of interest to look at, not even a gas fire. The same goes for radio broadcasts. Various orchestras now have streaming services where you can watch live (or recorded live) concerts. On the rare occasion I listen to them I set the concert up on my PC and stream it through my hi-fi; I rarely bother with the visual content. Often, when watching TV broadcasts of concerts I find myself closing my eyes as the visual content is rarely of any interest.
> 
> Most of my music DVDs are of operas or documentaries; I very rarely buy DVDs of concerts; again, I find the visual content of little interest and what there is doesn't bear repetition.


No gas fire? You need to come round to my house for an immersive multi-media experience.


----------



## LezLee (Feb 21, 2014)

I rarely go to live concerts but I do keep my eyes open and watch whichever instruments are being played. However there is a certain distraction in looking at what the musicians are wearing and small gestures such as shaking their hair, adjusting their glasses etc. There’s a danger I would fall asleep if I closed my eyes.
At home whether I’m listening to the radio or playing CDs, I’m always doing something else, knitting, needlework, doing crosswords, reading. Doesn’t make me a bad person!


----------



## Blancrocher (Jul 6, 2013)

Out of curiosity, has anyone ever been to a Georg Friedrich Haas concert where they turn the lights out? It's usually described by reviewers as an unsettling experience: the space becomes truly pitch black so that you couldn't see anything if you tried. I've seen filmed concerts that give an indication of what it's like, but I'd like to experience the real thing. I can imagine it being an interesting effect in live concerts involving any composer (blackening the hall for the slow movement of the Waldstein, for example, and letting some light in with the opening trills of the rondo). 

I can imagine that Haas has shared his thoughts about the effects of sensory deprivation?


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

I find visuals somewhat of a distraction when listening to music except in a live setting as a member of an audience. Watching video of a live performance of classical music is a distant second to being there live, but with non-classical music, concert video can be quite effective when the camera remains focused on the performer (usually a singer). The pleasure comes from being part of a crowd joined together in shared intent and appreciation of stirring music. It's not so much that one's engagement with the music itself is enhanced; it's the linking of two powerful emotional triggers/stimulants.


----------



## eljr (Aug 8, 2015)

dogen said:


> Well, to state the obvious: listening to recorded music only involves hearing,


Not for myself.

Well, not for full enjoyment.

I find the setting can really add value. I would never listen to music, for example, in a basement, perfectly constructed listing room. 
I need windows and a nice room to enjoy to the fullness.


----------



## Guest (Mar 25, 2018)

Blancrocher said:


> Out of curiosity, has anyone ever been to a Georg Friedrich Haas concert where they turn the lights out? It's usually described by reviewers as an unsettling experience: the space becomes truly pitch black so that you couldn't see anything if you tried. I've seen filmed concerts that give an indication of what it's like, but I'd like to experience the real thing. I can imagine it being an interesting effect in live concerts involving any composer (blackening the hall for the slow movement of the Waldstein, for example, and letting some light in with the opening trills of the rondo).
> 
> I can imagine that Haas has shared his thoughts about the effects of sensory deprivation?


Here are Haas' thoughts (well, some of them):

Q. The element of darkness is particularly significant in in vain, did you always envisage a section of darkness when you first sat down to write this work?

A. No, it happened almost by chance. In Berlin, when I was invited by the DAAD in 1999/2000, I had a discussion with the stage director Bettina Wackernagel. We spoke about my opera Adolf Wölfli, which I had composed in 1981. There were sections in complete darkness, and light flashes which replaced the conductor. She encouraged me to continue. I was not sure whether it is correct to use darkness in a composition about enlightenment. But I felt a strong instinct driving me to do it. I was not consciously aware of my reasoning, however eventually I received the answer via the words of the music critic Marco Frei. On reviewing my opera KOMA, which also has passages of darkness, he said the following: "Indeed, this pitch-black requires a special manner of both playing and conducting […] Through close listening and a heightened awareness of each other, Haas creates a sense of shared humanity in the room that is often lacking in society. Here, Haas has created a solution in sound - a beacon of hope." Marco Frei


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

eljr said:


> I have read that when some people listen to music they prefer closed eyes in order to more fully appreciate music. To help focus.
> 
> OK, I get it. Remove other stimuli and more resource is devoted to the stimuli you wish to concentrate on.
> 
> ...


I prefer to listen to music with an appropriate image to look at; it enhances what I am listening to.


----------



## Biffo (Mar 7, 2016)

eljr said:


> I understand.
> 
> But is that because we are conditioned to listen to music without visuals?


I don't think we are conditioned at all. As a child I spent more time watching television or reading than I did listening to music. Later I spent a lot of time going to live music events (concerts, operas etc). Nowadays most of my music listening is done without visuals but that is for the reasons outlined above.

The dinosaur television in the room where I listen to most of my music doesn't have the technology for streaming concerts and even if it had I don't think I would bother.


----------



## eljr (Aug 8, 2015)

Biffo said:


> I don't think we are conditioned at all. As a child I spent more time watching television or reading than I did listening to music. Later I spent a lot of time going to live music events (concerts, operas etc). Nowadays most of my music listening is done without visuals but that is for the reasons outlined above.
> 
> The dinosaur television in the room where I listen to most of my music doesn't have the technology for streaming concerts and even if it had I don't think I would bother.


fair enough

I submit that had we created pathways that included visuals in our brain when we listen to music we would be less inclined to think of music as independent of sight.

For example, I would doubt that people who enjoyed music before recorded music ever thought to close their eyes to enhance enjoyment.


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

eljr said:


> I submit that had we created pathways that included visuals in our brain when we listen to music we would be less inclined to think of music as independent of sight.


If I don't experience a mental image whilst listening to a piece of music then I wont like it. It's probably why I do not enjoy most of Mozart's music.

I suppose I see music as expression - and that that expression should create a certain imagery for the listener.

That's my view and experience anyway.


----------



## Kevin Pearson (Aug 14, 2009)

It is possible to be so taken with the quality and beauty of what is being played to be unaware of what you may or may not be looking at. When I was a teenager I used to hold the record cover and look at it while playing the album but I was really lost in the music. Today I prefer to sit in a recliner with my headphones on and just listen. I may read the liner notes or may not. I often close my eyes and concentrate on the experience of listening.


----------



## jenspen (Apr 25, 2015)

eljr said:


> fair enough
> 
> I submit that had we created pathways that included visuals in our brain when we listen to music we would be less inclined to think of music as independent of sight.
> 
> For example, I would doubt that people who enjoyed music before recorded music ever thought to close their eyes to enhance enjoyment.


I've given this a bit of thought because not only with recorded music but also at concerts, even private concerts given by friends, I like to listen with eyes closed to any purely musical performance. For one thing, I get bored after a while with watching the performance. Secondly, I can then relax and give my butterfly brain a chance to concentrate on the sound.

But now you have made me think. And it seems to me that I must have pathways in my brain that include visuals when I listen to music because I like to visualise shape and movement, even colour, while I listen, eyes closed. I have thought that I do that deliberately but maybe it's synaesthesia.


----------



## eljr (Aug 8, 2015)

jenspen said:


> I have thought that I do that deliberately but maybe it's synaesthesia.


nice post

just a quick comment on the quoted line.

I doubt we do much of anything "deliberately." 

But that is a whole different conversation to be had in a neuropsychology forum.


----------



## Genoveva (Nov 9, 2010)

In the hope that I have understood the question properly, my answer would be yes, visuals do detract from my focus on music. When listening to classical music in the home, I much prefer just to listen to the music rather than in combination with any accompanying video like you-tube, or a dvd or a tv recording. But I can't just listen to classical music on its own whilst doing nothing else. Instead, I'm usually at my PC doing one or more of a wide variety of other things.


----------



## Blancrocher (Jul 6, 2013)

I enjoy watching opera dvds with beautiful singers. I have nothing to say in my defense.


----------



## FLighT (Mar 7, 2013)

When live I spend 99% of my time watching and listening. Even though I know what's coming musically I find both senses enhance my overall enjoyment. I only close my eyes when live to remind myself of the fact that all the subtle aspects of reproduced sound in the home (over speakers or earphones) that audiophiles (and I'm one of them) argue and swoon over just don't happen in the concert hall, for a lot of reasons that I won't bore anyone with here. 

When a conductor balances the various orchestral groups the sound I get in the hall from my favored balcony seating is completely different from what I hear in recordings made by a collection of microphones (which effectively become your ears), dangling a few feet over the heads of the musicians, that’s then balanced by a producer/engineer at a mixing console in another room / acoustic space altogether.

I change my expectations when listening to recordings at home. Any visuals can be intrusive even if it’s the same view over and over. But, once I get drawn into the music I find my eyes are looking but not seeing, so I don’t generally feel the need to close my eyes at home.


----------



## eljr (Aug 8, 2015)

Genoveva said:


> In the hope that I have understood the question properly, my answer would be yes, visuals do detract from my focus on music. When listening to classical music in the home, I much prefer just to listen to the music rather than in combination with any accompanying video like you-tube, or a dvd or a tv recording. But I can't just listen to classical music on its own whilst doing nothing else. Instead, I'm usually at my PC doing one or more of a wide variety of other things.


you, like me, need to be constantly stimulated.

very cool


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

Some music is very evocative of images, like Vivaldi’s 4 Seasons, some film music, symphonies by Kallinikov, Harty, and Vaughan Williams, and I get transported no matter what I’m staring at. But with most music I completely isolate mentally what I’m looking at with what I’m hearing. Closing my eyes, usually makes me fall asleep  after a few minutes, even while I’m sitting.

Mentally music comes just as sound/notes over time, with certain timbres and colours. Sometimes it is more structured, sometimes less. I don’t try to imagine the score or anything, but over time the music impresses tracks or prints.


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

Concert music is meant to be actively listened to, and I find that if I do anything else while it's on that the music goes in one ear and out the other without really hearing it. Can't read, watch tv with CC on, can't do puzzles...nothing except read along with a score, and even that detracts. It's hard for those of us who are borderline ADHD. It also depends on what the music is. I keep several sets of cds in the trunk when I drive long distances. I really like Glazunov on those occasions and really get into it. I also keep Tchaikovsky ballets and Beethoven symphonies. Doing housework to things like Dvorak Slavonic Dances and Liszt Hungarian Rhapsodies is also fine. But Mahler, Bruckner, Brahms - that's sit down and listen music!


----------



## Joe B (Aug 10, 2017)

eljr said:


> I have read that when some people listen to music they prefer closed eyes in order to more fully appreciate music. To help focus. *I do this on occassion myself.*
> 
> Ok, I get it. Remove other stimuli and more resource is devoted to the stimuli you wish to concentrate on. *I'm not sure that is accurate. I know it sounds logical, but I think that vision is so dominant in our perception of the world that we close our eyes so we can get as much out of the sound as we can without the distraction of the visual. I don't think we can reallocate horsepower as it were. The neural pathways are already established. I don't believe we can engage/disengage pathways by merely opening and closing of the eyes. It takes years of yoga practice to begin to gain control over neural pathways that are generally not "open to the public." For me, I think closing my eyes just ensures I don't miss out on anything my ears are capable of getting out of the experience. *
> 
> ...


aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

I prefer no visual stimuli and find it only is needed to make sub-par music more interesting.

Think of light shows at rock shows. It takes away from the music itself and covers up the lack of solid musicianship.


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

Like mbhaub, I am either fully focused on the music or I don't consider myself to be really listening. I'm happy to listen with eyes closed, but when listening on my home sound system there is a 12 foot high wall of glass in front of me with forest, sky and mountains beyond. I don't find that distracting — and you never know when a hawk or owl might happen by. 

With live music I can watch the players or not. No distraction for me there.


----------



## LezLee (Feb 21, 2014)

Captainnumber36 said:


> I prefer no visual stimuli and find it only is needed to make sub-par music more interesting.
> 
> Think of light shows at rock shows. It takes away from the music itself and covers up the lack of solid musicianship.


I went to see Sufjan Stevens doing the whole of his 'Carrie and Lowell' album. Beautiful album but he was sitting at the front of the stage with home videos being shown through 'windows' behind. Really distracting and spoilt it for me. 
Even worse was Suede with the band seated in front of a full-size screen showing a weird film about a man trying to commit suicide. Totally irrelevant to the music. Second half was marvellous though.


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

LezLee said:


> I went to see Sufjan Stevens doing the whole of his 'Carrie and Lowell' album. Beautiful album but he was sitting at the front of the stage with home videos being shown through 'windows' behind. Really distracting and spoilt it for me.
> Even worse was Suede with the band seated in front of a full-size screen showing a weird film about a man trying to commit suicide. Totally irrelevant to the music. Second half was marvellous though.


He has a good voice and good songwriting skills. I've heard that album too, it's tender. I'd say he is one that focuses harder on the music live, even though he can be quite extravagant with the visuals at times.

But, I do think classical is my preferred listening. I keep going back and forth on if I miss other forms of music, but keep coming back to classical, it's just so good!

I love how hard Classical musicians focus on putting on high level performances, and the audience is sitting down and being attentive, unlike shows from other genres.


----------



## eljr (Aug 8, 2015)

captainnumber36 said:


> i love how hard classical musicians focus on putting on high level performances, and the audience is sitting down and being attentive, unlike shows from other genres.


x10 

--------------


----------



## eljr (Aug 8, 2015)

Captainnumber36 said:


> Think of light shows at rock shows.


It adds to the music itself and adds to the virtuoso musicianship.


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

eljr said:


> It adds to the music itself and adds to the virtuoso musicianship.


I can't tell if you are being serious and that is a wink of correction or if you are joking and that is a wink of a court jester!

:lol:


----------



## eljr (Aug 8, 2015)

Captainnumber36 said:


> I can't tell if you are being serious and that is a wink of correction or if you are joking and that is a wink of a court jester!
> 
> :lol:


just trying to show that it's often about perspective










As far as distractions, you could not pay me to go to a rock concert

Last year I went to a Philip Glass Benefit at Carnegie Hall.

Half the folks went with a "rock concert" mentality. (Rock acts were part of the program)

It was horrible. I had to ask the usher to shut up the two couples who came drunk, sitting next to me.


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

eljr said:


> just trying to show that it's often about perspective
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That sucks, sorry you had a bad experience. Who goes to Carnegie Hall drunk?

Do you care to go into more detail about what exactly the different perspectives are in terms of lights at a rock show? I used to see Phish and Dave Matthews Band quite often, and the lights and inability to discern easily the different instruments b/c it was being blasted so loud were distractions that seemed to make up for the lack of quality musicianship.

Dave Matthews Band's violinist squeaks all the time and has horrid intonation.
Phish's lead guitarist is constantly hitting wrong notes in their musical passages.

Both are hard to discern live b/c the volumes are so high and people are intoxicated and don't really care about high quality musicianship; a quality I feel rock music prides itself upon.

You also have pop acts that are lip synching.


----------

