1. Comment #394628 by chuckgoecke on July 8, 2009 at 8:03 pm

That humans are a musical species seems a no brainer. I think I remember hearing about a new older date for the first paleolithic flute, something like 50 thousand years ago, which probably puts music and singing concurrent with language development(much earlier than 50,000 years ago, of course). It saddens me that music is one of the favorite programs in schools for the conservatives to cut.

Other Comments by chuckgoecke

2. Comment #394629 by NewEnglandBob on July 8, 2009 at 8:05 pm

Yes, it has a huge effect on the brain, but is that good, not good, or irrelevant to anything else in life? What do we know when areas 'light up'? Stronger connections? Musical only connections? etc.

Other Comments by NewEnglandBob

3. Comment #394631 by Goldy on July 8, 2009 at 8:13 pm

http://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2009/06/25/2608114.htm

Social networks
Conard speculates that late Stone Age music did not contribute directly to the evolutionary success of the first modern humans.

But it may have given them a slight edge over neighbouring Neanderthals, who died out even as Homo sapiens sapiens flourished.

"Upper Palaeolithic music could have contributed to the maintenance of large social networks, and thereby have helped facilitate the demographic and territorial expansion of modern humans" compared to the more "culturally conservative" and isolated Neanderthals, he says.

Other Comments by Goldy

4. Comment #394645 by helmiy on July 8, 2009 at 11:45 pm

His book Musicophilia is fantastic and it is big joy to read it.
the cases he describes and does the analysis for are simply dazzeling.
you cannot know what it is about unless you read it.

Other Comments by helmiy

5. Comment #394660 by friendlypig on July 9, 2009 at 2:23 am

Interesting to note that Handel took much of his music for the Messiah from bawdy Italian songs. Somehow seems appropriate.

Smetana, Tchaikovsky, Beethoven, Mozart, with such wonderful music I don't have a specific favourite but if I were pressed to pick just one piece it would be Smetana's Moldau from Ma Vlast. That's what you call a 'brain wash'.

Other Comments by friendlypig

6. Comment #394667 by purbrookian on July 9, 2009 at 2:52 am

friendlypig - the Moldau is a good choice for a descriptive tone piece. When you have 20 minutes free listen to Rachmaninov's 'Isle of the Dead' - equally compelling.

Other Comments by purbrookian

7. Comment #394672 by alabasterocean on July 9, 2009 at 3:31 am

I need this one on youtube or something like that. Can't watch it here in Sweden...

Other Comments by alabasterocean

8. Comment #394687 by bluebird on July 9, 2009 at 4:30 am

Last week I happened upon one segment of 'Musical Minds' (forgot it was on, dang it); hopefully PBS will rerun it. Anyway, it was fascinating, as is the subject.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/musicminds/

~~Happy B.D. to Respighi & Orff~~

Other Comments by bluebird

9. Comment #394707 by PERSON on July 9, 2009 at 5:43 am

Glad to see this on here. If you're in the UK you can watch The Daily Show on 4oD on-line or More Four on FreeView and FreeSat.

Other Comments by PERSON

10. Comment #394713 by black wolf on July 9, 2009 at 6:12 am

I can watch it in Germany with no problem. One thing you can try if it doesn't work is using a browser plug-in that will mask your IP.

Other Comments by black wolf

11. Comment #394717 by mitch_486 on July 9, 2009 at 6:33 am

I remember Stephen Pinker discussing this with Richard not too long ago.

I was fascinated by music's inherent meaning to all of us; beats forming as a result of our constant heart beat. Also, and even more interesting, is the way in which we feel music. How our specialized (through natural selection) system(s) brought together for means of survival, also work together and sort of culminate in this puzzle we call music. A way of "announcing" our understanding of love, fear, intrigue etc.

Bottom line, there is something deeply important to all of us in music. I think I'll be doing more research on the topic.

Other Comments by mitch_486

12. Comment #394719 by Diogenes of Sinope on July 9, 2009 at 6:36 am

I found the humour puerile and irritating. I know that it could be argued that the combination of humour and science allows for a gentle and 'layman' introduction to otherwise potentially complicated and specialist ideas, but I for one would much prefer a serious discussion with the fascinating Oliver Sacks, and a serious treatment of this research.

People's humour and intellect vary, but surely a more adult approach would go down better on this site?

Other Comments by Diogenes of Sinope

13. Comment #394724 by MarcCountry on July 9, 2009 at 7:01 am

I would prefer a serious discussion and a bag full of cash, personally.

Oh, and a pony.

Other Comments by MarcCountry

14. Comment #394732 by Lucas on July 9, 2009 at 7:25 am

Good lord you guys, it's the freaking Daily Show. How many entertainment shows bring on serious people to talk for 10 minutes? Thank you Jon, a million times over - for the serious questions AND the jokes.

Question: Why is it that the addition of the two members of Big Business to The Melvins makes them sound so good? The combined vocals and dual drummers are hard to separate into their constituent parts, but somehow mesh together into a more powerful sound. It actually sounds like the two bands perfectly conjoined, but doesn't sound like either alone. Why do I think so much about this? Also, what is sound memory? Like when you can hear the song in your head perfectly, note for note, including production effects.

Other Comments by Lucas

15. Comment #394744 by phasmagigas on July 9, 2009 at 7:48 am

lucas

Also, what is sound memory£ Like when you can hear the song in your head perfectly, note for note, including production effects.

i find it interesting how we remember and then anticipate parts of a track whilst it runs through the present (as such) a good track seemingly needs us to anticipate the good parts later. i suppose that leads to a different form of music appreciation, tracks we know and love and then new ones that youve never heard.

Other Comments by phasmagigas

16. Comment #394746 by Pluvialis on July 9, 2009 at 7:59 am

Is it just me or is the Daily Show a pile of crap? Would be lovely to hear from Dr Sacks in a better setting, where I don't have to cringe for most of the time.

Other Comments by Pluvialis

17. Comment #394747 by Philster61 on July 9, 2009 at 8:01 am

Saw a documentary awhile ago on Discovery about a child prodigy who at the age of 6 is already a concert pianist. They showed how pianists brains function at a higher rate. And that in order to perform they need to use both sides of the brain.
As a musician myself,I truly believe music should be part of any curriculum. Arent religious types always saying that its a gift from "God"?

Other Comments by Philster61

18. Comment #394748 by cam9976 on July 9, 2009 at 8:01 am

With regards to their guest choices, the Daily Show is fairly good. Neil DeGrasse Tyson has been on quite a few times and a scientist or intellectual is interviewed almost every week.

Other Comments by cam9976

19. Comment #394760 by clunkclickeverytrip on July 9, 2009 at 9:01 am

It has been found that Homo sapiens actually sang to the Neanderthals:

na-na na na, na-na na na, hey hey hey, goodbye.

Is that purile enough for you.

Other Comments by clunkclickeverytrip

20. Comment #394767 by bluebird on July 9, 2009 at 9:59 am

Dr. Sacks discusses his book via NPR (archived):

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=95336672

Other Comments by bluebird

21. Comment #394772 by Dhamma on July 9, 2009 at 10:41 am

alabasterocean,

That's odd. It worked perfectly fine for me, without the use of a proxy.

Other Comments by Dhamma

22. Comment #394782 by Partisan on July 9, 2009 at 11:49 am

Curiously enough, I'm reading a book on this very topic at the moment - The Singing Neanderthals by Steven Mithern, I was even entertaining the idea of doing a dissertation on it.

Other Comments by Partisan

23. Comment #394786 by DamnDirtyApe on July 9, 2009 at 12:16 pm

The Daily show is my primary source of factual journalism.

They work for Comedy Central.

Other Comments by DamnDirtyApe

24. Comment #394788 by Lucas on July 9, 2009 at 12:27 pm

I think it's just you, Pluvialis, and a few others who seem to very confused. Do you not understand what the show is and what it's purpose is? It is not 60 Minutes. The interviews are akin to Conan O'Brian interviews, not Mike Wallace. Over and over and over again Jon has made the point that they are engaged in pure, and often puerile, entertainment. The point is to make you laugh. Any actual factual knowledge you get out of it is extra. During his tenure, Jon has slowly started weeding out the actors and celebrities and started inviting authors, academics, and politicians. Does this mean he doesn't make fart jokes with these respected individuals? No. He certainly does, and they expect that. But what he's really doing, very cleverly, is hiding content in a shroud of satire. This allows him to pretend that every serious thing said is a joke. And it's up to the audience to be clever enough to get the point. It is not a news show. It is a FAKE news show that just happens to have actual news in it, as a departure point for jokes. In their attempt to make fun of CNN, FOX, MSNBC, etc., they ironically have found themselves in the position of being the source of real news, because the "real" news has become such a farce. Can you wrap your head around that?

Other Comments by Lucas

25. Comment #394813 by Azven on July 9, 2009 at 2:12 pm

The Daily Show wasn't on today for some reason (the show for the 8th would have been shown today on the 9th in the UK).

I was so annoyed.

Other Comments by Azven

26. Comment #394815 by Hellene on July 9, 2009 at 2:38 pm

5. Comment #394660 by friendlypig

"Interesting to note that Handel took much of his music for the Messiah from bawdy Italian songs. Somehow seems appropriate."

The melody for the American national anthem has similar roots.

Other Comments by Hellene

27. Comment #394842 by Mel Olontha on July 9, 2009 at 5:18 pm

I hope somebody puts this pbs-documentary on youtube quickly. Can't wait to watch it.

Other Comments by Mel Olontha

28. Comment #394851 by KRKBAB on July 9, 2009 at 6:35 pm

I love the Jon Stewart show and his brand of comedy. I still am embarassed to be an American, though. The word orgasm is mentioned- people laugh- someone says "and things get bigger" and people laugh. Adults. Adults laughing at things that should normally make a 14 year old laugh. American adults. Yes, I'm embarassed to be an American. Please, let there be a support group where I can go and stand up and say: "Yes, I am an American and that embarasses me". poopy tinkle titty fart - hee hee hee - lord help me

Other Comments by KRKBAB

29. Comment #394852 by Pluvialis on July 9, 2009 at 7:06 pm

Comment #394788 by Lucas

I appreciate your explanation, Lucas. Perhaps it is just that I find the host stupid rather than funny, and though I can see how you'd call what he's doing clever I don't identify with it at all. The guy's jokes are nothing other than awful and the whole show simultaneously fails to either deliver sufficient content of interest or parody anything amusingly.

Other Comments by Pluvialis

30. Comment #394868 by NormanDoering on July 9, 2009 at 10:29 pm

"Handel took much of his music for the Messiah from bawdy Italian songs."

And you can turn church hymns into Death Metal with a few changes.

http://normdoering.blogspot.com/2008/12/devils-music.html

Other Comments by NormanDoering

31. Comment #394883 by Mr. Grape on July 10, 2009 at 12:17 am

Pluvialis - I don't know if you're from America or not, but Oliver Sacks does not have a better setting or another setting at all to go on television. It's a very sad state of affairs that serious topics need to be digested and made fun of, but that's the only way people like Oliver Sacks and Richard Dawkins will get any air time in America(at least without their mics being cut off)

Other Comments by Mr. Grape

32. Comment #394913 by Dispiracist on July 10, 2009 at 2:28 am

If this item strikes a chord then I recommend you get hold of ‘This is Your Brain on Music’ Dan Levitin.

http://www.yourbrainonmusic.com/

Music is the original language; the rest is just evolutionary history.

(The PBS doco Musical Minds is available to the impoverished from the usual disreputable sources.)

Other Comments by Dispiracist

33. Comment #395475 by Border Collie on July 12, 2009 at 7:23 am

Clunk ... perfect response.
US television sucks ... what a revelation.

Other Comments by Border Collie

34. Comment #395602 by gos on July 12, 2009 at 1:49 pm

3. Comment #394631 by Goldy on July 8, 2009 at 8:13 pm

http://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2009/06/25/2608114.htm

Social networks
Conard speculates that late Stone Age music did not contribute directly to the evolutionary success of the first modern humans.

But it may have given them a slight edge over neighbouring Neanderthals, who died out even as Homo sapiens sapiens flourished.

"Upper Palaeolithic music could have contributed to the maintenance of large social networks, and thereby have helped facilitate the demographic and territorial expansion of modern humans" compared to the more "culturally conservative" and isolated Neanderthals, he says.

Does it irritate anyone else when speculation like this is emphasized? It seems like every article on scientific discoveries I read ends with a few paragraphs of this kind - what seem to be just-so stories, in my opinion.

This isn't in any way critical of music, music education, or Goldy, I'm just commenting on this phenomenon in general.

Other Comments by gos

35. Comment #395709 by A-Farr on July 13, 2009 at 12:02 am

I have been told ever since I was very young that classical music such as Bach was helpful for brain development and that it stimulates creativity. However I have always had a negative reaction to it. My parents have encouraged me to listen to it and learn it and I have tried to learn to appreciate it at various times over the years but it simply hasn't worked. I find myself depressed and annoyed by it. It had been several years since the last time I tried listening to Bach and so just now after listening to the Oliver Sacks interview I tried a few songs and I still have the same almost immediate strong negative reaction to it. I'm very curios to know why this is and if it might indicate anything.

Other Comments by A-Farr

36. Comment #395881 by clunkclickeverytrip on July 13, 2009 at 9:16 am

Thanks Border Collie - you're obviously a dog with discerning taste.

Other Comments by clunkclickeverytrip

37. Comment #399647 by Rational_G on July 26, 2009 at 12:44 am

The Daily Show brings on excellent guests and exposes their work to a mostly 20-30 something audience. That's a good thing. A few entertaining minutes with real scientists and intellectuals. The level of conversation actually exceeds the quick "sound bites" on most "real news" shows. These daily show interviews can only help.

Other Comments by Rational_G