FNiMN

[LMcD]

Exactly. The question asked was about the justification, rather than R3's preference or anything else.

Perhaps the 'justification' is that it helps to create young Jackson's warmer, more inviting Radio 3 - a project which is just part of the BBC's seemingly endless, and so far largely unsuccessful, masterplan to demonstrate it's 'relevance' in a changing world and get its Royal Charter renewed .

[Nick Armstrong]

Fair enought, but the point remains: what is the justification for putting it on Radio3 and not leaving it on Radio 2?

I certainly think Montague Phillips, William Alwyn and Eric Coates (for example, who featured in last night’s concert alongside Debussy, Grieg etc - live, ygad, from Maida Vale) have a rightful place on R3 - much more naturally than on R2 imo

[vinteuil]

I certainly think Montague Phillips, William Alwyn and Eric Coates ... have a rightful place on R3

not in my (ideal, obvs.) world they don't


...

[french frank]

not in my (ideal, obvs.) world they don't

Nor mine. And there doesn't need to be a discussion about relative quality, good or bad; or whether I (whoever I is) like, enjoy, admire or appreciate it. It isn't about those things. But there can usefully be a reasoned discussion about what criteria should be applied. For example, one can complain (and one has!) about how often Florence Price gets played. But according to what criterion would one say that her music should never be played on R3?

[LMcD]

Nor mine. And there doesn't need to be a discussion about relative quality, good or bad; or whether I (whoever I is) like, enjoy, admire or appreciate it. It isn't about those things. But there can usefully be a reasoned discussion about what criteria should be applied. For example, one can complain (and one has!) about how often Florence Price gets played. But according to what criterion would one say that her music should never be played on R3?

The frequency with which works of some belatedly recognized female composers, including Florence Price, Albena Petrovic and Louise Farrenc, are played nowadays makes me wonder whether somebody's got a guilty conscience.

[french frank]

The frequency with which works of some belatedly recognized female composers, including Florence Price, Albena Petrovic and Louise Farrenc, are played nowadays makes me wonder whether somebody's got a guilty conscience.

Arguably they should have a guilty conscience but that's a different discussion. Is there an argument that Florence Price has a place on R3 and Eric Coates doesn't?

[LMcD]

Arguably they should have a guilty conscience but that's a different discussion. Is there an argument that Florence Price has a place on R3 and Eric Coates doesn't?

Let's be generous and say there's room for both (in moderation!

[french frank]

Let's be generous and say there's room for both (in moderation!

Why? I'm trying to tease out reasoned arguments, definitions, criteria. And am I alone in thinking Friday Night Is Music Night is a stupid name for a Radio 3 programme?

[LMcD]

Why? I'm trying to tease out reasoned arguments, definitions, criteria. And am I alone in thinking Friday Night Is Music Night is a stupid name for a Radio 3 programme?

Well, it's less stupid than 'Tearjerker', although thankfully that seems to have vanished (at least for now), and 'Afternoon Concert' was a pretty stupid title for a programme that, while it was on in the afternoon, wasn't really a concert.

[Nick Armstrong]

not in my (ideal, obvs.) world they don't

Vive la différence!

[french frank]

'Afternoon Concert' was a pretty stupid title for a programme that, while it was on in the afternoon, wasn't really a concert.

The definition of 'concert' is pretty vague. Not much more than a group of musicians playing together. So what does 'Live in Concert' mean? But all this gets away (again) from reasons for and against FNIMN and Eric Coates et similes being on Radio 3. Cui bono?

[cloughie]

In one respect none, but in another quite a lot - it is short pieces with presenter input, which is the current preferred format for R3.
Whether that is sufficient is a whole other, and much bigger, argument about what R3 is actually for.

Radio 2 has in general always been short pieces with presenter input,

[french frank]

Radio 2 has in general always been short pieces with presenter input,

Exactly. Which is now it's R3's preferred format: it will appeal to R2 listeners, as will Jools Holland and Friday Night Is Music Night. Radio 2 can afford to shed half a million listeners - just the job for R3. None of this shows any concern for what Radio 3 listeners might prefer on Radio 3.

[oddoneout]

Exactly. Which is now it's R3's preferred format: it will appeal to R2 listeners, as will Jools Holland and Friday Night Is Music Night. Radio 2 can afford to shed half a million listeners - just the job for R3. None of this shows any concern for what Radio 3 listeners might prefer on Radio 3.

Will/do R2 listeners cross the great divide to access R3?

[LMcD]

Exactly. Which is now it's R3's preferred format: it will appeal to R2 listeners, as will Jools Holland and Friday Night Is Music Night. Radio 2 can afford to shed half a million listeners - just the job for R3. None of this shows any concern for what Radio 3 listeners might prefer on Radio 3.

Rather than worrying about what current Radio 3 listeners might prefer, perhaps young Jackson is more concerned with trying to work out what might be to the taste of possible future Radio 3 listeners.