Should BBC presenters express judgements on the performance?

[Frances_iom]

his response to that was probably acceptable however I was based my opinion on the the presentation on all of the concerts both before and after (after is easy I just switch off, before is the nuisance as I have to guess how long it will be before he gives way to the music.
The female presenter is the one reputedly exceedingly well paid but she doesn't worry me as much - I'm afraid I just turn off everything she is presenting as a matter of course accepting that the loss is mine - Service has turned out to be an unpleasant listen for me - maybe the PG school of intro is what I really hanker for - discreet, to the point and in the background

[Nick Armstrong]

before is the nuisance as I have to guess how long it will be before he gives way to the music.

Esp if trying to record it with a little ambient noise / applause before the first note (actually the same applies after, if one just wants to fade / stop the applause before some buffoon or buffoonette starts yelling how amazing it was)

[Richard Tarleton]

They seem afraid of telling radio listeners when anything has obviously gone wrong - I'm thinking of that abortive concerto performance by - was it Gil Shaham? - that was interrupted by demonstrators not long ago, and the Strauss FLS the other day when Anna S was (it turned out) visibly as well as audibly unwell.

[amcluesent]

Far too many presenters now regards themselves as celebridees, and hence have cart blanche to start shouting and bawling while the last note is still hanging in the air. I see no reason why the R3 controller can't insist 30 to 45 seconds go past before we hear from the presenter, rather than bellowing over the noise in the hall.

Of course, some (well one) is beyond parody, when every performance is not only the best ever, it was the best it could possibly be. Until the next broadcast! All critical faculties are suspended, so they are.

Words you never hear on R3 for some reason - under-rehearsed, split notes, rows of empty seats, cacophony, poor programming, perfunctory, self-indulgent ...

[Extended Play]

Perhaps terminology is a factor here. This thread is concentrating on "presenters", because that is what today's Radio 3 has conditioned us to expect: people put before us with a much higher profile than the "announcers" of the past, whose names were given on air, of course, but who would probably never have dreamed of voicing, or have been expected to express, personal opinions about the standard of the performance (even though it would have been entertaining to hear some of them do so!). I detect a yearning for such restraint in some of the posts above. Maybe what it boils down to is that, as listeners, we don't need an instant critique from the presenter when we can hear the audience's reaction and can make up our own minds. Might there not be a case for resurrecting something akin to a weekly Critics Forum where the performances could be assessed after a period of reflection by genuine experts?

[french frank]

Words you never hear on R3 for some reason - under-rehearsed, split notes, rows of empty seats, cacophony, poor programming, perfunctory, self-indulgent ...

In fairness, I wouldn't expect that from a presenter either.

The problem, I think, is that they're so set on attracting 'new listeners' that it's now not just the morning and drivetime programmes that have been tailored to suit them: presenters seem to have been instructed that the 'new listener' is the one they're supposed to be addressing, with all opinions being gratefully received, they assume, by people who don't anything at all.

[cloughie]

In fairness, I wouldn't expect that from a presenter either.

The problem, I think, is that they're so set on attracting 'new listeners' that it's now not just the morning and drivetime programmes that have been tailored to suit them: presenters seem to have been instructed that the 'new listener' is the one they're supposed to be addressing, with all opinions being gratefully received, they assume, by people who don't anything at all.

Life is really too short to have great concern over presenters and their plusses and minuses - I just decide whether I want to listen to the music - it's often on iplayer anyway so I can just fast forward!

[french frank]

Life is really too short to have great concern over presenters and their plusses and minuses - I just decide whether I want to listen to the music - it's often on iplayer anyway so I can just fast forward!

You can do that if listening on iPlayer - but as has recently been reported, only 0.4% of BBC radio listening is not 'live'. Most people still want the experience of linear radio, which is either On or Off.

The value that Radio 3 has historically added to the broadcast music has been relevant, informed introduction (or 'contexualisation, as the BBC calls it) and otherwise low profile presentation. If you don't require any added information and don't mind listening on iPlayer you will be one of a minority of the minority!

BBC management would probably confirm that general complaint centres on presenters and presentation almost more than anything else.

[Hornspieler]

... BBC management would probably confirm that general complaint centres on presenters and presentation almost more than anything else.

I was very happy with SMP throughout the concert. Factual and informative. Then at the end, she was as bad as all the others. We had all formed our own opinions and her's were effusive and totally unneccesary.

HS

[BBMmk2]

Yes, I agree with youy threre, HS! Presenters should be apart from audience and be more objective and factual rather than giving us their opinions. They should be, descibing the event and that's it, really in a niutshell.Plus telling us who the performers are and the music ofcourse!!

[Ariosto]

Should BBC presenters express judgements on the performance?

NO!!!! NEVER!!!!!!!!!!

[kernelbogey]

I was very happy with SMP throughout the concert. Factual and informative. Then at the end, she was as bad as all the others. We had all formed our own opinions and her's were effusive and totally unneccesary.

...and there was that primary school teacher's injunction to 'listen out' for the high E representing Smetana's tinnitus.

[kernelbogey]

You can do that [fast forward] if listening on iPlayer....

In my experience that's a rather crude tool - it jumps in rather large segments. (Perhaps there's a trick to that I haven't spotted...?)

[LeMartinPecheur]

I can live with the presenter of a live performance sincerely echoing (once in a while) the reactions of the audience in the hall. Where I feel comments are most gratuitous is where it's a performance on disc or - most especially - a studio live performance with no audience.

And a certain presenter of In Tune is for me almost permanently way beyond the pale in his fire hydrant-force 'gushing' over each and very studio performance by his very various guests. Are we to believe that none of them ever played even a so-so performance on his show, let alone a frankly bad one??

[antongould]

I have found Martin Handley quietly impressive in tonight's Prom.