RADIO 3 evening concert intervals - cut the music !

[amateur51]

My remark was in respect of Ferney's suggestion which I quote below:


To which suggestion my reply was "Absolute speculative bunkum!"

Orchestral musicians play what is put in front of them - to the best of their ability. That is what they are paid to do, regardless of their personal opinions of either the composer or of his/her musical output.

HS

And they never complain of course, being professionals

I recall being at the world premiere of Peter Maxwell Davies' Symphony at the Royal Festival Hall. It was played by the Philharmonia conducted by Simon Rattle. At one point a gentleman wearing dark glasses, who had been seated in the percussion section walked quietly over to the tubular bells and on a signal from Rattle appeared to have a small fit on bells with his mallet. As he returned to the safety of his colleagues, he raised his eyebrows & shrugged

[Flay]

If I may be permitted to but into this fraught discussion.

I don't particularly like music being played in the interval programmes, I would prefer a talk or discussion.

However I hate the way Discovering Music has been ruined. If I remember correctly the original programmes lasted up to an hour, they were made in a studio and any clips were pre-recorded. This made for a sleeker more authoritative production. There used to be an online archive of programmes listed by composer, allowing all the old episodes to be enjoyed at will. I found this most educational when I went through my own musical renaissance. I can't find this archive any more, and what there is seems to be listed by date only.

The format was then changed to have a live presentation before the work under discussion would be performed in full. This still made for fairly good listening (although I could not see the point of having questions from the audience as they were generally of poor quality). Unfortunately now DM has been downgraded so it can barely touch on the subject in question.

[amateur51]

If I may be permitted to but into this fraught discussion.

I don't particularly like music being played in the interval programmes, I would prefer a talk or discussion.

However I hate the way Discovering Music has been ruined. If I remember correctly the original programmes lasted up to an hour, they were made in a studio and any clips were pre-recorded. This made for a sleeker more authoritative production. There used to be an online archive of programmes listed by composer, allowing all the old episodes to be enjoyed at will. I found this most educational when I went through my own musical renaissance. I can't find this archive any more, and what there is seems to be listed by date only.

The format was then changed to have a live presentation before the work under discussion would be performed in full. This still made for fairly good listening (although I could not see the point of having questions from the audience as they were generally of poor quality). Unfortunately now DM has been downgraded so it can barely touch on the subject in question.

A very fair summary, Flay

[jayne lee wilson]

Amusing and interesting discussion! And nice to see some people can get cross without me around

Intervals, shmintervals... crisis - what crisis?

Those 20 minutes are usually spent coping with Mum, cat and dishes of the day fetching tea, coffee and... chewy sticks. Usually collapse in my chair as the greeting applause for part 2 fades...
But no, I'd rather not have music in or around them, even assuming I could listen. If the talk is about the following work I would usually avoid it, otherwise the music's impact would, for me, be diminished. (But a listener coming to Tippett's 2nd for the first time may find it intensified, so...)

Heavens, I'd be grateful just to find an evening concert of sufficient interest to draw me in - what, is Thursday now The Rite Night? Sounds like a job for R2 circa 1975...
Still there's Tippett 1 next Friday - shame about the pairing of these with big, main-course concertos though. But there's always Jonathan Lloyd to look forward to....

[amateur51]

Amusing and interesting discussion! And nice to see some people can get cross without me around

[Hornspieler]

If I may be permitted to but into this fraught discussion.

I don't particularly like music being played in the interval programmes, I would prefer a talk or discussion.

However I hate the way Discovering Music has been ruined. If I remember correctly the original programmes lasted up to an hour, they were made in a studio and any clips were pre-recorded. This made for a sleeker more authoritative production. There used to be an online archive of programmes listed by composer, allowing all the old episodes to be enjoyed at will. I found this most educational when I went through my own musical renaissance. I can't find this archive any more, and what there is seems to be listed by date only.

The format was then changed to have a live presentation before the work under discussion would be performed in full. This still made for fairly good listening (although I could not see the point of having questions from the audience as they were generally of poor quality). Unfortunately now DM has been downgraded so it can barely touch on the subject in question.

Several good points here, Flay. The idea of a discussion about a programme before its transmission as is now done for some of the Proms in the RCM opposite the Albert Hall seems to work very well in this respect. (The only problem being that the interval is turned over to a presenter (No Names &c) to invite the opinions of a couple of young newbies who pontificate upon performances that they are hardly qualified to judge)

Now how about this for an idea? When BBC Four televise the Proms, they usually defer transmission from the actual starting time, so the viewers still see and hear the performance as it was in the RAH just a short time before.

If "Live Performance on 3" were to be given the same treatment, Part I (recorded) of a concert starting at 7.30 could be transmitted at 7.50 and be followed immediately (subject to the customary introduction) by Part II.

No interval. No squabbling by enthusiasts. Nothing to divert the listener from concentrating on the actual programme.

HS

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

So when the work is performed, do you listen out especially for these modulations or do you listen to and enjoy the music?

What is the Music but its key relationships in such a case? When you see a painting, do you see the colours or do to look at and enjoy the painting? The question strikes me as absurd.

What on earth do you mean by that? Does the listener need such an explanation for his/her reaction?

The tritone relationship of A and Eb creates a Tonal contrast quite different from that of A and D, or A and F# - the difference creates whatever emotional response the listener experiences. The listener doesn't "need" this explanation any more (or less) than s/he "needs" to know the names of the different colours in order to "react" to the Hay Wain - but such knowledge helps them to explore and discuss their reactions sensibly and articulately.

Absolute speculative bunkum!

Well, I have witnessed professional groups who do explore such matters in rehearsal, but they have all been Chamber Music players or members of ensembles rather than larger orchestras.

Yes, but not in that way ... Those who do, in fact, listen to Radio 3, do it for their enjoyment of the music and nothing more.

Bunkum yourself! If this were true, what justification would we have for public funding of Music and/or Radio3? How do we claim serious attention for our Art above that of, say, a Brotherhood of Man Tribute band? Those who control the purse strings have the philistine attitude that Music is "just another type of entertainment" that you suggest (and I'm sure you don't mean) here. Without education exactly "in that way", how do we counter such an opinion?

Sorry, Ferney, but you have obviously never been a professional orchestral player - much as I admire your musical expertise and knowledge in other areas.

Quite right - I'm the sort who pays for his ticket to hear them, and who chivvies others to give orchestral concerts a go (often successfully). I couldn't persuade them if all I had to say was "You might like it!" A sixteen year-old lad (a Jazz/Rock guitarist) who overheard me waxing lyrical in these terms about Sibelius' Fifth Symphony went to a concert to hear the Sibelius Second - and was hooked - and told his Rock/Jazz mates about it in terms of keys and rhythms and sound masses; just the way they talk about their own Music. A "Pennine Sibelius Society" might be the result! With benefits for those who are professional orchestral players.

[salymap]

Several good points here, Flay. The idea of a discussion about a programme before its transmission as is now done for some of the Proms in the RCM opposite the Albert Hall seems to work very well in this respect. (The only problem being that the interval is turned over to a presenter (No Names &c) to invite the opinions of a couple of young newbies who pontificate upon performances that they are hardly qualified to judge)

Now how about this for an idea? When BBC Four televise the Proms, they usually defer transmission from the actual starting time, so the viewers still see and hear the performance as it was in the RAH just a short time before.

If "Live Performance on 3" were to be given the same treatment, Part I (recorded) of a concert starting at 7.30 could be transmitted at 7.50 and be followed immediately (subject to the customary introduction) by Part II.

No interval. No squabbling by enthusiasts. Nothing to divert the listener from concentrating on the actual programme.

HS

Sounds a workable idea HS, but too late for this year's proms of course.

[french frank]

A few points seem to be getting combined here:

1. The live concert has an interval. Wouldn't it be better to have a talk between the two halves rather than more music unconnected with the concert?

2. Isn't the new Discovering Music format unsatisfactory, being squashed into 20 minutes instead of a full length programme like it used to be?

3. In any case, do people want to be told that a piece starting in D minor then moves through A major to E flat before returning to the original key (regardless in what programme this information is imparted)?

To those questions I would say yes, yes and yes.

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

3. In any case, do people want to be told that a piece starting in D minor then moves through A major to E flat before returning to the original key (regardless in what programme this information is imparted)?

I fear that the R3 establishment would only get excited about this idea if someone texted it to them in the early morning.

[teamsaint]

In response to FF's point 2 in# 39, could "Discovering Music" not be treated as a brand , (perfect for the BBC) and vary according to need or opportunity?
They could even publish books , and make money . Lovely.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

Discovering Music began as a 45min programme in the 1990s. A variety of presenters (including Anthony Payne) were involved and illustrations came from recorded performances. Some were very good, others less so (Chris de Souza did a couple of programmes in which he seemed to be suggesting that Barbara Cartland wrote Brahms' First Symphony and Schumann's Second!)

It was then turned into an hour-and-a-half programme with live performers who would play extracts and conclude with a complete performance of the work involved: a sort of high-level open rehearsal and lecture followed by a complete performance. Some of these were excellent - SJ's discussion of RVW's Fifth (in which the orchestra also performed some of the sketches and initial ideas - so that the audience could hear the glorious difference between opening the work with a straightforward D pedal and the actual C natural that the composer used) and SM-P's discussion of the Brandenburg Concertos (in which the various polyphonic layers and Tonal shifts were dissected to sighs of loving recognition from the audience) stand out in my memory as broadcasting at its best. A reminder of how Tovey, Hopkins and Bernstein all used to introduce "ordinary" listeners to the intricasies of how such Music works, presenting techinical terms in such a way that listeners unused to such language could fully understand and hear.

Then a year or so ago, the programme was reduced to a twenty minute "crammer", (?almost?) exclusively presented by SJ and mainly devoted to Orchestral works. It's not as good, and suffers from the tight time-span as much as the NHS suffers from under-staffing. There's too much to discuss in too short a time.

[aeolium]

I think on the whole I preferred the 45 minute DM, particularly when they began to schedule it a few days before a live performance of the work in question, so that the ideas conveyed in the programme were reasonably fresh when you heard the performance. The problem with the longer 90 minute version - and this is true of the current condensed one - was that I found I didn't really want to hear the performance of the full work immediately after hearing a load of extracts. That said, as ferney mentioned, some of the longer programmes were very good (and some not so good, as when Charles Hazlewood interpreted Mozart's D minor piano concerto in terms of Mozart working out his psychological problems with his father ).

I am certainly among those who wants to learn about the use of keys and key-changes within works. Some of the best talks I have heard on music - e.g. Robert Simpson on Fidelio and Hans Keller on Haydn's op 76 quartets - were very illuminating on this subject.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

and some not so good, as when Charles Hazlewood interpreted Mozart's D minor piano concerto in terms of Mozart working out his psychological problems with his father

Oh, lor', yes! I'd forgotten that monstrosity!




And the programme he presented!

[Barbirollians]

Charles Hazlewood - how did he make such a career from being - judging by the performances I have heard him conduct - such a mediocre conductor ?