Kent Nagano conducts Bruckner 8 on Skyarts 2 today

[Bryn]

I rather doubt that they broadcast commercially available DVDs and Blu-rays. I think they licence the programmes, which also happen to have been released quite separately in commercial disc format, from the original broadcasters or whoever the relevant rights holder happens to be. As with the recording of Berio's Outis which had such serious drop-out problems around a decade ago, I understand they are broadcast from hard disc. It was the mess that Sky made of those broadcasts of Outis that was the final straw for me and I disconnected my Skybox and cancelled my direct debit.

[Hornspieler]

And the cost of Sky Arts Mr Pee? It's gone very quiet over there.

Sky Arts 1 and 2 come with a package available to any broadband user, which includes Sky Sports 1, 2, 3, and 4, Sky Sports News, Sky F1, ESPN (Sports news) and Sky 1 and 2. (You don't need a satellite dish to watch these programmes). The monthly cost that I pay is £25.75 for all of these goodies and the orchestral concerts and recitals DO NOT HAVE PRESENTERS TO GUSH ALL OVER US . Details of what is happening are printed on screen with discreet subtitles.

That, for me (and for all those MBs who are football crazy or love all sports), represents excellent value for money.

HS

[antongould]

That, for me (and for all those MBs who are football crazy or love all sports), represents excellent value for money.

HS

.......and might just make the BBC Licence fee look fair value?

[Hornspieler]

.......and might just make the BBC Licence fee look fair value?

Well, actually what I am being charged for is the Sky Sports 1 and 2 package, which includes all those extra channels at no additional charge.

That for me, does look very fair value indeed. As for Andre Rieu and his bevvy of dolly birds dragging their bows slowly up and down, if those programmes attract just one pop fan to the awareness of more classical music, that is good.

When I was a small boy, my parents had a collection ofl gramophone records ranging from Gracie Fields to Fodens Motor Works band with Harry Mortimer's cornet solos; but it did also include Mascagni's Intermezzo from Cavalier Rusticana, Heddle Nash singing the serenade from "The Fair Maid of Perth", Sid Phillips playing "Valse Vanite" on the Alto Saxophone, Dame Clara Butt singing "God Shall Wipe Away All Tears". I played those records until they were almost like liquorice whorls and I still treasure them.

When HMV introduced their budget priced "Music for Pleasure" LPs, it generated interest in their "Classics for Pleasure" same price selections which included many fine performances.
We tend to mock Classic FM - but it's a start for people to become more interested in hearing complete performances of wider ranging classical music on Radio 3.

Let's not hold our noses in the air. We music lovers need all the support that we (and Radio 3) can get.

Hornspieler

E and OE

[amateur51]

My principal gripe is that the money raised supports the Murdoch Empire. Am I just being a snob? I don't think so.

Hornspieler describes the access to sports coverage that Sky affords him, which I agree is wonderful. But time was, I could watch, say, all the forthcoming Ashes Test matches as part of the BBC's coverage as part of my licence fee. So could Hornspieler. But such is the Sky monopoly that because a) I can't afford it and b) I would not subscribe to it even if I could, on principle, I can no longer watch it (unless I go to a pub with a large screen - no thanks).

Knowledgeable commentators remark on how the Sky monopoly has distorted football, from the prices to enter the ground to the wages that players get; they also talk about how cricket has become inflated by the Sky monopoly. It now costs anything from £50/seat upwards to go to one day of Test cricket and the county game is dying on its feet financially.

I'm sure that my position will be dismissed as 'old-fashioned' and 'harking back' to a golden age but I find that the added thought that Sky subscriptions go to the criminal enterprise that is NewsCorp sticks in my craw.

Add to this, the sheer nerve of members here advertising this service on a Board inspired by the need to defend BBC Radio 3 against the dumbing-down initiated by the need to compete against its commercial rival, and I am astonished that so many intelligent people can be so short-sighted.

[antongould]

Please dismiss me as old fashioned too then please.

[Mr Pee]

Tomorrow night at 8pm, Sky Arts 2:-

http://skyarts.sky.com/sky-arts-to-screen-benjamin-brittens-death-in-venice

[Mr Pee]

Add to this, the sheer nerve of members here advertising this service on a Board inspired by the need to defend BBC Radio 3 against the dumbing-down initiated by the need to compete against its commercial rival, and I am astonished that so many intelligent people can be so short-sighted.

And that commercial rival would be Classic FM. BBC Radio 3 are not in competition with Sky Arts TV.

[salymap]

Luckily I don't have to pay the BBC licence fee as the over 75s don't and Wimbledon starts tomorrow, so one fairly happy BBC viewer here.

My problem is with BT emails, but that's another story.

May it keep fine for your footie,cricket or tennis

[Hornspieler]

My principal gripe is that the money raised supports the Murdoch Empire. Am I just being a snob? I don't think so.

Hornspieler describes the access to sports coverage that Sky affords him, which I agree is wonderful. But time was, I could watch, say, all the forthcoming Ashes Test matches as part of the BBC's coverage as part of my licence fee. So could Hornspieler. But such is the Sky monopoly that because a) I can't afford it and b) I would not subscribe to it even if I could, on principle, I can no longer watch it (unless I go to a pub with a large screen - no thanks).

Knowledgeable commentators remark on how the Sky monopoly has distorted football, from the prices to enter the ground to the wages that players get; they also talk about how cricket has become inflated by the Sky monopoly. It now costs anything from £50/seat upwards to go to one day of Test cricket and the county game is dying on its feet financially.

I'm sure that my position will be dismissed as 'old-fashioned' and 'harking back' to a golden age but I find that the added thought that Sky subscriptions go to the criminal enterprise that is NewsCorp sticks in my craw.

Add to this, the sheer nerve of members here advertising this service on a Board inspired by the need to defend BBC Radio 3 against the dumbing-down initiated by the need to compete against its commercial rival, and I am astonished that so many intelligent people can be so short-sighted.

I think it is a shame that some message boarders seek to impose their political views on what is an interesting discussion on the alternative but usually additional opportunities to watch, as well as to listen to great music.

BBC 4 TV could screen a lot more concerts and recitals, giving those of us unable to attend the feeling of being present and also to observe the players and conductors' antics when 'at work'.

The money is there for the BBC to use if the corporation would stop wasting it by such unneccesary usage as a news reader handing over to "our reporter" who then hands straight over to another correspondent for half a sentence (usually beginning with the words "That's right, Sophie...") and then passing to yet another reporter who says much the same thing as the first before handing back to the news reader ... and very often about a item which will be covered anyway by the local regional news bulletin for the benefit of those who would have only had the slightest interest anyway.

Each activity requiring technical support from cameraman, lighting, and director.

No. I'm not exaggerating - I've been there!

HS

Perhaps we can now return to the subject of this thread and stop waving the Red Flag.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

Perhaps we can now return to the subject of this thread and stop waving the Red Flag.

But the subject of this Thread is an invitation to put more money into the off-shore bank accounts of Rupert Murdoch, a singularly venal, sociopathic individual any encouragement of whose profiteering cannot (and should not) be allowed to go unchallenged. If that counts as "waving the Red Flag" then watch me wave!

[Hornspieler]

But the subject of this Thread is an invitation to put more money into the off-shore bank accounts of Rupert Murdoch, a singularly venal, sociopathic individual any encouragement of whose profiteering cannot (and should not) be allowed to go unchallenged. If that counts as "waving the Red Flag" then watch me wave!

Originally Posted by Hornspieler
Perhaps we can now return to the subject of this thread and stop waving the Red Flag.

Fifteen minutes ago, I posted a reply to Caliban's message showing a picture of two cats fighting and quoting my comment as shown above.
Both Caliban's post and my reply have disappeared from these message boards. (Should be shown as messages #26 and #27)

What is going on here?

HS

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

Fifteen minutes ago, I posted a reply to Caliban's message showing a picture of two cats fighting and quoting my comment as shown above.
Both Caliban's post and my reply have disappeared from these message boards. (Should be shown as messages #26 and #27)

What is going on here?

HS

No idea - I quite liked the cats: and Cal's reply to your #25.

[Nick Armstrong]

Fifteen minutes ago, I posted a reply to Caliban's message showing a picture of two cats fighting and quoting my comment as shown above.
Both Caliban's post and my reply have disappeared from these message boards. (Should be shown as messages #26 and #27)

What is going on here?

HS

I deleted my own message, on second thoughts - thinking that there were already enough claws out here.

I never saw your reply though - that's odd.... (and there's no record of it ever having been posted. Maybe you wrote it but didn't post? )

[VodkaDilc]

Well that's because it's a bit of a meaningless question. I pay my 31.50 per month to Sky, of which 10.00 is for the Hi-Def option, and of course that covers not just Sky Arts 1 and 2, but all the other Sky Channels, except for sports and movies. The Formula One channel is included, which is my sport of choice, as are many other channels which show programmes of interest, such as The South Bank Show, Playhouse Presents, The Book Show, Game of Thrones -which I love-and many more too numerous to mention; for example I have just watched the second of a brand new eight part series on Sky 1 ,presented by David Attenborough. Filmed in Hi-Def and using revolutionary new filiming techniques, it is a fascinating if somewhat grisly look at the insect world- also available in 3D if I had a 3D telly!

With the dismal offerings generally available on the terrestrial channels Sky gives me a wealth of choice and I for one would not be without it. The Arts Channels are just a welcome part of the overall package. I consider it worth every penny. I know you disagree.....but then you thought Vicious was actually worth watching, so there's no accounting for taste....

I'm another in agreement with Mr Pee. Just over £1 a day is a real bargain. (I pay a bit more, but I like films, so I add the Movies option.) No-one's mentioned the sheer convenience and efficiency of satellite television, complete with Sky+. (I know other satellite options are available.) As for criticising Sky because of its ownership, this must be on the same level as the salesmen who accost people about their power suppliers. "Do you know that np***r is a foreign-owned firm", I have been asked. "Do you want to get your electricity from a foreign company?" My stock reply is "I don't care who owns the companies I use, as long as the product and service are good. Now excuse me, because my Volkswagen is parked in a limited-stay car-park."