Pappano on Cavalleria Rusticana - Radio 4

[Guest]

Yes, Radio 4, I know, but worth a listen.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p0393dyd

[french frank]

Yes, Radio 4, I know, but worth a listen.

What one can say is that this gets out to a wider audience than it would have done on Radio 3. But why does Radio 3 not have similar features which are a grade up on this? Why, instead, programmes playing the Dambusters March, the Warsaw Concerto and music from the Lord of the Rings, Saving Private Ryan and My Beautiful Laundrette?

Sorry, SB, ignore - a good programme, as is anything that involves Pappano … (I'm sure he can find illuminating things to say even about Cavalleria Rusticana).

[Richard Tarleton]

(I'm sure he can find illuminating things to say even about Cavalleria Rusticana).

He can/did indeed, and about Pag....an action-packed few minutes No melismas [in verismo], every syllable has a note, directness....

Are you in both parts, Simon?

I've only seen one live Cav&Pag, the WNO's splendid 1990s one designed by Elijah Moshinsky, but love them both, if that's the right word for such unpleasant tales.

[Cockney Sparrow]

We are lucky to have Pappano at the Royal Opera House. Long may it continue.......

[Simon Biazeck]

Actually, as a lowly extra chorister, I am not involved at all! Just love Pappano's never dumbed down enthusiasm. I have plenty to do in the rest of season!

[Simon Biazeck]

Radio 3 seem frightened of frightening people with undiluted, total immersion Classical music, when, in my view, that's the best way in. It was mine. Pappano presents it brilliantly, as always.

[french frank]

Radio 3 seem frightened of frightening people with undiluted, total immersion Classical music, when, in my view, that's the best way in. It was mine. Pappano presents it brilliantly, as always.

Have seen two such references to the Pappano programme now. And, yes, the question isn't: why is it on R4 (pretty obvious), but why doesn't Radio 3 have such programmes, regularly? They could be more esoteric, more technical on Radio 3. Instead, we get - what?

Not being a jazz fan I probably couldn't cope with two hours of this - but potentially much more 'R3' than two hours of some celebrity playing 'My kinda music'.

[grandchant]

I've been reading comments like some of these ever since the dumbing down of R3 started in earnest; there are at least three recently in progress on these message boards. I do sympathise, but I'd like to bet that, like me, most of the people complaining are either graduates or the intellectual equivalent thereof? Well, that puts you in the top 5% or so of the ability range. I too crave my fix of analysis and criticism, but what about the other 95% of Joe Public? Is R3 not for them?

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

I've been reading comments like some of these ever since the dumbing down of R3 started in earnest; there are at least three recently in progress on these message boards. I do sympathise, but I'd like to bet that, like me, most of the people complaining are either graduates or the intellectual equivalent thereof? Well, that puts you in the top 5% or so of the ability range. I too crave my fix of analysis and criticism, but what about the other 95% of Joe Public? Is R3 not for them?

A couple of points, grandchant:

Graduates now make up getting on for 40% of the population.

http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171776_337841.pdf

Despite the efforts of the BBC to make R3 more inviting for a larger number of listeners, that invitation has not been accepted: RAJAR figures year after year show annual listening figures for R3 to be declining, not increasing. The aim of getting more people to listen to R3 is commendable - the methods to secure this aim is a failure.

And ... well, the Pappano programme was on R4, as was the Stockhausen in Huddersfield documentary, which suggests that there is an audience which might be interested in R3's "wares", but who wouldn't be attracted by the presentation style that, it was decided, would attract them over to R3 itself.

[Barbirollians]

A couple of points, grandchant:

Graduates now make up getting on for 40% of the population.

http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171776_337841.pdf

Despite the efforts of the BBC to make R3 more inviting for a larger number of listeners, that invitation has not been accepted: RAJAR figures year after year show annual listening figures for R3 to be declining, not increasing. The aim of getting more people to listen to R3 is commendable - the methods to secure this aim is a failure.

And ... well, the Pappano programme was on R4, as was the Stockhausen in Huddersfield documentary, which suggests that there is an audience which might be interested in R3's "wares", but who wouldn't be attracted by the presentation style that, it was decided, would attract them over to R3 itself.

Tales from the Stave
Soul Music ( when dealing with classical pieces although including a lot of reminiscences also includes commonly some interesting musical analysis )

It seems that much of the interesting stuff is now on 4 rather than 3 .

Pappano's programmes are accessible yet intelligent . They seem to sum up that line that broadcasters should never overestimate what the audience knows or underestimate their intelligence .

A friend of mine who I did not think was the slightest bit interested in classical music has just borrowed the Ferrier/Boult Bach and Handel arias off me after catching the mezzo soprano programme by chance .

[french frank]

but what about the other 95% of Joe Public? Is R3 not for them?

Radio 3 For All? Why? Most of the BBC radio stations aren't for me: they have their target audiences. Radio 1 target is for 'Joe Public under the age of 30'. Radio 2 is for 'Joe Public interested in popular music'. Radio 1Xtra? Radio 6 Music? The Asian Network? Radio 3 is just another 'flavour'. Given its scope, which is as broad as Radio 2 and Radio 4 put together (comedy perhaps being omitted), it does pretty well in covering a whole range of interests. Its USP is that it covers all these various fields for people who have a special interest in them, rather than a general/casual (Joe Public) interest.

As ferney has pointed out: look at the RAJAR figures, in spite of what you yourself describe as 'dumbing down'. And look at the evidence that the BBC puts such programmes as they think will interest 'Joe Public' on Radio 4. If 'Joe Public' declines to listen to Radio 3, that ought to release Radio 3 to be more 'analytical, critical, intellectual' - to which add 'experimental', 'risk-taking'.

A small audience is an enabling factor - enabling Radio 3 to stick to its original remit.

[Roehre]

...
Graduates now make up getting on for 40% of the population.

http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171776_337841.pdf

....

Which is not too difficult to understand, most universities nowadays being more like Upgraded Primary Schools

[mercia]

The aim of getting more people to listen to R3 is commendable

yes, out of interest are the listening figures for Radio 3 now the worst they have EVER been (including Third Programme period) ? or are listening figures unavailable for certain years to make a judgement on that ?

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

Which is not too difficult to understand, most universities nowadays being more like Upgraded Primary Schools

Oh, yes - it's a well-known fact that degree courses (and, indeed, what passes for "education" these days in general) have also dumbed down. It says so frequently in the Daily Mail, so it must be true.





(I don't need to add the , do I?)

[french frank]

yes, out of interest are the listening figures for Radio 3 now the worst they have EVER been (including Third Programme period) ? or are listening figures unavailable for certain years to make a judgement on that ?

Merc, it's not really possible to compare. I don't think the Third's figures are readily available, and in any case when it started there were only 6 hours per day and the reception was so poor the population in general couldn't all receive it - even if they could tolerate the quality.

More recently, I do have figures which show the average weekly reach as over 3 million - again not comparable as in those days there were programmes like Test Match Special, and the rest of Saturday's sport.

The moment the figures are deemed roughly 'comparable' is the beginning of 1999 (Roger Wright became controller in Nov 1998!). The figure for that first quarter was 2.277m (I have a suspicion that was unrealistically high). Since then it it did go down to about 1.9m - 2m (as now), though it has dropped as low as 1.783m and risen to 2.29m - usually attributable to schedule changes, at least in some measure.

The figure that is rubbing along the bottom at 'lowest ever' is the percentage of the population listening, since the audience is now a good deal larger than in 1999 - so potentially there are more listeners. I think this is the figure which exercises BBC management. I.e.the population is bigger and if Radio 3 has to 'stoop to conquer' (or dumb down), that's what it must do.