Originally posted by AuntDaisy
View Post
The Eternal Breakfast Debate in a New Place
Collapse
X
-
I'm content with Furtwangler (ah, those 1940s Vienna Philharmonic winds!) or Robert Craft, not the first name that springs to mind in Mozart, nor is Pierre Boulez, who did record K361 for Decca, I suspect at the urging of Mitsuko Uchida who plays the Berg Concerto on the same disc.
Do HIPP interpreters use a string bass instead of a contrabassoon? Otto Klemperer used both in his recording.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by LMcD View PostThe Breakfast playlist is now stuffed so full of 'favourite tunes' that I'm half expecting to switch on one day and find that the programme has a new host in the form of an AI-generated Alan Keith.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by oddoneout View Post
Which is a shame. There also seems to be increasing quantities of 'listener input', as in lengthy messages from same read out. I hope that's just a misperception on my part or, if not, that it's just a temporary blip. I have stuck with Breakfast for the better selection of music, and that listener input has been limited, brief and to the point, but if that changes noticeably then so will my listening.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by hmvman View Post
It seems to me to vary. Some mornings I think they're trotting out all the old warhorses and others there's more unusual and interesting fare. Would this be down to different producers?
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by smittims View PostAh well, it was Sir John Reith who said switching off the wireless was as important as switching it on!
People used to switch on specially to listen to a selected programme. Now 'stripped' programming (same time, same programme, same presenter, across the week) and longer - 3 hours or more - programmes with a standard format and little information of the music to be played are the usual radio broadcasting. Aim? as many people as possible listening for as long as possible; and strategies for achieving this are more important than content or quality.It isn't given us to know those rare moments when people are wide open and the lightest touch can wither or heal. A moment too late and we can never reach them any more in this world.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by french frank View Post
This is why R3 was unpopular with the BBC hierarchy. How many hours a week does the average R3 audience member listen for? O be joyful! The last Rajar figures had people 'listening' for longer than they ever had in the past. Because they keep the radio switched on, regardless of whether they're listening or not. So it may well be that people have the radio switched on for longer but are actually listening less than they were ten years ago.
People used to switch on specially to listen to a selected programme. Now 'stripped' programming (same time, same programme, same presenter, across the week) and longer - 3 hours or more - programmes with a standard format and little information of the music to be played are the usual radio broadcasting. Aim? as many people as possible listening for as long as possible; and strategies for achieving this are more important than content or quality.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by Serial_Apologist View Post
So much of Radio 3's music programming has now become so disconnected and de-contextualised that it makes little sense, thus it would come as no surprise if Radio 3 tuners merely had it on as a kind of musical wallpaper.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by LMcD View Post
I'm afraid that seems to be increasingly the case chez moi. However, thanks to the Forum, I know that Yle Klassinen and other broadcasters are on hand to provide more nutritious fare, to which I pay due attention.
Comment
-
Comment