The Eternal Breakfast Debate in a New Place

[smittims]

Oh dear, Heldenleben , I seem to have touched a nerve, or perhaps you were waiting to say that. Sorry.

I only suggested that Churchill, like Reith, was 'a difficult man to work with'. I don't think any impartial historians would disagree with that. And I think most people who had to work with me would have said the same. Some did, and to my face! 'Nice' people are ofen not what is needed . A collleague of mine was popular, affable, easy to get on with, but would never object to anything. A pleasant man to heve in a room, but I wouldn't want to trust him to defend democracy for me.

But since you've raised the Churchill standard. I think I must point out in reply that he was often drunk on the job,that he went on too long, that he made some terrible mistakes that cost thousands of lives (Norway, Greece ad Crete instead of reinforcing Wavell in Libya ) . I agree that without him we would probably have given in after the French surrender; the attack on the French fleet was a daring gamble but it convinced the world that we were going to fight on when eveyone thought we were finished,and he must be given credit for that. Nothing is simple and straightforward about the second world war, and to protray Churchill as a spotless hero, as some (not you) have done is misleading.

[kernelbogey]

The obvious point to make: why, just because one listener can only hear a portion of a piece of music at a particular moment, is no one else allowed to hear the rest? Thousands of different listeners do different things at different times. One snatch of a piece may please 17 listeners who coincidentally all have to stop listening at the same moment. It makes no sense to try and second guess what "the listeners" want to do at any given moment. But with perseverance even Pavlovian dogs could be trained to react in certain ways .

I want to make the point that there isn't just a binary between 'listeners who are happy with short pieces' and 'listeners who want whole works'. I am in both camps. We can, all of us I believe, have different needs & habits at different times. As it happens I am frequently ok listening to the succession of short pieces on Breakast for a while - and often switch off after abut 30-45 minutes. The TTN forum works well for me and I often have it on softly for long stretches of the night and will also often turn the volume up a bit for something I want to listen to.

[smittims]

I respect your right to choose, kernelbogey. For myself, I have to say that while I've nothing against short pieces, playing a work incomplete misrepresents it, since one movement often contains references to another. Something that happens in one movement makes sense only when you hear what happens to it later in the work, and so on; and this doesn't just apply to 'motto' themes or works in cyclic form.

Again personally, I don't want 'background' music. If I'm not listening, I prefer silence.Goodness knows it's rare enough these days.

[LMcD]

[QUOTE=kernelbogey;n1320068]
We can, all of us I believe, have different needs & habits at different times.

That's why I listen to Breakfast - well, most of it - on weekdays, and Night Tracks. They're offering what I need at the time I need it. Private Passions and Monday's Wigmore Hall concert are the ideal accompaniments to my signature bacon butties and beans on toast (or the other way round). I would enjoy an afternoon concert if such a thing were on offer.

[Ein Heldenleben]

Oh dear, Heldenleben , I seem to have touched a nerve, or perhaps you were waiting to say that. Sorry.

I only suggested that Churchill, like Reith, was 'a difficult man to work with'. I don't think any impartial historians would disagree with that. And I think most people who had to work with me would have said the same. Some did, and to my face! 'Nice' people are ofen not what is needed . A collleague of mine was popular, affable, easy to get on with, but would never object to anything. A pleasant man to heve in a room, but I wouldn't want to trust him to defend democracy for me.

But since you've raised the Churchill standard. I think I must point out in reply that he was often drunk on the job,that he went on too long, that he made some terrible mistakes that cost thousands of lives (Norway, Greece ad Crete instead of reinforcing Wavell in Libya ) . I agree that without him we would probably have given in after the French surrender; the attack on the French fleet was a daring gamble but it convinced the world that we were going to fight on when eveyone thought we were finished,and he must be given credit for that. Nothing is simple and straightforward about the second world war, and to protray Churchill as a spotless hero, as some (not you) have done is misleading.

Yep absolutely definitely not spotless, Apart from anything else he sent both my Grandads to Gallopoli on a disaster mission from which one returned with frozen feet and PTSD.

[Serial_Apologist]

I respect your right to choose, kernelbogey. For myself, I have to say that while I've nothing against short pieces, playing a work incomplete misrepresents it, since one movement often contains references to another. Something that happens in one movement makes sense only when you hear what happens to it later in the work, and so on; and this doesn't just apply to 'motto' themes or works in cyclic form.

Again personally, I don't want 'background' music. If I'm not listening, I prefer silence.Goodness knows it's rare enough these days.

The other point of course is that while one person with preference for extracts is not deprived of anything, the other's wish to hear the entire work in its intended glory is.

[french frank]

I want to make the point that there isn't just a binary between 'listeners who are happy with short pieces' and 'listeners who want whole works'. I am in both camps. We can, all of us I believe, have different needs & habits at different times.

But this isn't about what any individual likes or dislikes (I keep saying this). It's about whether Radio 3 plans its programming to suit the most people most of the time, or whether it has a wider vision about what Radio should provide and how. I don't understand (I have my limitations ) why anyone who enjoys classical music would object to Breakfast if it played, say, 8 works in three and a half hours instead of 25. That wouldn't force them to do anything that wasn't convenient at the time because 'they wanted to hear the whole piece'.

[AuntDaisy]

But this isn't about what any individual likes or dislikes (I keep saying this). It's about whether Radio 3 plans its programming to suit the most people most of the time, or whether it has a wider vision about what Radio should provide and how. I don't understand (I have my limitations ) why anyone who enjoys classical music would object to Breakfast if it played, say, 8 works in three and a half hours instead of 25. That wouldn't force them to do anything that wasn't convenient at the time because 'they wanted to hear the whole piece'.

Given the huge amount of our data that the BBC is harvesting via SOUNDS & iPlayer, it should be easy for Sam J to do, say a two week test of Breakfast with just 8 longer pieces and then crunch the numbers...
Perhaps Jools Holland, Elizabeth Alker, Clive Myrie, Emma Clarke... are all part of some large, data-driven experiment?

Anyone fancy Beethoven's Triple Concerto in its entirety for Breakfast?

[Ein Heldenleben]

Given the huge amount of our data that the BBC is harvesting via SOUNDS & iPlayer, it should be easy for Sam J to do, say a two week test of Breakfast with just 8 longer pieces and then crunch the numbers...
Perhaps Jools Holland, Elizabeth Alker, Clive Myrie, Emma Clarke... are all part of some large, data-driven experiment?

Anyone fancy Beethoven's Triple Concerto in its entirety for Breakfast?

A very good point and that data would be much more reliable than either Rajar or market research.

[Old Grumpy]

A very good point and that data would be much more reliable than either Rajar or market research.

[Pedant] those data [/Pedant]

Sorry

[kernelbogey]

....Anyone fancy Beethoven's Triple Concerto in its entirety for Breakfast?

Yup. Maybe along with a thin beefsteak segnol and strong black coffee....
But Mrs Schickaneder next door will probably switch to R2 or CFM.
I once played the whole of Bach's Chaconne from the Partita in D Minor to a friend who had asked to be educated about 'classical music'. At the end I said 'What did you think,' and they said 'Boring'.

[french frank]

No one seems to want to tackle the question of how far the BBC should take its cue from audiences in deciding what Radio 3 should broadcast. 'We need our content to attract younger listeners, we need the right tone to attract people who are intimidated by the unfamiliarity of classical music, we have to cater for people with busy lives and shorter attention spans, we must attract a more diverse audience.' Which is the cart and which is the horse?

[oddoneout]

No one seems to want to tackle the question of how far the BBC should take its cue from audiences in deciding what Radio 3 should broadcast. 'We need our content to attract younger listeners, we need the right tone to attract people who are intimidated by the unfamiliarity of classical music, we have to cater for people with busy lives and shorter attention spans, we must attract a more diverse audience.' Which is the cart and which is the horse?

Following on from that I want to know why attracting those new listeners necessitates throwing out everything which keeps/kept the existing audience listening? Given the amount of airtime available why has the balance tipped so very far in favour of attempts(the success of which has yet to be ascertained) to woo a completely new audience, attempts which also seem to assume that none of these new listeners will be able to cope with even just small elements of the older R3 format such as a greater number of complete and/or longer items.
It also concerns me that by providing so much pre-digested and sampled music new listeners not only get a completely false impression of what "classical" music actually is(I don't mean the technicalities, just basic stuff like a movement not being a complete work) but then create a demand for that approach since it's all they know, having listened to "the home of classical music". At that point R3 effectively ceases to exist, not least because presumably AI will be able to meet the demand for playlists of that kind.

[LMcD]

Yup. Maybe along with a thin beefsteak segnol and strong black coffee....
But Mrs Schickaneder next door will probably switch to R2 or CFM.
I once played the whole of Bach's Chaconne from the Partita in D Minor to a friend who had asked to be educated about 'classical music'. At the end I said 'What did you think,' and they said 'Boring'.

I would probably have said 'Wow!' or 'Gosh!' in the hope that I would then be allowed to go and lie down in a nice quiet darkened room and try to work out what I really thought of it. (Mind you, I STILL don't really know what I think of it, and probably never will).

[smittims]

I have to say in fairness that chaconnes are not the 'ear-friendliest' introduction to classical music. It's the fear that it will never end. I felt this the first time I heard the finale of Mozart's D minor quartet. I love it now , but I do think it should be heard after the first three movements. Otherwise it's like buying a car with one wheel missing.