The other alternative is: that by not tuning in, as listener numbers fall, Radio 3's critics will all point the finger and claim that there is no longer an audience for classical music, unless one makes the point that it's the presentation and not the content which is the issue here.
The Eternal Breakfast Debate in a New Place
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by Pabmusic View Post... you won't see me back here.Originally posted by Thropplenoggin View PostShame. I rather enjoyed your outburst of vitriol. Wasn't Aristotle's view that it's good to purge such emotions?Originally posted by Sir Velo View PostThe other alternative is: that by not tuning in, as listener numbers fall, Radio 3's critics will all point the finger and claim that there is no longer an audience for classical music, unless one makes the point that it's the presentation and not the content which is the issue here.Last edited by Pabmusic; 23-04-14, 08:54.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by Sir Velo View PostThe point is, if one doesn't complain, it will absolutely never get better; and then you give R3 management the perfect opportunity to say "Look, we never get complaints! Our audience loves us!"
[Edit: Aargh! I'm doing it now!]
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by aeolium View PostMaybe, although I've learnt with R3 (at least with Roger Wright) that the complaints rarely lead to changes except to make things worse, as if the management revel in the fact that what they see as a hidebound bunch of old fuddy-duddies aren't able to move with the times, so their strategy must be working. So the inane chatter, the oft-repeated set of familiar short pieces, the butchering of concerts to make new 'concerts' - all these things increase.
[Edit: Aargh! I'm doing it now!]It loved to happen. -- Marcus Aurelius
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by Sir Velo View PostThe other alternative is: that by not tuning in, as listener numbers fall, Radio 3's critics will all point the finger and claim that there is no longer an audience for classical music, unless one makes the point that it's the presentation and not the content which is the issue here.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by cloughie View PostThe content of Breakfast is very much an issue!
What I was trying, maladroitly to say, is that there is an audience for quality music at this time. Breakfast is in every sense a dog's dinner.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by Sir Velo View PostThe point is, if one doesn't complain, it will absolutely never get better; and then you give R3 management the perfect opportunity to say "Look, we never get complaints! Our audience loves us!"
Complaining here does no good at all, & only serves, as noggin suggests, to make the poster feel a little better, for a little time (but, yes, the question has to be why keep listening to a programme that one detests? Perhaps the syndrome already has a name - Masochism)
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by Sir Velo View PostThe other alternative is: that by not tuning in, as listener numbers fall, Radio 3's critics will all point the finger and claim that there is no longer an audience for classical music, unless one makes the point that it's the presentation and not the content which is the issue here.
I'm attempting an analysis of the BBC's quarterly 'Performance' statistics (such as they are). The headlines when the new figures are published usually report that the BBC is performing very well - in fact improving. One figure I haven't seen quoted is Radio 3's record on 'Distinctiveness' - a key measurement for a public service broadcaster. Last quarter it was Not Bad, but prior to that it showed the station sinking lower. Over the entire 3-year period for which we have statistics, it comes averagely 7th out of 10 of the the UK-wide station. But the strategy is quite deliberate: short bits of music, presenter-led, chat with listeners and guests, regular news headlines, much like Radio 2; and snippets of undemanding familiar music like Classic FM. Because these are the stations that have 'potential' listeners - those who don't listen to R3 at the moment but who might be persuaded to do so if it's given a 'familiar', less 'daunting' style.
Radio is now rated a 'low involvement', secondary activity; so you aren't likely to find a large percentage of the schedule devoted now to what has been called the 'cultural and intellectual' level. Not in the classical field anyway.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.Because these are the stations that have 'potential' listeners - those who don't listen to R3 at the moment but who might be persuaded to do so if it's given a 'familiar', less 'daunting' style
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by cloughie View Postthe 'Beeching' trick!
Looking at the figures again, Radio 3 shows a gradual descent in appreciation too. I think it will be worth forwarding the results somewhere ... Given that the Trust, the Director-General and the Director of Radio have all been told of dissatisfaction - the Trust for a number of years - they will find it more difficult to write off the results. Especially with R3 management about to undergo a changeIt 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 aeolium View PostWhat might have an impact would be if radio critics like Gillian Reynolds and music critics/musicologists like Richard Osborne spoke out, but I suppose those in the latter category don't want to put heads above the parapet because they might be denied reviewing work on R3 programmes.
Comment
-
-
Richard Tarleton
Comment