Sunday Morning

[french frank]

...and light music has all but disappeared from Radio 2, as is to be the fate of the Organist Entertains and Listen to the Band, replaced by the exR1 DJ entertains and listen to the bland!

There is something of a non sequitur about, There's nowhere else on the whole of the BBC radio portfolio where one can hear 'light music' - let's put it on Radio 3 … Isn't there?

[Serial_Apologist]

I've been rather enjoying the little morsels of light music on a Sunday morning. There's precious little anywhere else on BBC (or, indeed, any other network) radio.

Indeed, I was rather ticked orf on the Jazz Bored by Alyn Shipton for mildly complaining about the presence of sugary 1950s dance bands on Jazz Record Requests; Alyn pointed out that there were precious few other remaining places where our senior citizens could hear such fare on BBC radio.

[vinteuil]

There is something of a non sequitur about, There's nowhere else on the whole of the BBC radio portfolio where one can hear 'light music' - let's put it on Radio 3 … Isn't there?

... one might think the home for such fare might be "the Light Programme". Which then became Radio Two.




.

[Serial_Apologist]

... one might think the home for such fare might be "the Light Programme". Which then became Radio Two.




.

Exactly.

[antongould]

Presenters .... I suggest the BBC get rid of Suzy Klein on Essential Classics and replace her with David Mellor. His Sunday evening 'show' on CFM is often a delightful and informative experience. He knows at least as much about music as she does - probably more - and he manages to educate his listeners without talking down to, or bullying, them. Next Sunday, we're promised, he'll play something from Hamish McCunn's opera 'Jeannie Dean', so he can hardly be accused of relying exclusively on popular favourites. I didn't realize (or had forgotten), incidentally, that Hamish McCunn conducted the first performance of 'Tristan' in English.

This intrigued me so I looked at the playlist for Sunday ..... 21 pieces in 2 hours seemingly themed for St Patrick’s Day ??? With lots of James Galway inc. Annie’s Song, John Field and Leroy Anderson ..... if Skellers served it up he’d, I would suspect, be hung, drawn and quartered hereabouts ......

[french frank]

Indeed, I was rather ticked orf on the Jazz Bored by Alyn Shipton for mildly complaining about the presence of sugary 1950s dance bands on Jazz Record Requests; Alyn pointed out that there were precious few other remaining places where our senior citizens could hear such fare on BBC radio.

Which is an argument for having Billy Mayerl, Wonderful Town and Peggy Lee on Jazz Record Requests. They're as close, if not closer, to jazz than to classical music. And if the argument is that there's already little jazz on Radio 3, neither is there much classical on the other five BBC Radio stations.

It all boils down to whether Individual X enjoys it, in which case they don't care how out of place these types of music are.

And to add to that: It's no use INDIVIDUAL X saying, Let's not have that presenter (who I think is awful), let's have this presenter (who I like).

Individual likes and dislikes are irrelevant.

[Serial_Apologist]

There is something of a non sequitur about, There's nowhere else on the whole of the BBC radio portfolio where one can hear 'light music' - let's put it on Radio 3 … Isn't there?

Given that there is an argument, possibly, for including, say, Offenbach, Delibes, Sullivan or Edward German on the "putatively" classical music-based morning programmes, there might be a discussion to be had on whether or not they are the place for jazz, coming as it does from a different musical and cultural lineage than "light music", and concomitantly for presenting jazz under a heading of its own, alongside other programme categories such as blues, rock, and "world music". Others will rightly say we are bedevilled by cultural categorisations; to some there is acceptance that the classical heritage has served its audiences and functions as a feed-in to where music now is, namely a reflection and expression of global cultural interdependence and an intermingling of traditions on equal terms. But where would this leave the experimental end of such musical cross-fertilization, in terms of fostering levels of audience sophistication rarely on offer in today's education systems, or Radio 3, in its morning schedulings?

[Serial_Apologist]

Which is an argument for having Billy Mayerl, Wonderful Town and Peggy Lee on Jazz Record Requests. They're as close, if not closer, to jazz than to classical music. And if the argument is that there's already little jazz on Radio 3, neither is there much classical on the other five BBC Radio stations.

It all boils down to whether Individual X enjoys it, in which case they don't care how out of place these types of music are.

And to add to that: It's no use INDIVIDUAL X saying, Let's not have that presenter (who I think is awful), let's have this presenter (who I like).

Individual likes and dislikes are irrelevant.

They are - and as many have said many times on here, it is a shame that Home Service-type programmes catering for those daily weaned on such kinds of music, who have not yet passed on, have been dispensed with. There is a certain hard-core jazz following, in which I supose I include myself, who grew up to appreciate that part of jazz that only survived by effectively separating itself out from the "lighter" forms of entertainment and show-based music, because not to do so would have killed off the cutting edge that had always been the lifeline of jazz, and with it jazz itself. They - we? - are the ones who demur at the prolificity of jazz in all its periods and manifestations being under-represented; we have no desire to deprive the older (?) folks of their Peggy Lee etc! In a way, the classical enthusiasts who complain about jazz being included on Breakfast do so from a similar standpoint to ours.

[french frank]

They are - and as many have said many times on here, it is a shame that Home Service-type programmes catering for those daily weaned on such kinds of music, who have not yet passed on, have been dispensed with. There is a certain hard-core jazz following, in which I supose I include myself, who grew up to appreciate that part of jazz that only survived by effectively separating itself out from the "lighter" forms of entertainment and show-based music, because not to do so would have killed off the cutting edge that had always been the lifeline of jazz, and with it jazz itself. They - we? - are the ones who demur at the prolificity of jazz in all its periods and manifestations being under-represented; we have no desire to deprive the older (?) folks of their Peggy Lee etc! In a way, the classical enthusiasts who complain about jazz being included on Breakfast do so from a similar standpoint to ours.

I agree entirely with that.

[cloughie]

Indeed, I was rather ticked orf on the Jazz Bored by Alyn Shipton for mildly complaining about the presence of sugary 1950s dance bands on Jazz Record Requests; Alyn pointed out that there were precious few other remaining places where our senior citizens could hear such fare on BBC radio.

As indeed there is no home for the better than mundane pop but not quite jazz stuff!

[oddoneout]

Just expect the audiences for other programmes which don't include light interludes to go down: evening concerts which expect listeners to listen for 40 mins+ at a time; Record Review which is for informed listeners who take a critical attitude to what they're listening to; Hear and Now, Music Matters, Discovering Mu … oh, but that one's gone already, hasn't it?

Why? I don't quite follow why the inclusion of non-R3 fare in the already non-R3 morning schedules would reduce the - entirely different I would have assumed - audience from the programmes you list, unlessthe content of said programmes is so reduced in quality and content that they no longer fulfill their purpose for that self-selecting audience. That scenario is sadly not one that can be dismissed completely but I'm not sure that its possibility should be solely blamed on the intrusion of non-R3 fare; it also requires wrong thinking at implementation/policy level to facilitate universal dilution of quality(aka dumbing down).

[hmvman]

That's precisely how they get away with it It doesn't matter what they do, someone will like it and others won't. Who wins? Why should those who appreciate light music be given priority over those who don't? All Radio 3 is doing is gradually welcoming in the light music lovers and driving out those who want 'heavier' fare - at least on the programmes which are supposed to be classical.

Just expect the audiences for other programmes which don't include light interludes to go down: evening concerts which expect listeners to listen for 40 mins+ at a time; Record Review which is for informed listeners who take a critical attitude to what they're listening to; Hear and Now, Music Matters, Discovering Mu … oh, but that one's gone already, hasn't it?

With respect, I think that might possibly be overstating things, ff. It's one little 2-3 minute piece once a week (I'm not counting "On the Town" or Peggy Lee as light music). I hardly think, as an appreciator of light music, I'm being given priority over others who aren't. Also, I don't think 'light' and 'heavy' music listeners are necessarily mutually exclusive. Yes, I like 'light' music but I also listen to and enjoy 'heavier fare' too.

Am I, monk-like, to refuse to listen/switch off when music I like is played on R3 but is not 'heavy' classical or jazz in order to remain 'pure' as a R3 listener?

I do take the point that lighter music's home, traditionally, was the Light Programme, now R2 and that all non-pop music is gradually being squeezed out of there. If that network was to start broadcasting lighter fare again I'd be happy to go there for my fix. The wider issue is, as you've said elsewhere, is R3 becoming the 'dumping ground' for all the genres not wanted by R2 and other stations? And if not to R3 where should they go?

[Sir Velo]

It all boils down to whether Individual X enjoys it

Individual likes and dislikes are irrelevant.

Not for the first time I'm not entirely clear as to the point you are making. OTOH you seem to be saying that if a particular listener requests a piece of music, no matter how non "core R3" it is, they will get it played, provided the producer/presenter is in tune with it; while OTOH you seem to be implying that particular listener preferences are irrelevant when it comes to presenters. Surely, the opposite is true if only from your opening remarks?

Moreover, I think you provide the evidence that individual likes and dislikes are extremely relevant in the selection of presenter. Look at the recent success of Ian Skelly; this has surely come about through his garnering a little fan club on these pages and among other listeners. Anyone who listens attentively can tell after a few moments that he has neither the breadth of musical knowledge of Jonathan Swain or Martin Handley, yet he has become flavour of the month. Furthermore, one can see from the evidence of other radio stations that if there is sufficient dislike of a particular presenter then they get bounced quickly, particularly if the holy grail of listener numbers is adversely impacted.

[cloughie]

Not for the first time I'm not entirely clear as to the point you are making. OTOH you seem to be saying that if a particular listener requests a piece of music, no matter how non "core R3" it is, they will get it played, provided the producer/presenter is in tune with it; while OTOH you seem to be implying that particular listener preferences are irrelevant when it comes to presenters. Surely, the opposite is true if only from your opening remarks?

Moreover, I think you provide the evidence that individual likes and dislikes are extremely relevant in the selection of presenter. Look at the recent success of Ian Skelly; this has surely come about through his garnering a little fan club on these pages and among other listeners. Anyone who listens attentively can tell after a few moments that he has neither the breadth of musical knowledge of Jonathan Swain or Martin Handley, yet he has become flavour of the month. Furthermore, one can see from the evidence of other radio stations that if there is sufficient dislike of a particular presenter then they get bounced quickly, particularly if the holy grail of listener numbers is adversely impacted.

There are two sides to every coin, but there remains a great deal of discontent with the BBC's music policy and R3 is losing many traditional listeners.

[french frank]

Not for the first time I'm not entirely clear as to the point you are making.

Clearly. They mean the same thing.

When someone (INDIVIDUAL X) comes on here and says, 'Actually, I enjoy that' or 'Actually, I think that was appalling and I hated it', the comment has no relevance to a discussion of whether it 'should' or 'should not' be on a particular station or programme, unless there is some expressed rationale underlying that opinion. Liking or disliking has no general bearing on the debate since everyone likes/hates everything. The same with 'Get rid of Presenter X. He/She is awful. Let's have more of Presenter Y'. Next minute someone will pop up and say, No, no, other way round. I like Presenter X. Get rid of Presenter Y.' To which the reply should be, 'Irrelevant what you as an individual like or dislike.' Though, of course, this is a forum which allows all opinions … Even crushing responses to anyone one disagrees with

I'm not saying that broadcasters find these arguments irrelevant. If such-and-such a policy or presenter proves popular with the public that's what they'll give them more of. It works for the broadcaster - look at Classic FM. Popularity and ratings are all; Radio 3, as a minority interest station, loses out on that - but it's why we get single movements, no full-length pieces during mornings.