End in sight for Classical Collection?

[Mark Sealey]

One logical response to this dictum of the Trust's (if indeed it can be interpreted that way) is: Why isn't the brief of, say, R1 being widened to include, say, Tallis?

(I know it's an old argument. But it still stands.)

And - I may be daft - but I still honestly don't see how 'switching', 9 ams, Today, Suchet, 'Collections', stopping audiences from doing something, making audiences do something, Classic FM, markets and the rest can possibly change the note row that makes, say, Berg's Violin Concerto such wonderful music.

Don't people want to hear the music and concentrate on what it has to offer? Are they really taken in by all the packaging?

Really?

It may be convenience for radio controllers to tell us they are.

But how is the music any different when it's performed under one set of circumstances from under another: once the first note begins, the rest is irrelevant.

[antongould]

I know it is sad, but it is the age we live "business" and "the numbers" i.e ratings rule everything. If Radio 3 could, as people hereabouts will now wish, go TNT 0.00 to 12.00 it would, in my view be gone in any form acceptable to anyone within 5 years. I too constantly "rail, rail against the dying......." but look at TV drama, cricket, High Street shopping and many many more soon to be joined by many many more e.g. the NHS - don't, in my view, blame RW blame the thankless age and environment he finds himself in!

Excuse me while I go to the Air Raid Shelter!!!

[aeolium]

It certainly looks to be a hopeless case, a sort of Morning Wasteland. If only access to the BBC archives were properly opened up, then the poverty of its current provision would be offset, but that doesn't look like happening either. It looks like a matter of exploring the other classical internet stations, live concerts (which at least are more plentiful in the summer) and the CD collection.

[Bryn]

Essentially Car[sic] FM, eh?

[french frank]

don't, in my view, blame RW blame the thankless age and environment he finds himself in!

Up to a point, I do agree with that. But one can take a stand - Hier stehe ich - I mean, we know that live evening concerts will never come back to R3. We were told categorically that there were no plans to return to the 7.30pm start time. Once the sound engineers told management that the difference between their tweaked 160kbps was 'almost indistinguishable' from 192kbps, we knew the battle for sound quality was lost for ever.

The problem is that people don't care enough to resist - even about the things they care a lot about. Someone has to keep picking away at these things. At least one can make them feel horribly, horribly guilty

[Norfolk Born]

Is there something wrong with Radio 4 at 9.00 a.m?

I started listening to 'Today' because I got fed up with 'Breakfast'. Now, I wouldn't miss 'Today' whatever (or whoever) was on Radio 3 from 6.00 to 9.00 a.m. However, by 9.00 a.m. I feel like listening to some music. If I like the look of what's been scheduled on 'Classic Collection', I'll switch to Radio 3. If I don't (sadly, this is increasingly the case), then I'll turn to my CD collection or MP3 player. More often than not, this means that I'm probably lost to Radio 3 for the rest of the day. I never switch to Classic FM at 9.00 a.m. But it will take more than a big-name presenter or similar cosmetic changes to persuade me to tune to Radio 3 at 9.00 a.m. if I don't like the look of the scheduled contents. By which I mean that it doesn't strike me as potentially nourishing, substantial, possibly unfamiliar and also challenging.

[Frances_iom]

I do blame RW - he is an apparachik in a job that demands a different class of person - did he ever give his view about the sound quality of the broadcasts, he introduced the 'listen up' pale imitation of a concert and trumpeted it as live - have we had any explanation of the U-turn re 'live' as per OED and not RW's mangling of the English language, have we had any explanation as to why 7.30 starts are a better idea especially when all those with experience told him that 7pm was not a good idea, + many more changes wrought under his leadership - it is easy for corporate apparachiks to avoid giving any explanation - such leads to many worse things than RW's behaviour (eg Railtrack's attitude so heavily criticised that a very watered down version of coporate responsibility had to be introduced to avoid even worse derelictions of duty in the future) but it stinks of the same attitude to those you are employed to serve.

[Mark Sealey]

His vision is fundamentally flawed.

[doversoul1]

Message 1
Message 16

Is it what it is to be? What a short-lived dream! What a lost opportunity!! They can't be serious, really?

[Paul Sherratt]

>>nourishing, substantial, possibly unfamiliar and also challenging


Ofca,

All BBC national radio stations work to those ideals, surely ?

[Eudaimonia]

It will aim to hold on as far as possible to the Breakfast audience

But on the other hand, they did say it has to be significantly different from Breakfast.

"If they're getting more new listeners and better ratings than ever by doing what they're doing now, how could you even think they'd radically change course to an old-style show?"
But they're getting fewer listeners - the figures I've seen for CDM were higher than the figures I've seen for CC. What do you call this if not an 'old-style show'?

Oh. Maybe they just screwed up and aren't in a position to admit it, so have to find something in the same vein-- yet fresh and different!--to prove they're on the right track after all. No no, not a screw-up at all. An experiment; these things take time, don't you know. Fresh and different. Yes, that's it.

[Eudaimonia]

...without hourly straightjackets...

Are there any British radio stations who still operate this way? Perhaps this made sense in the 70s and 80s, but now they're pushing everything to the iPlayer and podcasts, is it really feasible anymore? I don't see why listeners should be expected to forgo the sense of consistency they get from other stations just to make it easier on the presenters. If you plan things properly, I can't see why this should be such an issue.

.If only access to the BBC archives were properly opened up, then the poverty of its current provision would be offset, but that doesn't look like happening either.

Are you sure? One of the questions on the survey that always pops up when you visit the R3 page has to do with "how far back would you expect to listen to archival programming?" and the last two options are "3-5 years" and "5+ years". So at least it's somewhat on the table, yes? I hope so, and think it would be a fantastic way to save money and satisfy disgruntled listeners who aren't having their needs met.

His vision is fundamentally flawed.

It's easy to have perfect vision when you don't have to deal with any of the messy realities of running a publicly-funded radio station in a competitive environment, isn't it?

[Eudaimonia]

FF: I think I found the perfect smiley for your comment...

Whoever heard of such a limp programme brief as a presenter-led CD-based information light music sequence with a guest dropping in for a chat and invitations to listeners to send in their emails and text messages?

Better? Hope that helps! But seriously, rather than sit around bashing it for being completely lame, can't we think up some interesting ways a presenter might work within these guidelines and craft a show that's a) different from Breakfast and b) somewhat of value?

I'll admit nothing's springing to mind, but it is a challenge. Let's do it!

[Eudaimonia]

have we had any explanation of the U-turn re 'live' as per OED and not RW's mangling of the English language, have we had any explanation as to why 7.30 starts are a better idea especially when all those with experience told him that 7pm was not a good idea,

Here, let me spell out the reasoning behind this decision for you: they're making the Trust happy by doing something distinctive, promoting British orchestras and building attendance at live events, carving out a unique niche vis. CFM, starting concerts at a time most concertgoers prefer, saving funds and getting value for money, and getting a few persistently loudmouthed critics off their collective back. Good grief, what else do you need to know, Frances?

You've got everything you want. Now bust out your green ink and write him a thank-you letter.

[Frances_iom]

...

You've got everything you want. Now bust out your green ink and write him a thank-you letter.

why - just because I have a longer term memory than is convenient for marketers ?