Why? Why play music backwards and ask people to identify it? This is my signal to run to Spotify and find some music that actually plays forwards. This item seems to be a daily "feature" of "Essential Classics". Why is it essential to run the music backwards? To add dumbness to dumbness they then read out a long list of people who actually play this game and phone in to say they know the answer. Why? Why would anyone want to know who had found the answer to a silly game?
-
-
Mal - Welcome.
The question has long been asked! And more than asked … It has been raised with Radio 3
As I don't listen to Essential Classics (I presume I 'm missing something essential?), I had thought the whole inessential Brainteaser had been ditched …
Originally posted by Mal View PostIt 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. -
It was on after the Durante organ concerto, which might not be essential, but I enjoyed it very much:
As I know nothing about Durante, I was hoping they might tell me something about him, but, no, it was straight into that stupid game.
P.S. it wasn't "Jimmy", they haven't dumbed down that much. :)Comment
-
Welcome indeed, Mal. Sadly not - that and the equally silly quiz (I'm a well-known landmark. I'm famous for.... I witnessed the/was bombed in/etc.) the first clue invariably producing a range of bizarre answers which are described as "interesting" (as opposed to wildly wrong, really stupid etc.) by RC/SW....Originally posted by french frank View PostComment
-
At least it's not a phone in quiz, though I used to do quite well with the CFM ones with Quentin Howard, and we had several tins of chocolate drink as a result. It took me years to realise (I hope I got this right) that QH was a big proponent of digital radio, pushing for the adoption of DAB standards and may even have been an engineer or scientist/technical person at one time. I did meet him once at a technical meeting, and it was only later that I figured that the "two" people were probably one and the same.Originally posted by Richard Tarleton View Post
Although I disliked his assertions that effectively digital compression at lowish bit rates is good enough, I can admire the overall view, though this is an example of "the just about acceptable is the enemy of the best".
Judging digital radio success (which arguably is the case) by those who listen to stations I'd never want to listen to, in quality levels which are only mediocre, may make economic sense, and by the averaging power of statistics works, but does not do much to promote really good audio quality for broadcasting.Comment
-
Originally posted by Mal View PostIt was on after the Durante organ concerto, which might not be essential, but I enjoyed it very much:
As I know nothing about Durante, I was hoping they might tell me something about him, but, no, it was straight into that stupid game.
P.S. it wasn't "Jimmy", they haven't dumbed down that much. :)
A relief and pleasant surprise.
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
-
My coffee break went a lot better (between 10.50 and 11.30). Short, informative, interesting, ungushy, links between fascinating pieces of music. No news, promos, "celebs", games, phone-ins, waffle... they can do it right!... Oh no it couldn't last, ... extended waffle about the latest awards ceremony she (SW) attended... yawn... time to turn off...Comment
-
-
Hiya Mal,Originally posted by Mal View Post
You know I find the games such as identifying music played backwards or two pieces played together etc so tedious, time wasting, wretched if fact and it can make me angry and reach for the off switch. Yet I have good friend, knowledgeable too, who I travel to concerts with and I have heard his name read out as one of many winners so he must enjoy participating. If I had my way I'd bin straight away.Last edited by Stanfordian; 08-12-16, 14:40.Comment
-
No chance. They don't do that. They just say that it's great...Originally posted by Mal View Post
Pacta sunt servanda !!!Comment
-
This is absolutely the nub of it. They have these quizzes, there is evidence that there are listeners who enjoy them (whatever happened to Herbie Goldberg?). They equally have evidence that there are listeners who hate them and switch off. So:You know I find the games such as identifying music played backwards or two pieces played together etc so tedious, time wasting, wretched in fact and it can make me angry and reach for the off switch. Yet I have good friend who I travel to concerts with and I have heard his name read out as a one of many winners so he must enjoy participating.
1) Can they quantify the numbers who like/hate the quizzes?
2) Assuming they can, and assuming the majority likes them (in the unlikely event that that is demonstrable) - is that a reason to continue with them? Does it not simply trivialise the programme and Radio 3 and the music they are notionally aiming to promote?
3) What do they conclude?
My hunch is that the programme makers live in this little bubble along with 25 - all right, 100 - listeners, and they enjoy playing their little games - deaf to the scorn and derision they provoke, and dismissive of all reasoned argument.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
-
Why not play music backwards?Originally posted by Mal View Post
Why not have a game?
Are you suggesting that those who like to play this are somehow "silly" ?
I'm not a fan of "Essential Classics" but encouraging people to listen in different ways is a good thing IMV
Maybe it's not aimed at you?
I know it's probably not aimed at me either
Comment
-
Alternatively, why not aim the programme at the majority of Radio 3 listeners who are serious about their music, and are most likely to want to listen? Don't disagree for the sake of it.Originally posted by MrGongGong View PostWhy not play music backwards?
Why not have a game?
Are you suggesting that those who like to play this are somehow "silly" ?
I'm not a fan of "Essential Classics" but encouraging people to listen in different ways is a good thing IMV
Maybe it's not aimed at you?
I know it's probably not aimed at me eitherIt 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
-
Why doesn't BBC R3 commission a composer (mais pas moi, s'il vous plaît) to write a piece of music backwards so that they could play it forwards on the programme?Originally posted by MrGongGong View PostWhy not play music backwards?
Why not have a game?
Are you suggesting that those who like to play this are somehow "silly" ?
I'm not a fan of "Essential Classics" but encouraging people to listen in different ways is a good thing IMV
Maybe it's not aimed at you?
I know it's probably not aimed at me either
Why don't they broadcast Feldman's Second String Quartet backwards?
As Macaulay's Horatius has it:
But those behind cried 'Forward!'
And those before cried 'Back!'
And backward now and forward
Wavers the deep array
Only there was no quiz involved in that.
Ahem.Comment
-
The title of the programme is "Essential Classics", not "Silly Game Time". For those who like silly games, they can turn to Radio 4, which provides silly games in abundance. Hmmm... I wonder if some cloth eared "silly game" producers from R4 got assigned to R3? "But boss I don't like classical music?" "Well think up some silly games to shove in there..." It's the only explanation I can think of...Comment
Comment