Radio 3 Programming - Problems & Solutions

[Quarky]

The Remit of Radio 3; has this changed somewhat?::

The remit of Radio 3 is to offer a mix of music and cultural programming in order to engage and entertain its audience. Around its core proposition of classical music, its speech-based programming should inform and educate the audience about music and culture. Jazz, world music, drama, the arts and ideas, and religious programming should feature in its output.

The station should appeal to listeners of any age seeking to expand their cultural horizons through engagement with the world of music and the arts.

So its speech based programming should inform and educate. All music should do is to engage and entertain. The core proposition is of course Classical Music, but take out "Classical" and this remit might just as well apply to Resonance FM

[french frank]

I heard Walton's viola concerto on R2 last week.... it was part of an interview with Damon Albarn
just saying as some like to think that there is a one way valve in radio

That's good to hear, but … what is needed is a regular programme which will can gradually attract new listeners who will eventually be tempted to try out Radio 3 - having already heard enough to make them think about 'classical music' as something they might like to pursue. It's the fact of hearing it in a context (you know - context is important!) where they already feel comfortable.

I didn't have you down as a Radio 2 listener

[french frank]

The Remit of Radio 3; has this changed somewhat?::

The remit of Radio 3 is to offer a mix of music and cultural programming in order to engage and entertain its audience. Around its core proposition of classical music, its speech-based programming should inform and educate the audience about music and culture. Jazz, world music, drama, the arts and ideas, and religious programming should feature in its output.

The station should appeal to listeners of any age seeking to expand their cultural horizons through engagement with the world of music and the arts.

So its speech based programming should inform and educate. All music should do is to engage and entertain. The core proposition is of course Classical Music, but take out "Classical" and this remit might just as well apply to Resonance FM

I'm not sure that the remit has changed, so much as R3's gradual slithering away from it. By 'speech-based' programmes they mean Composer of the Week, Discovering Music (now dropped), the Music Feature (also dropped), Jazz File (also dropped) &c, as distinct from 'music sequence' programmes.

[Bella Kemp]

There is much that is ghastly - what on earth is that noise at 11 p.m. on weekdays? - but the vast majority of the R3 output is excellent. No-one can seriously complain about anything between the hours of noon and the aforesaid 11 p.m.; and although Mrs Kemp might want Szymanowski's third symphony at 8.15 a.m. she accepts, without a heavy heart, that others get much pleasure from a movement here, a movement there. And, my goodness, the Sunday night plays are excellent - especially the Shakespeares.

[Serial_Apologist]

There is much that is ghastly - what on earth is that noise at 11 p.m. on weekdays? - but the vast majority of the R3 output is excellent. No-one can seriously complain about anything between the hours of noon and the aforesaid 11 p.m.; and although Mrs Kemp might want Szymanowski's third symphony at 8.15 a.m. she accepts, without a heavy heart, that others get much pleasure from a movement here, a movement there. And, my goodness, the Sunday night plays are excellent - especially the Shakespeares.

But it's the movement here and the movement there that's the problem! Extractions amount to false representation, like looking at a corner of a Durer painting without having first seen the whole thing, which with a part missing loses its sense, unless granted the original composer's permission, as in the case of The Planets, where the movements really are separate and deliberately not thematically related in any musical sense. I think of composers who struggled to complete symphonies, who must be rolling in their graves!

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

Well, this particular "no-one" can and does complain seriously and frequently about the presentation of some of the material "between the hours of noon and the aforesaid 11:00pm", and of the policy of breaking up programmes from different concerts and scattering them around the afternoon schedules - and as for In Tune ...

But, yes - there is much in those hours (and, indeed, after) that makes for very worthwhile visits to the i-Player (to edit out the chitter-chatter).

[DracoM]

Well, this particular "no-one" can and does complain seriously and frequently about the presentation of some of the material "between the hours of noon and the aforesaid 11:00pm", and of the policy of breaking up programmes from different concerts and scattering them around the afternoon schedules - and as for In Tune ...

But, yes - there is much in those hours (and, indeed, after) that makes for very worthwhile visits to the i-Player (to edit out the chitter-chatter).

[french frank]

false representation, like looking at a corner of a Durer painting without having first seen the whole thing, which with a part missing loses its sense,

As far as I'm concerned, music programmes which have 'presenters' should be restricted to those 'speech-based' programmes (like Composer of the Week) or documentaries where a knowledgeable person is speaking about the music, in which case extracts for illustrative purposes are acceptable. Purely music programmes should have announcers, should not seek on-air interaction with listeners (which wouldn't prevent, formerly, 'letters and postcards', now also emails and texts/tweets, being sent in to inform production staff). I don't think that happening to like/approve of a particular 'presenter' should be mitigating: that's simply another egocentric way of saying, Well, I like X and want him/her to present X programmes. It's not about what individuals happen to like (or dislike!): 'I enjoy it', 'That's awful'. It's about having a clear reason/argument for an expressed opinion, which commands wide agreement when set against an opposing argument.

I think the music programme presenters waste time that i would be better spent playing full works. This is a reason why 'turning the clock back' would be a good idea. But expecting the stilted delivery of the past - which isn't necessary anyway - wouldn't. I suspect a lot of people criticise Radio 3 even now because they want radio which is easy listening and don't want 'unnecessary' information like opus numbers, key signatures, dates &c (they'd rather have a quiz) and Radio 3 gives in to that persuasion rather than sticking to its traditional values: 'erudite' (= boring) broadcasting, educaton rather than 'lighter entertainment'. Education is something that can be passed on to others, entertainment is not. Should public service broadcasting be solely about entertainment? If not, should certain services, like Radio 3, be more concerned about educating than (light) entertainment, serving those who want education? When does entertainment become 'light'?

[gurnemanz]

Well, this particular "no-one" can and does complain seriously and frequently about the presentation of some of the material "between the hours of noon and the aforesaid 11:00pm", and of the policy of breaking up programmes from different concerts and scattering them around the afternoon schedules - and as for In Tune ...

But, yes - there is much in those hours (and, indeed, after) that makes for very worthwhile visits to the i-Player (to edit out the chitter-chatter).

If I don't like what a radio station does, I don't tune in (in my case classic FM), so your course is clear. They can't hope to please everybody.

I am also against radio stations playing isolated movements from composite works. I may well in the privacy of my own home have good reason not every time to listen to such composite works in their entirety:

I get distracted (doorbell/telephone rings, wife enters room, going out, meal time etc)
I'm not enjoying the piece (the music itself/the interpretation)
I only like certain movements of that piece (eg Mahler 8, Brahms Req)
With LPs I might not get around to turning the disc over.
My mood changes
etc etc

In such cases I certainly do not sit there feeling guilty about somehow betraying the composer's intentions (as mentioned above). What I choose to listen to is my business - idiosyncrasy or personal preference. What I really do greatly object to is the BBC making that single movement decision on my behalf. If broadcasting such a composite work publicly they simply do not have the right not to play the whole thing.

Misguided it may be, but I can see why they do it. The predominant musical form of our time is a short one - the song. (Also my favourite musical form, as it happens. Just checked, I have a nuttily large number of CDs of German Lieder - 756). Most people don't listen to any other music but songs. Until 1967, when I was 18, I had listened to nothing much else myself. I then went "square" and converted to classical music and have not tuned to pop/rock stations since. I assume those at R3 consequently feel the need to try to keep things short and snappy when they are trying to lure young people in. However ... as a case in point, our daughter, aged 37, is musically literate, is not averse to classical music, played violin to a good standard in a youth orchestra and goes to ballet and opera but her staple music listening is almost entirely geared to rock - either live gigs, streamed or from her own collection. It's through her that I get to hear contemporary stuff that I never would otherwise. The only music radio station she tunes to is Radio 6. She and people like her seem not to be not attracted to Radio 3's morning jollity, and no wonder R3's age profile is rising. The strategy isn't working and it is just annoying the oldies like us.

PS I've just re-watched Kubrick's Barry Lyndon in which the slow movement from Schubert's Piano Trio figures - a bleeding chunk, but it works. Maybe I should soften my prejudice against single movement extractions.

[french frank]

In such cases I certainly do not sit there feeling guilty about somehow betraying the composer's intentions (as mentioned above). What I choose to listen to is my business

But a radio station like Radio 3 is not catering for an individual who happens to hold a personal point of view. My argument is that it should have principles, of which 'The predominant musical form of our time is a short one - the song' as an argument is one that needs to be discussed. You like lieder/songs, so you don't object, but is that a reason to 'go with the flow'?

[gurnemanz]

But a radio station like Radio 3 is not catering for an individual who happens to hold a personal point of view. My argument is that it should have principles, of which 'The predominant musical form of our time is a short one - the song' as an argument is one that needs to be discussed. You like lieder/songs, so you don't object, but is that a reason to 'go with the flow'?

I didn't say they should "go with the flow", describing this strategy as "misguided" and "not working". So no disagreement here.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

If I don't like what a radio station does, I don't tune in (in my case classic FM), so your course is clear. They can't hope to please everybody.

You do realise how I knew that the Hound of the Baskervilles had not been in this alleyway, don't you, Watson?

[vinteuil]

You do realise how I knew that the Hound of the Baskervilles had not been in this alleyway, don't you, Watson?

... are we not thinking of the dog in 'The Adventure of Silver Blaze'?


.

[french frank]

I didn't say they should "go with the flow", describing this strategy as "misguided" and "not working". So no disagreement here.

No but:

I get distracted (doorbell/telephone rings, wife enters room, going out, meal time etc)
I'm not enjoying the piece (the music itself/the interpretation)
I only like certain movements of that piece (eg Mahler 8, Brahms Req)
With LPs I might not get around to turning the disc over.
My mood changes
etc etc

Every listener's doorbell/telephone doesn't ring at the same time, some listeners will be enjoying a performance, they may no longer play LPs &c. The fact that there will be a multiplicity of listening factors affecting some but not all listeners at a given moment suggests that it's YOU who should turn off/interrupt your listening rather than that R3 should second guess what is going on in listeners' lives at that moment and 'change the record' (or stop for a little quiz); still less adjudicate that because lifestyles are so busy nothing should last longer than 10 minutes. The people who live busy lives should just go away and return when they have an idle moment and listen to whatever is being played. As it is, it's the people who object to what R3 is doing who are told to switch off. (R3 knows best).

There seems to be an argument that because I haven't the time or inclination to hear a whole string quartet in the morning, no one else should do so either.

By 'go with the flow' I was simply referring to your point that 'the predominant musical form of our time is a short onepredominant musical form of our time is a short one' and that therefore Radio 3 should follow the practice of other stations.

[Alain Maréchal]

I should not complain, since I do not contribute to the BBC's income, but prompted by this thread I listened to part of this morning for the first time in months. The music itself was unobjectionable (I was intrigued by the Tabakova, a name new to me, and the Bringuier/Ravel had all the point and clarity I recall from a concert a year or two ago), the presentation not too intrusive (a welcome respite from the usual bickering couple on France Musique), BUT who created the programme? A computer? The courses are too short (I had been warned, here) and one really cannot listen to Copland, then Gibbons, then Rachmaninov without musical dyspepsia.