Radio 3 Programming - Problems & Solutions

[MrGongGong]

It looks as if this was an evening entertainment and not a concert. In other words, the audience was not there to listen to the music, which, in tern, sounds just like the audience of Radio 3 these days is assumed to be doing.

If you look at the programmes from the early days of the Bechstein Hall / Wigmore Hall you will find that the distinction that we now think is a hard boundary between different types of event didn't exist in the way that is does now. The idea of the "concert" as we now know it (and Wigmore being a perfect example) is relatively new and many of these mixed programmes were called "concerts" at the time.

[doversoul1]

If you look at the programmes from the early days of the Bechstein Hall / Wigmore Hall you will find that the distinction that we now think is a hard boundary between different types of event didn't exist in the way that is does now. The idea of the "concert" as we now know it (and Wigmore being a perfect example) is relatively new and many of these mixed programmes were called "concerts" at the time.

I thought we were discussing the matters concerning Radio 3 now and not how things were in general then.

[MrGongGong]

I thought we were discussing the matters concerning Radio 3 now and not how things were in general then.

I was merely pointing out that the kind of programming that R3 does these days isn't a "modern" thing.
Whether it's a "good" thing or not is another matter entirely

[french frank]

If you look at the programmes from the early days of the Bechstein Hall / Wigmore Hall you will find that the distinction that we now think is a hard boundary between different types of event didn't exist in the way that is does now. The idea of the "concert" as we now know it (and Wigmore being a perfect example) is relatively new and many of these mixed programmes were called "concerts" at the time.

As regards Radio 3 I wouldn't suggest that there was such a thing as a 'hard boundary': jazz programmes stick to jazz, I presume, because few hours per week are devoted to jazz. Where I think a boundary is a little 'harder' is between 'education' and 'entertainment'. A mix of musical pieces of various types has little chance of 'educating'; a programme devoted to Baroque music does. Or again, a jazz composer on Composer of the Week would be educational for whoever listened, and those who weren't interested could skip it for a week.

What I believe, firmly (and others may disagree with this), is that Radio 3 has a primary remit to inform and educate to a high level; and that there should therefore be a limit to the number of hours devoted to the type of presenter-led sequence which mixes the styles (for me, as a 'hardliner' that would mean not playing a bit of a medieval Mass followed by Copland's Appalachian Spring followed by 'Sheep may safely graze' followed by Libertango followed by Ave verum corpus - others may enjoy this, but I would give such a programme a miss: this is because I actually prefer education to entertainment, strangely ).

[Bryn]

As regards Radio 3 I wouldn't suggest that there was such a thing as a 'hard boundary': jazz programmes stick to jazz, I presume, because few hours per week are devoted to jazz. . . .

Ahem: http://www.for3.org/forums/showthrea...110#post635110

[doversoul1]

I was merely pointing out that the kind of programming that R3 does these days isn't a "modern" thing.
Whether it's a "good" thing or not is another matter entirely

No one has said it is a modern thing. Anyway, what was the point in you post (no need to answer this as it’s a rhetorical question)?

[french frank]

Ahem: http://www.for3.org/forums/showthrea...110#post635110

By their posts shall ye know them!

On the whole (i.e. with necessary qualifications, as ever), I don't imagine that those who listen to jazz programmes because they are, first and foremost, jazz fans, would appreciate classical pieces being slipped in for those who also like a bit of classical music. In principle, I see no reason why the same should not apply to 'classical programmes'. When deviations from the norm become too regular, those who are listening for the 'norm' are put off listening altogether - whether they're classical, jazz, world or folk lovers. The fact that there are more hours devoted to classical is because Radio 3 is the [BBC's] classical music station (NB a grammatical point: the classical music station means the one station where you are able to hear classical music; a classical music station is a station which plays nothing but classical music. Radio 3 is the classical music station).

[Serial_Apologist]

I don't disagree with any of this. My point is that the culture of Radio 3 is up against the almost irresistible pressure of the internet, and its promotion of short attention spans.

People used to say that about capitalism.

That said, my own belief is that the people who heavily promote (or make excuses for) social media-based accessing are well aware of its consciousness-siloing effects on still-developing minds. Individualise everyone for experiencing how the world comes to them (and how they interact with it) via the conveniencing medium of conditioning, and you have your target primed for expecting and demanding instant satisfaction, and then taking the blame for not taking responsibility for their part in our self-centred, debt-ridden world.

No wonder right-wing populism flourishes!

[Serial_Apologist]

By their posts shall ye know them!

On the whole (i.e. with necessary qualifications, as ever), I don't imagine that those who listen to jazz programmes because they are, first and foremost, jazz fans, would appreciate classical pieces being slipped in for those who also like a bit of classical music. In principle, I see no reason why the same should not apply to 'classical programmes'. When deviations from the norm become too regular, those who are listening for the 'norm' are put off listening altogether - whether they're classical, jazz, world or folk lovers. The fact that there are more hours devoted to classical is because Radio 3 is the [BBC's] classical music station (NB a grammatical point: the classical music station means the one station where you are able to hear classical music; a classical music station is a station which plays nothing but classical music. Radio 3 is the classical music station).

Rudely disregarding Bryn's message above, I was recently taken to task (on this forum!) for criticising Jazz Record Requests for including what from memory I described as pre-rock and roll popular choices that were not jazz. My critic rightly pointed out that this was the only place listeners once catered for on (for example) the Light Programme could hear such music; hence its inclusion. These are probably still some who would disagree with that programme's inclusion of, for example, early country blues. Jazz people have their own untransgressible red lines, as will have been clear from arguments on here between myself and Ian Thumwood, regardless of our agreements over performances we both concur to be jazz. While Bryn was being ironic, it is undoubtedly the case that a lot of jazz goes below the broadcasting radar. That said, Radio 3 deals much more generously in the jazz it does allow us to hear, than in its mornings scheduling of classical music.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

No one has said it is a modern thing.

But kernelb did refer to the Internet, dovers:

Willy-nilly, it seems to me the omnipresent internet is influencing listening taste, one way of another, in the direction of frequently-changing short pieces.
Compare, too, the editing styles of films today with those of even thirty years ago: rapidly-changing, very short scenes are now the norm.

MrGG is pointing out that it isn't quite so simple as that - that the "rapidly-changing, very short scenes" which are "now the norm" is reflected in the programming of concerts long before the Internet.

I think that this is a valid and very interesting point - that there have always been audiences who prefer the "itsy-bitsy", smorgasbord type of programming, and those who much prefer "taking a line for a walk" and following an extended argument (and those early Wigmore Hall concerts appeared at a time when it was considered very jolly in Britain for critics to mock the Symphonies of Bruckner and Mahler). The waves of fashion means that programmers today think that the larger public wants the "small portions and lots of it" diet. I'm looking forward to when it moves back onto the longer, fewer menu.

Either way, the Internet (and whatever successors emerge) will simultaneously follow and mould these fashions.

[MrGongGong]

Either way, the Internet (and whatever successors emerge) will simultaneously follow and mould these fashions.

I would argue that for some (and I mean SOME but a significant number all the same) folks the internet has had the opposite effect on "attention spans".
In the days of LPs, it would be a constant getting up and down to turn the record over

Now we have this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JSJ9Bkhb1Q4

and this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VtMnDo7NItU&t=1515s&frags=pl%2Cwn

and this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OgN3_KXv5O8&t=1945s&frags=pl%2Cwn

and so on

[french frank]

My critic rightly pointed out that this was the only place listeners once catered for on (for example) the Light Programme could hear such music; hence its inclusion.

Rightly, I presume , in saying it was 'the only place listeners once catered for on (for example) the Light Programme could hear such music', but that is a tired argument constantly applied to all sorts of music. You can't hear it anywhere else (why isn't it being played anywhere else?) so it has to be heard on Radio 3 (otherwise known as R3 as the dumping ground for what other stations refuse to play.

[doversoul1]

I would argue that for some (and I mean SOME but a significant number all the same) folks the internet has had the opposite effect on "attention spans".
In the days of LPs, it would be a constant getting up and down to turn the record over

Now we have this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JSJ9Bkhb1Q4

and this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VtMnDo7NItU&t=1515s&frags=pl%2Cwn

and this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OgN3_KXv5O8&t=1945s&frags=pl%2Cwn

and so on

You had to be listening to the music in order to turn the LP over whereas youtube just plays on whether you are paying attention or not.

[teamsaint]

You had to be listening to the music in order to turn the LP over whereas youtube just plays on whether you are paying attention or not.

Yes indeed.

Auto reverse on cassettes was the real step change......

[MrGongGong]

You had to be listening to the music in order to turn the LP over whereas youtube just plays on whether you are paying attention or not.

Hummm
I have an LP of this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5e8QKh3LOQY&list=RD5e8QKh3LOQY&start_radio=1

(WARNING contains FLASHING images and quite loud audio)

It doesn't work anything like as well as online versions

Yes, this is a pretty extreme example BUT for long form musics the internet has enabled wonderful things that go against the recieved wisdom of "attention spans"