Essential Classics - The Continuing Debate

[MickyD]

And the patronising repetition of the clue... as if he's patiently talking (with forced, infantile inflection) to a roomful of halfwits.

I don't listen to Breakfast any more. This 'mystery voice' b*ll*cks is the worst thing on R3 these days, from my point of view.

Doesn't anyone know Stephen Johnson? Can't we get him to refuse to do it? He must know it's crap.


Compare him, reduced to this, with the insights of the axed Discovering Music... It really makes one want to weep. Pitiful.

It must be a month now since I've stopped listening. Best thing I ever did, by the sound of all this, Caliban!

[doversoul1]

It must be a month now since I've stopped listening. Best thing I ever did, by the sound of all this, Caliban!

A couple of months since I stopped.

And Caliban, I had no more tears left to weep by then. Pitiful is the word. How many millions would we need to buy off Radio3 and…recruit ff for the controller?

[mercia]

there never seems to be a day when they get no replies to their invitation for answers to quiz questions.

does this surprise anyone?

[french frank]

there never seems to be a day when they get no replies to their invitation for answers to quiz questions.

does this surprise anyone?

Not really. If, at any moment, there are 100,000 people listening, the chances that there will be two or three individuals who want to answer are pretty high.

[mercia]

two or three

the impression I get is that it is more than that

it's heartening to know that 100,000 people are (regularly?) tuning in to a programme that half-a-dozen people on this forum dislike

[Nick Armstrong]

the impression I get is that it is more than that

it's heartening to know that 100,000 people are (regularly?) tuning in to a programme that half-a-dozen people on this forum dislike

I don't mind the programme by and large - some good non-standard recordings of decent music.

It's the patronising, infantile tone of the 'mystery voice' bit and the shameful waste of the talents of a great broadcaster like Stephen Johnson that gets me all riled up and wanting to punch someone!!

[mercia]

all riled up and wanting to punch someone!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SZN2qvR__34

[johnb]

Whereas I still have reservations about the gimmicky format of the programme, Sarah and Rob are delivering a really good selection of music, mostly full works and the well-known works are usually well-chosen versions. Breakfast is Radio 2.1, EC is Radio 2.8! The values of presenters makes the difference.

I hadn't realised that there are regional variations in what is broadcast on Radio 3 but that seems to be the only explanation, as you are definitely listening to a different programme to the one that I have heard.

Yes, there are *some* substantial complete works but there are many more fillers and bleeding chunks. Even the last hour of the programme seems to be degenerating - next week one of RC's Essential Classics is Shostakovich 7 which the Radio Times lsts as being represented by a single movement.

Overall, the programme appears to be to designed to provide fairly mindless background listening - a kind of high class "lift music". You only need to compare an EC programme with any of the pre 2007 CD Masters (some of which I have recordings of) to realise just how dramatic the changes are.

As to the idea that SW and RC select all the music themselves - that is open to question. There is a whole production team behind them and IMO they will be the people who do the bulk of the work in putting the programme together. I'm sure the RC will have an influence (his selections for the last hour seem more interesting than those of SW), SW probably less so.

[Barbirollians]

I was driving on Sunday morning and to avoid the revolting Nicholas Witchell voiceover on Radio 4 I switched to Radio 3 to hear James Jolly apologising for doing something he hates only having time to play one movement of VW Symphony No 3 .

Maybe this explains why he did not get or want the Essential Classics gig.

[french frank]

it's heartening to know that 100,000 people are (regularly?) tuning in to a programme that half-a-dozen people on this forum dislike

It may hearten you, but actually, I'm going by the 1999/2000 and 2003/04 figures. These show that for Radio 3 the morning 'peak' was reached at 9am (almost an hour later than the other stations) and it falls fairly gradually, with a trough at 3.30pm.

That was the pattern of listening, roughly, regardless of the changes in programme between the two graphs. This is because radio listening is dictated more by the time of day, not by the programme itself. The reason why duff programmes get so much flak is that they are on when people want to listen - and they're damn well cross at being let down.

The vast majority of radio listening is still linear - people switching on to hear what is being broadcast at that moment - rather than using the iPlayer.

The evidence is that these morning programmes are widely disliked. If they survive it will be because of the complacent 'passive listening' of a large number who actually don't care what they're listening to - Radio 3's current target audience, apparently.

As for Breakfast - look at the letters page for next week's Radio Times: one letter of complaint followed by one of praise, from a Mr Leach of the West Midlands. The editor's comment: "Many of you object to the recent changes on Radio 3: Mr Leach is in a minority of one, so far."

[mercia]

so much flak

I must be looking in the wrong place. Apart from (being generous) a dozen people on here, I can't find this flak

[mercia]

The evidence is that these morning programmes are widely disliked.

oh dear, you must be heartily sick of providing this evidence for me, so I won't ask for it again.

[Osborn]

Even in this tiny corner of the BBC's empire, research will be carried out and all schedule innovations will be evaluated, maintained, modified or scrapped after 6 months or so (including live evenng concerts).

Would it not be far, far, far, far more sensible to address your concerns to Radio 3 by email or Facebook rather than moan pointlessly and ineffectively amongst yourselves?

It's daft to hide your views in a chat room which the BBC may well see (if at all) as populated by people who get enraged if nurse brings them a bourbon biscuit, not a custard cream.

[Bryn]

Even in this tiny corner of the BBC's empire, research will be carried out and all schedule innovations will be evaluated, maintained, modified or scrapped after 6 months or so (including live evenng concerts).

Would it not be far, far, far, far more sensible to address your concerns to Radio 3 by email or Facebook rather than moan pointlessly and ineffectively amongst yourselves?

It's daft to hide your views in a chat room which the BBC may well see (if at all) as populated by people who get enraged if nurse brings them a bourbon biscuit, not a custard cream.

Whatever makes you think such other avenues of addressing the concerns raise here are not pursued? Or are you merely trying to stifle discussion of these matters?

[Frances_iom]

oh dear, you must be heartily sick of providing this evidence for me, so I won't ask for it again.

FF seems remarkably patient - I'm afraid I'm reminded of the Tobacco Industry's astroturfing that occured over smoking bans, then the Fossil Fuel lobby re climate change - a professional band of deniers who it seemed were incapable of doing anything more than wasting time by repeating 'show me' etc but never looked at replies .