Essential Classics - The Continuing Debate

[mercia]

repeating 'show me' etc but never looked at replies .

point taken. I won't bother ff again.

perhaps you could provide the evidence that "the morning programmes are widely disliked" (apart from the few that have said as much on this forum)

[doversoul1]

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?

Not really. I expect words spread easily these days via facebook or twit or whatever that there is another programme you can phone in. It doesn’t mean all those people are actually listening to the programme before and after my true story. No, I can’t prove it. It’s just a guess.

Barbirollians

James Jolly apologising for doing something he hates only having time to play one movement of VW Symphony No 3 .

I heard that. I wasn’t sure whether I should be glad or sad.

Osborn

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?

Sounds familiar…

[Nick Armstrong]

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?

Been there, done that, got the fob-off.

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.

Whilst it's an honour to be patronised by you and (if you are right) by Auntie Beeb, it does me good to sound off somewhere And in my mind, it's sharing rather than hiding.

[barber olly]

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.

I think we can all whinge for England about the shortcomings of the Morning programmes, in the short term at least we are stuck with this format. You have the choice not to switch on, listen to all of it or as I do, dip in and out either to the programme live or via iplayer. The decision to let us have info in advance is an improvement. I have said on these boards that I think the guest spot and the gimmicks should be ditched. I've not analysed to the nth degree but I think that there are now more full works being played. Please do not patronise me by suggesting I am listening to a different programme - yes it has serious shortcomings, yes I would like CD Masters back, preferably as a 3hr slot. As I say we are stuck with this format for now and SW and RC are doing a resonable job within the constraints, incidentally I don't think I actually said they chose all the music, but they will surely have an input into this. Would you like them to confront Mr Wrong and refuse to do it this way. This would be the quickest way not to get an improvement but for some lesser presenters to be employed to deliver the CFM2 he wants!

[french frank]

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

I printed off 117 pages of comments found on the internet (none of it from this forum) and posted it to the BBC Chairman. To get an idea of proportions, I printed ALL comments on the various blogs (like Radio 3's own), positive and negative. I would say that 10% would be overestimating the positive comments.

This was to counter the Controller's implication (though, to be fair, he didn't quite say as much) that the great majority of listeners writing to Radio 3 were praising the new programmes, though there were, he said, 'some negative'.

That is what I meant by flak. You will note also the Radio Times's 'many' as against 'one'.

A lot of people who post here have nothing to say about the morning programmes because they don't (or possibly, no longer) listen to them.

The potential audience that they are aimed at is far, far larger than the long-standing Radio 3 audience which is complaining. That doesn't make it right to target that larger audience and marginalise the existing classical music audience.

[french frank]

perhaps you could provide the evidence that "the morning programmes are widely disliked" (apart from the few that have said as much on this forum)

If you give me your postal address, I will print off the 117 pages for you. Plus the added ones which have been sent directly to FoR3. Plus the ones copied to me by FoR3 supporters who have done as Ossie suggested and contacted the BBC. And I still don't need to include the ones here, or on Facebook.

[mercia]

If you give me your postal address, I will print off the 117 pages for you.

er, no thanks, perhaps you could tell me how many different people that represents approximately.

or perhaps I've misunderstood. That's 117 pages, one person per page. 117 different people unhappy (to say the least) with the morning schedule.
as against the 100,000 who are happy with the morning schedule but only because they are "passive" listeners, a euphemism I think for "imbeciles", whose natural home is Radio 2 or CFM. Before the arrival of RW Radio 3 belonged to those 117 "active" listeners to whom it should be returned.

You see I do understand.

[Bryn]

obviously that's a silly idea, perhaps you could tell me how many different people that represents approximately

There are easier ways to reach the antipodes than to continue digging, you know.

[Albion]

As another increasingly turned-off listener, it seems to me that nothing is going to bring back Radio 3 as many members here clearly remember it as it existed in the 1970s and 1980s, when studio recordings of works such as Bantock's complete Omar Khayyam and Havergal Brian's The Tigers were undertaken, when announcers introduced a symphonic work by highlighting points of interest in terms of harmony or structure and when informed presenters were accorded respect by listeners for the very reason that they clearly were informed. The ethos in this period was not paternalistic, but assumed a common corpus of knowledge amongst listeners and sought to use this as a starting point for further exploration.

The slide toward mediocrity can be blamed on many causes - but the greatest is perhaps the general paucity of knowledge about 'classical' music in our culture generally. When you listened to Radio 3 about 30 years ago you sensed that it was aimed at an audience which had at least a nodding acquaintance with standard repertoire and so wouldn't necessarily be reaching for the off-button when you programmed the latest symphony by Graham Whettam, Daniel Jones or Arnold Cooke. It seems that the BBC now perceives a need to introduce listeners to such works as Beethoven's 5th or Tchaikovsky's Pathetique, and often in 'manageable' chunks lest the goldfish should mistakenly go twice round the bowl.

There is obviously nothing reprehensible in such advocacy but it seems that the balance between the repertoire 'war-horses' and the exploratory repertoire and discussion has completely gone awry, as has the presentation: unctuous and glutinous are words that frequently spring to mind, often coupled with inept, lazy and under-researched.

[Anna]

The potential audience that they are aimed at is far, far larger than the long-standing Radio 3 audience which is complaining. That doesn't make it right to target that larger audience and marginalise the existing classical music audience.

Remind me, who is the potential audience they targetted? I recall it was the R4 Today listeners and a swift retune to R3 for them. Well, to be honest, there are far more interesting things on R4, if you were a daytime listener, aren't there? R3 really comes into its own from 1pm onwards and the evening transmissions. I have sampled Breakfast, it's ok until 7.30am but I much prefer my daily dose of John Humphreys. I guess I just don't like music in the early morning.

[Bryn]

I much prefer my daily dose of John Humphreys.

Who he? Not the man from Splott, for sure.

[french frank]

Remind me, who is the potential audience they targetted? I recall it was the R4 Today listeners and a swift retune to R3 for them.

'Research shows' that there are a lot of people who would like to listen to Radio 3 but who don't currently do so. 'Research shows' that 'some audiences' perceive Radio 3 to be 'a little inaccessible' 'at times'. Therefore the peak listening time of breakfast is now a 'primary entry point' for new listeners - rather than continuing as a programme for the existing, run-of-the-mill R3 listeners. Essential Classics, according to the commissioning brief, is designed to keep as many of the breakfast time listeners as possible while being also attractive to the Radio 4 listeners who at 9am are looking to switch over (whisper it not - to Classic FM) when the Today programme finishes.

Quite which bit of the five and a half hours (which had previously attracted more listeners than any other part of the Radio 3 schedule) is expected to continue catering for the original audience is unclear.

The gamble is that those who stop listening to Breakfast and/or Essential Classics will nevertheless listen at other times of the day, and thus will still count in the RAJAR figures, or, if they drift away altogether, they'll be outnumbered by the bright-eyed new listeners bustling in who have already been weaned on phone-ins, texts, quizzes, games and therefore will find it all quite normal and familiar.

[Bryn]

But most morning, when I happen to be able to, I would rather continue on Radio 4 at 09:00 Monday, Tuesday, and Thursday, at least until 09:45. Far more engaging that snippets from the classical charts interspersed with 'listeners'' phone-ins, tweets, etc. It uses to be a toss-up between Radio 4 and Radio 3. Now it's a given on three days of the week. Radio 4 wins hands down.

[Norfolk Born]

A lot of people who post here have nothing to say about the morning programmes because they don't (or possibly, no longer) listen to them.

Precisely ... I've 'disenfranchised' myself from commenting on these programmes because I now hardly ever listen to them. On the (increasingly) rare occasions when I decide to tune in, I soon find myself retuning or heading for the CD shelves.

[antongould]

........... the long-standing Radio 3 audience which is complaining

What proportion of the long standing Radio 3 audience is it felt is complaining? Or to put it more simply the majority or the minority? As a regular listener to Your Call the participants seem to be mostly long standing knowledgeable listeners this morning's even chose Bruckner. On the quiz as my fellow shill says they seem to get loads of answers to questions that are way beyond me. I remain convinced in my imbecilic view that 06.30 to 12.00 since the changes is considerably better that what filled the space before.