Essential Classics - The Continuing Debate

[french frank]

the self-proclaimed keepers of the flame of Radio 3 say they'd rather watch the telly

Not quite sure who you're referring to. Not me, I presume, since I don't possess a telly. What I meant (and said?) was that, as a general rule, in the evening licence fee payers up and down the country prefer to sit down in front of their telly, rather than listen to radio. But Radio 3 listeners, as I said, are rather more likely to listen to radio, i.e. to Radio 3, because of the concert.

When would members of the general public be more likely to watch television than in the evening?

This is the R1 audience through the day, for example - reflected by just about all radio stations.

[Gasteiner]

With regard to "Essential Classics", does anybody know why the Radio 3 website has not provided full play list details for Tuesday and Wednesday of this week (28 and 29 Jan)? The details usually appear shortly after the programme finishes but not on these occasions, except for a very truncated list on both occasions. It is bad enough not having prior lists of what's to be played, but not having lists after they are played is abysmal.

Also, have other people found that the published information provided about some of the works played is sometimes completely wrong? This is happening with increasing frequency. A recent example was the Schubert Mass No 6 played last week when the published details attributed the version to completely the wrong orchestra, in fact which does not actually exist.

Another annoyance is that they stopped providing full album details, e.g. instead of providing the full label name (like Harmonia Mundi) plus code, they now just give the label name. Yet another is that very often the links to the specified artists do not provide any information at all. All you get is a suggestion to take up the matter with Wikipedia. I do not know why they cannot revert fully to the old system with full details listed under each work that is played, instead of all these pretentious often phoney and useless links.

All this is quite apart from the fact that I hate the live programme as it has been over the past two years so. I only rarely listen to bits of it, and mainly scan through the programme on "listen again" to cut through all the tedious waffle. Until about two years ago, this 10-12 am weekday programme used to be all about decent music, and it was quite good, but now it has badly degenerated into little more than a chat show, providing amusement for a bunch of kiddos on their ipads, phones or whatever.

In particular, I cannot stand any of all that texting nonsense, and the stupid games of various descriptions, nor any of interviews with various people, which I find very disruptive. Doesn't it make you cringe, for example, when immediately after playing a piece Rob Cowan's first words are often something like "I've just had a text from ... to say that it reminded him of tea-time at granny's house years ago, or some other utterly naff comment?

[Nick Armstrong]

With regard to "Essential Classics", does anybody know why the Radio 3 website has not provided full play list details for Tuesday and Wednesday of this week (28 and 29 Jan)?

There was a grovel by the host today just after 9 saying that their playlists were up the technical spout and in the process of being fixed and sorry for the inconvenience etc. so it's a "known issue" (as the IT people call it when something doesn't work, and switching it off and on again hasn't repaired it )

[Gasteiner]

There was a grovel by the host today just after 9 saying that their playlists were up the technical spout and in the process of being fixed and sorry for the inconvenience etc. so it's a "known issue" (as the IT people call it when something doesn't work, and switching it off and on again hasn't repaired it )

Thank you very much for this. Because I don't listen to the programme "live" any longer, I missed that announcement. It seems amazing, however, that the BBC can't get something really simple like this sorted out in a jiff.

I was rather beginning to think that it was maybe the Beeb's new ploy to get people to listen "live", rather than to "listen again". I must say that I have learned to be quite adept at slicing through all the waffle on "Essential Classics", and focusing purely on the music. The "net" music content is actually quite low once all the verbiage is removed, and lower still if one eliminates all the recent repeat playings of the same work. The sound quality is also a lot better on "listen again".

Incidentally, another gripe I have is that they don't play anything longer than about 55-57 minutes. This cuts out all sorts of interesting material that extends a bit over the hour, let alone anything much in excess. And yet they call it "Essential Classics", which seems like a misnomer if it excludes anything over a certain length. If they'd cut out the daft interview section, this would make room for a longer duration repertoire. But obviously the BBC will be concerned about the risk of disenchanting the kiddos on their ipads and phones who probably wouldn't care for such extended lengths in between being allowed to play with their toys by texting in further naff comments.

I hope that the BBC and its various presenters do occasionally look at comments made here about their R3 morning programming. I know it has been said a million times before but I'd just like to say that I reckon it's become very poor indeed, immediately after "Through the Night" has finished. The latter programme is excellently presented, the only pity being that it focuses entirely on live performances, some of which appear to involve little known local artists. Why can't they play some commercially recorded material? As soon as "Breakfast" begins, it's like listening to CFM. I can't stand any of it, and simply switch off immediately. It may have something to with all the presenters, whom I find very irritating.

[Sir Velo]

Another cock up on the playlist front for Suffs to get his teeth into: Respighi's Fontana di Trevi transcribed as "Song and Dance" from Brazilian Impressions. So not only the wrong movement, but entirely the wrong suite, to boot. Moreover, the artists are down as Falletta and the Buffalo Symphony, who haven't even recorded the "Fontane di Roma"!

The Respighi was chosen as today's "brain teaser". Among the suggestions were: "On the Steppes of Central Asia"; Villa Lobos; "In a Spanish Monastery" etc. For some reason, Cowan described these fatuous shots in the dark as "terrific".

[Nick Armstrong]

The Respighi was chosen as today's "brain teaser". Among the suggestions were: "On the Steppes of Central Asia"; Villa Lobos; "In a Spanish Monastery" etc. For some reason, Cowan described these fatuous shots in the dark as "terrific".

The euphemistic, primary-school-style 'no one's a loser' way of dealing with wayward answers to the various daft questions in the morning (on the odd occasion when I'm listening at that time) always brings a wry expletive to my lips. I agree, SV, that this morning was exceptional: "Vltava" and "Saturn" being among other answers to the Respighi question that were described as "imaginative". Actually that's quite a nice subtle two-edged euphemism for "you're off your chump" it seemed to me...

Re: the listing, to be fair both Respighi chunks are correctly listed - because the Falletta performance did come a short time after the 'Fountains', after the work by wonderfully-named Cyrillus Kreek (never 'eard of 'im) whom I have filed away for use on the Alphabet Associations thread



00:32 Ottorino Respighi
Fountains of Rome

Performer: Chicago Symphony Orchestra. Performer: Fritz Reiner (conductor).

MERCURY LIVING PRESENCE

00:48 Cyrillus Kreek
Psalm 137 'Paabeli jogede kaldali'

Choir: Eesti Filharmoonia Kammerkoor. Conductor: Daniel Reuss.

Ondine

00:56 Ottorino Respighi
Brazilian Impressions: Song and Dance

Orchestra: Buffalo Philharmonic. Conductor: JoAnn Falletta.

Naxos

[amateur51]

For some reason, Cowan described these fatuous shots in the dark as "terrific".

Perhaps his livelihood depends on it, poor man?

[Richard Tarleton]

Another cock up on the playlist front for Suffs to get his teeth into: Respighi's Fontana di Trevi transcribed as "Song and Dance" from Brazilian Impressions. So not only the wrong movement, but entirely the wrong suite, to boot. Moreover, the artists are down as Falletta and the Buffalo Symphony, who haven't even recorded the "Fontane di Roma"!

(I heard this on the car radio, that's my excuse ) - wasn't the Brazilian Impressions the piece he played after the Brain Teaser?

The Respighi was chosen as today's "brain teaser". Among the suggestions were: "On the Steppes of Central Asia"; Villa Lobos; "In a Spanish Monastery" etc. For some reason, Cowan described these fatuous shots in the dark as "terrific".

Yes, Sarah W's normal synonym for "fatuous" is "interesting".

Another one for Suffs, if he can be bothered - Rob seems to be obsesssed with Schwanda the Bagpiper, plays it almost as often as Dvorak Slavonic Dances, or so it seems to me. Can't think why.

[Sir Velo]

:Re: the listing, to be fair both Respighi chunks are correctly listed - because the Falletta performance did come a short time after the 'Fountains', after the work by wonderfully-named Cyrillus Kreek (never 'eard of 'im) whom I have filed away for use on the Alphabet Associations thread

Fair cop. I must admit I turned off in disgust after the inane suggestions: Vltava indeed!

So they played two pieces of Respighi (nearly said works, but those days of complete works on R3 are long gone.) did they? Would be nice to hear the Queen of Sheba or the Metamorphoses instead of the usual potboilers, but that's for another life. Hey Ho.

[Serial_Apologist]

Perhaps his livelihood depends on it, poor man?

Not being a listener to the morning schedule, (and therefore a bit of an interloper in this thread), having caught the very end of EC this morning I had the definite feeling that RC didn't believe a word of what he was saying in his closing invitation to listeners to "keep on writing in" etc. Psychologically it must be agonizing for the likes of him and SW to have to keep up this kind of regular insincerity on air, having in the past been rightly respected for their knowledgeability in serious music, and one can only guess that the only reason they carry on is in some hope of a change of regime at the top that will restore their integrity and respect.

[mercia]

nice one Cyrillus, nice one son

I've decided Rob only owns one jersey

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/galleries/p01rhryg

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/galleries/p01nr4cl

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/galleries/p01lqwp2

[Domeyhead]

The Respighi was chosen as today's "brain teaser". Among the suggestions were: "On the Steppes of Central Asia"; Villa Lobos; "In a Spanish Monastery" etc. For some reason, Cowan described these fatuous shots in the dark as "terrific".

Someone in the mighty Radio 3 empire believes there are listeners who may be so traumatised after tweeting in wrong answers to Rob Cowan's "brain teaser" that their lives and self esteem are irreperably damaged. Better then to give everyone a sweet, and avoid all that nasty judgmentalism. I know we have aired our annoyance at this patronising and condescending tripe before but have we ever identified from where this directive to treat adults as sensitive children actually emanates? Is this the explicit policy of the controller? Is it down to the individual programme producer or editor?
........Or could it just be (as I suspect) that this is the nature of the presenters themselves? To me Rob Cowan comes across as an unctious, simpering, sycophantic sap, so do I lay the blame for the ever open sweety jar of this non competitive competition at his door?
As Lord Gnome says, I think we should be told.

[underthecountertenor]

Last week we were treated to this: "What am I? I'm long, thin and slightly bent." Listener's suggestion:"Rachmaninov"

[teamsaint]

Someone in the mighty Radio 3 empire believes there are listeners who may be so traumatised after tweeting in wrong answers to Rob Cowan's "brain teaser" that their lives and self esteem are irreperably damaged. Better then to give everyone a sweet, and avoid all that nasty judgmentalism. I know we have aired our annoyance at this patronising and condescending tripe before but have we ever identified from where this directive to treat adults as sensitive children actually emanates? Is this the explicit policy of the controller? Is it down to the individual programme producer or editor?
........Or could it just be (as I suspect) that this is the nature of the presenters themselves? To me Rob Cowan comes across as an unctious, simpering, sycophantic sap, so do I lay the blame for the ever open sweety jar of this non competitive competition at his door?
As Lord Gnome says, I think we should be told.

Have you listened to In Tune at all DH?

Oh Boy.......

[Nick Armstrong]

Last week we were treated to this: "What am I? I'm long, thin and slightly bent." Listener's suggestion:"Rachmaninov"

uct yes! I was listening as I cycled in to work, and passers-by in the park were treated to a number of suggestions none of which I can repeat here due to the law on defamation.