So what's wrong with Radio 3 Breakfast?

[Word]

Do you spend all evening googling...

No, I'm just a habitual reader of this fine site (including the fixed opinions of BoD and Frances_iom).

[cloughie]

Do you spend all evening googling "Katie Derham" to see who is bad-mouthing her, and then charge like a latter day knight errant to the fair lady's rescue?

If you can hear what the gabbler says, particularly when she lowers her voice at the end of sentences.

[kernelbogey]

If you can hear what the gabbler says, particularly when she lowers her voice at the end of sentences.

Hearing her just at the moment I find her presentation just mannered: no better word for over-dramatisation, laughing at the subtlety of her own script, etc. Don't like her style.

[old khayyam]

I find KD the worst of the "gushers" with a veritable cornucopia of superlatives spilling from her golden lips

Gush is indeed all she does. Cornucopia i find not. From the little attention i pay to her, i find the word "wonderful" to be her catch-all superlative of choice. "That really was a wonderful performance"; "The last movement built into a crescendo that was absolutely... wonderful!"

This includes welcoming guests to the studio "...its so wonderful to have you here".

[kernelbogey]

There seems to be a strong, clandestine influence on the style of presenters from producers and/or - what to call them? - producers' line managers to dumb down with chat about the Oscars, inane themes for texting and emailing in and all the rest of the malarkey so widely detested on these boards. These folk are never credited on air (nor I assume, in RT) so that they could be challenged, or at least addressed.

Domeyhead - post no 22: In one or two cases my ideal programme might even cause fellow posters to retune so Adam Gatehouse (Brerakfast Editor) would rightly not entertain my own musical vision as any "better" than his or anyone elses.

Is Adam Gatehouse the man to write to about all this? I've never seen his name attached to Breakfast before, so DH has inside information, I assume?

[Old Grumpy]

I'm not sure when the old listener/new listener divide kicked in. I can't remember when I started listening to the morning programme on Radio 3, but I certainly listened to Morning on 3 (presented by Penny Gore [aaah, the voice!]) for some years before Breakfast came along. I don't think the type of music played now by the current "announcers" is that much different. There certainly weren't tweets, Facebook or texts, but there was email (indeed I remember sending a grumpy one to the programme when they introduced the news on the half hour as well as the hour!).

I think the number of references on Breakfast to tweets and other communications has diminished in the last few weeks/months. The quarter hourly news updates by the presenter are unnecessary and should be discontinued. I don't really mind who reads the weather.

In general I am not a great lover of Your Call, but today's was an exception - I thought it was splendid and quite moving, on the other hand I agree the Peter and the Wolf call was terrible.

There does seem to be a circular nature to the Breakfast discussions on these boards - I'm not sure the circle will ever be squared!




Right, I'll now retreat to the Jazz board, lie down and inhale...

[cloughie]

I'm not sure when the old listener/new listener divide kicked in. I can't remember when I started listening to the morning programme on Radio 3, but I certainly listened to Morning on 3 (presented by Penny Gore [aaah, the voice!]) for some years before Breakfast came along. I don't think the type of music played now by the current "announcers" is that much different. There certainly weren't tweets, Facebook or texts, but there was email (indeed I remember sending a grumpy one to the programme when they introduced the news on the half hour as well as the hour!).

I think the number of references on Breakfast to tweets and other communications has diminished in the last few weeks/months. The quarter hourly news updates by the presenter are unnecessary and should be discontinued. I don't really mind who reads the weather.

In general I am not a great lover of Your Call, but today's was an exception - I thought it was splendid and quite moving, on the other hand I agree the Peter and the Wolf call was terrible.

There does seem to be a circular nature to the Breakfast discussions on these boards - I'm not sure the circle will ever be squared!




Right, I'll now retreat to the Jazz board, lie down and inhale...

The type of music hasn't changed greatly, but the length has, and Penny did not usually play odd movements - Iremember emailing re Tomita's Little Train. Penny probably enjoys a later start and its always a joy to hear her in the afternoons (certainly a contrast to Katie), but wouldn't it be good to turn the clock back. I don't know about squaring the circle - I'd settle for breaking it and then stick it back together with the prattle removed.

[Don Petter]

You could certainly email them then, but I don't recall emails ever being read out on air?

[Old Grumpy]

You could certainly email them then, but I don't recall emails ever being read out on air?

My recollection would be the same.

[Don Petter]

My recollection would be the same.

I also emailed them about the excessive news on the half hour, and received a typically anodyne reply.

[french frank]

I don't think the type of music played now by the current "announcers" is that much different.

The two main differences were that (going back to about 2004), Mo3 typically had 15-16 pieces, whereas once Breakfast started the number gradually went up through the 20s. The highest number I noted was 31, which, allowing for the announcements, news &c averaged about 5 minutes per piece. Secondly, there were no single movements in the Mo3 days. (Somehow, R3 now manages to argue, after long pointing out that R3 was 'distinctive' in not playing single movements, that they are in fact a good thing.)

One reason for regular repeats and single movements is presumably the larger number of pieces they have to find (slightly fewer now the programme is reduced by half an hour, but this morning, for example, there were still 23 pieces). Not that, with the mass of never-played works, it should ever be necessary to scrape the bottom of the barrel.

[french frank]

I also emailed them about the excessive news on the half hour, and received a typically anodyne reply.

It was brought up with RW in 2003. He said listeners had requested the extra bulletin. Common sense would tell anyone that listeners would not, in significant numbers, ever have spontaneously asked for them

[cloughie]

It was brought up with RW in 2003. He said listeners had requested the extra bulletin. Common sense would tell anyone that listeners would not, in significant numbers, ever have spontaneously asked for them

And now we get SMP doing her own summaries at quarter hours.

[mercia]

One reason for regular repeats and single movements is presumably the larger number of pieces they have to find

not sure I understand this

one could say the consequence of playing single movements is that they have to find a larger number of pieces

I would have thought the consequence of repeats is that one has to find less pieces of music to play

[mercia]

Common sense would tell anyone that listeners would not, in significant numbers, ever have spontaneously asked for them

common sense tells me that RW meant the requests had come over time, rather than all at once