What does the future hold for the BBC Orchestras?

[pastoralguy]

'What to do this weekend' in Times 2 has raised the issue of the BBC's five orchestras and their future once the licence fee is 're-negotiated'. There must be some very worried players out there who must be wondering if their jobs will be around in five years time.

If the BBC Orchestras were to be disbanded, surely it would be an act of cultural vandalism similar to what is being unleashed on sites of cultural heritage in other parts of the world.

[DracoM]

Well, the BBCSO should be the first to go, IMO.
BBCSSO is VG, but BBC Phil is for me top of the heap.

[MrGongGong]

That's what most people voted "for" i'm afraid

(except they didn't )

[Pulcinella]

Do all concerts (I don't mean repeats when on tour) that the BBC orchestras give get broadcast?
Not sure that they do, so perhaps Radio 3 could remedy that for starters.

[rauschwerk]

If the BBC Orchestras were to be disbanded, surely it would be an act of cultural vandalism similar to what is being unleashed on sites of cultural heritage in other parts of the world.

Agreed! Not having read the article to which you refer, I suspect it's little more than Murdoch-rag propaganda. The trouble is the the Mammon-worshippers who now run this country without even a fear of opposition have decided that the licence fee is a regressive tax, and like to fantasise that the arts would flourish without public subsidy.

[french frank]

If this should happen (and my understanding is that it's a big IF), it will only be because the new licence fee settlment by the government is forcing the BBC into making more savage cuts.

My understanding was, at the end of last year, that there were no plans to axe any of the performing groups.

[visualnickmos]

'What to do this weekend' in Times 2 has raised the issue of the BBC's five orchestras and their future once the licence fee is 're-negotiated'. There must be some very worried players out there who must be wondering if their jobs will be around in five years time.

If the BBC Orchestras were to be disbanded, surely it would be an act of cultural vandalism similar to what is being unleashed on sites of cultural heritage in other parts of the world.

I agree.

[Ferretfancy]

Well, the BBCSO should be the first to go, IMO.
BBCSSO is VG, but BBC Phil is for me top of the heap.

Some people have really got it in for the BBCSO, haven't they? A couple of Saturdays ago I heard them at the Barbican giving a magnificent performance of Nielsen 6, completing a superb cycle under Sakari Oramo.

It's unfortunate that so much of the good work that they do is unrecognised, partly because their public concerts are rarely reviewed. They remain the best orchestra in Britain for the performance of new music, and they have a very heavy workload.

It would be nice to hear a good word for them more often.

[gradus]

I agree Ferret. Why on earth attack the BBCSO, what have they done to deserve 'they should be the first to go'. Opinions may differ on the musicianly/artistic merits of orchestras but why go further than that?

[french frank]

I think the BBC recognises that each of the Performing Groups has its own specific field of importance: there are three "regional" orchestras (if the BBCNOW and BBCSSO will forgive the term in this context) and two London-based orchestras which all have very distinct remits. There isn't just the question of providing routine concert-fodder for Radio 3: there is outreach work in their regions and the provision of regular live concerts.

The BBCSO has a different remit from that of the BBC Phil in that the BBC/R3 can oversee its programming and use its specific expertise for new commissions and less familiar repertoire. It isn't dispensable just because London has several other symphony orchestras.

I'm not sure that I think it is particularly helpful to debate the merits/demerits of the various options when there is as yet no reason to suppose any of them will become a reality. In principle the BBC is not predisposed to axe any of them, and if faced with cuts it has many other options not affecting the orchestras at all.

[MrGongGong]

When (because unless those in government change their minds about these things and i'm not holding my breath ) the BBC stops being funded by the TV licence and is forced to become one of many commercial organisations I don't think it will be possible to keep all the performing groups (or Radio 3).

Sadly, the area of broadcasting that IS a duplicate of the commercial offering (which Radio's 1 & 2 aren't really) is the abomination that is "local radio", but we aren't going to loose that unfortunately.
When my children were at school and there was a possibility of a 'snow day' we were told to 'listen to local radio for information' something that is possibly responsible for my unstable mental state in later life

[Bryn]

I think the BBC recognises that each of the Performing Groups has its own specific field of importance: there are three "regional" orchestras (if the BBCNOW and BBCSSO will forgive the term in this context) and two London-based orchestras which all have very distinct remits. There isn't just the question of providing routine concert-fodder for Radio 3: there is outreach work in their regions and the provision of regular live concerts.

The BBCSO has a different remit from that of the BBC Phil in that the BBC/R3 can oversee its programming and use its specific expertise for new commissions and less familiar repertoire. It isn't dispensable just because London has several other symphony orchestras.

I'm not sure that I think it is particularly helpful to debate the merits/demerits of the various options when there is as yet no reason to suppose any of them will become a reality. In principle the BBC is not predisposed to axe any of them, and if faced with cuts it has many other options not affecting the orchestras at all.

Let's not forget the BBCs close relationship with, and involvement in, the Ulster Orchestra.

[french frank]

Let's not forget the BBCs close relationship with, and involvement in, the Ulster Orchestra.

Indeed, the UO fulfils the same function as the NOW and BBCSSO (if not moreso), but its future lies outside the BBC's control, though, from the historical point of view, I'm not sure why.

[pastoralguy]

Agreed! Not having read the article to which you refer, I suspect it's little more than Murdoch-rag propaganda. The trouble is the the Mammon-worshippers who now run this country without even a fear of opposition have decided that the licence fee is a regressive tax, and like to fantasise that the arts would flourish without public subsidy.

It was a very small comment regarding a performance of Belshazzer's Feast that the writer went on to add that 'the writing must be on the wall for the BBC Orchestras'. Remembering the debacle of the early 80's when the BBC attempted to disband their orchestras makes me despair for their future in the current climate.

Surely the Proms would be the first to suffer from a reduced BBC Orchestra presence.

Very scary!

[subcontrabass]

Indeed, the UO fulfils the same function as the NOW and BBCSSO (if not moreso), but its future lies outside the BBC's control, though, from the historical point of view, I'm not sure why.

The Ulster Orchestra is part funded by the BBC. The BBC National Orchestra of Wales is part funded by the Arts Council of Wales. So any changes to these would involve other organisations. The BBCSSO is funded only by the BBC. Scottish Government funding goes to the Royal Scottish National Orchestra and to the Scottish Chamber Orchestra.