I like it, I like it not

[french frank]

And do we really want Bruckner's 8th Symphony in the morning?

I was looking at the Classical Collection playlists earlier on this evening - a programme I thought a notch or two down from CD Masters. They played an entire Mahler symphony ( I think it was No 6!) one morning and the running order seemed to be full-length pieces with shorter pieces in between, rather than shorter pieces with an occasional semi-long piece. Both CD Masters and Classical Collection were said at various times to have had good audiences, so clearly some people are willing to listen in the mornings.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

Point taken. But I do wonder what the alternative is. I've always believed that the BBC employ top people so what's the alternative to the current crop of presenters? And do we really want Bruckner's 8th Symphony in the morning? I, (genuinely!), wonder how many listeners have the time and concentration to devote their full attention at that time of the day.

Why do you cite Bruckner 8th, pasto? I think that there is a danger of an artificial polarisation between "short pieces" and Bruckner #8 (or Mahler #3). There are plenty of full-length works lasting half the time of the Bruckner. The number of listeners who had time and attention at that time of the morning wasn't a problem on 2nd January 1979 - the date I found when searching for a particular evening programme from that time: the breakfast time programme for that day included full works lasting up to half-an-hour, and after nine, even a little longer. Why is this now regarded as impractical when it wasn't forty years ago? And - if CFM is offering the "bits and bobs" type of programming at that time, why not cater for the few (if it is indeed few) listeners who can so "devote their full attention at that time of day"?

String quartets by Haydn, Mendelssohn, Borodin, Schumann, Haydn Symphonies, Piano Sonatas by Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven, Schubert ... as well as individual, self-contained shorter pieces. Is there any objection to this? If so, this Thread provides an opportunity.

[antongould]

Like - the idea the station exists at all .... but it is, surely, between a rock
and a hard place .... if the early morning shows played full Bruckner/Mahler symphonies would anyone hereabouts listen or switch off and play their current favourite of the 37 recordings they have ... ???
Also like it is there as an alternative to / move on from CFM so helps, in a small way to keep a love of classical music alive ....
Don’t like - the endlessly repeated trailers and the seeming fear that to play any other symphony than Hayden/Mozart or Prokofiev 1 will destroy the morning schedule .....

and did I mention Skellers ....

[french frank]

if the early morning shows played full Bruckner/Mahler symphonies would anyone hereabouts listen

10.38am Mahler 7 25/9/2007

[antongould]

10.38am Mahler 7 25/9/2007

Yes but 10.5 years later they have all bought 18.7 further versions ....

[Lat-Literal]

10.38am Mahler 7 25/9/2007

I would not like wall to wall Mahler. As someone who is wordy and conscious that in today's Twittersphere many consider that brief is best, I have never seen a reasoned argument put forward for symphonies of never ending length. There is, as some might say, a "disconnect". Maybe it is that the rot hasn't quite yet set in due to the absence of a Plain Music Society?

But as a matter of interest, french frank, what would you like instead of, say, Essential Classics?

A daytime Through The Night?

Concerts by a range of newly formed and fully funded BBC orchestras?

Daytime plays?

I am not sure that I am entirely clear.

[french frank]

Yes but 10.5 years later they have all bought 18.7 further versions ....

So they can play Mahler 6 or Mahler 2

But this is irrelevant, isn't it? Why, suddenly, are we no longer to be given more than the occasional piece lasting 18 mins? If people can't give it their full attention, how does it stop them doing anything else they have to do?

[teamsaint]

Why do you cite Bruckner 8th, pasto? I think that there is a danger of an artificial polarisation between "short pieces" and Bruckner #8 (or Mahler #3). There are plenty of full-length works lasting half the time of the Bruckner. The number of listeners who had time and attention at that time of the morning wasn't a problem on 2nd January 1979 - the date I found when searching for a particular evening programme from that time: the breakfast time programme for that day included full works lasting up to half-an-hour, and after nine, even a little longer. Why is this now regarded as impractical when it wasn't forty years ago? And - if CFM is offering the "bits and bobs" type of programming at that time, why not cater for the few (if it is indeed few) listeners who can so "devote their full attention at that time of day"?

String quartets by Haydn, Mendelssohn, Borodin, Schumann, Haydn Symphonies, Piano Sonatas by Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven, Schubert ... as well as individual, self-contained shorter pieces. Is there any objection to this? If so, this Thread provides an opportunity.

1979 was the better part of half a century ago. So much has changed, and in terms of scheduling radio programmes, surely the largest of many large changes is the enormous volume and quality of music available to most potential listeners. So the function of radio is perceived, by those with hands on controls, to have changed . But of course listeners tend to view through the prism of their own wishes, whereas station directors ought to be viewing through the prism of service provision, and its various demands.

I'd maybe view the ( perhaps unwelcome) change as a move from old fashioned paternalistic motivations to ones based more in professional arts management, which sees ( and tell me if I am wrong here......) a substantial part of its remit as using its reach to develop an audience, even if that audience doesn't know it wants to develop.


Likes : Record review/BaL, even the twofers. Afternoon concert. Evening Concert. Anything that helps me learn more . Some of the presenters. ( I'm trying really hard to get along with Ron Shafferty).

Don't like: The absence of Discovering Music. Too many of the presenters. The crassness of Breakfast and EC most of the time. Not nearly enough contemporary or late C20 music in the daytime. Deeply predictable programming of major works.

[EdgeleyRob]

I very rarely listen live.almost always I-player.

Like

Some evening concerts,lunchtime concerts,TTN,choral evensong,COTW

Dislike

Breakfast,essential classics,in tune,even BAL gets on my nerves these days so I only listen if it's a work that interests me.
It's just occurred to me that I hardly ever listen at weekends.
TTN 24/7 would suit me fine.

Wish

Interpretations on record would return.

[french frank]

I would not like wall to wall Mahler.

Well, as the saying goes, you could always switch off

But as a matter of interest, french frank, what would you like instead of, say, Essential Classics?

I would do away with the idea of a 3-hour CD programme. Essential Classics was the first programme ever to introduce that on Radio 3. I might have a first programme that was CDs only, but with at least one full-length (30-40 mins) work, and the shorter works a mix of v short to medium long. And if I were thinking entirely of myself, there would be no non-classical works (musicals, jazz, Ivor Cutler or whatever novelty someone thought up). There would be no guests (though I might bring back the old Artist of the Week programme with a distinguished classical performer being interviewed about their life and career). Presentation would be concise and informed. No listener contributions. After that there could be a 'recital' - not necessarily an actual recording, but a choice of works that might well form a recital programme. Or works that were connected in some way.

On the whole, I've always rather avoided 'prescriptions' of this kind. It usually leads to disputes - but as you asked me nicely …

[Quarky]

Like

iPlayer and specialist programmes, Hear and Now, Jazz, Early Music, World Music, Late Junction. And in the mainstream programmes, TTN, Concerts, there is much to like, but it does require some ferreting - e.g. Monteverdi Vespers on TTN last Saturday.
Presenters Alyn Shipton, Max Reinhardt, Jonathan Swain, Simon Heighes ( I never thought I would appreciate the edicts of the Council of Trente).
R3 does inform and educate - me, at least.

In Tune Mix Tape, Words and Music.

Generally, R3 provides 90% of my music listening time.

Dislike
Since most of my listening is on iPlayer, I can't comment on the mainstream programmes. Except that Breakfast can be good, but then there may be a loud bombastic orchestral piece that has me reaching for the off switch.

Tom Service.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

Thirty-nine years might well be "the better part of half-a-century ago" (with or without the ) - but so was The Hitch-Hikers' Guide to the Galaxy, and they're bringing that back!

And the new-fashioned anti-paternalist motivations aren't using a reach to develop an audience - the reach is getting shorter as the audience numbers fall. That's (for me) the important bit - the alienation of the once devoted* audience is not being replaced by greater numbers of eager new listeners: if it were, if the Rajars showed an increase in numbers for the pre-noon programmes which then spilled over into the later schedules, it would be selfish and churlish to decry the happy-clappy fare. As the listener numbers drop, it's not unreasonable to firmly and politely request something more substantial - especially if the same sort of programming is available for those who prefer it elsewhere.

(* = I was going to describe it as a "once regular" audience, but as we're discussing breakfast-time broadcasting ... )

[Barbirollians]

FF - do you no longer listen to composer of the week or any of the concerts ? surely you tune in to the odd Prom or two ?

[Lat-Literal]

Well, as the saying goes, you could always switch off



I would do away with the idea of a 3-hour CD programme. Essential Classics was the first programme ever to introduce that on Radio 3. I might have a first programme that was CDs only, but with at least one full-length (30-40 mins) work, and the shorter works a mix of v short to medium long. And if I were thinking entirely of myself, there would be no non-classical works (musicals, jazz, Ivor Cutler or whatever novelty someone thought up). There would be no guests (though I might bring back the old Artist of the Week programme with a distinguished classical performer being interviewed about their life and career). Presentation would be concise and informed. No listener contributions. After that there could be a 'recital' - not necessarily an actual recording, but a choice of works that might well form a recital programme. Or works that were connected in some way.

On the whole, I've always rather avoided 'prescriptions' of this kind. It usually leads to disputes - but as you asked me nicely …

That doesn't look especially radical to me, as in likely to frighten the executives, or difficult to achieve. Having just considered the most recent output on Breakfast, I see that dear old Ivor has now been on the Petroc show as well as Georgia's. I wonder if there is a reason? Still, I'm not sure that he or anyone similar has been on Essential Classics. James Rhodes was an interesting if harrowing interviewee on Hardtalk last night. Distinguished classical performers are, therefore, on the BBC but everywhere other than R3. It's cross-platforming etc.

[antongould]

So they can play Mahler 6 or Mahler 2

But this is irrelevant, isn't it? Why, suddenly, are we no longer to be given more than the occasional piece lasting 18 mins? If people can't give it their full attention, how does it stop them doing anything else they have to do?

..... “ ...fear that to play any other symphony than Hayden/Mozart or Prokofiev 1 will destroy the morning schedule ..... “ perhaps we sort of agree as perhaps always ....