Jess Gillam's "This Classical Life"

[MrGongGong]

Hmm. How about 6 Music? While I'm at it, which of 1 and 6 Music would be the more likely home for Cinematic Orchestra? I first heard the On Radio 1 DAB, back in the days before it's data rate dropped from 192 to 128kbps. More recently they were featured on 6 Music. My guess would be the latter is where they are more likely to be heard, these days.

I don't listen to 6 music much as I mostly listen while travelling and don't have a digital radio in my car
I first heard "The Orb" on Radio 3

[Stanfordian]

All that may be true, but even agreeing with that, I think it's a better fit with Radio 1. 'It's not "instead" of all the other things BUT "as well as"' might just as well be a good motto for Radio 1.

Radio 3's theory is, "We want young people listening to Radio 3, and it doesn't matter what they're listening to,"
or, "We want to attract new listeners and it doesn't matter what they're listening to."

This is precisely why so much of Radio 3 now seems to be 'dumbing down' to listeners who have become more informed. What did you think of Jacob Collier on the clips? I know you like him

Personally I don't believe that most "young people" would be seen dead listening to Radio 3. Some music students maybe.
Do the marketing people at the BBC know if "young people" continue to listen to the radio like previous generations of young people did or do they increasingly listen to their own playlists. After all "young people" don't buy actual newspapers, magazines or CD Players like past generations did - do they.

When in the last couple of years when I started to occasionally listen to R2 for big band jazz it felt as if the coffin lid was quickly closing in on me! This was a station I associated with retired people. But that's just my view!

[french frank]

1. 'Dumbing down' now has a dictionary definition: it may be an unfortunate, unlikeable phrase, but it means: "To make more simple or less intellectually demanding, especially in order to appeal to a broader audience." That has nothing to do with "something I don't like that I look down on those who do". It has nothing to do with snobbishness, elitism or all these other lazy epithets to describe people who happen to like - and be knowledgeable about - classical music. It is a phenomenon - call it what you like - which refers to the managerial tailoring of material which is deemed too 'demanding' (tbd) for a particular audience in order to make it 'accessible'. Some regard this use as patronising (if 'dumb' only means 'unable to speak', 'accessible' means making something easier for disabled people. So do you prefer the comparison with generally disabled people, rather than just with those unable to speak?).

2. The musical discussion here, such as it is, barely progresses beyond what presenter and guest like, or how they came to hear it, which is similar to the limitations of Radio 3's presenter input. It puts two young people together and gets them to talk about music and other things. It is neither demanding, intellectual or musically informative for a general audience; though as entertainment, it will entertain some listeners.

3. If, MrGG, you judge Jacob Collier to be "flashy and superficial" (I take it you mean as a musician?), you did not bother to listen to the clips from his programme and are responding merely to your own non-critical prejudices, with more than a tinge of the patronising (γνῶθι σεαυτόν): "though they are usually "older" folks..... which says something, I think". Yes, it says that you can be as patronising and snobbish as anyone else.

4. 'Dumbing down', like the phrase or not, means altering content to make it more attractive to a particular sector of the community: if this means making it acceptable to people who lack the necessary knowledge to enjoy the material other than if it is made easier, it doesn't take much to work out that if people can cope with a more informed approach they will consider the easy approach … dumbing down. They may still enjoy it as light entertainment, but they may just find it tedious and insulting. Don't blame them for wanting something intended for their knowledge level.

[Serial_Apologist]

'Dumbing down', like the phrase or not, means altering content to make it more attractive to a particular sector of the community: if this means making it acceptable to people who lack the necessary knowledge to enjoy the material other than if it is made easier, it doesn't take much to work out that if people can cope with a more informed approach they will consider the easy approach … dumbing down. They may still enjoy it as light entertainment, but they may just find it tedious and insulting. Don't blame them for wanting something intended for their knowledge level.

Surely, though, the problem with "dumbing down" is that it has come to characterise so much of prime-time Radio 3 listening, rather than its specificity to this particular programme; and as such it is a symptom of a much wider problem.

What, sociologically and politically, is the purpose of dumbing down, do you suppose? It seems to me to be to access a part of the individual receptive process at a perceptual/interpretive level where it is particularly vulnerable in the young, who have yet to acquire the critical faculties to be able to evaluate whether or not they are being exploited to non-thinking ends. And behind it a very pernicious and damaging assumption is being perpetrated: that people need to be spoon fed ideas about what they are receiving which in turn aligns with what they are merely capable of taking in. And it is a peculiarly modern manifestation of education - one which, I would argue, is designed to foster and maintain attitudes in society which mean you can only truly belong if you think about music, once regarded universally as an elevated and elevating medium of expression, the same way the rest of us do, or you will be ostracised. It certainly did not exist among tribal societies we of my generation were once informed were "primitive" - this being the reason they neeeded colonising - and believed it until one day we experienced the so-called "primitive" art of such peoples, and found in the music they put together with singers, drums and dancers a complexity of untold proportions as regards rhythms and juxtaposed lines.

There was a lesson to be learned in that. Music, from once being a social coherent, has been turned into something into which one can escape the imponderables, stresses and complexities of the world we now live in. And as long as Radio 3 continues to come around to that particular appreciation of its function, who are we to complain?

[MrGongGong]

3. If, MrGG, you judge Jacob Collier to be "flashy and superficial" (I take it you mean as a musician?), you did not bother to listen to the clips from his programme and are responding merely to your own non-critical prejudices, with more than a tinge of the patronising (γνῶθι σεαυτόν): "though they are usually "older" folks..... which says something, I think". Yes, it says that you can be as patronising and snobbish as anyone else.

I think you might be taking me a bit too seriously ?
Yes, he is wonderfully accomplished etc etc but (like Joshua Bell ?) doesn't work for me

that's all
I know lots of folks luuuuurve him and that's fine

[french frank]

Surely, though, the problem with "dumbing down" is that it has come to characterise so much of prime-time Radio 3 listening, rather than its specificity to this particular programme; and as such it is a symptom of a much wider problem.

And the ways this 'phenomenon' manifests itself differ, depending on the target audience. I would take Breakfast and Essential Classics to be targeted on the "replenisher" group, the 35-54 year-olds. This is the R2/6 Music demographic, which goes from MOR easy listening to somewhat more distinctive popular. But, to me, 'popular music' is mainly 'understood' by the accompanying words, with the music echoing the sentiments expressed verbally (sad, happy, angry, hopeful). There can't be any great variety/development within a piece which lasts no more than 4-6 minutes. Are the general listeners aware of anything other than the tune and the words (if there's more to it than that, what is it?)? Is it possible to have a programme discussing the music (genuine question, not an assertion that it isn't), rather than the words, performer, social/historical reflections?

What, sociologically and politically, is the purpose of dumbing down, do you suppose?

That would be your angle, rather than mine. First purpose seems to me to be your old friends - commercialism/capitalism. Does profit need to have a sociological or political purpose? Effects, no doubt, but a purpose? Dumbing down is no more than increasing the clientele (in the BBC's case, it's not so much company profit as the response to political pressures. A public service which attracts public money must show that 'everyone is getting their fair share of the benefit'. A 'general' service which serves the 65+ ABC1s is not good value for money (especially because 65s and ABC1s are minorities; so a service serving only the under 65s and C1,C2,DEs would be good value because there are more of them).

It seems to me to be to access a part of the individual receptive process at a perceptual/interpretive level where it is particularly vulnerable in the young, who have yet to acquire the critical faculties to be able to evaluate whether or not they are being exploited to non-thinking ends.

Yes, and this is where Gongers' objection about R1 falls down. When I say This Classical Life is a better fit with R1, I don't mean it fits with what R1 broadcasts now, but that it fits with R1's demographic: it's intended for younger listeners, and they're listening to R1, not R3. To hear young people enthusing about something other than pop musicians will help to develop critical faculties and move them towards a less commercialised environment. The programme does little for young or old on R3.

And behind it a very pernicious and damaging assumption is being perpetrated: that people need to be spoon fed ideas about what they are receiving which in turn aligns with what they are merely capable of taking in. And it is a peculiarly modern manifestation of education

Exactly my point about 'accessibility', now one of the factors that has to be considered by all public organisations: providing the necessary help for disabled people. Surely not educationally helpful to regard youth, inexperience, limited knowledge as 'disabilities' in the same class as people with hearing, sight or mobility problems. Or lack of knowledge in a particular field as a sign of intellectual deficiency.

… tribal societies we of my generation were once informed were "primitive" - this being the reason they neeeded colonising - and believed it until one day we experienced the so-called "primitive" art of such peoples, and found in the music they put together with singers, drums and dancers a complexity of untold proportions as regards rhythms and juxtaposed lines. There was a lesson to be learned in that.

[MrGongGong]

Yes, and this is where Gongers' objection about R1 falls down. When I say This Classical Life is a better fit with R1, I don't mean it fits with what R1 broadcasts now, but that it fits with R1's demographic: it's intended for younger listeners, and they're listening to R1, not R3. To hear young people enthusing about something other than pop musicians will help to develop critical faculties and move them towards a less commercialised environment. The programme does little for young or old on R3.

Young people (or even old people like me) who are INTERESTED in music don't, (generalisation based on experience) listen to Radio 1 at all.
I asked a group of 18 year olds (who WERE studying music) about what old folks like me would call "chart" music. The response was along the lines of "what are the charts?"... that time has gone.

Jess is an interesting musician, her R3 program is a talk based thing (like R3 does lots of ) about the music she and the folks she talks with listen to.

I'm 54, I don't only listen to things made by people who are my age. The youngsters I meet who are passionate about music listen to anything that they find interesting. Nile Rogers is much older than me BUT has a massive following because he is interesting.

[teamsaint]

If the BBC bosses think that a young voice is enough on its own to draw in new audiences, they will be disappointed.
People who are interested in hearing music that is , for them, new and different will, if they are prepared to be led, will be led by voices that they trust. They really won’t care if they are old or young, what matters is a similarity of interest, but a recognition of a degree of expertise of whatever kind.

One of the things that would be likely to draw younger audiences in would trusted voices from within familiar fields. So ( younger) audiences may understand that Jonny Greenwood, Damon Albarn or whoever are not necessarily steeped in decades of experience in classical music and indeed may be from a different generation to them but might still be prepared to take their lead along a path.
Another way of putting this is that there has to be a connection somewhere, somehow. Gongers may tell me I am wrong, and I would accept it if he did, but my experience, both personal and second hand, is that we have a tendency to move by step, rather than by giant leap , and each step tends to need a connection of some kind to the familiar.

[doversoul1]

I think you might be taking me a bit too seriously ?
Yes, he is wonderfully accomplished etc etc but (like Joshua Bell ?) doesn't work for me

that's all
I know lots of folks luuuuurve him and that's fine

This is about Jacob Collier as a presenter on Radio 3. Did you hear this?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/p0717n9q

All the rest about him is irrelevant.

[french frank]

Young people (or even old people like me) who are INTERESTED in music don't, (generalisation based on experience) listen to Radio 1 at all.
I asked a group of 18 year olds (who WERE studying music) about what old folks like me would call "chart" music. The response was along the lines of "what are the charts?"... that time has gone.

R1 has 10m listeners (incl a cohort of under 15s): it would be a generalisation to suppose few of them have any interest in music whatever. Jess Gillam and guests aren't talking about classical music exclusively (or even predominaantly on the bits I listened to), so what's the objection to the idea of it being on R1? A group of 18-year-olds studying Music would not, by definition, be typical of 18-year-olds in general, would they?

Jess is an interesting musician, her R3 program is a talk based thing (like R3 does lots of ) about the music she and the folks she talks with listen to.

I'm sure Jess is an excellent musician, she may also be an interesting musician, though I didn't personally find her 'talk-based' comments interesting. They may be interesting to people who roughly share her musical interests, but how many of them are listening to R3?

I'm 54, I don't only listen to things made by people who are my age. The youngsters I meet who are passionate about music listen to anything that they find interesting. Nile Rogers is much older than me BUT has a massive following because he is interesting.

Dear Gongers, one more birthday and you'll be too old for R3's "replenishers"! Age is indeed less important when considering friends or general socialising, when one is older. But for young people, they find more in common with people of a similar age, which is why 20-year-old Jess is talking to guests in her 15-34 age group and why this is a programme to appeal to young people. This is the current network strategy: "Radio 3 is focusing on driving overall reach upwards by growing the audience among younger live listeners - specifically ‘replenishers’, 35-54 ABC1s." And this is the purpose of This Classical Life.

[MrGongGong]

All the rest about him is irrelevant.

I think we have what my academic friends would call an epistemological difference in understanding

[doversoul1]

I think we have what my academic friends would call an epistemological difference in understanding

I take it that you have not listened / did not listen to the programme.

[french frank]

I think we have what my academic friends would call an epistemological difference in understanding

All dover and I are trying to establish is: did you listen to the clip before making your judgement on him? Have you listened since? Can you comment on what you heard on that clip?

[MrGongGong]

All dover and I are trying to establish is: did you listen to the clip before making your judgement on him? Have you listened since? Can you comment on what you heard on that clip?

OK
So i'm listening to the helium voiced Jacob
SLOW DOWN FFS

It's all a bit "old school" to my ears
I'm not 100% conviced by the whole "note based music" as fundamental

The tritone isn't "quirky" FFS

I don't agree with the assumtion that the pitch content of music is always the most important charateristic and could probably find research that says otherwise
His examples are a bit "well worn" in my experinece

"The all time interval Classics" without Black Sabbath ?

That's 10 minutes of my life that would have better spent with my bat detector in the garden

SO ... having listened to this ... I think it's OK as far as it goes BUT not the same thing aas Jess's programme that sets out to do something entirely different

Sorry

[doversoul1]

OK
So i'm listening to the helium voiced Jacob
SLOW DOWN FFS

It's all a bit "old school" to my ears
I'm not 100% conviced by the whole "note based music" as fundamental

The tritone isn't "quirky" FFS

I don't agree with the assumtion that the pitch content of music is always the most important charateristic and could probably find research that says otherwise
His examples are a bit "well worn" in my experinece

"The all time interval Classics" without Black Sabbath ?

That's 10 minutes of my life that would have better spent with my bat detector in the garden

SO ... having listened to this ... I think it's OK as far as it goes BUT not the same thing aas Jess's programme that sets out to do something entirely different

Sorry

You’ve proved that Jacob Collier’s programme has contents.

Jess's programme that sets out to do something entirely different

Exactly.