What changes, if any, would you make? This is assuming (pure fantasy, of course) that you had absolute control over what was broadcast or not broadcast.
-
-
Much more George Lloyd! Andrew MacGregor to be featured on the cover of Radio Times. -
A number of changes to the roster of presentersOriginally posted by smittims View Post"...the isle is full of noises,
Sounds and sweet airs, that give delight and hurt not.
Sometimes a thousand twangling instruments
Will hum about mine ears, and sometime voices..."
Comment
-
Predictable, coming from me
Radio 3 to return to covering classical music (full range), jazz, world music (though with more of a bias towards traditional classical musics rather than contemporary genres, and with critical/explanatory material as well), drama, arts discussion, music and arts documentaries. And short series and one-offs which could be anything from hiphop, triphop, 'unclassiified', 'uncategorisable', as long as that has a critical/documentary focus.
Fewer of the 'Unclassified'. 'uncategorisable', sort of (middle) youth cultural shows. Now that the BBC has expanded its radio portfolio with readily accessible digital stations and spin-offs, there's no reason for such music to be found a permanent home on Radio 3. If R3 listeners want to hear it, have the nous to go and look for it elsewhere.
On the aim to broaden, add diversity to, the audience, absolutely fine: but a bit more imagination and risk-taking is needed by the BBC. Don't automatically assume that the responsibility lies with Radio 3 to attract a new audience to classical music. More classical music, more jazz, more world music on the other services.
But: I appreciate the BBC's difficulty. If they add classical music (even just a teeny weeny bit) on other services, they fear listeners/viewers will switch over to rival stations/channels. And they are right to an unquantifiable extent. But it either is or it isn't worth trying to broaden/diversify audiences. Just don't take the view that Radio 3 as an arts station has a small audience, so it won't matter if it loses a few more listeners. Don't listen to the Ivan Hewetts of the world who denigrate even lip-service paid by R3's aim to "stretch" or "challenge" its listeners.It isn't given us to know those rare moments when people are wide open and the lightest touch can wither or heal. A moment too late and we can never reach them any more in this world.Comment
-
Where to begin?!
More scholarly, in-depth programmes such as Interpretations on Record (and NO twofers).
More gems from the huge BBC archives (contracts permitting). Plus repeats of, say, John Amis interviews with notable performers and composers.
Less of Mr Service please!
I could go on...Comment
-
Originally posted by Lordgeous View Post
I'd settle for a retraining course in basic radio and television presentation techniques, concentrating on measured speaking and not talking over the beginning and/or end of a musical performance, even when that performance is via a recording.Comment
-
Definitely one of the few instances where a 'Reduced Service' would be a good thing.Originally posted by Lordgeous View PostComment
-
I think that's one aspect that's gone out of the window because 'training' is seen as less desirable than 'naturalness' which is actively encouraged. 'Be yourself.' As Lordgeous said: more erudition. And less aimless burbling.Originally posted by Bryn View PostIt isn't given us to know those rare moments when people are wide open and the lightest touch can wither or heal. A moment too late and we can never reach them any more in this world.Comment
-
Bring back 'Brains Trust'.Comment
-
Yes, of course, Radio 3 is not necessarily just music, though I think it should be. Brain's Trust on Radio 4 please.Comment
-
Trevor Dann's Viewpoint article in next weeks Radio Times applies "realist" arguments to listeners bemoaning like-minded changes to Radio 2:
It's like coming home to find someone's been in your living room and rearranged the furniture. Worse, they've actually taken away your favourite armchair. That's how Jim Moir, a former controller of Radio 2, characterised his listeners' reactions to schedule changes.
So why do BBC executives so often risk the wrath of their most loyal consumers by axing much-loved broadcasters who have become family friends? What have they done to Simon Mayo? ask the jilted fans. What will I do without Steve Wright and the posse in the afternoon? No, not Vanessa too?
Well, if you're seething about the high-handed way the bosses are treating you, don't bother writing to complain, because they don't care what you think ...
The modernisers [that word again] at the Beeb think of Radio 2 as a comfy old high street boozer. [supply your own simile for their view of Radio 3] Out goes the cheery landlord with his tankards and dart board. In come the baristas, shot glasses and exposed air-conditioning pipes. In the world of audience research, listeners are nowhere near as important as potential listeners. I've even heard older loyalists described as "the wrong kind of listeners"...
We faced the same issues at Radio 1 in the 1990s ... The overall effect was to lower the total audience, but raise the numbers in the key target audience.
Dunn ascribes the new orientation (albeit that it's been around for some decades) to the introduction of its Sounds making easy around-the-clock access to fare of any kind a good excuse for sidestepping the shrinking budgets, pointing out the enticements elsewhere on offer to the likes of Evans, Feltz and Norton and anyone such as Scott Mills, Steve Wright's replacement. But are there equivalent enticements elsewhere for Radio 3 presenters cajoled into dumbing down choice and its manner of presentation? The career boats to which aspiring broadcasters hitch their lifelong hopes are as provisional as employment prospects anywhere in the zero contracts age, and this in turn conditions and is conditioned by the culture it sires and sustains.Comment
-
Under Roger Wright, quite early on Brains Trust did return for a short while. I think I'd prefer a retrial for Critics' Forum. What would make me shudder in either case would be having a live audience asking various questions, with never really enough time for any subject to be dealt with in any depth. For a short while "Discovering Music with Charles Hazlewood" had a live audience asking questions and it was not a patch on Discovering Music.Originally posted by Lordgeous View PostIt isn't given us to know those rare moments when people are wide open and the lightest touch can wither or heal. A moment too late and we can never reach them any more in this world.Comment
-
On the button. Potential listeners are what we're after. And as for "the wrong kind of listeners" …Originally posted by Serial_Apologist View Post
As for the axing of favourite presenters, one might point out that managers are seldom axed, they go either at a time of their own choosing (for a better job) or when they reach the statutory retirement age - extended if they're much appreciated. On presenters, though, 'De gustibus' …It isn't given us to know those rare moments when people are wide open and the lightest touch can wither or heal. A moment too late and we can never reach them any more in this world.Comment
-
Increase length of Building a Library to one hour
Axe twofers
No more bleeding chunks
Bring back Rob Cowan
Bring back Stephanie HughesComment
Comment