If you could control Radio 3...

[antongould]

A number of changes to the roster of presenters

Would you wish to detail these …… more Alker obviously …….

[Quarky]

The relevant BBC executives should be required to take compulsory French Lessons, and to study how France Musique is approaching similar issues::

https://www.radiofrance.fr/francemusique/evenements/la-rentree-france-musique-2022-2023-les-temps-forts-de-la-saison-3475174

In particular, their handling of the problem of attracting young people is completely different.

[french frank]

In particular, their handling of the problem of attracting young people is completely different.

Just throwing out a load of FoR3 stuff for 'recycling' and came across a BBC "lifestyle" report, a major piece of regular market research that they undertake - or used to.

I was struck by a bit of their wisdom relating to 'middle youth' which reads: "25-34s prefer to stay away from programmes relating to religion, debate, politics and classical music". Ergo, if you want to attract them to Radio 3 cut down on the damn classical music for a start, and put on the sort of stuff they'll like. Happy Harmonies, Piano Flow, Downtime Symphony, Unclassified ...

[pastoralguy]

And Bo Holten as Composer of the Week! (I’ve actually bent Donald Macleod’s ear about this one!)

[Nick Armstrong]

Would you wish to detail these …… more Alker obviously …….

No*… and no!

(*due to a distinct risk of me having to place myself in pre-mod )

[eighthobstruction]

No*… and no!

(*due to a distinct risk of me having to place myself in pre-mod )

....he's pleading the 5th Amendment....

Ah R3£....¬¬`^¬¬/¬``avec Tapas....

[agingjb]

Remove Jess Gillam as a presenter, and as a musician unless everything she performs is overlaid with the most inane talk that the BBC can find (not hard).

[pastoralguy]

Remove Jess Gillam as a presenter, and as a musician unless everything she performs is overlaid with the most inane talk that the BBC can find (not hard).

Harsh…

[oddoneout]

Remove Jess Gillam as a presenter, and as a musician unless everything she performs is overlaid with the most inane talk that the BBC can find (not hard).

Disagree about your second part. I may not be particularly interested in the kind of music she plays but I think she is a fine musician. However I do think that "This Classical Life" R3 slot does her no favours being on R3, with too many of the features that drive away the core R3 audience, aimed as the programme is at a different audience that isn't listening to R3 - if indeed it exists as anything other than a BBC construct.
There is no reason in my opinion why she should not be a good contributor on R3 but in a different format, using her enthusiasm and knowledge to illustrate features of the repertoire and instrument she works with as part of another programme - like the specialists that the Early Music Show has on. It would avoid pigeonholing her in the short attention span yoof demographic, accepting instead that many(quite probably most) of her fans are likely more clued up than that and quite capable of a bit more "challenge".

[DracoM]

[Please forgive repeat of a post under another thread: ]

Over the last three or so years, I find R3 ever more compromised, and drifting ever closer to a mash of CFM / R2.
Deo Gratias for the online classical music stations that do not see the need to undermine their 'mission' so shamelessly.
Drama - yes - R3 VG
Proms - deffo on the steep side of deep slide. For me this is pretty nearly its least satisfactory year in a decade plus. Are you listening John Wilson, Mark Kermode etc etc etc.?
Night Tracks - yes R3 VG
Choral Evensong - yes, R3 VG - but 'repertoire' not in R3's control, one likes to suspect.
Regular R3 Presenters - NO, no and no again.
R3: making music feel like a tired, repetitious 1750-1850 nostalgia trip. 'Will we ever / never get over the death of Beethoven?' stuff, bit like Brighton through rock.

[Belgrove]

Radio 3 has become an arts ghetto where the quality of criticism and comment is not of the highest quality. When I began listening to the station there were regular programmes on science (John Maddox - Scientifically Speaking) that were serious, having both breadth and depth. There is nothing equivalent on R4 currently, where science and technology programmes have a magazine format, or the (perceived) bitter pill is sugared with lighthearted banter and a studio audience; both of these lead to truncation and superficiality. So I’d like the strict arts remit of R3 to be relaxed and embrace wider forms of culture, including science and philosophy. Make it a bit more challenging and brainy - some chance.

[DracoM]

[oddoneout]

Radio 3 has become an arts ghetto where the quality of criticism and comment is not of the highest quality. When I began listening to the station there were regular programmes on science (John Maddox - Scientifically Speaking) that were serious, having both breadth and depth. There is nothing equivalent on R4 currently, where science and technology programmes have a magazine format, or the (perceived) bitter pill is sugared with lighthearted banter and a studio audience; both of these lead to truncation and superficiality. So I’d like the strict arts remit of R3 to be relaxed and embrace wider forms of culture, including science and philosophy. Make it a bit more challenging and brainy - some chance.

Well, quite. At a time when science has arguably never been more important to the general public it is the target of dumbing down across the media - inaccurate, lack of understanding of subject, infantile presentation, erroneous judgements of audience capacity to engage with "difficult" topics (always assuming they have to be dressed up in some way - wizzy graphics, jokey presentation)
The same attitude has become so much the norm, across the board and nor just science, that I have given up expecting TV programmes to be any good and that has begun to spread into my R3 listening - Inside Music was one such that didn't live up to what I expected and thought it should be. However pleasant the presenter and the "my favourite tunes" might be, it doesn't add anything to the existing output and I didn't (I no longer listen) feel I was extending my knowledge of instrument, repertoire, or the musician except in passing, almost accidentally.
In terms of the question posed by the thread it boils down to bringing back the length, breadth and depth of output as far as I'm concerned. Programmes that are long enough to cover the subject, opportunity for the many excellent people available to do more than offer soundbites and recognition that we do possess brains and like to use them.
The ongoing and seemingly unstoppable reduction of output to variations of the same format succeeds only in driving away existing audiences while not engaging new. Afternoon Concert for instance has been increasingly tinkered with to make it into a longer winded and more unsatisfactory version of the morning schedules - incomplete works, increased chat, listener suggestions. There is currently a temporary partial respite with the repeat of some Proms concerts, but even then tangled for and aft with the messy AC bits - rendered even more messy by all too often having inaccurate or non-existent schedule information.

[smittims]

Splendid ideas there; thanks so much. I hope R3 management reads it.

I'm close to Lordgeous' post on page 1. I'd say: cut out the silly small-talk chit-chat by presenters and replace it by friendly, informative and accurate remarks about the music;

and play works complete always, except for pieces that have become accepted as separate works in their own right, e.g. opera overtures.

I'd also have a revision of Radio 3's preferred composers. I think Judith Weir, Judith Bingham, Thomas Ades and David Matthews have had more than enough air time and Priaulx Rainier, Vagn Holmboe, Arnold Cooke and Bernard van Dieren hardly any .

[DracoM]

The Finnish online stn I listen to a lot has widened my musical awareness far more in 6 mths than R3 has done in ten years.
More adventure, better archaeology, and the very minimum of inter-track talk.