If you could control Radio 3...

[ahinton]

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 .

Agreed on all counts except the last to which I would respond "what's wrong with both?"...

[ahinton]

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.

Spot on!

[french frank]

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.

Yes.I didn't mention science, but I really meant that R3 could do more or less anything as long as it was dealt with intelligently and in depth, not 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.

I remember Stephen Moss, the Guardian/Observer critic, saying years ago: "It's the Alps when it ought to be the Himalayas." I reckon it's now heading for the Somerset Levels.

[ahinton]

Definitely one of the few instances where a 'Reduced Service' would be a good thing.

An revised amended Service would surely be far better. Whenever I listen to his gushings (or indeed read similar kinds of expression in BBC MM) I am less irritated by them per se as I am by my suspicion that he is capable of so much better and I just wish that he would give us the evidence of this; I believe that he has far more to offer than is apparent from what is aired from him which almost seems to be wilfully oriented towards the very kinds of R3 presenter mannerisms that have rightly been pilloried elsewhere on this thread - as though he's been told how he's expected to to do his stuff. As to the general presenter problems, I have nothing to add to what's already been noted here except that one frequent presenter in particular likewise has the knowledge and sensitivity to do far better and conveys once again the impression that this is how all R3 presenters are now supposed to do their stuff; some are worse than others, inevitably, but one thing that puzzles me is that, if gushing popularism (including speaking over music) is R3 policy these days, how come Donald McLeod retains his set on CotW?

[smittims]

Well, Alistair (and good to see your screen- name again), The more of one composer they play the less room for others.

I'm guessing they have a certain amount of time to devote to 20th-and 21stcentury music and having filled it with those favourites there's no room for anyone less in the public eye (less 'acclaimed' or 'award-winning' as they say).

I don't think that's a measure of value. Personally, I find the music of the first four composers there 'Doll as ditchwatter, me bhoy' . One day on 'Afternoon on3' in the middle of them all they played Havergal Brian's English suite no.3. Now the English Suites are not major Brian; they're Brian rolling up his trousers and having a paddle, but immediately I heard a tang, a flavour, missing from the other music. Why they neglect the second four composres I canot think.

[ahinton]

I remember Stephen Moss, the Guardian/Observer critic, saying years ago: "It's the Alps when it ought to be the Himalayas." I reckon it's now heading for the Somerset Levels.

!!! - or yet the Dead Sea, peut-être?...

[ahinton]

Well, Alistair (and good to see your screen- name again), The more of one composer they play the less room for others.

I'm guessing they have a certain amount of time to devote to 20th-and 21stcentury music and having filled it with those favourites there's no room for anyone less in the public eye (less 'acclaimed' or 'award-winning' as they say).

I don't think that's a measure of value. Personally, I find the music of the first four composers there 'Doll as ditchwatter, me bhoy' . One day on 'Afternoon on3' in the middle of them all they played Havergal Brian's English suite no.3. Now the English Suites are not major Brian; they're Brian rolling up his trousers and having a paddle, but immediately I heard a tang, a flavour, missing from the other music. Why they neglect the second four composres I canot think.

Well, I wasn't suggesting neglecting the second four and no, the English Suites are hardly vintage Brian, but R3 is on air 24/7 so there ought to be room, surely? I noticed that several works of another composer who has rarely received the attention that she deserves have been broadcast over the past few months, albeit always on Through the night, but broadcasts at those (for some) unsocial hours can be recorded for listening at other times; I refer here to Bacewicz, surely one of the finest Polish composers of her day? Anyway, in doubting that David Matthews has been disproportionately represented on R3, I would point out that he is very prolific, his opus number tally alone extending now to over 150 including 10 symphonies, 17 string quartets and much else including a goodly number of arrangements of other composers' works...

[RichardB]

If I could control Radio 3 I wouldn't want to control it, but to appoint a roster of in-house producers, each an expert in their own field, and have them be responsible for programming in that field, having first decided on a rough division of airtime between all the things that the station might be expected to cover, apart from rendering unto CFM those things that are CFM's. Some programmes obviously need to be devoted to bringing in new listeners, but I think that can probably be done in a less cringeworthy way than at present. Many of the comments here have to do with one presenter or another. Personally I would say that's the least of R3's problems. Much more important is having it properly funded, but that pretty much goes for the entire world of culture and the arts in the UK... Charlotte Higgins in today's Guardian: "£341m a year for an entire country’s arts infrastructure compared with £849m for a month of pub lunches [under the Eat Out to Help Out scheme] that may, or may not, have had an impact on the health of the hospitality sector, but certainly affected rising Covid cases and pressure on the NHS." It's just yet another area crushed by years of failing governments.

[oddoneout]

I remember Stephen Moss, the Guardian/Observer critic, saying years ago: "It's the Alps when it ought to be the Himalayas." I reckon it's now heading for the Somerset Levels.

All part of the "Levelling up agenda"?

[oddoneout]

Well, I wasn't suggesting neglecting the second four and no, the English Suites are hardly vintage Brian, but R3 is on air 24/7 so there ought to be room, surely? I noticed that several works of another composer who has rarely received the attention that she deserves have been broadcast over the past few months, albeit always on Through the night, but broadcasts at those (for some) unsocial hours can be recorded for listening at other times; I refer here to Bacewicz, surely one of the finest Polish composers of her day? Anyway, in doubting that David Matthews has been disproportionately represented on R3, I would point out that he is very prolific, his opus number tally alone extending now to over 150 including 10 symphonies, 17 string quartets and much else including a goodly number of arrangements of other composers' works...

Except for the bits allocated to Dumbtime which I would argue are not R3. Heaven forbid that those slots be used for extending the R3 offer though.

[oddoneout]

If I could control Radio 3 I wouldn't want to control it, but to appoint a roster of in-house producers, each an expert in their own field, and have them be responsible for programming in that field, having first decided on a rough division of airtime between all the things that the station might be expected to cover, apart from rendering unto CFM those things that are CFM's. Some programmes obviously need to be devoted to bringing in new listeners, but I think that can probably be done in a less cringeworthy way than at present. Many of the comments here have to do with one presenter or another. Personally I would say that's the least of R3's problems. Much more important is having it properly funded, but that pretty much goes for the entire world of culture and the arts in the UK... Charlotte Higgins in today's Guardian: "£341m a year for an entire country’s arts infrastructure compared with £849m for a month of pub lunches [under the Eat Out to Help Out scheme] that may, or may not, have had an impact on the health of the hospitality sector, but certainly affected rising Covid cases and pressure on the NHS." It's just yet another area crushed by years of failing governments.

Article here https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...t-levelling-up

[gurnemanz]

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.

I'm all for cutting the banter, and luckily R3 is nowhere near as bad as CFM for this, such that I can't actually bear listening to that station and don't even have it as a pre-set. Just give us classical music with some informative comment and criticism. I don't expect to like every presenter's style but don't see the need for nasty and crude personal attacks as with Jess G above. I'm OK with In Tune with its artist interviews and live studio performance slots. To satisfy those who want no chat at all they could run a parallel channel which would be like Through the Night (which I never hear, being asleep), but 24/7, as RAI, YLE and other foreign broadcasters manage to achieve. I often tune to the all-music Venice Classical Radio.

Personally, I don't need science talk on R3 and am happy with it as an "arts ghetto", even though that would not be my choice of vocabulary.

[mopsus]

Well, Alistair (and good to see your screen- name again), The more of one composer they play the less room for others.

They might free some time for, say, Bacewicz (a composer I first encountered when I played one of her pieces in a piano exam) if there were less careless repetition of the same pieces within a short space of time. Recently we had Elgar's First Symphony (I think) twice in one week in the evening concert, and the same Vivaldi concerto twice within a few days. I realise that this is not one of the most serious problems with R3 at the moment, but with the forthcoming programming (presumably) logged electronically, it could easily be avoided.

[Bryn]

Agreed on all counts except the last to which I would respond "what's wrong with both?"...

I find myself with Smittims regarding the 'usual suspects'. Weir, Bingham, Ades and Matthews all deserve to have their work represented but not to the exclusion of those mentioned, let alone some of the younger generation of UK-based composers.

[ahinton]

I find myself with Smittims regarding the 'usual suspects'. Weir, Bingham, Ades and Matthews all deserve to have their work represented but not to the exclusion of those mentioned, let alone some of the younger generation of UK-based composers.

Quite so; I'm just less convinced then smittims appears to be that R3 exposure of these four composers' works is excluding those of others per se...