Sam Jackson's reply

[french frank]

Was that his total reply FF or just a section ?

There was a lot more - hence 'kudos' - but I thought it might get a bit muddly if the entire reply was posted and people dotted around all over the place: not a very focused approach. I wanted to make this first point that, since he had replied so promptly and courteously, any response from here should be a serious attempt at debate. No insults, no intemperate speech, strictly forensic. I'll see what might be a suitable point next :-).

[Ein Heldenleben]

Having posed the question, I would want to hear what Sam Jackson's response is - rather than disparate or similar views here :-). I am cautious because last time I took this approach (with RW) sending him a list of open-ended questions, he took one look, declared he was 'aghast' (or some such word) as he hadn't the time to answer them because he "had a radio station to run". This time I would respectfully suggest that someone at the BBC or R3 did sit down and have a long think about this. They seem to take a reactive approach to whatever happens to be going on rather than having any firm idea of a clearly expressed remit, or the station's scope. As Paul Donovan of the Sunday Times once asked in his column: "Where's the vision?"

For a start, it seems to me to be a mistake to focus on 'the audience' rather than the content. R1 is popular music for the under 30s with (I assume) some 'social' output suitable for the age group. There is also a specialist station for young Asian (actually Indian sub-continent) listeners - the Asian Network - and another for fans of black popular music 1Xtra. Radio 2 is popular music for older listeners, 6 Music is (looks round for inspiration) contemporary popular music of an 'iconic' character. So can we encapsulate Radio 3 as succinctly? Classical, jazz, world, drama, arts and music features and documentaries ... Late Junction, Unclassified. Plus random inclusions on classical programmes such as Ladies in Lavender, Moon River, Mr Freddie's Blues, Sailing By ...

The current Director of Music, with overall control of all these music stations is Lorna Clarke - formerly head of popular music. I was going to ask whether any senior management person at the BBC promotes classical music, but I see that 'Working with colleagues in BBC Radio 3 and the BBC Orchestras, [Suzy Klein] also leads on classical music strategy'. Unfortunately, information on what that strategy is comes under the BBC's FOIA 'derogation' - excluded from Freedom of Information requests.

And that’s where the BBC gets things wrong . There’s nothing wrong with publishing the classical music strategy with possible redactions for anything commercially sensitive or likely to give competitors an advantage . It’s still far too secretive which is one of the reasons I decided on retirement to join this forum and give some inside info. As it’s all massively out of date in and I worked on R3 for a tiny amount of time it’s of limited use !

[kernelbogey]

Not sure calling him “Wacko” is likely to win any friends or that calling the running of a trail between programmes “insane “ is the right way to conduct an argument....

I will put my hand up to feeling angry - and acting angrily - in my post yesterday on the Breakfast thread: but not to insulting SJ personally in it. I was reacting almost three hours later to an (IMV) awful sequence of: renaissance music > 'insane' trailer > news & weather > HF's gentle & professional tones > more renaissance music.

The word 'insane' has acquired an additional meaning in street talk and journalism: like, 'that Florence Welch Prom was just insane...' If you listen to that sequence from 0625 to about 0635 (both yesterday and today) you will sample the - ok - inappropriateness of the style of the trailer. Most people already listening to R3 at 0625 will, I'd contend, already be 'serious music' fans: do they need a reminder about Jools Holland's mid-day show just then. And if, like me, they appreciate renaissance music, then they might too not like the background use of Britten and Rachmaninov (IIRC).

The marketing fault, IMV, is to have just one, fairly ballsy, ad for Jools's show, to go out maybe all week. Why can't producers have a choice of what ad to run at 0630 (a new ukase)? (Please write on one side of the paper only. )

So, I rest my case, My Lady and will try to behave like a Senior Citizen henceforth.

[french frank]

There’s nothing wrong with publishing the classical music strategy with possible redactions for anything commercially sensitive or likely to give competitors an advantage . It’s still far too secretive which is one of the reasons I decided on retirement to join this forum and give some inside info. As it’s all massively out of date in and I worked on R3 for a tiny amount of time it’s of limited use !

We're at a disadvantage if we have to first calculate what they want to achieve from what we experience as listeners (and that's even more difficult if you've already given up on the station). But it isn't such a personal disadvantage since I've always made sure that I wasn't 'complaining' about items that didnt suit me. The forum is useful for gathering a range of views, often verifiable by listening on Sounds, and arriving at a sensible consensus.

It has in the past suited some at Radio 3 to depict 'us' (formerly the registered Friends supporters, now the posters on this forum) as all kinds of crazy. The BBC tends to latch on to the views it wants to hear as they provide confirmation that they are doing the right thing. A detailed vision statement would be welcome.

[AuntDaisy]

both mine I would guess and if they have caused anguish and/or distress and reflect badly on this forum I most humbly apologise ……. I shall eat nothing but sackcloth and ashes for a week ….

I've said far worse about Alan Davey & probably Sam J. Enjoy your meal, I'll be joining you - can we swap recipes?

[french frank]

Right, Point the Second:

"Firstly, I am grateful to you and your fellow Friends of Radio 3 forum contributors for the time you devote to discussing the station. We may differ in our views regarding certain elements of Radio 3’s output but it is abundantly clear that, above all, you care deeply about what we do.

I certainly do not want to appear defensive, or somewhat tiresomely challenge each of your points below. That said, as I listened to Radio 3 in Concert last night and heard Martin Handley introducing Mahler’s First Symphony from the LSO under Sir Antonio Pappano, or enjoyed an illuminating discussion about the role of the character of Pierrot in classical music on Saturday Morning with Tom Service, I heard programming that was certainly not “relaxed triviality”. Likewise, Hannah French’s presentation of Radio 3 Breakfast this week, or Tom McKinney’s celebrations of the BBC Singers’ centenary, would not fit this description."

What I wanted, of course, was to have my points challenged, even if tiresomely. That was the whole point of mentioning them. What doesn't really satisfy is to have the points made (aka 'complaints') ignored but countered by examples of what weren't the subject of complaint. Had `i heard it, I'm sure I would have had nothing but praise for Martin's introduction and the following performance. I would also defy Radio 3 to produce an entire day's output which was nothing at all but 'relaxed triviality' (my phrase originally). But there does seem to be at the BBC a wish to avoid seeming erudite, serious, critical - broad sense.- and thus possibly 'offputting' to the less informed listener. I think it was on Tuesday that the morning was taken up with 55very different 'tracks'. Not a single full length work in over 6 hours, and odd pieces like Ladies in Lavender and Moon River thrown into the 'classical' mix. It boils down to the kind of listener is Radio encouraging to listen, and what kind will be discouraged.

[Ein Heldenleben]

[QUOTE=french frank;n1319856]Right, Point the Second:

"Firstly, I am grateful to you and your fellow Friends of Radio 3 forum contributors for the time you devote to discussing the station. We may differ in our views regarding certain elements of Radio 3’s output but it is abundantly clear that, above all, you care deeply about what we do.

I certainly do not want to appear defensive, or somewhat tiresomely challenge each of your points below. That said, as I listened to Radio 3 in Concert last night and heard Martin Handley introducing Mahler’s First Symphony from the LSO under Sir Antonio Pappano, or enjoyed an illuminating discussion about the role of the character of Pierrot in classical music on Saturday Morning with Tom Service, I heard programming that was certainly not “relaxed triviality”. Likewise, Hannah French’s presentation of Radio 3 Breakfast this week, or Tom McKinney’s celebrations of the BBC Singers’ centenary, would not fit this description."

What I wanted, of course, was to have my points challenged, even if tiresomely. That was the whole point of mentioning them. What doesn't really satisfy is to have the points made (aka 'complaints') ignored but countered by examples of what weren't the subject of complaint. Had `i heard it, I'm sure I would have had nothing but praise for Martin's introduction and the following performance. I would also defy Radio 3 to produce an entire day's output which was nothing at all but 'relaxed triviality' (my phrase originally). But there does seem to be at the BBC a wish to avoid seeming erudite, serious, critical - broad sense.- and thus possibly 'offputting' to the less informed listener. I think it was on Tuesday that the morning was taken up with 55very different 'tracks'. Not a single full length work in over 6 hours, and odd pieces like Ladies in Lavender and Moon River thrown into the 'classical' mix. It boils down to the kind of listener is Radio encouraging to listen, and what kind will be discouraged.[/QUOTE

Ein H thought


There are “two “ radio threes. There are the evening concerts , the Monday recital , COTW , the Early Music Show, Choral Evensing which as he says are very far from being “trivial. “ The Monday Mahler concert was absolutely excellent and very well presented .
I don’t know what the phrase “relaxed triviality “ refers to. Very little of its musical output is trivial - second rate and derivative maybe but rarely worthless . I’m assuming we are talking about the Breakfast and Essential Classic sequences - the other “Radio 3” . I don’t object to them as much as others as they are just background as I attempt to earn a humble freelance crust. But I can see why others don’t like them and I’m not a fan of single movement extraction from works conceived as a symphonic whole.

It seems to me the “ideological “ divide is now so great the only only solution is a kind of de-militarised zone . Call it Radio 3 Classic - on air from 06.30 to midday with a series of whole work concert repeats performed by the BBC orchestras and thus copyright free - with presentation AI generated from the recordings of previous R3 announcers (don’t laugh it’s already happening in the movies ).

[LMcD]

I will put my hand up to feeling angry

I gave up being angry some time ago, as I found wistful resignation less stressful and less energy-consuming. There are much worse things going on in the world than the possible abandonment of the original purpose of a radio station, especially as there are now so many others out there. It may be irritating, but it's hardly the end of civilization as we know it.

[oddoneout]

I gave up being angry some time ago, as I found wistful resignation less stressful and less energy-consuming. There are much worse things going on in the world than the possible abandonment of the original purpose of a radio station, especially as there are now so many others out there. It may be irritating, but it's hardly the end of civilization as we know it.

Not getting angry is still a work in progress for me - possibly in part because I don't have anyone to hand to grumble with, which would reduce the head of steam effect. I do feel resentful though that what used to be such a pleasure - listening to R3 - has been reduced so much, a resentment that isn't at all helped by the constant promotion of Sounds, a non-solution for me as are the alternatives of online stations often recommended in these parts. I realise that is a minority situation(or so it seems) since "everyone" has the necessary gadgets now, but even if that option was available I still like the basic idea of switching the radio on and listening to something that someone else has made decisions about in terms of composer, period, performers etc. as it increases the chance that I will hear something new(to me) or that I wouldn't have chosen to hear. There are times when I want/need to delegate decision making or at least reduce it considerably!
There are indeed much worse things happening in the world, but until recently R3 was an important part of me coping with those awful things - no longer though, except as isolated hours here and there during the week, as the current format and content just reinforces that sense of things being done which distress me , but over which I have no control.

[french frank]

Very little of its musical output is trivial - second rate and derivative maybe but rarely worthless . I’m assuming we are talking about the Breakfast and Essential Classic sequences - the other “Radio 3” .

Yes, I was. An individual piece may not be trivial, but to play 55 different pieces, either short and not very substantial or just part of some longer work, could be regarded as trivialising the morning output. Catering for certain lifestyles (but not others) e.g. background listening while one works is also, in my view, trivialising and needs explanation (why - not rhetorical - cater for background listening rather than careful listening?). Extracting a spoken item from a longer programme and declaring it to be interesting and not at all 'relaxing triviality' doesn't refute the accusation. That this type of programming satisfies one section of the audience is also insufficient reason.

I do feel, looking at playlists, that there is a deliberate attempt to introduce little known or unknown composers to listeners, largely as novelty ("look, you wouldn't hear these on CFM") Nainita Desai, My mind is still? Heino Kaski, Night by the Sea? Gabriela Montero, Beyond Bach?, Galina Grigorjeva, In Paradisum? - all played and replayed in the last year.

t seems to me the “ideological “ divide is now so great the only only solution is a kind of de-militarised zone . Call it Radio 3 Classic - on air from 06.30 to midday with a series of whole work concert repeats performed by the BBC orchestras and thus copyright free ....

Personally, I'd be more likely to listen at restricted times knowing I wasn't going to be bombarded with as many bits and pieces that I'd just as soon not hear and nothing substantial of interest at all. Mornings or evenings tbd and preferably with advance notice of what is to be played. I must admit that it was the trivial inter-music witter that made me give up Breakfast in, I think, 2007.

[LMcD]

Not getting angry is still a work in progress for me - possibly in part because I don't have anyone to hand to grumble with, which would reduce the head of steam effect. I do feel resentful though that what used to be such a pleasure - listening to R3 - has been reduced so much, a resentment that isn't at all helped by the constant promotion of Sounds, a non-solution for me as are the alternatives of online stations often recommended in these parts. I realise that is a minority situation(or so it seems) since "everyone" has the necessary gadgets now, but even if that option was available I still like the basic idea of switching the radio on and listening to something that someone else has made decisions about in terms of composer, period, performers etc. as it increases the chance that I will hear something new(to me) or that I wouldn't have chosen to hear. There are times when I want/need to delegate decision making or at least reduce it considerably!
There are indeed much worse things happening in the world, but until recently R3 was an important part of me coping with those awful things - no longer though, except as isolated hours here and there during the week, as the current format and content just reinforces that sense of things being done which distress me , but over which I have no control.

It's always been an important element in my life, too, but when people get angry they sometimes say things which (a) they may subsequently regret and (b) definitely won't encourage young Jackson and Co to pay much attention to what they have to say.

[french frank]

I do feel resentful though that what used to be such a pleasure - listening to R3 - has been reduced so much, [...] I still like the basic idea of switching the radio on and listening to something that someone else has made decisions about in terms of composer, period, performers etc. as it increases the chance that I will hear something new(to me) or that I wouldn't have chosen to hear. There are times when I want/need to delegate decision making or at least reduce it considerably!

For me it's less the idea of 'delegation' as the (once fulfilled) expectation of a structured presentation of worthwhile music presented in an informed way for my edification. Do I care whether someone is reading their own script or someone else's? No. Just that it's delivered in a clear, well-modulated voice. Broadcasters are (or should be) professionals, like other professionals. Why do they need to sound enthusiastic or warm or friendly? Just prepare conscientiously and do the job unfussily. Less of the show biz populism

... that sense of things being done which distress me , but over which I have no control.

[kernelbogey]

... Why do they need to sound enthusiastic or warm or friendly?

Or telling us (them?) what to think - 'That absolutely fizzing performance of Beethoven's Eroica Symphony has brought the packed hall to its feet....'

[Roslynmuse]

A few random thoughts from me.

Mostly I have Radio 4 on when I am driving, but on three occasions this week I have had R3 on - briefly. Twice in the first half hour of Essential Classics, once during the final part of In Tune and the first part of Mixtape on Tuesday. I heard the Jools Holland trail at least three times and was mightily irritated by it even after hearing it once. To have R3 on at random times for maybe 75 minutes and hear the same trail three times - I can only imagine how irritating it would be to have the radio on any longer. I would be turning it off. Other observations - Ken Burton's Prayer was played twice in half an hour on Tuesday evening; Sean Rafferty referred to Beethoven's Violin Sonata Op 23 No 4 (he meant the final mt of the 4th violin sonata, Op 23); Georgia Mann - who sounds so bored (heavy sighs every other sentence) - introduced the finale of Beethoven 7 rather than the 3rd mt (as has already been noted above); there were almost no standalone pieces broadcast; and I could go on.

On the other hand, the discussion programmes on R4 seem perfectly happy to talk about sentence structure (Front Row this evening), in-depth analysis of political events from 150 years ago (In Our Time this morning), etc. It seems that only music is treated as a special case that cannot be talked about except in terms of the sort of basic emotional response of a teenager.

One of the fairly regular contributors to BaL told me that their producer said something to the effect of "now, don't start talking about metronome marks and modulations" before recording their segment of the programme. Why are we being 'protected' from such esoteric references? Who is afraid that it will put off the 'average' listener? I knew what a metronome was when I was at primary school, and even if it took me longer to grasp modulations, I learned from hearing or reading the words and then hearing the music, and gradually built up my understanding from a sort of unobtrusive education during my teenage years. I never felt patronized, and I never felt excluded even if I didn't understand everything I was hearing.

[Barbirollians]

I suppose what frustrates me most is that outside those short windows - the evening concert as an example mainly that every morning of the week is now just filled with snippets - its Classic FM with bits of Radio 3 still allowed to remain later in the day. It is the lack of interest in the heritage of performance , something we can now only access by recordings that has just gone . Heavens the only time one hears them is being criticised as historical on record review - let alone the possibility of hearing a whole famous recording - we once had programmes like Your Concert Choice where listeners could choose a recording to be played on the radio . Suzy Klein tells us hearing a Mozart trio hooked her into classical music - would she have felt the same with a snippet?

I recall being amazed by that Das Lied von der Erde being played one day when i was a teenager. How could that happen now ? Who wants to listen to more music in a concert interval rather than hear someone talk accessibly but interestingly about the music. Why are programmes like Interpreations on Record considered totally passe? Why do we have to be told what to think by presenters ?