Saturday morning success!

[Ein Heldenleben]

I've noticed this on Radio 3 for some years, so much so that I am sure it is deliberate policy. They give the impression that they are talking about music, but if you listen carefully you find they are not really talking about music as such, just things around it, such as a musician's life,the story of an opera, the financial success of a concert series, etc.

I think is is a general trend in broadcasting. Some years ago I saw a half-hour Tv programme 'action from the (name forgotten) yacht race'. Most of it showed the participants eating, drinking and laughing. There were just eight minutes of actual yacht racing.

There’s also a lot of talk about instruments including Sean Rafferty’s endless plugs for the studio Steinway and a near fetishistic obsession with Strads . Who cares?
There used to be quite a bit of musicological anaylsis in Radio 3 from the likes of Hans Keller and Wilfred Mellers - the latter even taking apart Who and Led Zeppelin tracks . It’s been killed by several things - the lack of music education at schools , the fear of being perceived as elitist and talking over peoples heads, and not least a collapse in self belief amongst musicologists themselves including Hans who listed them (along with editors, producers ) as pointless professions.
I’d be very happy to hear a jazz pianist talk through the substitutions and voicings they use but I recognise that most people wouldn’t be interested. Similarly the level of technical analysis of a symphony i’d be interested in - about 1st to 2nd year undergrad level - say one of the harder Cambridge companion articles - probably wouldn’t attract much of an audience. Even those Anthony Hopkins Talking About Music programmes weren’t that demanding - now of course they be considered far too difficult. .
It’s the same in factual programming right across the media - the intellectual demands the programmes make now are far less than a nineties Horizon , or blue chip series like Ascent Of Man.

[french frank]

I’d be very happy to hear a jazz pianist talk through the substitutions and voicings they use but I recognise that most people wouldn’t be interested.

'Most people' aren't listening to R3 anyway I'd be interested in hearing your proposed jazz talk even though it would certainly be 'over my head', as Discovering Music sometimes was. You either find that off-putting or 'intimidating' (stupid word in this context), or you struggle to understand - and with the help of the internet ... It's like the demand for ready-made meals and convenience foods that don't require much effort. Give 'em what they want. And if they don't want it, keep giving it to them until they do.

Similarly the level of technical analysis of a symphony i’d be interested in - about 1st to 2nd year undergrad level - say one of the harder Cambridge companion articles - probably wouldn’t attract much of an audience. Even those Anthony Hopkins Talking About Music programmes weren’t that demanding - now of course they be considered far too difficult.

That's the whole problem with the BBC now. Not enough people would listen and frankly, my dears, WE DON'T CARE ABOUT THE PEOPLE WHO WANT TO LISTEN (excuse me raising my voice)

[Ein Heldenleben]

'Most people' aren't listening to R3 anyway I'd be interested in hearing your proposed jazz talk even though it would certainly be 'over my head', as Discovering Music sometimes was. You either find that off-putting or 'intimidating' (stupid word in this context), or you struggle to understand - and with the help of the internet ... It's like the demand for ready-made meals and convenience foods that don't require much effort. Give 'em what they want. And if they don't want it, keep giving it to them until they do.



That's the whole problem with the BBC now. Not enough people would listen and frankly, my dears, WE DON'T CARE ABOUT THE PEOPLE WHO WANT TO LISTEN (excuse me raising my voice)

Well all I can is my programmes were packed with information. One controller said he had to rewind one once and watch a section again. I was secretly quite proud of that . It’s not all bad : Springwatch for example is absolutely packed with hi qual info in the links - less so in the films.
What always amazes me is the reverence for the blue chip Natural History series that have relatively little intellectual content but amazing shots and sequences.
I once worked out that a File On four had about twice as many facts in it than an equivalent Panorama. Yes that’s how we spent the licence fee payers time folks…
To be honest if you want to stretch your mind read a book or even a broadsheet newspaper. Even at its height the Third Programme was “dumbed down” compared to say The New Leviathans - a book by the philosopher John Gray which is about the most demanding book I’ve read this year and even that is pop philosophy - a walk in the park compared with Kant et al.
To quote an ex colleague : “the BBC , a place where Ph.D’s spend a day to three weeks reading everything on a complex issue and then produce scripts aimed at a Daily Mirror reader.”
That is (largely ) the fate of mass media.

[french frank]

Even at its height the Third Programme was “dumbed down” compared to say The New Leviathans - a book by the philosopher John Gray which is about the most demanding book I’ve read this year and even that is pop philosophy - a walk in the park compared with Kant et al.

I got that book last year from Prospect magazine for winning the month's Brainteaser competition. It was so simple (the competition) I think the real intellectuals were too snooty to bother entering. It prompted me to buy a copy of Hobbes's Leviathan (soon set aside for the long winter ahead!). But I take your general point, including re Talking About Music. The idea was not to impress or talk to fellow professionals but to enlighten those listeners who were interested enough to want to learn. Even given my skimpy knowledge of classical music, R3's current level was teaching me nothing; and I sense that it's got worse since I gave up on it.

[LMcD]

That's the whole problem with the BBC now. Not enough people would listen and frankly, my dears, WE DON'T CARE ABOUT THE PEOPLE WHO WANT TO LISTEN (excuse me raising my voice)

I'm probably not the only person who, living alone, sometimes turns the radio on 'for a bit of company'. What has changed of late, as far as Radio 3 is concerned, is that increasingly I seem to hear it without actually listening. Perhaps I should invest in a canary or budgerigar?

[Ein Heldenleben]

I got that book last year from Prospect magazine for winning the month's Brainteaser competition. It was so simple (the competition) I think the real intellectuals were too snooty to bother entering. It prompted me to buy a copy of Hobbes's Leviathan (soon set aside for the long winter ahead!). But I take your general point, including re Talking About Music. The idea was not to impress or talk to fellow professionals but to enlighten those listeners who were interested enough to want to learn. Even given my skimpy knowledge of classical music, R3's current level was teaching me nothing; and I sense that it's got worse since I gave up on it.

That did make laugh . Can’t think of a better way of getting a copy. Not exactly an enticing gift . It’s possibly the most depressing book I’ve ever read - up there with the 20th Century chapters of Norman Davies Europe and I timed reading it superbly to coincide with the Trump victory.
Still think the BBC is a good deed in a very naughty world. But yes there needs to be more intellectual challenge in the mid and upper range - something that Anthony Hopkins, David Munrow did superbly and with no sense of de-haut-en-bas.

[french frank]

I'm probably not the only person who, living alone, sometimes turns the radio on 'for a bit of company'. What has changed of late, as far as Radio 3 is concerned, is that increasingly I seem to hear it without actually listening. Perhaps I should invest in a canary or budgerigar?

I'm sure you're right and I sympathise in a general way without empathising . It was at the point when I sensed that I was hearing without listening that I stopped listening. R3's USP as a radio station was that it was for people who were, in Sir Bill Haley's words, selective and attentive. They switched on to hear particular programmes because they were interested in the subject.

But people have changed pretty dramatically over the past 50 years or so. They seem to me, in my Mrs Grundy way , to be much more self-indulgent and disinclined to undertake anything that requires a bit of physical or mental effort. 'And here's another selfy of me posing with my selfy stick.' Snort.

[Ein Heldenleben]

The unusual locution Sir Bill Haley made me momentarily think the self styled “inventor “ of Rock and Roll had also once run Radio 3 and inconsequence been awarded a knighthood.

[french frank]

The unusual locution Sir Bill Haley made me momentarily think the self styled “inventor “ of Rock and Roll had also once run Radio 3 and inconsequence been awarded a knighthood.

Just my whimsical sense of humour!

[oddoneout]

I'm probably not the only person who, living alone, sometimes turns the radio on 'for a bit of company'. What has changed of late, as far as Radio 3 is concerned, is that increasingly I seem to hear it without actually listening. Perhaps I should invest in a canary or budgerigar?

I find myself doing that, and it's why I now usually turn off after Breakfast and often don't turn on again until the next day if the evening offering doesn't appeal(which has been the case most of the time for more than a year), but I've come to the conclusion it's the result in part of getting used to tuning out the rather large element of unwanted content. At one time the mute switch would suffice, but the increasing frequency of ads, irrelevant chat and now "oh no not again" music means that it's easier to tune out - not least as the remote unit has to be precisely lined up in order for the mute to work and I'm not always in the right place for that. The downside is that the tuning out habit increasingly seems to be involuntary so that the broadcast is uniformly background, and I decided a while ago that that wasn't a good thing. The now unsatisfactory nature(to me) of the afternoon offering tended to provoke the same inattention while waiting for the advertised or wanted content to appear so that doesn't get turned on now; I don't want to risk possibly being unable to listen properly due to acquired bad habits.

[LMcD]

I might just about accept the last movement of K551 as the triumphant end to an unstructured selection of musical items, but not just after 10.00 a.m. as the first of 3 promised single movements from symphonies. Fortunately there is a choice of internet stations offering complete works, quite a few of which are new to me, to which I can listen properly.

[smittims]

I wonder sometimes how those inside R3 really feel about the changes. This morning we had the 'incredible lightness of touch' (read 'very fast and superficial') finale to a Haydn symphony , followed so quickly by a Tansman/de Visee arrangement that many listeners would have thought it part of the Haydn, then an 'incredible' piece by a Scandinavian composer, then one movement of a symphony by 'Bate Heuven' (sic) played so fast one wondered what the rest of it was like (we didn't hear).

I'm told Sarah Walker is an intelligent person with a knowledge of classical music. If I were in her position I'd be ashamed to be treating music in this way.

[LMcD]

I wonder sometimes how those inside R3 really feel about the changes. This morning we had the 'incredible lightness of touch' (read 'very fast and superficial') finale to a Haydn symphony , followed so quickly by a Tansman/de Visee arrangement that many listeners would have thought it part of the Haydn, then an 'incredible' piece by a Scandinavian composer, then one movement of a symphony by 'Bate Heuven' (sic) played so fast one wondered what the rest of it was like (we didn't hear).

I'm told Sarah Walker is an intelligent person with a knowledge of classical music. If I were in her position I'd be ashamed to be treating music in this way.

Thank you for confirming that I was wise to switch off when I did!

[Serial_Apologist]

I listened to a complete programme because when I say 'I don't listen to R3 now' people ask 'Well how can you criticise it?" There are various things about R3 which one can criticise without the need to listen e.g. the almost total absence of complete works of any length. But when I say I don't listen, I'm not counting the occasional forays to discover what other people are talking about and to find out whether they have a point.

On the day (last week) that I listened, his guest was a jazz musician whose name escapes me (I will check), but who chose mainly classical works. What struck me was that two musicians were talking together and said virtually not a word about 'music' or Music. It was almost entirely unenlightening chat. No discussion about classical music, no discussion about jazz. Pointless as far as I was concerned.

It was a few weeks ago: the jazz musician was Michael 'Bami' Rose.

It's not uncommon for jazz musicians to be their own worst advocates when it comes down to talking about their own music; they often leave a feeling that for them inspiration speaks for itself and often goes beyond explanation, so they talk instead about circumstances, associates past and present, the latest recording, but about influences in a very general way. References to models ("So-and-so gave me useful tips about breathing and embouchure, and not indulging in alcohol before performing") can be useful as one can then go the model in the hope that he or she is more articulate. Some jazzers are understandably suspicious of critics and choose to throw the interviewer off the scent, having been stung in the past by negative reviews.

[LMcD]

It's not uncommon for jazz musicians to be their own worst advocates when it comes down to talking about their own music; they often leave a feeling that for them inspiration speaks for itself and often goes beyond explanation, so they talk instead about circumstances, associates past and present, the latest recording, but about influences in a very general way. References to models ("So-and-so gave me useful tips about breathing and embouchure, and not indulging in alcohol before performing") can be useful as one can then go the model in the hope that he or she is more articulate. Some jazzers are understandably suspicious of critics and choose to throw the interviewer off the scent, having been stung in the past by negative reviews.

Humphrey Lyttleton was (IMVHO) not like that, thank goodness.