Latest RAJARs

[Ein Heldenleben]

As far as I know, you have to become a subscriber at vast cost; you then have access to a huge amount of data, most of which you don't want. And it isn't that easy to get at what you do want. At FoR3, we never thought it was practical - or worth the money - to subscribe. Even if we'd had the money …

The 'breakfast shows' are the only ones where the figures are published - for national stations e.g. R3. Occasionally some snippets of information are embedded in BBC documents, plus there may be other sources which can be helpful. I understand why the BBC, in particular, isn't keen to release figures. If you take Radio 3, for example, the numbers listening are often so small that a population sample which represents the entire 15+ population doesn't provide reliable results. Though the BBC has them.

Thanks - didn't realise the Breakfast shows were publicly available . I did notice that one or two R3 figures were up year on year e.g total hours and share in TSA.

[french frank]

Thanks - didn't realise the Breakfast shows were publicly available . I did notice that one or two R3 figures were up year on year e.g total hours and share in TSA.

On the RAJAR Home page, go to menu Listening figures > Market trends from dropdown. There's a pdf for Breakfast Show Listening for National and London stations. Includes the figures for CFM as well. Yes, the listening hours are okay, in spite of a drop in reach - hence my assumption that it's the popular morning shows that are keeping their audience. So who's losing?

[Lat-Literal]

On the RAJAR Home page, go to menu Listening figures > Market trends from dropdown. There's a pdf for Breakfast Show Listening for National and London stations. Includes the figures for CFM as well. Yes, the listening hours are okay, in spite of a drop in reach - hence my assumption that it's the popular morning shows that are keeping their audience. So who's losing?

I still toy with the idea of cutting BBC local radio stations by half, making that strand BBC regional radio - it is halfway there already - and using the money that is saved for an R3 Extra. In reality, I don't think it could be done in the absence of a Radio 2 Extra. There might, therefore, be something to be said for making it a new Radio 2/3 Extra which would enable the figures to be bumped up there as it would be a viable competitor with CFM etc. Radio 3 would be freed up from the likes of Essential Classics and its movie music shows. Perhaps even Sean Rafferty could go on to 2/3 along with, say Claudia Winkelman's Arts Show. The figures for a purified R3 would be even lower than they are now but the new arrangement could provide additional justification for its existence in that at least it would as the more expensive product with better ingredients hang on the coat tails of the bigger figures for 2/3 Extra.

[Lat-Literal]

Less ambitiously, there are many minor tweaks they could make. The titles of the programmes for a start. "Lunchtime Recital" is a clear concept. "Lunchtime Concert" is not. Worse, "Afternoon Concert" says nothing that is eye catching. I'm still for six month seasons there - one with country or area of the world (Mondays - France : Afternoon Concert, Tuesdays - Latin America : Afternoon Concert etc) and the other with music forms (Mondays - Symphonies : Afternoon Concert, Tuesdays : Brass : Afternoon Concert etc). That is to say, to have something which orientates people time and schedule wise and which stands out. They also need a greater sense of occasion more often. The Proms is not enough. Latch it on to what people understand from their travels. An opera season actually from Italy. Choral events which accentuate the cathedrals they have visited. The sort of excitement there used to be in the 1960s of stateside performances but this time from the perspective of many people having been near or to the buildings concerned. As a "brand" - horrible word - it needs colour built around it, ie in its architecture. That was in many ways what it had years ago although it wasn't necessarily understood as such at the time. And it need not dilute the content.

[french frank]

In reality, I don't think it could be done in the absence of a Radio 2 Extra.

There already is a Radio 2 Extra: it's called Radio 6 Music … same management.

[Lat-Literal]

There already is a Radio 2 Extra: it's called Radio 6 Music … same management.

Oh no - same management perhaps but that is all - I will comment but let us hear first from some other people.

Adrian says : I would have much preferred it if they had announced a station that was like the old radio 2 playing a lot of easy listening music and album tracks, much of it not heard elsewhere , from the last 70 years but without all that current chart stuff and hits from the 80’s and 90’s Radio 2 now plays which makes it sound like just another pop station a lot of the time to me these days.

Mr Boltar says: If Radio 3 actualy played more music instead of boatloads of pretentious waffle in an attempt to turn it into an arts Radio 4 probably more people would listen.

Christopher Evans says : Great news for Classical music lovers. Now they have the choice of 2 great stations Scala or Classic FM. Also good to see another National station giving us the best presenters.

Kevin Poole says : I hope that Scala plays a wider range of music than the generally repetitive stuff churned out by Classic FM. We have Lyric FM here in Ireland, great quality and a better library. It is nice to hear something different which sparks interest in a different area. For example, when did you last hear anything by Josef Suk on Classic FM? His brilliant Scherzo Fantastico is 12 minutes long and won’t be heard on Classic FM as they won’t play anything of any length that upsets their advertising schedule. Scala, please take note.

Yes - they are discussing Scala.

[teamsaint]

There already is a Radio 2 Extra: it's called Radio 6 Music … same management.

Same dreary daytime dentists waiting room fare.

[Lat-Literal]

In my view, 6 Music is more of a post Peel style Radio 1 than any form of Radio 2, albeit more commercialised as is that genre for the younger generations.

Whatever the BBC and commercial stations believe, and it is different, these are the significant strands of music radio:

A. Youth : clubbing, rap and 21st Century pop - leanings towards British ethnicity.
B. The modern family : wide range of pop and rock music with a fair slice of 21st Century.
C. Classical music - the full works.
D. Popular classical music in bite sized chunks, a bit of light jazz and easy listening.
E. The easy listening end of pop music : mainly 20th Century. Includes light rock n roll, MOR and soul.
F. Specialisms - indie, folk, jazz, world, reggae, blues, country : cross-era, cross-generation.
G. The rock end of pop music : mainly 20th Century. Some crossover into indie but it isn't huge.

Radio 1 does A while Radio 1 Extra has a more clubby feel with some more emphasis on ethnicity. Radio 2 does B and a bit of F. It also segues slightly into E. Radio 3 tries to do C but does C and D and a bit of F. 6 Music does F to an extent but its emphasis is very much on the indie. Other specialisms are often found elsewhere. It also segues ever so slightly into G.

BBC National Radio has largely abandoned E and G. They are mainly 20th C and as yesterday's news it feels that they do not require a full service. I accept this, albeit with reluctance. The commercial stations cover these bases separately and actually where you will find a combination of the two on BBC radio is at the local level so they are there. Equally, I accept that R1, R1 Extra and Radio 2 are the stations they are in the daytime. So far as I am concerned, they might as well go the whole hog with it if the specialist shows are placed elsewhere.

So this leaves C, D and F. Take out D from R2 and R3 and stick it in R2/3 Extra. Free up Radio 3 for C. And then you have to decide what to do with F which is the only category other than C in which people have in their enthusiasms an almost puritanical, studious approach to music although a significant chunk of the younger indie audience for 6 Music is more casual. Move the Blues and Reggae from R2 to 6 Music. Keep the proper Jazz on R3. World Music - either R3 ongoing or across to 6 Music but given the history I favour the former.

I doubt Folk would sit in 6M - or on a new Radio2/3 Extra. Move that from R2 to R3. With these changes, there would be plenty of room on R3 to put in one or two hours a week of folk music. Country - trickier. If they want modern and autotune, as they probably would do, keep it in R2. If it is roots based, in the R3 folk programme. If it is MOR, onto Radio 2/3. Even now, I look at "the plan" and think that there isn't sadly the sort of thing which would combine Stax like soul with other roots based stuff as there should be - but you can't have it all.

[french frank]

Andrew did zoom back to tell me the Breakfast reach last quarter was 612k not 621k as I stated earlier (we discussed whether there was a numeric equivalent to dyslexic ). It shaves a few thousand off the Breakfast reach but doesn't alter the likelihood that Radio 3 does best (in terms of reach) with its CFM morning programmes; but, notwithstanding, the overall reach is very poor (lowest Q4 reach since comparable records began, and only the second time overall reach has been below 1.9m).

In my view, 6 Music is more of a post Peel style Radio 1 than any form of Radio 2, albeit more commercialised as is that genre for the younger generations.

I'm sure all you say is correct, Lat. But 6 Music was set up as the digital sister station to Radio 2. The pop music stations, R1 and R2, both got digital Xtra stations (as did R4). I really can't see that a case could be made for Radio 2 getting a second one - regardless of what its content is. It was intended, according to the then Director of Radio, to be for listeners who were 'too old for Radio 1 and too young for Radio 2'. I dont think it has stuck to the remit originally proposed by the BBC - on the basis of which it was granted its licence. But when the independent review was published, it was decided that although it wasn't what had been proposed, it was sufficiently 'different' from other stations to merit continuing.

[Lat-Literal]

Andrew did zoom back to tell me the Breakfast reach last quarter was 612k not 621k as I stated earlier (we discussed whether there was a numeric equivalent to dyslexic ). It shaves a few thousand off the Breakfast reach but doesn't alter the likelihood that Radio 3 does best (in terms of reach) with its CFM morning programmes; but, notwithstanding, the overall reach is very poor (lowest Q4 reach since comparable records began, and only the second time overall reach has been below 1.9m).

I'm sure all you say is correct, Lat. But 6 Music was set up as the digital sister station to Radio 2. The pop music stations, R1 and R2, both got digital Xtra stations (as did R4). I really can't see that a case could be made for Radio 2 getting a second one - regardless of what its content is. It was intended, according to the then Director of Radio, to be for listeners who were 'too old for Radio 1 and too young for Radio 2'. I dont think it has stuck to the remit originally proposed by the BBC - on the basis of which it was granted its licence. But when the independent review was published, it was decided that although it wasn't what had been proposed, it was sufficiently 'different' from other stations to merit continuing.

Thank you French Frank for your comments. My assessment is that it most definitely does not stick to the original remit as you outline. There is no natural progression age or generation wise from R1 and R1X to 6M. The styles are entirely different. I can't remember when the station began. Perhaps it was a bit different then but my guess is the remit was already based on an old concept of R1 as it once had been. The teenager who goes out a lot socially and then settles down to have a family is more likely to go from R1 to R2, if anywhere at all. The teenager who has 6M leanings may well on reaching 30, 40 or 50 still be with 6M unless her/his offspring want R1 and they sort of compromise, when they are really forced to, on R2.

I could be a bit crass on this to hammer the point home while recognising it is horribly stereotypical.

As a trend - 6 Music - white, male, with qualifications.

R1/R1X - much less so.

[cloughie]

I think that the BBC's music policy is fatally flawed and working towards output which in trying to attract younger audience who are not interested are alienating what audiences they are. There appears to be HQ decisions which dictate what music is played on national and local radio - we know here about the mess that is morning Radio 3, but it appears that on other music output including on local radio the scope of what is played and the guidelines to producers and presenters leave them little scope on what is played - mainstream pop music, and very little before 1970. I have checked playlists on Radio Cornwall and this is confirmed. Bearing in mind that 61% of local radio listeners are over 55, I think there must be more than a few who dislike the music played but like the presenters and local nature of programme content.

[french frank]

My assessment is that it most definitely does not stick to the original remit as you outline. There is no natural progression age or generation wise from R1 and R1X to 6M.

I don't think I mentioned the remit as such. The target age seems pretty much as intended: R2 average age abt 50, 6 Music average age 40 and I'd put the R1 average age at about 30+ (they seem to be a bit coy about publishing this - but I'd put it as slightly above the target 15-29 group). The independent government review of 2004 stated: "The audience targeted is 25 to 44 “music lovers”, falling between the core demographic audiences of Radio 1 (15-24) [sic - at that time] and Radio 2 (35+). However, it defines its audience more by attitude than by age."

The remit was supposed to be substantially BBC archive material of music, especially if it didn't make the charts when it was first released but which had a sort of 'cult' following. I think there was a limit placed on newly released music. The report (2004):

The DCMS Conditions [for granting the licence]:

o The service will offer popular music from the 1970s to 1990s.
o In particular, the service must concentrate on major artists and material
which do not receive much radio support elsewhere in the market place.
o The service must have a strong strand of live music, as well as speech output through news, features and documentaries.

Independent review assessment:

"However, its commercial critics are right when they point to the fact that the DCMS Conditions suggested that 6 Music was intended to be more of an archive station than it has in fact turned out to be. The 6 Music team itself admits that as the station has developed, so its original description does not quite match its achievement."

Market impact:

"Playing more contemporary music has brought 6 Music into more direct competition with Xfm than was originally envisaged, although 6 Music is targeted at an older demographic (25 to 45 rather than 15 to 34). […] However, it is important that there is clear predictability in the remit and that the DCMS Conditions represent the identity of 6 Music more accurately than they do at present."

[Lat-Literal]

I don't think I mentioned the remit as such. The target age seems pretty much as intended: R2 average age abt 50, 6 Music average age 40 and I'd put the R1 average age at about 30+ (they seem to be a bit coy about publishing this - but I'd put it as slightly above the target 15-29 group). The independent government review of 2004 stated: "The audience targeted is 25 to 44 “music lovers”, falling between the core demographic audiences of Radio 1 (15-24) [sic - at that time] and Radio 2 (35+). However, it defines its audience more by attitude than by age."

The remit was supposed to be substantially BBC archive material of music, especially if it didn't make the charts when it was first released but which had a sort of 'cult' following. I think there was a limit placed on newly released music. The report (2004):

The DCMS Conditions [for granting the licence]:

o The service will offer popular music from the 1970s to 1990s.
o In particular, the service must concentrate on major artists and material
which do not receive much radio support elsewhere in the market place.
o The service must have a strong strand of live music, as well as speech output through news, features and documentaries.

Independent review assessment:

"However, its commercial critics are right when they point to the fact that the DCMS Conditions suggested that 6 Music was intended to be more of an archive station than it has in fact turned out to be. The 6 Music team itself admits that as the station has developed, so its original description does not quite match its achievement."

Market impact:

"Playing more contemporary music has brought 6 Music into more direct competition with Xfm than was originally envisaged, although 6 Music is targeted at an older demographic (25 to 45 rather than 15 to 34). […] However, it is important that there is clear predictability in the remit and that the DCMS Conditions represent the identity of 6 Music more accurately than they do at present."

There is a lot here for which thanks.

I will need to consider it carefully.

First, a couple of things.

From what I gather - I hardly ever listened to it - Chris Evans was - and presumably Zoe Ball now is - all about the school run. Mum and Dad and the kids. Ditto teatime, especially now with Mayo gone. Now I know that people are having their children at an older age these days but an average age of 50 is somewhat stretching it. Furthermore, are we to assume in the average ages that are sent out that any individual under 15 isn't counted?

Next, re 6M, by 2004 the times were already a-changing - actually, it was the year that John Peel died at the age of 65 - but the music/radio/social environments, all interconnected, were a very long way away from those in 2019. Plus 25-45 then is now 40-60 (I was 41 and am now 56) so I think we might look at the 25-45s now as well as younger. In the current day, the age 25 is a weird starting point. I will broaden it out a bit shortly.

(I do wonder what planet the BBC is on sometimes - Pete Murray and Jimmy Young were probably playing to an average age of 50-55 on R2 in the mid 1970s)

[cloughie]

I don't think I mentioned the remit as such. The target age seems pretty much as intended: R2 average age abt 50, 6 Music average age 40 and I'd put the R1 average age at about 30+ (they seem to be a bit coy about publishing this - but I'd put it as slightly above the target 15-29 group). The independent government review of 2004 stated: "The audience targeted is 25 to 44 “music lovers”, falling between the core demographic audiences of Radio 1 (15-24) [sic - at that time] and Radio 2 (35+). However, it defines its audience more by attitude than by age."

The remit was supposed to be substantially BBC archive material of music, especially if it didn't make the charts when it was first released but which had a sort of 'cult' following. I think there was a limit placed on newly released music. The report (2004):

The DCMS Conditions [for granting the licence]:

o The service will offer popular music from the 1970s to 1990s.
o In particular, the service must concentrate on major artists and material
which do not receive much radio support elsewhere in the market place.
o The service must have a strong strand of live music, as well as speech output through news, features and documentaries.

Independent review assessment:

"However, its commercial critics are right when they point to the fact that the DCMS Conditions suggested that 6 Music was intended to be more of an archive station than it has in fact turned out to be. The 6 Music team itself admits that as the station has developed, so its original description does not quite match its achievement."

Market impact:

"Playing more contemporary music has brought 6 Music into more direct competition with Xfm than was originally envisaged, although 6 Music is targeted at an older demographic (25 to 45 rather than 15 to 34). […] However, it is important that there is clear predictability in the remit and that the DCMS Conditions represent the identity of 6 Music more accurately than they do at present."

All this says that no one cares two hoots about over 65s.

[Lat-Literal]

I don't think I mentioned the remit as such. The target age seems pretty much as intended: R2 average age abt 50, 6 Music average age 40 and I'd put the R1 average age at about 30+ (they seem to be a bit coy about publishing this - but I'd put it as slightly above the target 15-29 group). The independent government review of 2004 stated: "The audience targeted is 25 to 44 “music lovers”, falling between the core demographic audiences of Radio 1 (15-24) [sic - at that time] and Radio 2 (35+). However, it defines its audience more by attitude than by age."

The remit was supposed to be substantially BBC archive material of music, especially if it didn't make the charts when it was first released but which had a sort of 'cult' following. I think there was a limit placed on newly released music. The report (2004):

The DCMS Conditions [for granting the licence]:

o The service will offer popular music from the 1970s to 1990s.
o In particular, the service must concentrate on major artists and material
which do not receive much radio support elsewhere in the market place.
o The service must have a strong strand of live music, as well as speech output through news, features and documentaries.

Independent review assessment:

"However, its commercial critics are right when they point to the fact that the DCMS Conditions suggested that 6 Music was intended to be more of an archive station than it has in fact turned out to be. The 6 Music team itself admits that as the station has developed, so its original description does not quite match its achievement."

Market impact:

"Playing more contemporary music has brought 6 Music into more direct competition with Xfm than was originally envisaged, although 6 Music is targeted at an older demographic (25 to 45 rather than 15 to 34). […] However, it is important that there is clear predictability in the remit and that the DCMS Conditions represent the identity of 6 Music more accurately than they do at present."

Until Year Zero

Here goes.

You probably know most of this anyway.

In the mid 1950s, teenagers were invented. Earlier there was not a marketed identity such as the one which then arose. You were either a child or an adult. Rock n Roll. Next, the Beatles and the Stones from 1962-63. Motown - mainly black - from the United States shortly afterwards. A lot of other things in parallel including a British version of rock based upon old American blues. There's Carnaby Street for fashion. Then, Sgt Pepper in 1967 is where the boat is really pushed out. It is a kaleidoscope which represents the myriad of ways in which popular music has already been taken. It also divides opinion as some only like "Yesterday" but find the new stuff altogether too remote. Dear old Auntie misses most of it. It is all "Two Way Family Favourites" on the Light Programme. Perry Como and Andy Williams. That isn't so ridiculous when such people also continue to have big chart hits and are joined by a range of younger artists who are easy on the ear. You can as writers include Burt Bacharach and Jimmy Webb among the best of them. Still, pirate boats are sailed to address the obvious gaps until Anthony Wedgwood Benn clamps down on them. The trade off in 1967 is Radio 1 which is introduced in a revamp of BBC National Radio with a 2 and a 3 and a 4.

The Beatles are important here not only because of their place in British music and history but in view of the way that they themselves were perceived to have progressed. Remember that U2 and similar bands are coming up to 40. The Beatles had just eight years of hits. Like it or not, they were beginning to suggest that popular music at the rockier end of the spectrum could be seen not as trite but as an art form. Invention. Sophistication. Maturity. Even superiority. These were unspoken concepts which were attached to the rock label. By the early to mid 1970s, albeit via heavy rock which I won't go into here as it muddies the waters, it is onto prog rock and the more pared down art rock and even rock preferably with symphonic orchestra if you were Rick Wakeman. That was largely the stuff of albums. Radio 1 was largely the stuff of singles. It was very much in sync with the daytime pirates who in turn had picked up on the angles of American radio in the late 1950s and early 1960s. Jingles. Daft banter. Bite sized chunks. But in truth there had been a rockist sort of fringe even on the pirates in the late 1960s with the likes of John Peel's hippy "The Perfumed Garden". From the outset, it was oppositional to mainstream pop and arguably it saw itself above it.

Whatever the opponents said of each other and not without justification, the crossover in both directions was considerable. The aforementioned "Yesterday" is a good example. "God Only Knows" by the Beach Boys is another. Diana Ross on Motown too. These were hardly things that were likely to upset anyone just because of an age difference. The Carpenters arrived at the start of the 1970s. You get the gist. Meanwhile, various strands of music which were either seen as historically fogeyish or had never been introduced to British audiences were also invigorated with supposed sophistication. Folk was rocked up. Reggae was brought in by Chris Blackwell who was arguably first and foremost a rockist. Motown went onto a political train in 1971 with Marvin Gaye's "What's Going On" in which rockist approaches to albums were clearly identifiable. In the sheer rapidity of what was taking place - unlike now, every year sounded different from the last year and extremely different from the year or two before it - meaningful age cohorts were not on 19 or 20 year spans. They were on spans of three years. And we are not talking here about the difference between age 36 and 33 or age 26 and 23 but age 15 and 12 or age 13 and 10. Radio 1 was throwing out T Rex and Slade and Sweet and the Glitter Band for the 10 and 12 year olds. Those at 15 or 18 were not necessarily listening to the radio but rather to albums by the forerunners to Genesis and Yes.

Following the introduction of BBC Local Radio in the very early 1970s, Chris Chataway wanted commercial competitors. Free markets. Thatcherism long before Thatcherism. All seen as very daring. So daring that it could only be done modestly which meant that it should begin on a local rather than a national level and only then by being strictly under the helm of establishment figures. They were there to reassure a small c conservative public that it wasn't to be the end of the world. Hence, it was Richard Attenborough at Capital Radio in 1973. And in the first couple of years, it was mayhem. No one knew where or how to pitch it musically. It couldn't be a narrow re-running of the kids' stuff on Radio 1, nor would it seem vibrant if it was popular with the pre rock n roll old fogeys aged 40 or 50 who listened to Radio 2. As for prog rock, it would turn off almost everyone apart from people in their mid to late teens. But by 1976, it had settled into a sort of American FM pattern. The melodic end of rock. The sophisticated end of pop. It was hugely successful and undoubtedly viewed as a transition from Radio 1 for a very narrow generation of people. Mine. The other ILR stations copied the blueprint to an extent. Briefly, it seemed like the future. A combination of US Radio as it had been a couple of decades earlier and as it had become with only a slight hint of the pirates and a nod towards British localism. Then came 1977 and everything changed.