Latest RAJARs

[edashtav]

Personally I'm glad not always having to give a reason - my reasons too often being that I've not completely thought through what I had wanted to say, and am ashamed at having to admit it!

Yed, indeed… from a Serial Apologist!

[french frank]

On reflection I don't have much to say

The R3 overall reach at 1.703m is very much at the lower end of what it has recorded in the past 10 years. In 2013 all radio reached 91% of the population; in these figures it reached 88% but that fluctuates and against that, actual reach as against the percentage is up by almost a million - due to population growth. My feeling is that local fluctuations (relating to a particular station) are largely due to local changes: e.g R2's drop is attributed to the departure of Ken Bruce, with an associated rise in Greatest Hits.

There's not a lot that can be reliably explained by R3's low figure (it was 1.995m in 2013). What I see is that Q on Q the Breakfast figure was virtually static this quarter (up to 622k from 620k), Y on Y it's down (from 696k to 622k). BUT, look back at 2013, the June figure was similar to 2023 at 615k; however, that was a very low firgure compared with Q on Q (704k) and Y on Y (723k). In that light Breakfast hasn't done that well over ten years, especially as the goal has apparently been to widen/extend the audience. And Classic FM seems to have lost proportionately even more.

I would explain this as the pressure of more and more popular music adding to the available 'casual listening' output. To take BBC 6 Music as an example, in June 2013 it recorded a reach of 1.792m; this year it was 2.669m. So it appears that R3's move to 'casual listening' in the end can't compete.

[antongould]

Idle thought from an idle person do proportionally more people listen to R3 on Sounds exclusively than they do other stations …… ?????

[french frank]

Idle thought from an idle person do proportionally more people listen to R3 on Sounds exclusively than they do other stations …… ?????

And what would it mean if they did?

[antongould]

And what would it mean if they did?

you tell me .. and oh thanks for the summary …..

[Pulcinella]

you tell me .. and oh thanks for the summary …..

Not wanting to put words in your mouth, but are you asking if more people (proportionately?) listen to R3 on Sounds via catch-up rather than live, compared to other stations, and are these numbers included?

[french frank]

you tell me .. and oh thanks for the summary …..

I can only speculate. If Radio 3 is listened to disproportionately more on Sounds rather than live, it might suggest for example that a higher proportion of listeners are deliberately avoiding a live programme and selecting something more to their taste: e.g. someone avoiding the lunchtime concert or Composer of the Week and listening to Essential Classics or Downtime Symphony; or someone avoiding Essential Classics or Downtime Symphony and listening to Composer of the Week or Through the Night.

If that is the reason (and it is mere speculation), it might indicate that Radio 3 is catering for an audience of great diversity in its musical tastes (everything from Dialogues des Carmélites to Happy Harmonies to Sound of Gaming) rather than conceiving of the station more traditionally as a home for a particular type of audience or for restricted styles of music (e.g.classical/jazz/world).

[Ein Heldenleben]

Idle thought from an idle person do proportionally more people listen to R3 on Sounds exclusively than they do other stations …… ?????

It’s impossible to tell because though the streaming figures are very precise they don’t tell the broadcasters how many are listening to each stream. The Rajar figures rely on a diary system where listeners log the number listening. The key thing to bear in mind with Rajar figures is that have a wide confidence interval. There’s some evidence that people claim to listen the Radio Four more than they actually do for instance.

[Serial_Apologist]

Yed, indeed… from a Serial Apologist!

On the news this morning, if I've got this right, it was reported that more and more listeners and viewers (presumably) over the age of 60 are now consuming broadcasts via Sounds, podcasts, iplayers and so on, rather than in real time. As regards french frank's hunch that this might indicate a broadening of tastes, for my own part I sometimes do prefer scrolling in order to avoid specific works of a given concert, say, if there is one piece of particular interest to me.

[french frank]

Not wanting to put words in your mouth, but are you asking if more people (proportionately?) listen to R3 on Sounds via catch-up rather than live, compared to other stations, and are these numbers included?

Perhaps I should add that that is what I understood ag to mean (and my reply refers to): Sounds as catch-up/on demand.

[antongould]

Not wanting to put words in your mouth, but are you asking if more people (proportionately?) listen to R3 on Sounds via catch-up rather than live, compared to other stations, and are these numbers included?

I was - excuse my Non-English

[french frank]

I was - excuse my Non-English

I don't believe the quarterly figures include Listen Again/On Demand/Catch Up. They do include all live listening on whatever device, so live on Sounds but not Listen Again on Sounds.

[AuntDaisy]

I can only speculate. If Radio 3 is listened to disproportionately more on Sounds rather than live, it might suggest for example that a higher proportion of listeners are deliberately avoiding a live programme and selecting something more to their taste: e.g. someone avoiding the lunchtime concert or Composer of the Week and listening to Essential Classics or Downtime Symphony; or someone avoiding Essential Classics or Downtime Symphony and listening to Composer of the Week or Through the Night.
If that is the reason (and it is mere speculation), it might indicate that Radio 3 is catering for an audience of great diversity in its musical tastes (everything from Dialogues des Carmélites to Happy Harmonies to Sound of Gaming) rather than conceiving of the station more traditionally as a home for a particular type of audience or for restricted styles of music (e.g.classical/jazz/world).

I wonder if SOUNDS tracks when listeners switch off or fast forward through a R3 programme?
It's also a shame that frequent cursing due to endless SOUNDS / Proms / R1 / R6... trailers isn't being recorded.
Both could generate some interesting statistics for Sam, Sam the Classic FM man.

[french frank]

I wonder if SOUNDS tracks when listeners switch off or fast forward through a R3 programme?
It's also a shame that frequent cursing due to endless SOUNDS / Proms / R1 / R6... trailers isn't being recorded.
Both could generate some interesting statistics for Sam, Sam the Classic FM man.

I daresay Sounds could track that, but it would be entirely separate from Rajar quarterly figures which are compiled from the listener diaries based on timeslots which indicate what was being listened to e.g Saturday 9.15 - 9.30 Radio 3 (that'll be Record Review then). The BBC has a pretty good idea of what listeners are listening to and who they are: they just keep the information sub rosa - as they are entitled to do.

[AuntDaisy]

I daresay Sounds could track that, but it would be entirely separate from Rajar quarterly figures which are compiled from the listener diaries based on timeslots which indicate what was being listened to e.g Saturday 9.15 - 9.30 Radio 3 (that'll be Record Review then). The BBC has a pretty good idea of what listeners are listening to and who they are: they just keep the information sub rosa - as they are entitled to do.

Thanks, that makes sense. Although I don't like the idea of Auntie knowing who I am! Or what I'm listening to.

(Your sub rosa prompted a G&S earworm "One Latin word, one Greek remark, And one that's French.")