What are the big successes of For3?

[Dave2002]

Maybe time for some reflection/introspection.

For me the big success of For3 was the campaign to keep DAB on R3 at 192 kbps (minimum) for as long as possible, while some cloth eared people in the BBC wanted to lower it as far as possible and claimed we wouldn't be able to tell the difference.

On going battles may still have to be fought on the technical/delivery side - retention of FM and coverage of DAB maybe, though these issues may become less important as more people switch to internet delivery modes.

On the programming side we have had the timing of concerts, and I'm still somewhat miffed about the repeats of COTW not being staggered a week apart as they were a few years ago, which gave an extended period for some familiarisation with some less well known composers' works.

What do others think have been successes, and what issues are still worth pushing for?

[french frank]

Maybe time for some reflection/introspection.

For me the big success of For3 was the campaign to keep DAB on R3 at 192 kbps (minimum) for as long as possible, while some cloth eared people in the BBC wanted to lower it as far as possible and claimed we wouldn't be able to tell the difference.

That was when they launched the 24-hour looped trail for R5Live Sports Extra: "We're not actually broadcasting anything at the mo, but when we are, this is a placeholder. " This extracted an apology – the one occasion

On the programming side we have had the timing of concerts, and I'm still somewhat miffed about the repeats of COTW not being staggered a week apart as they were a few years ago, which gave an extended period for some familiarisation with some less well known composers' works.

Haven't pushed this with the new man. Might be possible to get a result.

Otherwise … we outlasted RW . And this forum?

[greenilex]

Campaigns are important, but I value the forum as the only kind of social media I indulge in...contacts which don't bite back (on the whole)and interlocutors who teach me lots about one of my favourite subjects.

[Dave2002]

Campaigns are important, but I value the forum as the only kind of social media I indulge in...contacts which don't bite back (on the whole)and interlocutors who teach me lots about one of my favourite subjects.

I agree with the sentiments expressed, but that does seem a drift away from the original aims of for3. The forum was intended, IMO, to help supporters of for3, but now it seems to exist in its own right and some of the objectives of for3 may have been lost. It was also developed as a forum when the BBC was withdrawing support for its own message boards - so in that way it was providing some support for R3 by providing an alternative service and presumably saving the BBC, and R3 in particular, some money and effort.

I"m not complaining about this, but merely pointing out the apparent change in emphasis. The connection with Radio 3 and/or moves to change, or sometimes to prevent change, in R3 is now sometimes tenuous.

[Richard Tarleton]

Campaigns are important, but I value the forum as the only kind of social media I indulge in...contacts which don't bite back (on the whole)and interlocutors who teach me lots about one of my favourite subjects.

very well put, my feelings also

[french frank]

The forum was intended, IMO, to help supporters of for3,

That is completely wrong. The forum was set up to replace the BBC Messageboards when the BBC dropped them; that is, to provide the same facility that the BBC was offering, free, to the public.

I've stressed until I cracked my skull that this is not a FoR3 forum. Most of the forumites are NOT FoR3 supporters and that has always been the case. If the forum is FoR3's biggest success, so be it. But it's no use asking forumites what FoR3 has achieved because they have no clue what we've been doing.

I should add that, like the BBC boards, it is intended to support Radio 3 and its existence will be reconsidered if it fails completely to do that. It is free at the point of use: that doesn't mean it costs nothing.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

That is completely wrong. The forum was set up to replace the BBC Messageboards when the BBC dropped them; that is, to provide the same facility that the BBC was offering, free, to the public.

I've stressed until I cracked my skull that this is not a FoR3 forum. Most of the forumites are NOT FoR3 supporters and that has always been the case. If the forum is FoR3's biggest success, so be it. But it's no use asking forumites what FoR3 has achieved because they have no clue what we've been doing.

I should add that, like the BBC boards, it is intended to support Radio 3 and its existence will be reconsidered if it fails completely to do that. It is free at the point of use: that doesn't mean it costs nothing.

I believe that I am not the only Forum Host who is not and has never been a member of FoR3 - at the time when I joined the Forum, I didn't feel particularly "friendly" towards the station - and not only didn't feel it was merely "OK", but should aspire to higher quality than that. I was also very pleased to see so many of my "cyber friends" from the BBC Messageboard here, too - and this social aspect of the Forum is one of the reasons that I believe it continues to flourish; something to be valued, and something that I greatly needed three years ago in particular (and several times in the time since owing to the aftermath of what happened then). I deeply regret the absence of salymap, gamba, john skelton, Chris Newman, amateur51, roehre, Anna and others who brought such distinctive "character" to the Forum, and whose contributions I much miss - their absence, and the very welcome presence of Forumistas who have joined more recently - in itself might contribute to any "change of focus" that might be felt.

When Radio 3 was producing programme content that frequently failed to engage the interest of many Forumistas, it is unsurprising that so many Threads appeared which had nothing to do with what was being broadcast - puzzles, gardening, sport ( ), birdwatching, cookery, jokes, our CD collections, what we're listening to in the absence of anything worth hearing on the radio ...

But I have noticed that recent posts have shown greater interest in what has been broadcast - and I think that reflects changes in attitudes towards R3 at the BBC, leading, with the appointment of Alan Davey, to the restoration of at least some of the content (and even perhaps some of the presentation) that its core audience have often expressed a wish for; and if the Forum, and FoR3 have contributed towards those changes in attitude, then that is a "big success" worth celebrating ... and pursuing! The social community that the Forum has created - and I have learnt so much about Jazz and World Music in particular from the Forum - is vitally important for its continued survival and success. But I think it is even more important that the core focus should be on Radio 3 - a collection of comments on what we, as individuals, have enjoyed and what makes us despair and/or angry. With a mixture of constructive criticism of what deters us from switching on (or causes us to switch off), ideas/suggestions of what we think might make for successful programming, and enthusiasm for what we've greatly enjoyed, the Forum can play an important role in the future of Radio 3.

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

I believe that I am not the only Forum Host who is not and has never been a member of FoR3 - at the time when I joined the Forum, I didn't feel particularly "friendly" towards the station - and not only didn't feel it was merely "OK", but should aspire to higher quality than that.

That's interesting. I felt exactly the same, but took the view that FoR3 was worth supporting, because its aims were to encourage Radio 3 to change direction. After many years of struggle, this does now seem to br happening to some extent. Many of us have always been "friends" of Radio 3, without liking its tone or content. The group itself has been having a positive effect, and is, therefore, worthy of our support,

[french frank]

I believe that I am not the only Forum Host who is not and has never been a member of FoR3

True - we are not Exclusive Brethren. That said, unlike the forum itself, with FoR3 there's nothing much to 'join' and we have no 'members'. We laid out what we were aiming for and how we aimed to approach it (by engaging with the BBC). People who wanted to support that, could contact us and say so: all we needed was a real name so that we could prove the existence of our 'support' if challenged - forumites could be half a dozen very busy posters, for all we knew or cared . So there were/are 'registered supporters' and members of the public who vaguely think we might be doing something useful. And other members of the public who think we aren't. And should be ATTACKING the BBC, not just criticising them politely behind the scenes.

After years and years getting little positive response from, er, Radio 3, the situation has changed and the current controller considers us 'useful' and wants us to continue.

To go back to Dave2002's example of the cut in the DAB bandwidth, we took it up with RW - thinking he would be concerned about his network being 'downgraded' and were simply told 'sorry, not his decision'. So we went to the Director of Radio and when she told us the sound engineers had assured her the difference could not be distinguished by the human ear, we printed off pages and pages of the messageboard complaints and comments, bunged them in the post to her, and she changed her mind. RW could have done that.

[Dave2002]

That is completely wrong. The forum was set up to replace the BBC Messageboards when the BBC dropped them; that is, to provide the same facility that the BBC was offering, free, to the public.

I've stressed until I cracked my skull that this is not a FoR3 forum. Most of the forumites are NOT FoR3 supporters and that has always been the case. If the forum is FoR3's biggest success, so be it. But it's no use asking forumites what FoR3 has achieved because they have no clue what we've been doing.

I should add that, like the BBC boards, it is intended to support Radio 3 and its existence will be reconsidered if it fails completely to do that. It is free at the point of use: that doesn't mean it costs nothing.

Thanks for the clarification.

I obviously mis inferred the relation between For3 and the For3/forum - at least in your opinion which I'll take to be more or less definitive - but intentions are sometime difficult to discern in constructs such as this one.

[Tevot]

Hello there,

I very much agree with Ferney above #7 and you also Frenchie - comment #6. I am a Friend of Radio 3 and I joined this Forum because I felt welcomed and so too others when the BBC inexcusably and to their eternal shame silenced its audience when they closed down the message boards. Thus I found myself back in 2010 here amongst people with similar and dissimilar interests thankful for the space, time, scope and freedom to air our views and to be ourselves. Since then I have been honoured to “meet” many here who have introduced me to books, poetry, music, films, recordings and bands that I was unaware of or in my callow immaturity had stupidly dismissed or overlooked. I can also quite genuinely say that the anecdotes and reminiscences by forumites – some name-checked by Ferney above have amused , stirred and moved me. For that I am thankful.

Best,

Tevot

[pastoralguy]

Hello there,

I very much agree with Ferney above #7 and you also Frenchie - comment #6. I am a Friend of Radio 3 and I joined this Forum because I felt welcomed and so too others when the BBC inexcusably and to their eternal shame silenced its audience when they closed down the message boards. Thus I found myself back in 2010 here amongst people with similar and dissimilar interests thankful for the space, time, scope and freedom to air our views and to be ourselves. Since then I have been honoured to “meet” many here who have introduced me to books, poetry, music, films, recordings and bands that I was unaware of or in my callow immaturity had stupidly dismissed or overlooked. I can also quite genuinely say that the anecdotes and reminiscences by forumites – some name-checked by Ferney above have amused , stirred and moved me. For that I am thankful.

Best,

Tevot

I agree! I've never felt my contributions to be belittled or patronised. And unlike, say, Norman Lebrecht's site, the vitriol is minute.

[Sir Velo]

On going battles may still have to be fought on the technical/delivery side - retention of FM and coverage of DAB maybe, though these issues may become less important as more people switch to internet delivery modes.

My view exactly. Listening to a broadcast the other night via the iplayer app, the ChordMojo I use for OTG listening was registering 24/192, so I think the FM/DAB debate may be old hat.

On the programming side we have had the timing of concerts, and I'm still somewhat miffed about the repeats of COTW not being staggered a week apart as they were a few years ago, which gave an extended period for some familiarisation with some less well known composers' works.

I can't get too excited about this with programmes now available for 28 days following broadcast. In fact, I'd ask why are they taking up valuable air time with a repeat when the original broadcast can be listened to at any time!

[Lat-Literal]

I believe that I am not the only Forum Host who is not and has never been a member of FoR3 - at the time when I joined the Forum, I didn't feel particularly "friendly" towards the station - and not only didn't feel it was merely "OK", but should aspire to higher quality than that. I was also very pleased to see so many of my "cyber friends" from the BBC Messageboard here, too - and this social aspect of the Forum is one of the reasons that I believe it continues to flourish; something to be valued, and something that I greatly needed three years ago in particular (and several times in the time since owing to the aftermath of what happened then). I deeply regret the absence of salymap, gamba, john skelton, Chris Newman, amateur51, roehre, Anna and others who brought such distinctive "character" to the Forum, and whose contributions I much miss - their absence, and the very welcome presence of Forumistas who have joined more recently - in itself might contribute to any "change of focus" that might be felt.

When Radio 3 was producing programme content that frequently failed to engage the interest of many Forumistas, it is unsurprising that so many Threads appeared which had nothing to do with what was being broadcast - puzzles, gardening, sport ( ), birdwatching, cookery, jokes, our CD collections, what we're listening to in the absence of anything worth hearing on the radio ...

But I have noticed that recent posts have shown greater interest in what has been broadcast - and I think that reflects changes in attitudes towards R3 at the BBC, leading, with the appointment of Alan Davey, to the restoration of at least some of the content (and even perhaps some of the presentation) that its core audience have often expressed a wish for; and if the Forum, and FoR3 have contributed towards those changes in attitude, then that is a "big success" worth celebrating ... and pursuing! The social community that the Forum has created - and I have learnt so much about Jazz and World Music in particular from the Forum - is vitally important for its continued survival and success. But I think it is even more important that the core focus should be on Radio 3 - a collection of comments on what we, as individuals, have enjoyed and what makes us despair and/or angry. With a mixture of constructive criticism of what deters us from switching on (or causes us to switch off), ideas/suggestions of what we think might make for successful programming, and enthusiasm for what we've greatly enjoyed, the Forum can play an important role in the future of Radio 3.

Very nice wording.

Thanks.

From my point of view, it all sits in the context of the future of all the BBC - especially radio - so that it isn't lost because of convenient opinions about public indifference.

[french frank]

I can't get too excited about this with programmes now available for 28 days following broadcast. In fact, I'd ask why are they taking up valuable air time with a repeat when the original broadcast can be listened to at any time!

I tend to think that, though it sounds a bit like a get-out for any programming which effectively stops people 'listening live' to anything.

There's a difference between listening On Demand because you've missed a programme or want to hear it again, and listening On Demand as a substitute for what's being played (e.g. listening to TTN while Breakfast or Essential Classics are on) or because a programme is on too late for live listening (listening to Drama on 3 at a time of one's own choosing when it was on at 10pm). This is the result of poor scheduling.

A large majority of listening is still 'live' or linear even if some people have moved over to creating their own schedule with the iPlayer.