Presenters - Again

[french frank]

There are some lovely pieces there - I think that’s a well chosen selection for a Sunday morning .

It was a Saturday morning in fact. The list as given here disguises the fact that the Smetana is followed by Lucienne Delyle singing Le Paradis Perdu; the Chausson is followed by Jacques Brel; Bernstein is followed by Newman's American Beauty; Walton is followed by Robin Richards' Toompea; Britten followed by Kenny Wheeler, 19 pieces in all averaging about 5-6 minutes each. But I agree that if it's not to anyone's taste they don't have to listen.

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

Absolutely. The only way to get anything other than irritation from R3 is to be aware of the (sadly increasing) no-listen zones. Fortunately technology makes this very easy. No need to stray into areas of gabbling, gushing and the downright infantile

I dip in from time to time, more for research than in expectation. But when I’m driving to the Parkrun on Saturday morning, I’d rather listen to CFM than EA’s kindergarten tones, even with occasional bleeding chunk that might actually be reasonably interesting. Not pure pants - impure perhaps?

[oddoneout]

It was a Saturday morning in fact. The list as given here disguises the fact that the Smetana is followed by Lucienne Delyle singing Le Paradis Perdu; the Chausson is followed by Jacques Brel; Bernstein is followed by Newman's American Beauty; Walton is followed by Robin Richards' Toompea; Britten followed by Kenny Wheeler, 19 pieces in all averaging about 5-6 minutes each. But I agree that if it's not to anyone's taste they don't have to listen.

Afternoon Concert is heading towards that level of disconnectedness, the difference being that EA's Saturday morning selection isn't billed as a concert and there is usually some sort of link between apparently unconnected items even if not apparent from the listings , or if not then a bit of chat to provide a break between.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0016b75 had a Dowland Fantasia sandwiched between Dvorak 9 and Bartok Romanian Folk Dances - and the rest of it didn't exactly hang together either, despite Penny Gore's best efforts.

[gurnemanz]

I dip in from time to time, more for research than in expectation. But when I’m driving to the Parkrun on Saturday morning, I’d rather listen to CFM than EA’s kindergarten tones, even with occasional bleeding chunk that might actually be reasonably interesting. Not pure pants - impure perhaps?

I find even Radio 3 Lite preferable to CFM.

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

I find even Radio 3 Lite preferable to CFM.

I suppose it’s because CFM was always intended to be twee and trite, whereas Radio 3 aimed to be something better, before they lost the plot and started mimicking the weaker channel.

[french frank]

Afternoon Concert is heading towards that level of disconnectedness, the difference being that EA's Saturday morning selection isn't billed as a concert and there is usually some sort of link between apparently unconnected items even if not apparent from the listings

which, if it's important (to you/one) that there's some sort of link between pieces which follow each other, then it's important (to you/one). Does one expect the three or so pieces of every Afternoon Concert (as was) to be linked in some way?

or if not then a bit of chat to provide a break between.

Exactly. And if you have 20-odd pieces, you have 20-odd opportunities for 'a bit of chat' which for some people multiplies the irritation by a factor of about 4!

Although I'm happy to subscribe to the response, "If you don't like it, you don't have to listen," at best that's just a trite truism; and if you're happy with what's on offer it's a selfish "Well sucks to you, because I like it." Either way it avoids all discussion, as usual, as to whether the criticisms - and arguments - have some validity. Or, even if they do have some validity, "Nothing to be done about it so we'll have to put up with it." And one is either of that acquiescent disposition or one isn't.

[Ein Heldenleben]

Afternoon Concert is heading towards that level of disconnectedness, the difference being that EA's Saturday morning selection isn't billed as a concert and there is usually some sort of link between apparently unconnected items even if not apparent from the listings , or if not then a bit of chat to provide a break between.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0016b75 had a Dowland Fantasia sandwiched between Dvorak 9 and Bartok Romanian Folk Dances - and the rest of it didn't exactly hang together either, despite Penny Gore's best efforts.

I think the “disconnectedness “ is partly the product of two years of intermittent performances and constraints on recording. The number of live recordable concerts was so small at one stage the knock on effect is still being felt. Afternoon Concert was often a coherent programme performed by the same orchestra (or two ) - that format seems to have gone .

[gurnemanz]

I seem to be becoming more flexible in my dotage. I'm not so dogmatic about bleeding chunks as I used to be. Sometimes one might even be glad they are only playing part of a particular work. If you are disappointed when they just play one movement, it is easy to break off and play the whole work - nowadays possible via streamer if you don't own a recording.

Interconnectedness within programme lists can be rewarding but the more I think about it the more it seems not essential. Juxtaposition of totally contrasting pieces can be just as stimulating. The internet streaming channels I like have random playlists.

I have in the past chimed in complaining about the construction of the afternoon sequence of live performances but now mostly find myself enjoying it, sometimes listening on earphones while gardening

What I haven't revised my views on is excessive or redundant presenter chat and if it occurs it continues to be a reason to switch my choice of listening. It is one reason why I avoid CFM.

[french frank]

Trying to get back to the subject of the thread title from personal likes and dislikes, one of the points to make is the fact that Radio 3 has 'moved with the times' to make the presenter play a lead role in so many programmes. I say 'move with the times' because it seems to be another way to make Radio 3 merge in with what popular radio does. And whether it is people becoming 'more flexible in their dotage' or just generally being more sheeplike in going with the flow wherever it takes them, that has - as they say now - CONSEQUENCES. Which either bother you or which you don't notice at all.

I'm not sure that people welcome these changes or merely get used to them. As far as I understand BBC thinking, it seems to be "Plough on in spite of the grumblers: they'll get used to it." But I marvel at the ease with which people fall into the habit of talking about Liz, Petroc, Martin, Georgia, Clemmie as if they play an important role in their lives. Do they? If so, I marvel even more But then there are also those who seem to live in Ambridge with their real life friends the Archers.

[AuntDaisy]

Trying to get back to the subject of the thread title from personal likes and dislikes, one of the points to make is the fact that Radio 3 has 'moved with the times' to make the presenter play a lead role in so many programmes. I say 'move with the times' because it seems to be another way to make Radio 3 merge in with what popular radio does. And whether it is people becoming 'more flexible in their dotage' or just generally being more sheeplike in going with the flow wherever it takes them, that has - as they say now - CONSEQUENCES. Which either bother you or which you don't notice at all.

I'm not sure that people welcome these changes or merely get used to them. As far as I understand BBC thinking, it seems to be "Plough on in spite of the grumblers: they'll get used to it." But I marvel at the ease with which people fall into the habit of talking about Liz, Petroc, Martin, Georgia, Clemmie as if they play an important role in their lives. Do they? If so, I marvel even more But then there are also those who seem to live in Ambridge with their real life friends the Archers.

I really miss Peter Barker & Patricia Hughes' voices & presentation style, but I wouldn't dare call them Pete & Pat!

Andy Walmsley has a fascinating article on R3 presenters (including a youthful Donald Macleod photo, and a FOR3 comment)

http://andywalmsley.blogspot.com/2011/04/radio-3-announcers.html

I agree about the consequences - the BBC have just bricked our Alexa Echo Dot for radio listening (I've complained multiple times, as have many others).

[Serial_Apologist]

Trying to get back to the subject of the thread title from personal likes and dislikes, one of the points to make is the fact that Radio 3 has 'moved with the times' to make the presenter play a lead role in so many programmes. I say 'move with the times' because it seems to be another way to make Radio 3 merge in with what popular radio does. And whether it is people becoming 'more flexible in their dotage' or just generally being more sheeplike in going with the flow wherever it takes them, that has - as they say now - CONSEQUENCES. Which either bother you or which you don't notice at all.

I'm not sure that people welcome these changes or merely get used to them. As far as I understand BBC thinking, it seems to be "Plough on in spite of the grumblers: they'll get used to it." But I marvel at the ease with which people fall into the habit of talking about Liz, Petroc, Martin, Georgia, Clemmie as if they play an important role in their lives. Do they? If so, I marvel even more But then there are also those who seem to live in Ambridge with their real life friends the Archers.

Well said ff! Furthermore, for me the kind of change of mind that just goes along with whatever changes take place, chimes in with those folk who complain about continuing media coverage of Partygate. In the end such people are accommodating to a populist mindset that deems there's no point in questioning decision-making by those in power because there's nothing anybody can do about it, and in any case we shouldn't. How many of these people will one day wish they'd spoken out at the time?

[cloughie]

I really miss Peter Barker & Patricia Hughes' voices & presentation style, but I wouldn't dare call them Pete & Pat!

Andy Walmsley has a fascinating article on R3 presenters (including a youthful Donald Macleod photo, and a FOR3 comment)

http://andywalmsley.blogspot.com/2011/04/radio-3-announcers.html

I agree about the consequences - the BBC have just bricked our Alexa Echo Dot for radio listening (I've complained multiple times, as have many others).

Sorry you’ve lost me there - how do you mean bricked?

Peter Barker and Patricia Hughes’ professionalism beautifully compensated for Tom Crowe’s bloopers!

[cloughie]

Trying to get back to the subject of the thread title from personal likes and dislikes, one of the points to make is the fact that Radio 3 has 'moved with the times' to make the presenter play a lead role in so many programmes. I say 'move with the times' because it seems to be another way to make Radio 3 merge in with what popular radio does. And whether it is people becoming 'more flexible in their dotage' or just generally being more sheeplike in going with the flow wherever it takes them, that has - as they say now - CONSEQUENCES. Which either bother you or which you don't notice at all.

I'm not sure that people welcome these changes or merely get used to them. As far as I understand BBC thinking, it seems to be "Plough on in spite of the grumblers: they'll get used to it." But I marvel at the ease with which people fall into the habit of talking about Liz, Petroc, Martin, Georgia, Clemmie as if they play an important role in their lives. Do they? If so, I marvel even more But then there are also those who seem to live in Ambridge with their real life friends the Archers.

Are you trying to spoil my day ff? You mean the Archers are not real?

[french frank]

In the end such people are accommodating to a populist mindset that deems there's no point in questioning decision-making by those in power because there's nothing anybody can do about it, and in any case we shouldn't. How many of these people will one day wish they'd spoken out at the time?

I'm reminded of the commercial saying: "People don't complain: they just don't come back." Up to a point - and that may matter to commerce. But to me the interesting thing was their survey about why people don't complain - and the majority don't. It won't make any difference. I don't know who to complain to. I'll just be put down as a trouble-maker. I can't be bothered. It's not worth complaining about. And so on. The fact is, people DO get used to things and once people find just what they're expecting to find, they tolerate it (except the customers who 'don't come back').

Does this presenterism go back to the beginnings of popular music radio? The radio presenter becomes a (minor) celebrity, becoming part of the reason that people listen to their programme. Regarding Aunt Daisy's last, I don't remember either Peter Barker or Patricia Hughes, but I didn't get the impression that they were, or tried to be, 'friends'. I used to get quite nettled at being 'welcomed' to someone or other's programme - on the grounds that they were the ones coming into MY house, I wasn't going into theirs. Welcome to your house, french frank!

[AuntDaisy]

Sorry you’ve lost me there - how do you mean bricked?

Peter Barker and Patricia Hughes’ professionalism beautifully compensated for Tom Crowe’s bloopers!

Bricked is a technical term - it means a piece of complex electronics has been turned into a useless lump & no longer functions.
Bascially, it can no longer play any BBC radio stations - which was the only reason we got it. DAB & FM reception are terrible in our bit of the Forest of Dean.
The BBC are now insisting that "BBC Sounds App" users link their Alexa & BBC accounts - but it doesn't work for a lot of people, hence no radio. The App currently has over 7000 negative (1 star) reviews out of ~8800.

Bloopers can be quite entertaining, TC's included. I still smile at Patricia Hughes' nightgown story.