Review of Radio 3

[french frank]

the average life expectancy around these parts can not be that long .... perhaps if we sought to formulate what R3 should be after we are gone and why, that might make for a coherent and credible position? presently we are dismissed as old fogeys wanting our youth back .... [guilty as charged in my case]

It does frequently seem to me that whereas many of us agree on what we dislike about the present Radio 3, we should soon fall out if we started to say what should replace it.

For instance (and to exaggerate the views stated in another thread), I would consider 12 years of masochistically beating at the BBC's doors completely wasted if R3 ended up as round-the clock Through The Night. But I suspect that there are some who would like exactly that

[DracoM]

For me, what has so markedly changed is the MIX:
1. excellent talks / discussions on major topics eg Brains Trust [such progs now almost entirely banished to R4 and edited / packaged to avoid poor geriatrics having to work hard while listening]
2. drama at a reasonable hour.
3. concert interval talks almost always on one of the works programmed
4. Children's progs - eg David Munrow
5. Detailed discussions and evaluations of music both per se and on CD etc. CDR does it OK, but nothing like to the weekly depth it used to have. Ssssh! Shock Horror - Ahem - R3 takings its responsibilities as an educative 'music' platform seriously?? Because how the heck can you grow the next R3 generation when you do not provide cleverly worked educative ways into the environment? Circling warhorses round the paddock will only get you so far.
6. Presentation that is not chocolate box jolly, tweeting, facebooking, trailing every 15 or twenty minutes or less- in effect trying to bully R3 into behaving like R2. IMO, R3 took a major wrong turn in adopting such trivialising methodology.

I would take a small bet that more people relish TTN simply because the current R3 presentation packaging can be so emetic that in self-defence, one takes to the internet - even, FGS, in a foreign language. Listen to Jonathan Swain, John Shea, Martin Handley, Verity Sharpe, even Jill Anderson, and you KNOW R3 does NOT need to be all SMP, CBH, Rafferty, Sarah Walker, who between them largely and wearisomely dominate the entire R3 daylight hours.

[gurnemanz]

For me, what has so markedly changed is the MIX:
1. excellent talks / discussions on major topics eg Brains Trust [such progs now almost entirely banished to R4 and edited / packaged to avoid poor geriatrics having to work hard while listening]
2. drama at a reasonable hour.
3. concert interval talks almost always on one of the works programmed
4. Children's progs - eg David Munrow
5. Detailed discussions and evaluations of music both per se and on CD etc. CDR does it OK, but nothing like to the weekly depth it used to have. Ssssh! Shock Horror - Ahem - R3 takings its responsibilities as an educative 'music' platform seriously?? Because how the heck can you grow the next R3 generation when you do not provide cleverly worked educative ways into the environment? Circling warhorses round the paddock will only get you so far.
6. Presentation that is not chocolate box jolly, tweeting, facebooking, trailing every 15 or twenty minutes or less- in effect trying to bully R3 into behaving like R2. IMO, R3 took a major wrong turn in adopting such trivialising methodology.

• I would take a small bet that more people relish TTN simply because the current R3 presentation packaging can be so emetic that in self-defence, one takes to the internet - even, FGS, in a foreign language. Listen to Jonathan Swain, John Shea, Martin Handley, Verity Sharpe, even Jill Anderson, and you KNOW R3 does NOT need to be all SMP, CBH, Rafferty, Sarah Walker, who between them largely and wearisomely dominate the entire R3 daylight hours.

• I want music on R3 and prefer talk and drama to be on Radio Four. I often listen to Afternoon Drama rather than R3. The Brains Trust was probably excellent but ceased transmission in 1961 when I was 12 and more concerned with Radio Luxembourg, so I cannot really comment.
• I thought Pied Piper was great even though I was an adult when it was on (and not yet a parent). As far as I remember, it was the only programme of its ilk which R3 has ever attempted and suspect it would not have existed without David Munrow's infectious personality and enthusiasm as the key element.
• I agree about interval talks and also miss music appreciation content such as Talking about Music with Antony Hopkins and Interpretations on Record.
• Unnecessary blah is a bane which makes me turn off or increasingly not turn on, but I can't understand people like the Telegraph letter writer linked to above who claims to have given up Radio 3. There is much that is well worth listening to.
• TTN has the drawback of being on when I am asleep and I can't see much point in bothering to record it when there is plenty available during the day from various sources to keep me happy + backlog of CDs I have yet to do justice to.

I am generally wary about becoming starry-eyed about how much better things used be. (A German phrase, "Die Erinnerung verklärt" - memory transfigures, comes to mind.) I don't listen that much to R3, partly because of presentation style of some programmes but mainly because there is so much else around. I listen to the live concerts - evening and especially lunchtime + CDR and Private Passions and anything else that takes my fancy.

[kernelbogey]

[...]For instance (and to exaggerate the views stated in another thread), I would consider 12 years of masochistically beating at the BBC's doors completely wasted if R3 ended up as round-the clock Through The Night. But I suspect that there are some who would like exactly that

Yes - that is an exaggeration of what I, for one, suggested elsewhere; albeit on the rather flippantly titled 'What do we want?' thread. There's a difference between what I might want and what I think would work for the station and meet with my approval!

TTN exhibits the merits of a more traditional R3 style of presentation in which the music takes precedence over presenter fandango. I don't like being talked at in the morning, which is why I don't listen to Today (not since Jack de Manio left, anyway). I suggested (whimsically) extending TTN to noon (as some here do by means of recording and replaying it). I would certainly like the best elements of TTN's style to govern broadcasting at least until 0900, perhaps 1000: brief, informative announcements and back-announcements, with room for some complete, shorter works (classical symphonies for example), and fewer news bulletins.

[french frank]

Yes - that is an exaggeration of what I, for one, suggested elsewhere; albeit on the rather flippantly titled 'What do we want?' thread. There's a difference between what I might want and what I think would work for the station and meet with my approval!

I agree with all you say, and even if the answer is not to introduce 'Round The Clock', TTN remains a model for what that kind of, music-based, classical programme should be.

You mention Jack de Manio as being listenable; others here would mention the ineffable Skellers as making an unlistenable programme better. The BBC and Radio 3 have their 'challenges' and it's a question of finding the best possible solutions. As for much of Radio 3's output in the last 10-15 years, there are those who would say it had found the worst.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

I wouldn't want full-time Through the Night-type programming, either. But I would prefer it to the presentation style that's used between 6:00 am - Noon (and which bleeds into Afternoon on 3, too).

[DracoM]

Yes, the problem is that many have become so squeamish about the presentation style 6 a.m.- Noon and bits afterwards, that it leads them to wish for dignified silence and reticence, which may make people long for a TTN style platform. My own feeling FWIW is that the MIX of intelligent programmed speech and music, linked and integrated, is what we are missing.

As said upthread, R3 has painted itself into Marmite Corner with the style it's required of its presenters 6 -Noon. And talking and watching these threads, more and more are simply choosing the internet / digital platforms option as an escape.

I have real issues with the safe wallpaper in daylight hours. Mid 18th - earlyish 20th and that 's it. Very little of the adventure that is found on internet stations, where often they do a mix of core repertoire, whole works, chamber works, and out of left field stuff that is refreshing. Much of R3's programming is driven by safety, laziness, paranoia - or so it seems - to avoid being labelled as elitist, or inaccessible, or....well, you get the drift. In so doing, they have raised dullness ot the level of a major product. R3 as a sort of Tesco's?

Problem is that every so often there are gems, unrivalled, unequalled. There are terrific presenters. There are ideas. And then they do one of the ghastly 'immersion' stunts which sends me back to my own resources to escape.

The level of thoughtful and ongoing 'education' in the widest sense of the R3 audience seems diminishing by the month. RW, I fear, had taken that slimming to a new level. The new Controller MUST revisit the place of programming that endeavours to educate - lots of intelligent and engaging ways that can be done, but NOT to do it is to fail to bring in / on the new R3 generations. At the mo, I sense no willingness to take on that responsibility whatsoever, and thus they are reneging on a mighty part of the rem it, AFAICS.

[bb]

We are not so sure!

[Flay]

On the R4 Feedback programme of 24/10/14 Roger Bolton talked briefly about the current predicament of Radio 3 and of its hapless audience ("those who are still listening"). He included an excerpt from the recent Today Programme interview with Alan Davey (18 minutes into the Feedback episode). Roger indicated that he hoped to interview him on Feedback.

He finished by saying that he would like to air our views on the station and "whether it needs to change to attract more listeners."

Alan Davey has indicated that he will approach his job with intelligence. Let's hop so.

[french frank]

Thanks for the update, Flay.

[Flay]

Let's hop so.

Hopeless!

[french frank]

Hopeless!

I quoted that originally - as 'hop[e]' - but decided to draw a veil over it.

[Flay]

I'm hopping too!

[aka Calum Da Jazbo]

no pee

[teamsaint]

incidentally, the text information that gets shown on DAB on the car radio, (not sure if this is the same as shown on a household DAB set) is frequently useless, EG just the name of the composer of the piece currently (and not always currently)being played.

If you are going to bother providing this service, what on earth is the point of doing it so badly?