Cast your vote

[french frank]

I'd say everything except a) (and therefore, logically f) ) though d) is only hearsay as I didn't listen to R3 on the hoof and so missed such things entirely.

I would rephrase c) as being not the best way to present the music and that, in a way, 'every note he wrote' is an abnegation of critical judgement on the part of the producers, and only a minimal curiosity value. Not a scholarly approach which, of course, is my criticism but might for others be just the ticket. One of the worst faults which made 'live' listening unattractive was the number of hours with no indication of the content.

[Anna]

I would vote for a,b,c,e I cannot comment about interactivity as I turned off R3 and have no wish to email them.

Also, I will say it again, the lack of playlists and information was a disaster. For me, that was the worst thing.

Euda, in post #147 says " I'm currently making more than enough money as an analyst in the private sector, and am posting here because it amuses me"

So, a Banker playing games? Not a serious R3 listener?

[Eudaimonia]

So, a Banker playing games? Not a serious R3 listener?

I've been listening to Radio 3 since 2005 via the internet, and was THE only concertgoer this year to attend all of the Proms concert programmes. (*75 actual concerts, not 76 as they repeated the Dr. Who programme and I only went once.) Furthermore, I saw them from the front row of the Arena more often than not, which means I queued from about 2-2:30 every single day for two months. I'm very grateful to be doing the kind of freelance analysis work where I can afford to pop off for two months whenever I feel like it and do as I please. It's very nice indeed!

You know I'd dearly love to go on, but don't want to get sent to the Basement so will leave it that.

[french frank]

Well, in the interests of research and E&OE, I've gone through the four R3 Mozart blogs and of those who commented (44 in total) I recognised 5 names only - 4 are forum members, all anti (and one of whom has not voted in this poll), and one not a forum member, who is pro. The other names are unknown to me.

Of those 44, there were 26 (59%) against the Mozartfest, 18 (41%) in favour. The views are pretty much polarised between our Option 1 and Option 5. No one commented that they had No Opinion...

Removing the No Opinions and amalgmating all the Pros and all the Antis, we have in our poll Anti: 69%, Pro 31% (as against 59% v. 41% on the Radio 3 blog).

There is a slight difference in constituency, since everyone here may be taken to be an R3 listener, whereas one or two of the blog people seemed not to be. There is a difference in attitude, presumably, between those who are presented with something additional to their normal choice and those who feel they have been given less.

[doversoul1]

To me, the worst thing about this project was the fact that Radio3 had decided that it was a good thing to have a 2-hour phone-in programme every day. Inviting listeners to phone in and tell their personal stories couldn’t be more alien to what the station is meant to be doing.

[Eudaimonia]

Yes, but who's likely to be more motivated to take the trouble to write in with their two cents-- people who have mildly positive attitudes, or people who are severely dissatisfied and unhappy about something? In the context of "which kind of response is most likely to show up on a blog", letters of complaint almost always outnumber letters of congratulations, don't they? Attracting people who have an axe to grind goes with the territory.

Removing the No Opinions and amalgmating all the Pros and all the Antis, we have in our poll Anti: 69%, Pro 31% (as against 59% v. 41% on the Radio 3 blog).

For the purposes of proclaiming an "overwhelmingly positive response", I'm sure the 40% who admitted there were "some good programmes" would count firmly among the successes. The fact that 75% of people responded with varying degrees of positivity while only 25% of respondents consider it a total disaster is rather surprising; I would have thought it would be far more. Which just goes to show what a disproportionate impact a vocal negative minority can have on public perception, doesn't it.

[french frank]

To me, the worst thing about this project was the fact that Radio3 had decided that it was a good thing to have a 2-hour phone-in programme every day. Inviting listeners to phone in and tell their personal stories couldn’t be more alien to what the station is meant to be doing.

Or as Nicholas de Jongh of The Independent put it earlier this week: "These days Radio 3 sometimes sounds as if intent on transforming itself into a superior version of Classic FM. The wretchedly low-brow three hours' a night of listeners' requests during The Genius of Mozart festival sounds for the first time as if the station were seriously dress-rehearsing to slip down-market." Hmmmm ... that bad? (Yes, it was three hours most nights)

[Pianorak]

Hmmmm ... that bad?

Hmmm, not quite that bad. The vowels were still R3.

[doversoul1]

I did not have a heart or nerves to listen to the actual programme but caught a couple of examples poor SMP was telling on In Tune: someone told how he invited his girlfriend to a Prom and the programme was a Mozart… sort of things. It was honestly quite unbelievable and unbearable even for those few minutes, and retold by SMP (imagine the real thing…!) And those were supposed to be ‘some of the best’.

[Eudaimonia]

To me, the worst thing about this project was the fact that Radio3 had decided that it was a good thing to have a 2-hour phone-in programme every day. Inviting listeners to phone in and tell their personal stories couldn’t be more alien to what the station is meant to be doing.

I don't know, sometimes I wonder if my own extreme personal irritation at programmes like this clouds my judgment about their overall merit. You and I might think it's dire, but it really the Harbinger of the Dumbing-Down Apocalypse everyone here seems to think it is?

I have to confess it annoyed the snot out of me in every possible respect--from the patronising lilt in the presenter's voice to the gut-wrenching banality of the callers-- yet so many people really seemed to get something meaningful out of the experience. We don't care about such-and-so's relative in hospital, but think about it: some real person out there has a relative in the hospital and, for whatever reason, found dedicating a work of Mozart to their loved one a comforting way to pay tribute to them on air. I was rolling my eyes with the best of you, but when they featured an elderly caller reminiscing about his love of Mozart, it made me feel incredibly guilty for hating the show so much and being such a curmudgeon.

If a program 1) truly engages the audience, 2) fosters an appreciation of music, and 3) encourages them to listen to the station again, I'm not seeing how this experiment is an unmitigated failure. I'm *certainly* not saying I hope this becomes a regular feature--or should ever be done again; I just think it might be a good idea for those of you who are so violently opposed to it to make a bullet points list of why this is antithetical to what Radio3 stands for, and not just another expression of your personal bias against all things sentimental.

[Pianorak]

some real person out there has a relative in the hospital and, for whatever reason, found dedicating a work of Mozart to their loved one a comforting way to pay tribute to them on air. . .

Indeed - and the appropriate broadcaster to call? ClassicFM.

[french frank]

I just think it might be a good idea for those of you who are so violently opposed to it to make a bullet points list of why this is antithetical to what Radio3 stands for

Well, behind that lies a possibility that any kind of show, any format, is okay on Radio 3 as long as it features classical music.

It's not right for Radio 3 because in concept and in execution, it's banal, no matter how sentimentally touched we may feel at particular moments. Unoriginal and banal. And in the end, it isn't even in essence about classical music at all. Otherwise why not just play the music?

[Mr Pee]

Indeed - and the appropriate broadcaster to call? ClassicFM.

Not if said ill relative was listening to Radio3 whilst in hospital. Then phoning Classic FM would have been rather pointless, wouldn't it?

Anyway, I hope the person concerned is feeling much better and that hearing their dedication on the Radio cheered them up a bit.

[Pianorak]

Not if said ill relative was listening to Radio3 whilst in hospital. Then phoning Classic FM would have been rather pointless, wouldn't it?

Anyway, I hope the person concerned is feeling much better and that hearing their dedication on the Radio cheered them up a bit.

Good thinking, Mr Pee!

[Don Petter]

Indeed - and the appropriate broadcaster to call? ClassicFM.

The odd times I've caught these on CFM, they sound too glib and archetypal. Are they all genuine, or do they get the office boy/girl to record a few? I suppose they could get so many wannabe punters that they can select just the cosy ones, ‘just studying for exams’ or ‘having to do the housework’?