Schubert - second poll questions

[french frank]

I'm trying to think up some telling questions for the second poll. I think I can set this as multiple choice.

Suggestions (up to 10):


Altogether an impressive enterprise

Plenty of interest, even for a Schubert fanatic

Knew little of his music but now appreciate it more

Good and less good content, but on balance engaging

Good and less good content, and on balance off-putting

Liked the general tone and presentation

Much of the presentation and tone was irritating

The schedule was confusing

Like the total immersion coverage

Hate the saturation coverage




Five are broadly positive, five negative. Any better suggestions, keeping the same balance?

I think it should be possible to vote for as many or few as you like.

[Don Petter]

Only immediate thought - Do the last two mean much the same thing?

[Vile Consort]

For the sake of balance, you should offer a positive option about the presentation and tone.

[Simon]

"Saturation" is a negatively loaded word. In fact, I don't think you need numbers 8 and 9 at all.

[french frank]

"Saturation" is a negatively loaded word. In fact, I don't think you need numbers 8 and 9 at all.

I'll change the positive one to 'total immersion' then, which is the R3 term. Why don't you need those questions?

Yes, to the other two ...

OP updated (in a moment).

[Simon]

Given that we can vote for as many or as few as fit our views - I'd probably tick 3 boxes - I think it's very fair and that you've done a sterling job. The rewording seems to make things balance better.

[Don Petter]

Looks pretty good to me.

[Carmen]

I agree you've done a good job. The only thing that bothers me is that all of the suggestions assume listeners stayed tune during the whole week, when a lot of us tuned out for 200+ hours. But maybe you just want the poll to be for people who actually listened to all or part of it?

[french frank]

I agree you've done a good job. The only thing that bothers me is that all of the suggestions assume listeners stayed tune during the whole week, when a lot of us tuned out for 200+ hours. But maybe you just want the poll to be for people who actually listened to all or part of it?

I sense that people are already losing interest in the subject, otherwise I could construct a couple more polls!

No. It's a problem because I do want to get some idea of of what turned people off - either completely (probably option 10) or as a result of something that they were listening to (e.g the jingle for the 1,017th time, or a particularly fatuous contribution from a presenter, listener or press-ganged celebrity, the fifth airing of the arpeggione sonata or the continuously self-congratulatory tone); whether they didn't like it because they don't like Schubert or because they do ...

The poll isn't a very good instrument for this kind of investigation (especially with a limit of 10 options), though the comments are more useful.

If I'm doing them an injustice, perhaps someone would put me right, but one reason why I would mistrust the BBC's claims of a stunning success is illustrated on Facebook. They give a hip-hooray link to a write-up in the Guardian praising The Spirit of Schubert (not on this occasion by Tom Service!), but not to a review which took a fair, but rather more negative view of the whole proceedings.

[JFLL]

They give a hip-hooray link to a write-up in the Guardian praising The Spirit of Schubert (not on this occasion by Tom Service!), but not to a review which took a fair, but rather more negative view of the whole proceedings.

Fiona Maddocks's Guardian review ended with the words: 'If part of me cannot stand this completetist-crazed excess, nor will I complain. Long live the only radio station in the world that can offer this extraordinary level of commitment.' I'm surprised they didn't quote the last sentence (but not the penultimate), as in theatre reviews which are quoted as 'Extraordinary!!!" when the review said 'Extraordinary -- extraordinarily awful' or something similar. Ah, selective quotation -- the instrument of the puffer from time immemorial.