Just in: BBC Singers axed, more musicians redundant (but execs are saved)
NewsWe hear that the BBC is just making an announcement about the abolition of its choral group, the BBC Singers.
All the singers will be paid off.
There is also a call for voluntary redundancies among musicians in the BBC orchestras.
However, the six figure jobs of Proms Director and Director of BBC Orchestras have been preserved.
Of course.
More details when the press release drops.
WHAT ? If ever proof was needed that the music business is in trouble this is it.
One of the few things that made the license seem worth it!
Yes, for the BBC Singers, the Proms and the World Service. Certainly not worth it for general television.
What!!!? You actually pay the licence fee? I’m shocked anyone pays.
How anyone can give this comment a thumbs down beggars belief!
This site is regularly visited by all kinds of trolls, nihilists and objectionable characters. You can bet your bottom dollar that if there’s a piece lamenting the death of an outstanding individual, there’ll be a thumbs-down from them. In the past, whenever I’ve called out this basic lack of humanity, sure enough the red tab opposite the green one has bounced up. I don’t expect any change there.
See what I mean? Two thumbs-down for me already, which I shall wear like a badge of honour. It’s always the anonymous lunatic fringe who do this.
Perhaps it’s your implication that the BBC has nothing else to offer! What about: BBC orchestras, Proms, Radio 3, David Attenborough … and much else!
BBC Singers are superlative, they prove daily that they do their job. Magnificently. Yet the management teams do not. As ever, Directors and Head of This and That keep their jobs. Perhaps it’s time to defund this archaic organisation.
Superlative? It’s just that kind of thinking that is going to ruin this country. The arts are a vital part of a civilized society.
Maybe when you show up to your job to find that the boss cut your position as “superlative“ you will understand.
Please look up “superlative” you have it confused with “superfluous.”
This is truly horrific news, and utterly short sighted. Not just for the Singers and their immediate management (who are also losing their jobs) but for the wider sector as a whole. The BBC Singers are hte UK’s ONLY full time professional choral group – all others are freelance/project based. The work they do is not only singing of the highest quality, but also their education work, and their commission and performance of new choral works, has been a significant contributor to the UK’s musical output. This is a devastating loss, and one of the most appalling decisions the BBC has ever made.
Totally agree with all you’ve said, but I think we’ll find it’s not the Beeb making the decisions!
would you care to elaborate?
The BBC Singers shouldn’t be axed! They are one of the finest groups in the country and possibly the world. Their versatility and superb singing is renowned
The best choral group of its kind in the UK is now dead – or shortly will be. If you need proof that we’ve gone to the dogs, look no further.
Whether they are the best is a moot point, given that they are the only such group. Which makes the loss greater.
This is so sad and shocking…is anyone coordinating a public appeal against this outrageous decision …
Won’t make any difference.
i think change.org is trying
It’s dropped. It’s disgusting.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/2023/bbc-new-strategy-for-classical-music?fbclid=IwAR0mXopu9YNweLb3hhszEMkcqQFekguIP28luceGK6elNJqyznWtjT7Y1PY
Can someone explain to me how this works? 1/5 of the orchestral positions take redundancy and are no longer on a salary. So for example the principal oboe, 2nd bassoon no 5 cello and principal viola are chairs always filled by random freelancers?
Freelancers, but probably not random. Basically they are hoping that the actual musicians will stay but just be paid a lot less, and that they should gig somewhere else in between performances, teaching and rehearsals ….or go and serve pints at a pub when there are no concerts. Most full time musicians are already doing at least two or three jobs – eg teaching and their orchestra jobs, plus the occasional freelance concert – at present.
Not legal under ” IR 35 ” regulations.
If it’s just a ploy to stop paying employers National Insurance Contributions HMRC will step in…..
It is the role that is made redundant not the person. So it cannot be any of the roles you mention above….
More likely to fall on the r and f strings? ( just speculating….)
“However, the six figure jobs of Proms Director and Director of BBC Orchestras have been preserved.”
It’s usually the case that large bureaucracies are primarily concerned with their own survival and expansion. Also applies to the NHS, Civil Service etc.
Large corporations are not exempt either, particularly their HR departments. Remember when they were modest in size and called “Personnel”?
This is indicative of the current probity and insight of BBC Radio 3 management. The BBC singers are one of Radio 3’s core ensembles, with an admirable versatility and collective intelligence. Axing them saves the corporation very little.
Except the BBC can now use recordings or repeats and will do less 21st century music so savings in that respect. But it’s not good. People not listening to Radio 3 like they used to, and sadly that includes me. It is an indicator of the whole state of live classical music today and never more so since the pandemic and lockdowns. Everyone streaming or playing their own private CD collection. They’ve got got used to staying in and expect it all for free. Audiences are down for live concerts. Award winning and inexpensive Opera North is a case in point. Parts of the Grand Theatre in Leeds now regularly closed as empty. Then that affects hospitality as well.
… but frightens everyone else …
I don’t think pitting the BBC Singers against the jobs of Proms Director and Director of BBC Orchestras is really valid or helpful. Do we really think there should be no Proms Director??
This is more about the decline in music and music education in the UK after 13 years of austerity and public sector squeezes and a government that does not believe in or understand or trust the arts sector. Some local groups cling on, just about, because parents understand the value of music and can afford to buy instruments and pay for lessons and courses. But classical music is almost entirely now the preserve of the wealthy, which is extremely unhealthy for the musical future of the UK.
Proof, if any was needed, that our populist government likes to portray classical music as a preserve of the “elite” and calculates that it won’t lose many votes – from musicians or audiences – by this kind of cultural destruction. Dreadful that the BBC goes along with it. On a completely different note, BBC chairperson Richard Sharp is not only a previous Conservative Party donor, but also enabled a loan for Boris Johnson.
Neither does the current UK government appear to understand the benefits of investment in science and technology, given that the PM seems reluctant to accept the EU’s invitation to rejoin the Horizon Programme. This all gives rise to the question of just what HMG does understand, other than enriching its party donors.
I wouldn’t link this on political grounds – this has been a cultural trend underway since the 80s/90s. Put it this way – how many classical pieces do you hear on Desert Island Discs these days? Governments don’t need or care about perceived elitist culture forms (there is a Yes Minister line about Covent Garden being run from the Cabinet… ha!)
Not sure about “preserve” but hasn’t classical music always been kept afloat by “the wealthy”?
This is about the BBC not the government. Not the government. The BBC has plenty of money but chooses to spend it on what it considers more hip, well you know what I mean.
At this rate it won’t be long before there won’t be any Proms to direct.
This document is such a load of verbose nonsense in an attempt to dilute criticism and any possible reaction. It’s also Union bashing whilst promising more work for musicians but on the BBC’s terms which will inevitably mean one session fee to cover all media. They’ll easily achieve and probably exceed, their intent of reducing their musicians by 20% for who would want to work for such an employer?
The most disgraceful news from the BBC. The BBC Singers is a group of which the Corporation should be unreservedly proud. Can this madness be stopped?
Yes, it can be stopped if some multi-milliinaires pay for it or funded in some other than the compulsory and outdated licence fee.
Brexit karma; maybe they can pick your strawberries bwahahahahaha
A terrible day for music. The BBC proposes to lose one the world’s finest choirs and a unique asset to the life of the country. All music lovers must regret this day.
The BBC is a monopolistic piece of lunacy.
Sir Thomas Beecham
I am at a bit of a loss over all this hand wringing about the BBC choir. If, as a contributor has suggested they are one of the worlds finest choirs then I presume they will have no trouble touring and doing concerts both home and abroad to sell out audiences. Moreover, to quote another “The work they do is not only singing of the highest quality, but also their education work, and their commission and performance of new choral works, has been a significant contributor to the UK’s musical output” presumably they could still do these but charge a realistic fee for their “world class services”. This after all is what the real world of work is about, not being treated like a protected species which has to be subsidised…………….ah, but I forget that we are talking about classical music and “artists”. Pity that the miners, engineers, shipbuilders, steel workers, builders and many other “workers” were not designated as protected species………………….
“Pity that the miners, engineers, shipbuilders, steel workers, builders and many other “workers” were not designated as protected species………………….”
They were, and it didn’t work out too well. Billions in subsidies compared with loose change, by comparison, for music.
Yes, some of the industries did get subsidies but eventually those industries could not compete in the market place and thousands of jobs were lost (I know, I worked in Sheffield in the 70s and 80s). And these were industries providing the essentials of life, electricity, gas, coal, steel, engineering products, and my hasn’t it come to bite us on the arse. One could hardly say that classical music is an essential of life as so few actually listen to it. It has, is and always will be an elitist art form (nothing wrong with that) but shouldn’t be subsidised by the millions who have no interest in it. Tell the musicians to get out on the road, like the rock, jazz and folk musicians have to do to earn a crust and not consider themselves an “entitled” bunch!
I can’t believe how silly that comparison is.
Rock, for instance, is almost invariably amplified and can play to very large audiences. They earn rather more than a “crust”. The audience/performer ratios, and therefore the economics, are entirely different. The economics of staging an opera even more so. I’ve yet to hear a classical concert amplified successfully. And as for those who “have no interest in it” – I see you’re falling back on the lazy, simplistic notion that rich people listen to classical and poor people listen to everything else, probably pop. Subsidy increases accessibility. You might be happy with a situation where poor people are excluded entirely from some of our greatest achievements (audiences as far afield as Japan and Korea will attest to this), I certainly would not.
So far as my own background is concerned, three members of my family worked on the shop floor at John Brown in Clydebank. Hardly an elite, but if you want an example of true “entitlement”, look into the farce surrounding the construction of the QE2 in the 1960s. The 30+ unions were responsible for the industry’s suicide by ensuring that it was the last large vessel to be constructed there.
You are trying to tell me that in the modern age of technology that you can’t amplify an orchestra or opera performance, what world are you living in, certainly not the 23rd. As regards interest in classical music, I don’t recall that I made this a class issue, I think you are being presumptuous here. The simple fact ,whether you like it or not, is that classical music is a MINORITY interest (and I happen to be one of that minority) and always will be. I would also respond to your comment about the trade unions by saying I couldn’t agree more, many of the industries I mention refused to modernise, but it was a combination of both trade union and management intransigence and stupidity. This does not detract from the fact that the BBC is state subsidised and the vast majority have no interest in classical music or opera, and I am happy to review any research that proves this statement wrong. I repeat, classical musician are not a protected species!
“You are trying to tell me that in the modern age of technology that you can’t amplify an orchestra or opera performance”
Yes, that’s exactly what I’m saying if you want to preserve the tonal qualities, sound stage and dynamic range. The only successful amplification of this type I can recall is Ravi Shankar at the QEH using Quad Electrostatics many years ago. A solo instrument. These speakers, known for their unsurpassed accuracy, have been improved but are still very fragile and lacking in power handling ability, particularly at the lower end. I know, I own a modern pair, and am very familiar with modern technology (and its limitations).
So far as the “minority” argument is concerned, that’s precisely what subsidies are for.
‘if you want to preserve the tonal qualities, sound stage and dynamic range. ‘
That’s BS. A modern sound system can produce any volume you want. You know JS about this.
Volume and dynamic range are not the same thing. The clue is in the word “range”.
Not all of us are such big fans of the BBC Singers’ sound. For too long they sounded like an ensemble of wannabe opera singers with far too much vibrato and poor blend. To be fair however, they seem to have improved a bit recently under new conductors. For me they compare poorly other professional groups such as RIAS Kammerchor, Ars Nova Copenhagen or Nederlands Kamerkoor to name just a few. So whilst any reduction in nationally funded music resources is appalling, I shan’t miss this particular group.
I argued that for years, but since Sofi Jeannin took over as chief conductor, there’s been a change in their sound (and probably their personnel), and their blend and vibrato control are better than I’ve ever heard it. I make it a point to stream every new concert of theirs I find out about.
I do think it’s still true, at least in principle, that there is very little the BBC Singers do that can’t be done just as well by other professional choirs in Britain, and those choirs, all freelancer-based, could use the extra work.
But I’m not happy about this news. The BBC Singers have become a very impressive ensemble.
Will the membership of all the BBC orchestras come out on immediate strike? A little bit of collective spine… before they too are surplus to requirements.
How many of these organizations are run by frustrated non-performing people. They never had their own performing career and are now destroying the careers of others. I think this is happening across the arts spectrum. And, it is a disaster.
Very sad to hear this. They don’t deserve this; they’ve contributed so much to choral singing over the years, not least in their performances at the BBC Proms. They were an indispensable part of the Last Night of the Proms.
Glad to see (not!) that England has become so Americanized. Good job.
The BBC is not above picking a terrible target just to highlight how hard done by it is financially.
This is shocking news. Bad decision BBC.This Government needs to go. BBC singers are a national institution and sounding as good as they ever were.
Terrible decision, but the headline is inaccurate and divisive. Everyone who works for the BBC Singers on the executive side is losing their job. The fact that other people who work for other parts of the BBC are keeping theirs is irrelevant.
A dreadful decision — and an irrational one even from the perspective of a BBC ‘suit’. For the Government is itching to abolish the licence fee, which means hard times even for the suits. And decisions such as this, because they alienate so many of the BBC’s natural supporters, make abolition more likely.
As a musician, this is yet another devastating blow to the arts in this country. We have some of the best, if not the best, vocal ensembles in the world and as for our choral tradition, that is quite simply unrivalled. What on earth is happening in this country. We need to stand up and be proud of our musical heritage before it is completely dismantled and we lose one of the most important facets of a healthy, civilised nation.
But how safe is Gary Lineker’s career? That’s my main concern. Good value at only £1.35m.