On 20/09/2022 10:13, John Hall wrote:
> Though as far as I could make out, BBC 2 (and presumably 3 and 4 too)
> broadcast something not too far removed from their normal schedules, as
> did BBC 1 after the six o'clock news.

BBC4 did after the first couple(?) of days.

Sophie Raworth Teeted this

"Claire Popplewell is the Creative Director - the boss - behind all of
the BBC’s coverage over the past 10 days. Hats off to her. "

"MB" <MB@nospam.net> wrote in message news:tgcqj7$1i655$1@dont-email.me...
> Sophie Raworth Teeted this
>
> "Claire Popplewell is the Creative Director - the boss - behind all of the
> BBC’s coverage over the past 10 days. Hats off to her. "

What BBC broadcast was probably pretty good (I didn't watch *all* of it) but
they should not have simulcast (spammed) it across all their channels for
the funeral. They should have left all except one of their channels showing
normal programmes. Likewise for ITV: show their coverage on ITV but leave
normal programmes on ITV2, 3, 4. In both cases (BBC and ITV), some of the
more popular BBC1/ITV1 programmes should have been moved to one of their
other channels for the day.

But the main thing is: all listings sites (web or Digiguide) and the
over-the-air listings should be kept up to date so they reflect what and
when is actually goign to be transmitted. That is the biggest problem I
found over the past week: on each day, radiotimes.com, Digiguide and OTA all
gave different listings for that day's programmes - and what was actually
transmitted may have resembled none of them :-(

On 20/09/2022 18:59, NY wrote:
> "MB" <MB@nospam.net> wrote in message
> news:tgcqj7$1i655$1@dont-email.me...
>> Sophie Raworth Teeted this
>>
>> "Claire Popplewell is the Creative Director - the boss - behind all
>> of the BBC’s coverage over the past 10 days. Hats off to her. "
>
> What BBC broadcast was probably pretty good (I didn't watch *all* of
> it) but they should not have simulcast (spammed) it across all their
> channels for the funeral. They should have left all except one of
> their channels showing normal programmes. Likewise for ITV: show their
> coverage on ITV but leave normal programmes on ITV2, 3, 4. In both
> cases (BBC and ITV), some of the more popular BBC1/ITV1 programmes
> should have been moved to one of their other channels for the day.
Well, didn't the BBC carry on as normal yesterday with CBBC and CBeebies
programmes ?

BBC 1 showed the core coverage, BBC 2 had the same coverage but with
sign language (which is a perfectly acceptable use of that channel)

BBC 3 and 4 obviously don't appear until 7pm anyway (and are essentially
the same channels as CBBC and Cbeebies of course)

The only full duplication was the BBC News Channel and BBC 1 (nothing
new there !)

I thought ITV's coverage over the last 10 days was the best overall out
of BBC, ITV, and Sky, was the least cluttered of the three main choices.

Didn't arrive home until after 8pm last night, but I thought ITV's 60
mins highlights show at 9pm last night (if that's the right word) of the
day was just right.

On 20/09/2022 10:13, John Hall wrote:

> Though as far as I could make out, BBC 2 (and presumably 3 and 4 too)
> broadcast something not too far removed from their normal schedules, as
> did BBC 1 after the six o'clock news.

The BBC started their coverage (with talking heads) hours before any of
the other channels. BBC 3 and 4 don't start broadcasting until 7pm.
BBC 2 was advertised as signed coverage for the deaf.

--
mailto : news {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

In message <tgcq37$1i4dk$2@dont-email.me>, MB <MB@nospam.net> writes
>On 20/09/2022 10:13, John Hall wrote:
>> Though as far as I could make out, BBC 2 (and presumably 3 and 4 too)
>> broadcast something not too far removed from their normal schedules, as
>> did BBC 1 after the six o'clock news.
>
>
>BBC4 did after the first couple(?) of days.
>

I was specifically talking about the day of the funeral.
--
John Hall
"Home is heaven and orgies are vile,
But you *need* an orgy, once in a while."
Ogden Nash (1902-1971)

On 20/09/2022 18:59, NY wrote:
> What BBC broadcast was probably pretty good (I didn't watch*all* of it) but
> they should not have simulcast (spammed) it across all their channels for
> the funeral. They should have left all except one of their channels showing
> normal programmes. Likewise for ITV: show their coverage on ITV but leave
> normal programmes on ITV2, 3, 4. In both cases (BBC and ITV), some of the
> more popular BBC1/ITV1 programmes should have been moved to one of their
> other channels for the day.
>
> But the main thing is: all listings sites (web or Digiguide) and the
> over-the-air listings should be kept up to date so they reflect what and
> when is actually goign to be transmitted. That is the biggest problem I
> found over the past week: on each day, radiotimes.com, Digiguide and OTA all
> gave different listings for that day's programmes - and what was actually
> transmitted may have resembled none of them

It was presumably part of the planning that has been done for years with
updates. The trouble with moving around to other channels is that many
leave their PVR set to pick up series and episodes would be missed and
possibly have to be repeated.

But I can't see anything wrong with dropping all other programming
except children's programmes. There will always be moans but they
should be ignored.

My only real complaint was the inaccuracy of the prrogramme information,
in future they need to give keeping correct and up to date a higher
priority as do the companies like Digiguide.

I don't know how Digiguide is updated but suspect that it is not staffed
out of hours and at the weekend.

On 20/09/2022 10:22, John Hall wrote:
> I confess that I still watch "Family Guy", though it's nowhere near as
> good as it used to be, probably because Seth Macfarlane has too many
> other projects these days so is less "hands-on" with the producing and
> writing . Although there have been signs of a revival this series,
> perhaps because there's been more of Stewie and less of Peter.

I think I prefer American Dad, though I getting a bit bored with both.

--
Brian Gregory (in England).

"Mark Carver" <mark.carver@invalid.invalid> wrote in message news:jouejsF8ikvU1@mid.individual.net...
>
> I thought ITV's coverage over the last 10 days was the best overall out
> of BBC, ITV, and Sky, was the least cluttered of the three main choices.

Agreed, although I thought Sky's royal commentator was also very good.

I was watching TV (a rarity these days) during the time of the death
announcement, after reading of the news online, and I chose ITN over BBC,
which is a measure of just how much respect I have lost for the latter.

During the funeral it's unfortunate that one of the HD channels on
Freeview didn't air coverage without commentary, so we could hear the
(imho phenomenal) funeral marching music, although the commentators
did at least keep quiet for long periods of time, unlike on the US
coverage, where presenters never shut up from start to finish.

There were some odd audio cuts during the procession, almost as if some
of the mics they were switching to had a long delay, meaning the music
had chunks missing, and at other times chunks repeated. I'm unsure as to
why this was.

"Alexander" <none@nowhere.fr> wrote in message
news:tgfft6$1s3lt$1@dont-email.me...
> There were some odd audio cuts during the procession, almost as if some
> of the mics they were switching to had a long delay, meaning the music
> had chunks missing, and at other times chunks repeated. I'm unsure as to
> why this was.

How was the sound of the marching music picked up? Did they have a series of
mikes along the route, or did they have someone walking alongside with a
mike which transmitted to one of a series of receivers along the route?
There was no sense of the music gradually getting fainter as the band went
further away, and then louder as it approached another fixed mike, which
what makes me think of a travelling mike.

In article <tgfihg$1sbr5$1@dont-email.me>, NY <me@privacy.invalid>
scribeth thus
>"Alexander" <none@nowhere.fr> wrote in message
>news:tgfft6$1s3lt$1@dont-email.me...
>> There were some odd audio cuts during the procession, almost as if some
>> of the mics they were switching to had a long delay, meaning the music
>> had chunks missing, and at other times chunks repeated. I'm unsure as to
>> why this was.
>
>How was the sound of the marching music picked up? Did they have a series of
>mikes along the route, or did they have someone walking alongside with a
>mike which transmitted to one of a series of receivers along the route?
>There was no sense of the music gradually getting fainter as the band went
>further away, and then louder as it approached another fixed mike, which
>what makes me think of a travelling mike.
>

No reason not to!, a guardsman had it all in his Busby and was on a
freelance gig on overtime;)...

--
Tony Sayer

Man is least himself when he talks in his own person.

Give him a keyboard, and he will reveal himself.

On 21/09/2022 17:59, Alexander wrote:
> "Mark Carver" <mark.carver@invalid.invalid> wrote in message news:jouejsF8ikvU1@mid.individual.net...
>> I thought ITV's coverage over the last 10 days was the best overall out
>> of BBC, ITV, and Sky, was the least cluttered of the three main choices.
> Agreed, although I thought Sky's royal commentator was also very good.
>
> I was watching TV (a rarity these days) during the time of the death
> announcement, after reading of the news online, and I chose ITN over BBC,
> which is a measure of just how much respect I have lost for the latter.
>
The viewing figures seem to be lower than everyone was expecting (even
accounting for on-line etc).
Seems the BBC got about 2/3rds of the total audience with their version
of the coverage.

Everyone seems to have been assuming for years that Monday will have
smashed the all time record for TV viewing, but it didn't.

Maybe as the 1953 Coronation was a major turning point for television,
then the 2022 funeral may well prove to be too !

In message <jp2hv5Frr7iU1@mid.individual.net>, Mark Carver
<mark.carver@invalid.invalid> writes
>The viewing figures seem to be lower than everyone was expecting (even
>accounting for on-line etc).
>Seems the BBC got about 2/3rds of the total audience with their version
>of the coverage.
>
>Everyone seems to have been assuming for years that Monday will have
>smashed the all time record for TV viewing, but it didn't.
>
>Maybe as the 1953 Coronation was a major turning point for television,
>then the 2022 funeral may well prove to be too !

I was wondering the same thing, given that most young people seem rarely
to watch TV but to view everything via their phone or tablet.
--
John Hall
"Home is heaven and orgies are vile,
But you *need* an orgy, once in a while."
Ogden Nash (1902-1971)

On Wed, 21 Sep 2022 20:05:22 +0100, tony sayer <tony@bancom.co.uk>
wrote:

>>How was the sound of the marching music picked up? Did they have a series of
>>mikes along the route, or did they have someone walking alongside with a
>>mike which transmitted to one of a series of receivers along the route?
>>There was no sense of the music gradually getting fainter as the band went
>>further away, and then louder as it approached another fixed mike, which
>>what makes me think of a travelling mike.
>>
>
>No reason not to!, a guardsman had it all in his Busby and was on a
>freelance gig on overtime;)...

Amd no need for a a fluffy windshield.

Rod.

On 22/09/2022 08:42, Mark Carver wrote:
> The viewing figures seem to be lower than everyone was expecting (even
> accounting for on-line etc).
> Seems the BBC got about 2/3rds of the total audience with their version
> of the coverage.
>
> Everyone seems to have been assuming for years that Monday will have
> smashed the all time record for TV viewing, but it didn't.
>
> Maybe as the 1953 Coronation was a major turning point for television,
> then the 2022 funeral may well prove to be too !

Be interesting to see when more analysis of the figures is done.

Normally they seem to count a viewer as anyone who tuned in for a few
minutes, might have expected larger figures with the length of the coverage,

Everyone who I have spoken to since then has said they watched some of
it, could it be that their measuring system is not getting a true
figure? Even here in Scotland, everywhere was very quiet all day.

On 21/09/2022 20:05, tony sayer wrote:
> In article <tgfihg$1sbr5$1@dont-email.me>, NY <me@privacy.invalid>
> scribeth thus
>> "Alexander" <none@nowhere.fr> wrote in message
>> news:tgfft6$1s3lt$1@dont-email.me...
>>> There were some odd audio cuts during the procession, almost as if some
>>> of the mics they were switching to had a long delay, meaning the music
>>> had chunks missing, and at other times chunks repeated. I'm unsure as to
>>> why this was.
>>
>> How was the sound of the marching music picked up? Did they have a series of
>> mikes along the route, or did they have someone walking alongside with a
>> mike which transmitted to one of a series of receivers along the route?
>> There was no sense of the music gradually getting fainter as the band went
>> further away, and then louder as it approached another fixed mike, which
>> what makes me think of a travelling mike.
>>
>
> No reason not to!, a guardsman had it all in his Busby and was on a
> freelance gig on overtime;)...
>
>

a missed opportunity to have an immersive, commentary-free binaural
broadcast on radio and BBC Sounds

--
Robin
reply-to address is (intended to be) valid

On Thu, 22 Sep 2022 10:13:56 +0100, Mark Carver
<mark.carver@invalid.invalid> wrote:

>On 22/09/2022 08:59, John Hall wrote:
>> In message <jp2hv5Frr7iU1@mid.individual.net>, Mark Carver
>> <mark.carver@invalid.invalid> writes
>>> The viewing figures seem to be lower than everyone was expecting
>>> (even accounting for on-line etc).
>>> Seems the BBC got about 2/3rds of the total audience with their
>>> version of the coverage.
>>>
>>> Everyone seems to have been assuming for years that Monday will have
>>> smashed the all time record for TV viewing, but it didn't.
>>>
>>> Maybe as the 1953 Coronation was a major turning point for
>>> television, then the 2022 funeral may well prove to be too !
>>
>> I was wondering the same thing, given that most young people seem
>> rarely to watch TV but to view everything via their phone or tablet.
>
>If so, it will genuinely make TV an artefact the Elizabethan reign !

Exactly. The Second Elizabethan Age has also been effectively the
Television Age. Just as it gradually put an end to the previous one
which was the Wireless Age, it will in turn meet its own slow demise
with the advent of the Internet Age.

I know the internet has existed for quite some time, but many
technological 'Ages' have had fairly long gestations that didn't
really count, such as the time between 1936 and the Coronation when
television broadcasting did exist but only a few thousand people in
London knew anything about it. Similarly with the internet, which has
gradually grown from a specialist curiosity that was more remarkable
as an achievement than a genuinely useful facility. The turning point
will be when a majority have internet that is fast enough and reliable
enough to provide all the communication and entertainment needs for an
entire household, and in most populated areas we're already there.

Rod.

In article <8175bec8-be97-65ec-3db8-059082543f8c@outlook.com>,
Robin says...

> a missed opportunity to have an immersive, commentary-free binaural
> broadcast on radio and BBC Sounds
>

For the service and the first part of the procession audio was DD 5.1.

--
Ken

On Mon, 19 Sep 2022 21:44:14 +0100, NY <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:

> Although what is the cost of running the server for playing out pre-recorded
> programmes on (for example) ITV3?

Who cares. The stuff is on 24/4/365 regardless. It is just too much hassle
turning things off and on again (apart from fixing 95% of all known faults)
and just causes more hassles than it is worth.