BROADCASTING PROPOSALS

Press, Volume LXXIII, Issue 22005, 1 February 1937, Page 15

BROADCASTING PROPOSALS

TO THE EDITOR OP THE PRESS.

c,v—Fo'- musicians and those inter- / f»H in the future of play broadcastMo, two points made by Professor .yi-tbey at the opening of the new 2YA WfJ-yn are of special importance, be- ¥ Ile of their grave implications. m Shelley referred to the of a conservatorium of i es rfi W 'part of the new cultural built round and by the National Scasting Service; and the terms he „<ed make it appear that this desirhlp and necessary addition to the Onanism of culture in this country ? to be brought into being as part if the Broadcasting Service. A con.prvatorium of music is needed badly, and if it functions properly, it must develop talent which will be available to those who arrange the radio programmes; but work before the microphone is so specialised that the domination of the conservatorium by the Broadcasting Service, despite the oresence of a man of Professor Shelley's liberal training, must be viewed with grave misgivings. That the Broadcasting Service should contribute to the funds of a conservatorium of music is right, but no contribution can justify any action which will turn the new establishment into a conservatorium of broadcast music. The new conservatorium must be wholly independent and dedicated to the cause of music, without being biased in the direction of the microphone. Trained musicians can adapt themselves to the microphone performances; but as the tendency of the radio is to' "mellow" tone and volume, in both vocal and instrumental music, as the research work of the Bell .laboratories has shown, undue influence by f,the Broadcasting Service is likely to be disastrous to music. This view of the proposals is heightened by Professor Shelley's references to -training for stage work. He envisages a theatre with an auditorium where stage plays will be presented and from which they will be broadcast. This combination of stage and microphone is the only interpretation 16 put on his remarks;" but I shall be glad to learn that my reading is Incorrect, because between stage play and broadcast play there is a chasm which cannot be bridged and because 'those who attempt to straddle the gulf will miss one or both sides and plunge into the abyss. The British Broadcasting Corporation does«iot use an auditorium for broadcast plays, and the British Broadcasting Corporation toiows more about this part of radio ■ technique than any other organisation 'in the world. In Broadcast House the "producer" sits before a control panel and "mixes" the voices and sounds of several rooms or studios. Broadcast House recognises that its job'is to put its work into the microphone under the conditions best suited to microphone work, and it refuses to work from an auditorium. Orchestral works similarly should be treated from the Viewpoint of the microphone; dual purpose conditions are fatal. The Americans and the Australians use auditoriums, but most of their work is radio vaudeville. The new radio centre in Wellington should be a radio centre only, and all broadcasting of serious work should be carried out under conditions which will yield the best results through the microphone. Professor Shelley's aims are high I /nd large, but his statement suggests U/.aat he has not realised the width ™', of the gulf separating performance before an audience and performance for distribution through a microphone. The British Broadcasting Corporation understands this part of the problem thoroughly. One other point of special interest is the proposal that artists invited to New Zealand to broadcast will be asked to join the staff of the conservatorium temporarily as teachers. Visiting artists of first rank may be rather expensive as teachers, and if they do stay, may be more expensive than their fees suggest, because the virtuoso is not necessarily a good teacher. Kreisler may be a good teacher, but his fee to stay in New Zealand three weeks or three months as teacher would be a trifle high; an Australian comedian may ask a reasonable fee for a term on the staff of the dramatic wing, but his value as a' teacher may not be commensurate with the modest figure he asks. It is a high-sounding idea, but when it is considered from the practical side it becomes, like the other proposals I have mentioned, an inspiration to grave doubts. —Yours, etc., MERELY PRACTICAL. . January 29, 1937. [The above letter was referred to Professor Shelley, who made the fol-, lowing comment: "All the points contained in the letter have been adequately considered from a severely practical standpoint—the result being that the scheme has been approved by the Government. The time to doubt the practicability of the scheme Will be in four years' time."]