Note: this is a follow-up essay to an essay originally published on April 17, 2026 in the Traverse City Record-Eagle as part of the "Tuning In" series.
I recently published an article summarizing critiques that Classical IPR listeners had about the amount of talking on our station ("Shut up and play the music").
I put the question to readers: how much talking is the right amount of talking on Classical IPR?
My inbox was flooded with responses, and I'm summarizing the responses here. Thank you to the dozens of people who wrote in with their thoughts on the topic. As I hit "publish" on this essay, I've received more than 60 emails, many of them quite detailed and thoughtful.
The responses I received last week were overwhelmingly in favor of hearing information and commentary from the hosts on Classical IPR.
Several listeners noted that they appreciate the talking about music on Classical IPR because it functions as their education about the music.
Barbara wrote, "As a piano teacher and choir director, your comments are my continuing education. I can’t count the number of times that I use things that I heard in my lessons."
A few listeners noted that, since Classical IPR's parent organization is Interlochen Center for the Arts, which is an educational institution, we absolutely should be prioritizing music education for our listeners.
"I’ve never found myself annoyed with the amount of talk as it helps to feed my want and need to learn about classical music," Joanne wrote. "Keeping in mind that Interlochen Center for the Arts is an educational center is key to me in that I expect IPR to reflect the educational mission of the broader Interlochen Center for the Arts purview."
Others said that, as a public radio station, Classical IPR is serving the public by providing educational information.
"Part of the appeal and value of public broadcasting is learning about new music or musicians," Barb wrote.
Some listeners pointed out that they prefer some types of talking over others.
In particular, several people said that they prefer hearing about music from the Classical IPR hosts but are less interested in community or student voices or longer-form guest interviews.
"Personally, I'm not looking for commentary from listeners, Interlochen students, or visiting artists," Ed wrote. "But that's just one person's opinion."
Kay wrote, "Interviews about upcoming performances or background on the music or what inspired it or selections grouped around a theme are appropriate, but I’m not interested in listening to birthdays, favorite places or seasons."
For others, they only want to hear talking at specific times or during specific programs.
"When I want a deep dive, I turn to broadcasts like Exploring Music where I am focused on expanding my knowledge as opposed to the sensory experience of listening," Les wrote. Otherwise, classical music is a refuge for me. Narration and the bookending of music with identification are unwelcome distractions."
Others said that talking is disruptive to how and why they listen to Classical IPR.
"I do not enjoy the conversations with young musicians," Margie said. "I listen to you for relaxation, and details of their personal lives do not interest me."
"I listen to Classical IPR when I am working, and I need soft music," Marc wrote. "When I am working, the chatter interferes with my thought process."
I'll end this summary with this thoughtful note from Hank:
"Do the public service announcements, the presenters and the music fit the role and purpose of IPR? There is no question that it does. IPR is not like a CD player or Apple Music where there is no presenter role, just music. Shutting up is not the answer. Other factors in the balancing equation, are the type of show and its time slot. Repose has virtually no talking. Exploring Music has much. Bird Notes and Ephemeris are all talking. Each adds much to the richness and variety of the station. That is more to the balance question, not whether a presenter runs on too much or too little. I am sure all listeners would vote for a genuine individual with different personal characteristics and style over a programmed AI model which would limit the talking to 3% of the duration of each piece of the music. It is always good to keep your focus by asking questions of yourself and to every day work to strengthening and furthering the purpose of the station. I think you are doing that exceedingly well."
Thank you to everyone who took the time to respond to last week's essay.
As a public radio station, we always want to hear from the public to make sure that we are most effectively serving our listeners' needs.
Please email amanda.sewell@interlochen.org with additional feedback or ideas for future essays.
