Hard News: Out of the Groove
185 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 3 4 5 6 7 8 Newer→ Last
-
Your inability to answer a few simple questions about what you think the system should look like are conspicuous by their absence, robbery. As is your explanation of why it's naive to think people are forced, as at gunpoint, into changing the style of music they produce.
-
We've all got choices but the overriding insentive is that if you want a crack at doing this for a living you better tow the commercial line
And so what are you proposing? Depositing taxpayer largesse on people who make music New Zealanders don't listen to?
nz on air was about making ourselves feel comfortable with or voice and our culture, because we didn't get to see and hear ourselves on our airwaves eonugh we felt cultural cringe when we did.
NZers on the whole don't listen to it cos they don't get to hear it, chicken and egg as that situation may be.
nz on airs job most definitely was not to change the face of who we are and what we sound like so we can fit commercial radios pre defined moulds, but that is what they have achieved to an extent.a lot of the credit NZ on air takes for the good changes that have occured in our perception of ourselves has actually happened as a result of others actions. Channel Z, student radio, independent record labels and lets not for get the bands themselves, good shirt, shihad etc that made it embaressing for a station not to know who they were cos they had such an impact on the live scene all before nz on air came into the game.
This picture is a lot more complicated than you might think,
-
As is your explanation of why it's naive to think people are forced, as at gunpoint, into changing the style of music they produce.
with respect Roger, I don't think you have perhaps dealt with a major record company, or seen a recording contract with such....
-
Your inability to answer a few simple questions about what you think the system should look like are conspicuous by their absence
give me a few mins won't ya :) some of us have got day jobs we should be doing.
pay me a government wage and I'll solve all your musical problems for you.
I think we disagree on what the problem is. I think its what nz on airs job was in the first place.
my solution for that is to go back to the original plan. get more of how we sound in our natural form on our airwaves.
funding decisions made by informed musical types, (chris knox did a good job when he was on the QEII arts council panel and he's not dead yet) and more effort put into the real problem of convincing or forcing commercial radio to play that which they really don't want to.Remember its never been that its bad music, its that its different, and nzers aren't going to be hurt by it.
sorry if I offended you by the naive comment. it wasn't meant personally.
-
Nobody is suggesting that Roger...or at least I'm not.
It wasn't really a barbed aimed specifically at you but, to echo an earlier post: people who don't like the current, quite commercially oriented system need to explain what they think would make things better, and most importantly what their desired outcomes are.
We're all tossing around terms like "real New Zealand music" without really explaining why we think Split Enz (who, let us note, Neil Finn re-formed without once touring New Zealand on their most recent gigs, and spent a significant portion of their time in London and Australia when they were active) are "real New Zealand music" while elemenop or whoever aren't.
In any discussion of public funding of culture there's always going to be tension between people who want only to fund stuff that's comfortable for most of us, people who see no value funding anything that is less challenging to Joe Average than a Mapplethorpe exhibition, and points in between.
-
Rogerd, I'm not really qualified to make any comment on hip and/or hop. Only that like most musical idioms, there is cream and there is crap.
-
Sturgeon's Law applies to music as much as anything else.
-
__As is your explanation of why it's naive to think people are forced, as at gunpoint, into changing the style of music they produce.__
with respect Roger, I don't think you have perhaps dealt with a major record company, or seen a recording contract with such....
You are quite right, a fact for which I'm quite grateful. I'm aware that once signed up to a major record company one's fate is largely in their hands ("Oh, I'm sorry, we won't be releasing the album you've recorded, but you can't release it through anyone else, and you still owe us an album"). The comment was spawned from discussion about the fact that there are more than a few people who get out and make the music they love and care about without doing so on a commercial basis. People don't have to quit their day job, they choose to. The compromises that come after that are a result of saying, "I wish to be commercially successful enough to make a living from music" in the first place.
Now, if you're asking me if I think it sucks that people who are talented artists can't make a living out of it because the music industry rewards a handful of people (often with marginal ability) with mega-riches and the rest are lucky to break even, then I agree. As Stephen Judd mentioned in an earlier discussion the death of the professional musician started a long time ago, about when you could get recorded copies of music for less than the cost of hiring an actual musician.
-
It wasn't really a barbed aimed specifically at you but, to echo an earlier post: people who don't like the current, quite commercially oriented system need to explain what they think would make things better, and most importantly what their desired outcomes are.
I think I did that in response to Neil's question. I don't have the same opinion on this as Rob does..we've talked off line in the past (if its the same Rob I think it is)...I just think the current system is proving detrimental to the industry as a whole, its less than beneficial....but...as I said earlier... I need to edit myself here, and will, at least on a public forum...
We're all tossing around terms like "real New Zealand music" without really explaining why we think Split Enz (who, let us note, Neil Finn re-formed without once touring New Zealand on their most recent gigs, and spent a significant portion of their time in London and Australia when they were active) are "real New Zealand music" while elemenop or whoever aren't.
I didn't say either of those things, but Enz were smart enough to be where they could make a living. There is no imperative for NZ musicians to live in a shack in Bluff. Australia too, gave them their break, and was where their record label was
-
Really? I thought it was "if you want to be a commercially succesful musician, we'll give you money, if you want to write and perform music soley for your own pleasure, that's a hobby you can pay for."
Actually, you can apply for a Creative New Zealand recording grant. Some nice albums have been made with those.
Have to agree with Simon about the Hit Discs though. They used to be quite good compilations. Now I'm lucky if I can find two tracks I like.
-
You are quite right, a fact for which I'm quite grateful. I'm aware that once signed up to a major record company one's fate is largely in their hands....
And I agree, but it wasn't that long ago that you had no choice...want to make an album...you don't have 50K+++? Sign here....Even the FN acts that started on Doug Hood's 4 track made that jump.
As Stephen Judd mentioned in an earlier discussion the death of the professional musician started a long time ago, about when you could get recorded copies of music for less than the cost of hiring an actual musician.
and typsetters are out of work....we move on....there are plenty of living happy professional musicians in my world. Not rich perhaps but they never were.
-
And I don't mean to be mean, but the Music Month showcase tonight that I thought would expose me to a bunch of interesting new bands seems largely stocked with not-so-interesting old bands. Hmmm.
-
while elemenop or whoever aren't
I think Elemenop are getting a bit of a hard deal here. I just mentioned them as the first commercially successful band that sprang to mind.
I recall Shona Laing not getting any airplay for Kennedy until she won some songwriter award in Aus. I'd had the first Crowded House LP for a year before it got any airplay, and they were "commercial" artists. -
talking of, whatever..from EMI today:
"Tim Finn's 1st single "Couldn't Be Done", from his new album 'Imaginary Kingdom' (released in America through Manhattan Records), became the 'Most Added Single' at Triple A radio format in the USA this week.
This is the 1st time a New Zealand artist has had this level of support at American radio since Crowded House and OMC.
“Tim radiates fragility and a resigned wisdom. His is a face that has seen triumph and tragedy and his singing expresses that personal experience. Much of the material connects sympathetically with his native land, New Zealand, and he is certainly one of the great underappreciated pop singers of our time (C.D.)” the LA Times, April 26, 2007
. -
I didn't say either of those things, but Enz were smart enough to be where they could make a living.
Indeed. And I wouldn't criticise them for that, any more than I'd criticise Len Lye for going abroad to find people who could appreciate his brilliance, since no-one outside the Govett Brewster could.
But I guess I want to try and draw people into thinking about what makes something New Zealand flavoured, and what degree of flavour it's worth collectively shelling out to support. And of course, whether being New Zealand flavoured makes something otherwise not great or interesting worth supporting (and I say that as someone who thinks the New Zealand flavour of Shortland Street has made it worth having, even if it's just another soap).
-
This is more a of a general comment, but I have felt for some time now that the high water mark of the NZ music 'boomlet' was in 2005.
That year Fat Freddy's, Bic Runga and the Phoenix Foundation all released stellar records. This probably exposes my own bias, but while there have been good records put out in the last 18 months, I feel the only interesting NZ record released since then was from the Mint Chicks.
Goodness me, I am already getting nostalgic.
-
Have to agree with Simon about the Hit Discs though. They used to be quite good compilations. Now I'm lucky if I can find two tracks I like.
Yeah, but you're a cranky old git who doesn't get Tool.
I kid because I love 8).
-
This is more a of a general comment, but I have felt for some time now that the high water mark of the NZ music 'boomlet' was in 2005.
How taste shapes the world. I'd place it a bit earlier, mostly because I'm more a Shihad/Feelers/pre-blanded Fur Patrol kind of person.
-
pre-blanded Fur Patrol
Their old stuff is blander than their new stuff.
-
Ok excuse me but I‘m going to think a bit out loud here.
As we’ve already established I have no musical taste at all (I do like Little Feat), so I’m going to stay general rather than specific.
As a number of folks have pointed out artists in NZ can’t make a living from their art, be it music or playing with clay in the backyard, or stringing words together in interesting ways.
Free-market/Massey MBA thinking would argue that because NZ is a small market and because the percentage of the market that will pay for any particular piece of art is small then no art producer/marketer/retailer can make a living from NZ art. Logically NZ should then get all its art from overseas. The same logic that means we don’t have a local car manufacturer.
Two things prevent that happening. First artists don’t care, they still want to make their art. BTW this puts them in a crappy bargaining position.
But for me the really interesting bit is the second reason we have indigenous art. And that is of course society (aka the government) is willing to pay for some indigenous art.
Now as far as I’m concerned as a tax paying member of that society that is just great. I actually believe firmly that some of the money I earn is well spent encouraging artists to create …. well …. Art. Because art is good in all sorts of ways for a society and I sure as hell can’t create any of it myself (see my above lack of musical taste).
It seems to me the problem is, that at the same time the government has created funding bureaucracies to encourage artists to produce indigenous art (so we don’t have to rely on only foreign muck), they’ve also demanded those same funding bodies “perform”. And it’s the measures of performance that seem to be the issue. For NZOA it seems (from the outside) that the performance measures are commercial ?!?
So I guess the thought is how much do we as a society want to spend on building developing or maintain NZ art?
And why are we doing that?
If the answer to the second question is – so we can earn export dollars from the art then I think we should stop spending the money right now. But if the answer is – because it’s good for a society to have indigenous art – then cool keep spending the money. But make sure the measures of performance are consistent with the reason for spending the money in the first place.My gut feeling is if you judge the art/music/film/tv you fund on it’s artistic merit and support it on that basis then the best stuff will probably earn you export dollars anyway. The corollary is of course if you judge art etc on it’s potential for commercial success it will be crap.
Sorry long post
Cheers
Bart -
Oh dear, are there others whose spritual home is Upton Park? We must be strong for one another, these will be testing times.
The Zamora goal against Everton is on You Tube and provides sustenance.Is it more than coincidence to find so many other Hammers here? A matter of taste, or something else?
-
DanX,
Speaking of NZ music wikis, there is already one for Hamilton - http://htown.elwiki.com - which is ridiculously extensive and informative.
-
It seems to me the problem is, that at the same time the government has created funding bureaucracies to encourage artists to produce indigenous art (so we don’t have to rely on only foreign muck), they’ve also demanded those same funding bodies “perform”. And it’s the measures of performance that seem to be the issue. For NZOA it seems (from the outside) that the performance measures are commercial ?!?
NZOA has a bunch of different targets - although it should be noted that those don't include the radio targets, which are reported to the radio industry's own oversight committee.
But its job, to some extent, is bums-on-seats - or rather, hours on radio. So if it's got lots of local music played on radio and TV, it's doing its job. Its job isn't to play tastemaker - although its brief does include innovation.
As Simon noted, Brendan Smyth has achieved a lot there, and he is a genuine music fan. But I think that its early successes got NZOA given roles that aren't really those of a broadcast funding agency.
But if you start looking for support from the industry development agencies, you get much further into bean-counting. Maybe the Music Industry Commission is the right vehicle, but there ain't much budget there.
This actually puts me in mind of something Arthur Baysting said to me (in 1999, I think) about why it had been so hard to get support for music - because the music industry straddled art and commerce and didn't quite fit anyone's box.
-
Why does anyone even try to make a living as a musician (or an artist, painter, writer etc. for that matter)? Masocihism, obsession, sheer bloody-mindedness or all of the above?
~ because it's not about trying to make a livingAh, is that why they get a 'special' dole? One that means they don't actually have to look for work, unlike other unemployed?
all artists should be told that they can only produce great art when they are starving, miserable, and about to end it all. They have no right to expect otherwise. After accepting this, in writing, only then are they entitled to a small government grant every now and then.
I hear rumours that the Govt's new first-home buyers assistance packages will be 'trialled' with 'artists' first .... hmmm, I must re-aquaint myself with the tambourine ...
-
Ah, is that why they get a 'special' dole? One that means they don't actually have to look for work, unlike other unemployed?
For 12 months, detailed business plan must be submitted, accounted up the wazoo. It's not really a handout.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.