Posts by Simon Grigg
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
who's talking about old musos?
most of these people are under 20.
you got to get out more simon :)I get out a lot. Age is irrelevant. People either want to see you or they don't. Anything else is just making excuses, which is what I'm reading here.
I feel for any musician who puts their heart and soul into it but really doesn't connect. Since we're talking old, I used to look at those bands outside the punk scene in the 70s. They mostly couldn't understand why they had such lame gigs. Many were of the same age as the bands in the 'scene' pulling a crowd.
They blamed all sorts of things, not least the death of musicianship and taste and disco, but missed the point. Nothing much has changed but I'm at a loss to work out why a band with no crowd can blame p2p or piracy.
-
grass roots, ground level, reality.
not good enough for you?Nope because for every first hand account of some band who people don't want to see is doing badly I can point to an act or artist who is doing well and creating a buzz for themsleves
-
how does one USE 'traditional animism' to 'maintain control'
Suharto notoriously used Javanese spiritual beliefs to anoint himself as some sort of divine leader. To this day a large part of rural Indonesia still believes he had magical powers derived from Kebatinan. A mixture of that, Islam, a strong fist, massive underfunding of education and Western support kept him in power and control. He both increased and decreased the voice of Islam in Indonesia at various times when appropriate and played to widespread Javanese beliefs in traditional mysticism as methods of control.
-
Look band making people excited..apparently they're pulling crowds who love them
They have a buzz..go for it guys
Oh wait..old musos in Chch can't get a crowd.
Time to give up guys ..P2P has killed the industry...
-
The actual Fab 4 contracts are here
-
@RB
and also that Harrison was notoriously tight with money..hence the lyrics to Taxman.Although, having just read through the Beatles' early recording contracts I can see why
-
I haven't seen you come though with a touring act to play a shitty gig that nets less than $500 in a long while so forgive me if I'm somewhat hesitant to embrace your world view of how it all should go.
Like I said Rob, it's tough to make music that people want to buy or listen to. Blaming others when they don't gets tired. That's what I'm reading here. The world has moved on..disco is killing live music or whatever excuse you need this decade doesn't wash. Make something people want to hear and they will. The rest is just hogwash..excuses.
Once again you make the argument that these people from the 70s/ 80s are owed a living..bullshit. Why?
Still waiting for evidence...hard evidence...not bands don't make much at gigs. There is plenty of evidence out there that parts of the music industry are doing fine. Some are not. Acts that excite people make money. Acts that don't excite people rarely do.
you seem very keen to see it all go down unless I'm reading you wrong but that's cos you're income is tied up in publishing royalties.
Not all Rob, but I guess what you and I see as 'it' are a million miles apart. Time to work towards the future rather than wondering why the past doesn't work anymore.
-
the fantasy of so many nz'ers that religion is 'used to suppress thought' is highly amusing, to say the least!
Sitting in a country where it's illegal not to profess a belief in one of the six officially prescribed religions and where the dictator of the previous three decades worked actively with tame Islamic leaders and used traditional animism to maintain control, I'd argue that.....
-
I'm not a fan of the whole creating hits and chart statistics carry on that you love. that's business over art and its not what I'm arguing for. You enjoy it, I dislike it, we can agree to differ on that.
Well, as they saying goes, it's a fuck of a lot harder to make a record that people want to buy than a record that people don't want to buy. Those that make the latter often justify it by saying I'm only in it for the art.
I've released a fair number of fairly adventurous records that have sold quite well (and quite a few that have not) and am about to celebrate a club I owned for a decade that did pretty well by pushing the musical boundaries (and helped give NZ some fairly well known musical names in the process) and taking risks far later in my life than the early stuff I (gratefully) get kudos from you for.
So to be honest, Rob, I think you're talking absolute tosh.
-
sorry? where was the bit in your belly laugh comment where you grasped the predicament of the rock and a hard place the mpaa is in?
What rock and a bloody hard place. All they're trying to do is sidestep the fair use provisions and in doing so have come out looking ludicrous. This diminishes the value of everything they try to protect.
and I've clearly stated i'm not a fan of corporate media.
And yet pretty much everything I've read from you here paints you as a flag waver, rather unquestioningly so too. I think you very much advocate business over a live and vibrant art, much more than me.
I think its narrow minded to kill the existing movie or music biz cos of the top players, because that's only a portion of the picture. I've been trying to make that distinction.
You've been asked this a plenty of times..evidence please that it's dying. Changing sure but pretty much doing ok..and there is mountains of evidence to support that, some of which I've linked to.
The dying music industry seems able to produce more music than before and sell increasing number of units year by year. And companies like EMI are actually making money. You can't simply block yourself into the past, as I think you have, and fight tooth and nail to prevent change. It comes anyway. The creative industries have not been killed off. I'm as staunch an advocate of the concept of copyright and would never argue for free but I also recognise that copyright breathes if you will and the life that breath gives is what gave us things like hip-hop, which stretched copyright's boundaries and led to one of the most vibrant and important musical genres of all time.
Protect and nurture copyright but don't suffocate it, which is what I think both you and these rights organisations and corporates you champion are doing.
George Harrison was asked once about The Jam's Start, which borrowed heavily from Taxman. Was he pissed off? His response was something like "but it's such a great song". I guess he could afford it but more importantly he thought of Bright Tunes and MY Sweet Lord, but but in both cases he knew that the technical breach of copyright added to the original and gave society something more back.
As does the use of visual material from copyrighted items in the classroom..and not as a grainy DV shot from a TV. The US courts recognised that very basic idea.