Posts by Simon Grigg
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Although there were no "official" statements issiued on this at the time there were people (Ashley Kozac springs to mind, yes I am that old and I was there) who saw "Disco" as a way of improving sales of records that required no real bands. Session musos and producers, such as himself, could produce records without relying on real bands and live performance and the sales push would be through "Discos"
Oh twaddle. Sure the music industry made some fast money out of disco (and even more when it mutated into house) but the real investment was always bands. Do you want me to give you a list of the bands who were getting substantial investment and returning massively at the time, or will I leave that to you since you were there.
Ah, yes, the unlamented Mr Gladding. No longer part of RIANZ, or Sony, I believe.
er...laugh all you want Mark, but Michael is / was one of the true heroes of the New Zealand recording (as in recording local acts) industry. I could start a list here which would continue down the page of the acts that he funded, supported, recorded and released that he simply didn't have to (and risked his job doing so).
He was one of the cornerstones of the reformation of the major labels in NZ in the 1990s from foreign companies who released 'product' to active players in the development of NZ's musical landscape.
-
It was run by the musicians union and opposed by the recording industry
What 'recording industry'? Where? Sorry Steve, that, is just nonsense on so many levels.
-
I've been overseas for about 15 of my 50 years (Singapore as a child, Australia, UK and now almost 5 years in South East Asia as an adult) and clearly, as my post total on this blog is evidence, I'm neither want or am able to let go.
I miss mostly the people, and the comfy, intelligent conversation that I slip into when I'm home, oh, and of course, too, the vistas...Piha, just to increase the chorus, is one of those things I get misty-eyed over.
I don't miss Vegemite or Marmite and find decent coffee ain't that hard to find anywhere now, outside the USA where it remains a mystery.
But for that, I don't miss the parochialism, nor do I miss the distance which prevents me from doing the thing I love most, travelling (and, luckily, getting paid for it...I'm writing this from Doha, on the way to Dubai, he says gloatingly).
Nor the aggressive and in your face violence, physical or verbal, that NZers seem to think is acceptable.
Will I come back to NZ? Perhaps, but right now it's rather unlikely. But I'll never let it go.
-
To me that's a frustrating mix of "wow, beautiful, poignant song etc etc" with "why in God's name is the whole thing cheapened by being televised with appropriate commercial breaks and piece to camera's?"
As Russell says, America is back.
But, I'm happy to enjoy the 'awww' moments. There's plenty of time for cynicism comin' atcha in the months ahead.
-
The point I''m trying to make is that 99% of known income doesn't equate to 99% of copyrightable material and in new zealand's case the ratios are very much in the other direction, mainly because new zealand's musical output isn't that profitable on a global scale and hence not that appealing to fund.
But the point is, pretty much everything that's likely to be affected, assuming such copyright extension happened in NZ (and that is not planned unless I missed it), wouldn't be under threat until about 2030, and, given the the likely speed that technology is changing, and the acceleration in this change, I'd hope that some sort of resolution in copyright definition happens within that timespan.
And, regardless of how New Zealand is affected percentage wise right now, I suspect any resolution is likely to be more global rather than local.
-
That would be the leaders of Cuba, Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Iran, Syria, Burma, North Korea. Hamas as well.
Or Egypt, those wonderful central Asian nations, Saudi Arabia and a whole bunch more that seemed to have slipped your list.
Not like you to wallow in hypocrisy James.
Oh, wait.....
-
most of his catalogue wasn't shihad/bic/pluto/straw peple
+ Shona / Greg: most of what sold was. Warratahs being to obvious exception.
Half those things you mention were one off singles, and the bulk of the rest was label owned and paid for. Not much owned by the acts themselves.
-
What about the mee mees / blams stuff, didn't you go into hock for that? I assume you booked and paid for it.
yep, although some of the 'hock' was covered by gigs in the case of the Blams.
-
I know he sold bic runga's early recordings to them but there's a lot of other stuff he's run through the label, did they buy all that?
Bic, Strawpeople, Shona = Sony
Greg J, Pluto = EMI
Shihad = Warners
I realise that vast amounts of stuff sits owned by acts but mostly it remains unreleased or of minimal interest to the buying public, hence it has little financial value (cultural is another whole thing). But as I said in my first post, the percentage increased dramatically in the post punk years, after 1980.
But much of it is still owned by labels, not acts.
The FN thing is interesting as it's also a common afliction, where labels think that because they released something, they have some sort of ownership. I think the ownership is jointly, in lieu of paperwork, defined by who paid for it and / or who commissioned it.
There is a mass claimed by majors that clearly fits neither of those. I suspect FN was a lot like that but I think there has been much tidying up. I'm sure the same applies to the likes of Rough Trade.
I control the early Suburban Reptiles stuff because I paid for it and the band recorded it at dates I booked. Phonogram released it but that didn't give them ownership.
-
The real holdouts are down to 20% of the population.
Sixty million people is a fairly large chorus
I felt that he was honouring the servicepeople rather than the war. No?
true, but as time passes there seems to be an increasing national amnesia on much of what happened in SEA. It was not alright.
But saying 'we actually have to act decently rather than just pretending we can do whatever we want' is leaps and bounds ahead of the last guy, surely?
Absolutely, and at least someone at least understands the periphery of the problem. But I still don't think America has come to terms with, or been able to ask, the post 9/11 question 'why?' yet, and doesn't look likely to in the near future.