Posts by Simon Grigg
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Hard News: A few (more) words on The Hobbit, in reply to Russell Brown,
It proposes turning broadcast music funding into a folky version of Creative New Zealand
Which is where Rob and I differ. I'm not advocating any such, what I see as fairly narrow and rather indefinable, cultural approach.
Indeed, as I said above, I'd rather strip the word from the guiding document and more radically revisit the aims of funding. I do tend to think that the cultural aspects will sort themselves out and have faith that those that make the music are creating that vague thing whether they try or not.
I'm also extremely dismissive of the idea that something is not 'ours' because I don't like it.
What does irk me though is that we seem to be working from a mandate that was constructed in a past era - not only pre-digital, but pre-massed acceptance of the stuff we make by the the broadcasting media, and, to a much lesser degree, by middle NZ.
The last parameter has been achieved (we are still struggling with the first) so we should use that advantage and achievement to go to a yet to be fully defined next level.
The report still seems to be reworking that mandate.
-
Hard News: A few (more) words on The Hobbit, in reply to Russell Brown,
He makes the point that NZOA needs to develop better connections with "stakeholders".
Indeed. I think Chris, knowing him as I do, attended to this with gusto, energy and focused determination. He's a person I respect (and like) a lot.
As I said elsewhere, my problem is not that he failed to find the injuries but that the band aids miss them, which is not necessarily his fault. And that's all we seem to get from this - band aids.
The political will is missing now but a bigger review of what we are trying to achieve is perhaps well overdue.
-
Hard News: A few (more) words on The Hobbit, in reply to Russell Brown,
Unfortunately, we sold our stick in trade negotiations, unlike Australia and Canada.
I didn't realise that our capitulation was that complete.
However:
They hated the idea of being competed against with their own tax money way more than they hated a voluntary local quota.
sticks come in various flavas and all it takes is the will. The will was what Labour had in 2001.
I doubt that will exists in any flavour now though.
-
Hard News: A few (more) words on The Hobbit, in reply to Russell Brown,
In principle, yes, but the practical risk is that radio will simply not play what you fund.
There is a stick in waiting although nobody knows the current state of that stick I guess. Australia and Canada both used that stick with some success.
However, more positively, radio now knows that NZ generated content works. I suspect they would be substantially less resistant than they were a decade or two back. And I'm not suggesting that Flava be forced to play Death Metal. The system falls over if we leave sensible behind.
I do think it's a shame that Mai FM in particular have been subsumed into the corporations. They provided a very healthy door that interesting stuff that was too pop for B-Net could walk through.
Ironically, the suggested lineup for an oversight group in the Mayes paper looks a bit geriatric
I'm older than everyone on that list but two. Where's my invitation?
-
Hard News: A few (more) words on The Hobbit, in reply to Russell Brown,
What policy do you put in place to ensure we get those results, though?
As a first step, I would like to see radio completely removed from the decision making level of the funding process. Their parameters are too narrow and we have people who are perfectly capable of making funding decisions that are not going to limit radio's options. However, radio should be forced to take a risk or two (although what they call a 'risk' and I call a 'risk' may be two different things).
Hell, I'd like to see a bunch of 18 - 22 year olds in the driving seat - young label owners, writers, bloggers and so on. You tell us what's cool. What's sitting out there on the edge that you know about and we don't?
-
Hard News: A few (more) words on The Hobbit, in reply to Russell Brown,
And it's a good question. How would you answer it?
I don't really want to answer it and I think the term should be pulled from any guideline. It defines itself by what we make and play.
-
Hard News: A few (more) words on The Hobbit, in reply to Kyle Matthews,
Radio stations have a brand, play a certain type of music, surely the expectation should be that they play NZ music from inside that range?
Two things: firstly radio operates on licensed airwaves that we own (but yes, they have paid for the right to use that bandwidth).
Secondly, I don't think anyone is suggesting such but in the early days of NZoA radio did slowly start playing things that were pushing their range. Chains for example or Hip Hop Holiday both sounded like songs from another planet when added to commercial radio in NZ, both building via Mai and B-Net. Supergroove are another. The last two were also extraordinarily successful beyond our shores for the same reason. Even now, when I hear Can't Get Enough in Asia, where it gets gold airplay, it stands out. And that's why it worked.
Incidently (and I really don't like harking back to it but it's a reasonable case in point here) How Bizarre, the most successful NZ song on the world's pop airwaves globally ever, was turned down initially as too different by every station in NZ on release aside from Mai FM. That was in the NZoA era.
Don't Dream It's Over, pre-NZoA, was completely ignored in NZ until it was a US hit.
The last one I doubt would happen now. The first I ain't so sure.
-
Hard News: A few (more) words on The Hobbit, in reply to Russell Brown,
It went gold last month, three months after release. Also #1, and 'Young Blood' topped the singles and airplay charts. That's really not bad going for a debut album.
My mistake, I was basing the statement on the fact it hadn't been certified when it dropped out of the chart. 26th Dec means Xmas retail orders pushed it over I guess (album certs being based on retail orders rather than sales).
Going to number one is great. All it really tells you is there was a one week spike in sales though.
The really successful NZ acts are the ones who are keeping their albums in the charts for many months - the likes of FFD who work because they are so absolutely unique (and have a tune or two). And they sell records around the world because of it.
I'd like to see the discussion pulled away from the same old players but I guess I'm hoping for too much.
-
Hard News: A few (more) words on The Hobbit, in reply to Russell Brown,
Just making things up isn't a good basis for getting the solution right.
But I would argue that rattling the cage is. Any solutions to what I see as a self constructed brick wall by the NZ industry are rather more radical than the adjustments we are likely to get.
We got NZ music on the radio. Great. What next? Because if there isn't a next it's a fail.
Perhaps we need to step back and redefine what the words 'NZ on Air' actually means for music in a global marketplace. The goals.
-
Like I said Simon, I think you’re being very generous.
Perhaps but my point was more that it offered something to discuss, something to go forward with whether you strongly disagree with it or not. The very fact you've been able to post at such length about it and argue the points is a positive.
The official report seems to have garnered rather less interest and discussion in these pages and elsewhere than Rob's.
I think the idea that there has been no progress at all in “get-ting more of New Zealand’s musical culture on air” in 20 years is absurd, although I suppose it depends on how you define “New Zealand’s musical culture”. I’d have thought, say, The Naked & Famous being all over the radio last year and Smashproof the year before would be pretty significant examples to the contrary. If you really think there has not been a significant improvment in radio’s engagement with local music in 20 years, you basically can’t remember what it was like 20 years ago.
I'm perhaps the very last person to disagree with that. Of course I can remember and I think it's a mighty thing that the Radioscope chart for 2010 had such a New Zealand dominance.
NZoA deserves the credit for that (along with the last government). You won't find me anywhere 'hating on' Brendan, quite the opposite.
However, for all that the singles chart was not an exciting place from a NZ music POV. The NZ singles that do so well on the airwaves, with honourable exceptions such as Smashproof, are soundalike (and very dated soundalike to be more ruthless) versions of things that radio liked to add from abroad and do the industry no favours in the longer term.
So yes, we have music made in NZ being played on radio stations. Where does that take us next? How do we turn that positive into something that gives our recording industry legs? Those are the questions I hoped Chris' report would address but it really doesn't (hence my terms of reference qualifier above).
It may be worth noting (although I'm perhaps reading too much into it given the times) that the album by The Naked and Famous failed, with all the hype, to even go gold. Lots of albums in our country still reach that mark though and yet this record, all over the radio, failed to excite 7500 people to buy the long player (I'm not hating on them either BTW).
What disappoints me that we seem to be painting ourselves into a corner. New Zealand is too small to sustain a viable domestic industry and needs to find a way to move what we make into the global marketplace. We do this by encouraging artists that rattle the cage, that make music rather differently or are radically individual rather than pale soundalikes.
For all the radio play and growth inside the nation it's also a sad fact that the music we produce has mostly a lower global profile now than it did a decade back. Even in Australia.
For me that's where the discussion needs to go next but we missed an opportunity to do that and just getting radio to play songs that they don't feel threatened by isn't enough.