Music Biz Rantings
I'm sure many of you readers agree that there's a lot wrong with the way today's music scene is handled and/or governed. Whether your gripe is about Live Venues, Promoters, the Record Industry or even websites like this, have your say. Send me your rantings about what's disagreeable to you - I'm not guaranteeing that your rant will appear here but if it's really justified and constructive it probably will.
RANT! - It really annoys me at gigs that some people go there to talk rather than
listen to music! When the music is loud it is almost impossible to hear what
other people say anyway, so that means that people shout - when a song ends
the level of chatter can be extremely high. If I was in a band I would be
extremely annoyed that people ignored my performance and talked instead. If
you want to talk while the band is playing, go and join the smokers outside! ~ Al Toxic says : Me too! I agree absolutely Al. But, it seems to be that almost anything goes nowadays. I'm not sure who's to blame though - is it the fault of the artist for not captivating his audience or not making an issue of the 'noise'? Does the problem lie with the venue owner or promoter? Should he / she take more control in this matter and 'point the finger' at the noisy ones? Or should we as the paying audience do something? The artist is often too scared of upsetting the audience to make an issue of it, the owner/promoter often doesn't care coz he's / she's getting good money on the door and at the bar and us poor sods in the audience risk life and limb if we step in. It's a bit of a no-win situation that seems to be getting worse with time. I don't know the answer and I'm just as pissed off as you mate but I'm a smoker so don't chuck them outside, I want to smoke in peace and quiet!
RANT! - I'm not a music bloke, but I'm trying to raise the profile of ruddy
great big spanner that UK music royalties have put in the music
streaming in business.
I've written a blog for the IT mag I work on, but to be perfectly
honest no one reads the PC Plus blog. I interviewed Tim Westergren
recently, the founder of Pandora.com and it seems they want to launch
in the UK, but the way that compositional and lyric royalties are
calculated for music streaming channels means they'd have to pay 35 to
45 per cent of their gross revenue.
I think it's a joke and I don't even care that much about music! What
I do care about is unfairness though. I don't like the idea of the
music industry preventing disruptive technologies like personalised
music services from thriving in the UK.
The trouble is it's not an easily explainable situation. Traditional
Internet radio (with talking and a few songs being played an hour)
only pays a flat rate royalty fee of 5.75% of gross revenue, but any
service that pumps out tracks one after the other (like Pandora.com)
falls foul of a clause that demands a payment of 0.085p per song per
user. This clause only kicks in when the payments of 0.085p per song
played and users listening goes beyond 5.75% mark. Imagine how many
songs are played per in an hour with streaming music then times it by
the number of users and you have serious royalties bill on your hands!
All Pandora.com (and any other music streaming service that wants to
launch in the UK) wants to do is get a fair royalty bill for
compulsory licensing, so that ALL artists get paid for their music
being broadcast over the Internet in the UK. Unfortunately, some music
streaming services are compromising and doing deals with the record
labels direct. And that's great for the signed artists, but what about
the unsigned artist? Well, they get nothing.
Here's the link for the blog and a piece that was done on tech.co.uk
(our sister online tech portal - which no one really reads to be
honest!).
http://blog.pcplus.co.uk/page/pcplus?entry=the_fight_for_internet_radio
http://www.tech.co.uk/computing/internet-and-broadband/news/uk-internet-radio-strangled-at-birth?articleid=577105443
I've started a petition at Number Ten as well to gauge support. If you
want to use the PC Plus blog story then be my guest. I'm only
interested in raising the profile of this issue to the music-loving
public, not promoting myself in this.
http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/SaveNetRadioUK/?ref=savenetradiouk
Chris Thornett - Operations editor and News editor PC Plus magazine Toxic says : "Money, money, money" - the root of all evil! Seriously though, Chris is trying to be pro-active here and you can help out by 'signing' the petition using the link provided. Let's face it, we all get ripped off somewhere along the line; royalties, CD prices, DVD prices, gig prices etc. Anyway the 'big guns' can do us down they will! They seem more than capable of 'crucifying' music lovers in any number of ways and every time a new 'media' comes to the fore you can bet there'll be someone somewhere rubbing his/her hands just waiting for the pennies to roll in.
RANT! - Reading the recent rant about 'the good old days' when artists had
freedom of expression is viewing things with rose tinted specs. Back in
the seventies (until punk) you needed a shed load of cash n equipment
and a chateau in france to record. I think the music scene today is in
better shape than it has ever been. For a few hundred quid anyone can set
up a studio with a computer in their back bedroom and create some
splendid music. Home recording/Myspace music/the internet has created a
revolution for musical creativity and kicked the arses of the big record
companies. Stop yer moanin', get busy with a guitar port n computer and
get creative. The real problem as I see it is lack of decent live
venues..and that will only change if people get out and support good
local gigs....I was thoroughly surprised by the fantastic variety and
quality of music at the recent 'battle of the bands' heats at Marzy's,
and equally surprised by the lack of people at the gigs. Get in yer back
bedroom create some sounds and in between times get to some local gigs n
venues, go to jam nites n stop moanin. (Simon Charles) Toxic says : Hey, two good points Simon. Thanks for that. Yes it's surprising how little it costs to set yourself up with the software and hardware required to 'make music at home'; the results can be pretty impressive and it certainly allows those with a small budget to 'make a disc' or two. However, I still believe that it's 'horses for courses' and 'each man to his own trade' when it comes to the fine detail of getting mixes spot on, final mastering and getting top quality production. The professional recording studio is still the place to be to get the most out of the musician and it's not all that expensive to do either! Point two is something that I've never understood. With so much great talent doin' the rounds I don't know why so few people make it to live gigs nowadays. And, what really pisses me off is that if a venue puts on a free night, they bloody well flock in - charge two squid on the door and everyone stays at home. Surely, people don't really expect to be entertained for nothing - is that where live music is going - I sure hope not!!
RANT! - What happened to the days when artists could produce an album in their own time, contain it within 12" of interesting artwork and relax; content in the knowledge that the whole package could be fully appreciated by the music buying public? Don't get me wrong, there is a wealth of fabulous musicianship and artistry out there (signed+unsigned) but I just get the feeling that music isn't as fully appreciated as it used to be and I feel that it probably has something to do with the music industry. OK it has to move pretty quickly itself to keep afloat in a cutthroat world, but surely if you have a great band signed to you, you wouldn't treat them like a commodity and pressure them for that "difficult second album". Music is art and you can't force it. (Lee Badham - The George Cowley Experience) Toxic says : I think, to an extent, that's always been the case though, especially with the top labels. Nowadays with loads of 'minor' labels I believe that artists are allowed a much freer hand but they are still tied into that 'Contract'. Let's face it, the record companies are not necessarily in it for the artistry and the good of the artists are they? Many artists now prefer to be tied to the smaller labels and accept their shortcomings; smaller budgets and less exposure but possibly less pressure to come up with the goods and more control of your own destiny. In the modern world of of pc's and micro-chips, there are many more ways for musicians to access the 'public'; things are slowly changing - where will it end? Look at Gnarls Barkly - got to No.1 in the 'charts' without actualy selling a single 'disc' - many more will now try that approach. At the end of it all, the Record Companies will still take the lions share of the 'kill' leaving the creative talent to pick up the bare bones! And, if it's not a 'record' company but a media concern, someone at the helm will still want his big cut and be pressurising the 'artist' to make him even more money! Just keep creating mate and go with the flow - take pleasure from the fact that, against all the odds, you can bring pleasure to the people that really matter - the lovers of music!
RANT! - Why is it so difficult to get a decent record deal? There's a wealth of superb, unsigned bands and artists out there that simply can't get their foot in the door. Toxic says : Too true! So, come on you big cats, take more risks and invest some of those big bucks on some of the incredible talent that you're ignoring and the music loving public are missing out on through your 'monopoly' and lack of support. You've always got loads of money to regurgitate 'Greatest Hits' and 'Best Of's' - lets give the future of music a chance to re-invent itself though genuine foresight and make music 'real' again!
RANT! - How come so called Promoters can get away with creaming off so much of the cash when their input is minimal compared to the hard slog of writing and performing live music? Give more - Take less!! Toxic says : Absobloominlutely! It wouldn't be so bad if the promoters actually earned their big cut by really pulling in punters themselves. Too many still want unsigned acts to guarantee them a minimum turn-out or pay up front as a sort of deposit. Shouldn't that be the job of the Promoter? Shouldn't the Promoter be the one taking the risk? Shouldn't he PROMOTE?
RANT! - What's the crack with live music audiences. We used to be good at supporting original artists. Now the audiences seem content to listen to same-old same-old. Is it the fault of the media that we are now battered into submission by constantly seeing and hearing 'new' artists going over and over old ground. Too many are encouraged to do covers rather than nurturing creativity and originality and letting the world see what's really out there. And, too many allow it to happen by only supporting such acts - come on music lovers you've gotta take risks too! Toxic says : What more can I add? Same hymn sheet methinks!
RANT! - With longer licensing hours surely music venues now earn loads more from bar takings. Why don't they pay live acts a bigger percentage of 'door money'? Toxic says : It's probably not that simple. After all, the Venue has it's own overheads to cover and longer hours also means longer shifts for staff and bigger overheads! But, there could, perhaps, be some mileage here.
RANT! - Let's have more access to 'unsigned' acts through radio and television! If the public aren't able to access more of the unsigned bands out there, the music industry is in danger of becoming even more stagnant than it already is!! Toxic says : Can it become 'more stagnant'? Yes, surely it's false economy not to invest time and funds in new talent! Keep music live and keep it real, I say.
RANT! - Where's the successor to John Peel? The entertainment industry must make time and space to allow new acts onto our 'airwaves'. Peel made it his life's work to bring us something new. Why can't we have some of that back? Toxic says : Oh yes! Although some local radio stations do give a small slot to artists within their catchment area, I totally agree that that's just not good enough. It's important for those 'locals' to be able to get out to a much wider audience and vice versa. John Peel, as we all know, was an exception to most rules - but yes, we need more like him. John Peel, RIP.
| 
Re-start Site
|