7 October 2010

21 September 2010

Another Mercury Prize year has come and gone, and I’m left wondering if it’s time to either call it a day or change it very dramatically. The cool and happenin’ XX trio won and in so doing has been declared the best we can produce over twelve months. Sad is what it is because it’s now apparent that our “best” is just nowhere near good enough. It really is time for the powers-that-be at the Barclaycard Mercury Music Prize to reveal the 200 entries from record companies that for some unknown reason are kept secret. So what changes are needed to make this prize actually mean something? For example, assemble a more diverse judging panel and change it every year. Create a category for ‘debut album’ so there are two prizes. Pay far more attention to heavy rock records which the UK was famed for (and no, Biffy Clyro’s record was not a heavy rock one by any stretch of the imagination). Reveal all entries. Substantially reduce entry fees and allow CDRs to be submitted without sleeve notes or artist names for initial blind judging. Allow artists to submit albums, in addition to record companies.

http://www.shakenstir.co.uk/index.php/features/gaga-and-the-death-of-sex/features/20608/

Camille Paglia’s cover feature for The Sunday Times Magazine was a beauty, and one of the finest music pieces I’ve read in many years. Her principle subject matter is Lady Gaga, however, Paglia has used the piece to highlight other problems which exist today. Paglia peels each layer of the onion to reveal her truth - one I mostly share. At the heart of what she writes are two fundamental realities: we have become far less descriminating in making our choices; we prefer fantasy to reality - the fantasies created by marketing and production ‘experts’. Do I agree with everything she is saying? Well, not quite. For example, I don’t share her admiration for Madonna and would argue that in terms of vocal skill Gaga wins hands down. That said, Paglia’s piece is not about skill, it’s more about originality, hype and mind-games. I remember the Lady Gaga campaign which started several months before the album landed, when the media had already proclaimed her as being the ‘next big thing’. The amount of money pumped into videos, production, advertising, PR, etc., etc. in total has to represent one of the largest budgets of all time (if not the largest). Radio and TV coverage I guess has also provided quite exceptional and record-breaking coverage. Many millions bought her music, watched her videos and followed her on Internet social networks - we took the bait big-time and are now being manipulated like puppets; they pull the strings and out come the credit cards…

Consider, for a moment, inverse ratio and the 80/20 rule. Put simply and taking a large record company as an example, this means 20% of the record label’s artist roster contributes 80% of sales (and by implication, profits). With Gaga and certain other artists we’re now seeing this 80/20 ratio changing to more like 80/10 with record labels channeling more money into less acts in the hope of securing a higher return. They know the BBC and Channel 4 will play ball and that other radio and TV channels will then fall into line, and that TV talent shows will continue to supply market-ready artists.

The problem is that this policy of spending more on less will translate to even less expenditure on finding and developing new, un-hyped talent. Lady Gaga has cleaned up the music and video awards, walking away with armfulls of trophies for music and video that has cost blockbuster movie budgets to make. But how long can this go on for? And what’s left after the money runs out and all that’s left is raw talent?

It’s a sad state of affairs.

But what if Gaga had stuck to her real name and touted herself and her songs to the public, media and record companies without the crazy makeovers? How successful would she have been? Would her talent have been even recognised? I think we all know the answer to that one. Change what you are to something totally different; go Gaga; and immediately the media sniffs a story with potential for legs. It has reached a point where it is no longer a question of aspiring to fame and fortune, but a scenario where unless you have something to offer the media, it’s all or nothing…

Dishonesty, over-hype and bias reign supreme. Millions love the Killers and you’d think that a solo offering from lead-man Brandon Flowers would sell with minimum media fanfare. But he’s been on BBC Radio 1 endlessly, with interview, exclusive live performances, and endless A-list airplay. The album is of course top of the album chart. The unremitting coverage of artists like Pixie Lott, Florence Welch, Gaga, etc, is also reflected in the album chart with these artists still figuring quite strongly after very many weeks. This blanket coverage means one thing: music and artists we should be listening to on the BBC don’t get a look-in. At some point the legislators have to ask the question: Is the BBC so biased towards certain acts and record companies that other great UK talent and great songs are being starved of airtime?

The BBC will argue that it has BBC Introducing to provide coverage to new signed and unsiged acts, but how many of them actually secure national airplay? And isn’t it really the BBC taking a two-way bet to secure talent in the rare event that it takes off? I understand that the BBC terms and conditions imposed on uploading music to BBC introducing are so harsh/prescriptive that many acts are now only uploading their worst songs…

And tonight another example of BBC R1’s massive national power/influence will be displayed. My Chemical Romance is world-premiering the first single of their new album on Radio 1’s Zane Lowe show. My questions about a publically-funded (through the tax system) radio station securing this kind of world exclusive are many, but the big one is: What is the BBC giving in return? If you were a regional commercial radio station (the only kind here in the UK outside the BBC) fighting to maintain your advertising income, how would you react? My reaction would be simple: I would refuse to play the song. There comes a point in time when principle really does matter, and on this occasion I believe all other radio stations should ban playing the single in protest, and explain why to listeners. For the BBC, this is a deal too far and for this great band and its record company a slap in the face to supporters outside the BBC.

I saw the TV show featuring Fearne Cotton where she followed Perez Hilton (real name Mario Armando Lavandeira, Jr.) around for days like a whimpering pet dog. I couldn’t understand for the life of me how or why Lavandeira had got so famous and (allegedly) rich. So I went to Wiki and checked him out. You know, it frightens me that young people look up to unsavoury and untalented characters like this. Beam me up Scotty!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perez_Hilton

The Buckley Tivoli venue has history, and a proud one at that. Many great British and USA acts have played at this art deco music palace in the North Wales town of Buckley and at one time (not so long ago) it was the ONLY venue for great rock acts, attracting fans from the surrounding areas of Cheshire and Shropshire. Well, after a period of live music ‘hibernation’ which lasted a few years, it’s back and better than ever. In the last couple of weeks we’ve covered shows there by Fun Lovin’ Criminals and new USA singer/songwriter Nell Bryden, and have not been disappointed with both the venue and performances. Housing up to around 800 punters in comfort and providing great sound/lighting together with artist care that’s second-to-none, it’s a unique north-west venue and one we hope to be visiting at regular intervals. Frankly, the North-West and North Wales need more venues like this and we just hope that agents and promotors will come to the party and put the Tiv (as it is affectionately known) back where it deserves to be.

3 September 2010

Very many moon ago; gotta be ten years ago at least; I was covering a gig in Manchester and happened by accident to see UK singer/songwriter Thea Gilmore. I listened, I watched, I was not impressed. But over the last eleven years she has managed to garner a fair amount of very positive media coverage, including some sizeable spreads in The Sunday Times - usually a passport to fame and fortune. But for Gilmore, after no less than ten album releases, she still remains very underground, even after securing BBC R2 airplay. Last weekend’s Sunday Times had another double page spread, and I’m wondering why when there’s so much better talent out there starving for even a little media attention, including Katey Brooks, Carina Round and David Ford… Next to this double page spread was another cryptic column by Sean Adams of Drowned In Sound - one day I might understand what he’s trying to say - which is coming up to its 10th anniversary online (well, I did understand something then…). But it was back in July when I actually read something I admired deeply, and understood completely. Andy Gill’s ‘Mercury Falling’ piece in the Independent On Sunday represents the kind of journalism
badly and sadly missing from the music print and online media. In fact, if there was a Mercury Prize for music journalism, Gill would walk away with it.

You can find the piece here:

http://www.shakenstir.co.uk/index.php/features/andy-gill-on-the-mercury-prize/features/20301/

Gill used the imminent announcement of the Barclaycard Mercury Music Prize shortlist to provide a brilliant summary of the state of the UK’s music industry, with this opening statement providing a pretty strong hint of what was coming:

“The nominees for music’s biggest prize are announced today. But glittering ceremonies can’t conceal the fact that the industry is in terminal decline, argues Andy Gill.”

And boy does he provide a well-researched and cogent argument on the UK industry’s demise, that even I can understand. Such is the scale of the problem that Gill couldn’t possibly cover every component/reason why the industry is in trouble in his two-page article, but maybe at some point he’ll look at the music media’s key role in creating this unfolding artistic tragedy…

And here’s another classic which I loved from Gill, this time about Coldplay back in 2008:

Andy Gill: ‘Why I hate Coldplay’

“Pompous, mawkish, and unbearably smug, Coldplay have conquered the charts with the sonic equivalent of wilted spinach, argues Andy Gill. And in the process, they’ve poisoned an entire generation of British rock music

“Without wanting for a moment to give the impression that it’s anything other than a wonderful way to earn a living, there are times in a rock critic’s life when the soul sighs, and one faces the blank screen with heavy heart and empty head. Last week was one such time.”

“A new Coldplay album.”

Here’s the link to the complete piece:

http://www.independent.co.uk/artsentertainment/music/features/andy-gill-why-i-hate-coldplay-844190.html

And another excellent Gill piece:

http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/music/features/saluting-the-old-masters-of-rocknroll-829072.html

Late last night in an idle, awake moment I fiddled with the TV control and found what I thought was a world heavyweight championship boxing match. Now I used to box myself so I am quite interested and haven’t seen a good match on TV for years. But what’s this, I thought, they’ve replaced perimeter ropes with like a fence making the ring look like an open-topped cage. There was the usual glitzy musical entrance and some weird official goings-on before each boxer entered the ring, but it was late and I really didn’t care. Then I noticed the ‘boxing gloves’ being used that looked more like leather knuckle dusters than the traditional plumped-up variety… What then followed was nothing less than horrific as all parts of the body were used to attack, and when both boxers were grounded one of them continually pummelled the other guy’s face. The canvas was heavily blood-splattered and after just one round the attacked boxer was in a dreadful state. I had to switch off it was so horrific, but before I did I noticed that the more violent the match became, the more vociferous and excited the crowd became. It was blood-lust, pure and simple!

I paused for thought about this dreadful event and came to the conclusion that there are parallels here with the whole celebrity, reality show thing where the media is just waiting for something to go wrong. Take for example the X-Factor shows and the excruciating performances from deluded, talent-less people, or the pitiful antics of the Jedward twins now being played out on TV virtually every night. Or maybe Project Catwalk where, unlike the USA equivalent, designer competitors are asked on each show to declare who of their number is the worst designer (in reality they are all very poor in comparison with their USA counterparts) thereby creating an increasingly combative atmosphere. Even when asked to defend their own designs participants instead choose to batter their competition… The whole ‘celebrity thing’ has gotten out of hand with one TV channel in particular showing series based on Mr and Mrs Price, Dannii Minogue, Jedward, Peter Andre, The Saturdays and the most horrendous show called Paris Hilton’s BFF (Best Friends Forever) where pathetic young Americans vie for the position of becoming Hilton’s best friend. And people actually watch this garbage which is dominated by the common theme of minimum talent, maximum attention…

And on the subject of limited talent… I was watching the news coverage of our Foreign Secretary (Hague, the one who shared a double room with his male personal assistant) leaving some building in Whitehall. Suddenly a photographer stuck his camera within inches of Hague’s face and rattled off a few shots. I see this time and time again, paparazzi not even bothering to look through their camera viewfinders in the hope of capturing a big money image. It’s another profession where talent and integrity come a poor second to bottle, balls and greed.