[lighthouse]

The news that Sony and BMG have joined forces is bad news for British music. It means that our own major record company - EMI - have become the smallest of the so called big 5 entertainment corporations. Yesterday I had a look at our own singles and album charts and out of both top 40s we had 5 recognisable UK labels in the singles and 6 in the albums. We might have UK acts signed to the other companies but as their share of the profits via a wage or royalty percentage is small compared to the rest does this mean that the serious money (and therefore control) goes abroad? Will this mean less money for britain to invest in its own vast array of musical styles in the future?

[Tipacanoe]

There's not much there anyway. Me, I buy Ace.

[Pacalis]

Ahh , the Music Industry They are pretty much in a bind do to the fact that there is simply no talent in the industry any longer. Hence the revival of Musicians from the sixties , seventies, & eighties. When the best you have to offer are people like Spears, J. Jackson etc. , they have no choice but to merge or close. For instance, Paul McCartney's current world tour is expected to gross more than any other this year. The baby boomers are the largest populace and I don't believe we'll be buying many of the newer recording artist music. The most popular radio stations in the U.S. are the ones playing "oldies". Boy, do I feel old now .

[Cédric]

Originally Posted by lighthouse

The news that Sony and BMG have joined forces is bad news for British music. It means that our own major record company - EMI - have become the smallest of the so called big 5 entertainment corporations. Yesterday I had a look at our own singles and album charts and out of both top 40s we had 5 recognisable UK labels in the singles and 6 in the albums. We might have UK acts signed to the other companies but as their share of the profits via a wage or royalty percentage is small compared to the rest does this mean that the serious money (and therefore control) goes abroad? Will this mean less money for britain to invest in its own vast array of musical styles in the future?

I hope there are still indie record companies which organise the "résistance", no? and honestly, I don't agree with people who say British music is dead. What about Franz Ferdinand, Portishead, Tindersticks, the Divine Comedy, the Rapture, Radiohead etc...? All those great bands! Nothing to do with Madonna or Jackson!

[lighthouse]

How many of the apparent 'Indie' labels are actually that independent? A lot of 'Indie' companies are actually subsideries of major labels anyway. Food = Parlophone/EMI, Indolent = BMG, Independiente = Universal, and before Alan McGee disolved it Creation was half owned by Sony. It could be argued that Richard Bransons V2 are an independent in that they are owned exclusively by him. It's interesting how you mention the Divine Comedy as they were on a small label called Setanta before signing to Parlophone/EMI. Sony can be a bit of a death knell for a band as we had a pretty good 90s group called Echobelly who did rather well signed to Fauve records, then tranferred to Sony who apparently didn't really understand the band too well and their 3rd album suffered as a result. Indie labels are really important because they allow for experimentation without huge financial implications, but we need a healthy major record company to keep up the momentum. Not totally sure that EMI have made the right decisions in recent years though (Robbie Williams getting a reported £80Million advance to try and break into the US market a couple of years ago springs to mind here).

Another problem we have in the UK is that when a lot of the bigger British bands began we had programmes on local radio (BBC and Commercial) that would play their records and therefore give them that all important early publicity. Most of that has disappeared and the ILR market now just has a narrow playlist of the usual stuff (Kylie, Britney, Timberlake, Lopez etc) and not much else. The radio scene of the early 1990s was rather different and provided a springboard for a lot of what I suppose you'd describe as 'Credible' or at least original artistes. The centralisation process of recent years has made it difficult for local bands to get that crucial early airplay. The dearth of local radio output has led to some record plugging companies closing their local/regional radio departments completely.

There's a cynicism in a lot of it nowadays and a sense that it's somehow had the vitality drained from it. Looking forward to the Pogues christmas tour as an antidote to a lot of that, which should put some of the fun back into it. But then an Irish band is gonna be pretty true to the rock and pop spirit as they provided an enormous influence on a lot of the stuff we call popular music these days anyway . Paul McCartneys tour might be selling well, but is there a 21st century equivalent of Skiffle going on somewhere in provincial land to keep the vibe alive into the new millenium? Even if there was you'd have to have a UK label that not only released the record but also manufactured the audio equipment that you played it on - erm - like EMI used to do.................when the Beatles began!

[Paquadez]

Hopefully, LH, the web will increasingly provide a platform for new talent. I emphasise the word, "Talent".

Rather like the movie industry, they are far to keen on re-makes of earlier blockbusters, which with indifferent contemporary "Actors" pale into insignificance, when compared to the original.

Let's face it, when movies are being made of video games, comic strips and kid's stories, something is seriously wrong.

The modern "Music" biz, to me, is all about finding some kids, who can pretend to sing, are not too bad at miming, can't play any instrument to save their life, but are OK at jiggling about, pretending they can dance.

There is a heap of real telent out there, but as with all communications media, today, including books, unless you are (e.g.) David Beckham, it is a real struggle to find a publisher. And of course, it would take a vast effort, to convince me, that a guy why cannot even string three words together, has not grasp of English grammar, can actually write!

Most of the stuff, today, is plain BS.

However, when major corporations throw their marketing muscle and financial clout behind any duff product, it is amazing how many muppets go out and buy it!

Paq

[columbo]

I think Paq is right. A lot of these large companies are fighting the concept of making music available through the internet, because they know that it would force them to make their product that much better.

I think it's brilliant that a lot of up-and-coming musicians are able to provide the listening public with access to their material via personal websites, or other web services that enable people to download music on a per-song basis.

Prince (or the Artist formerly known as the Artist formerly known as Prince ) is a good example. Not that I'm a big fan of his, but I do know that he essentially broke ties with Sony around 10 years ago, and was one of the first well-known musicians to embrace the whole "internet-downloading" thing.

[twotugs]

Originally Posted by columbo

I think it's brilliant that a lot of up-and-coming musicians are able to provide the listening public with access to their material via personal websites, or other web services that enable people to download music on a per-song basis.

Magnatune is an awesome site for downloading or listening to indie stuff. I found through iTunes, of all places.

I had more that I'd written for this post, but after walking away for a smoke and coming back to review it seemed more like a quixotic diatribe than a constructive contribution to this thread. So I deleted it.

But it did feel good to use the words "Radiohead" and "turgid" in the same sentence.

(Sorry, Cédric, I just had to get that in.)

[lighthouse]

Oh oh - Twotugs - Thread rules NO DISSING INDIVIDUAL BANDS/ARTISTES - even if it might seem like a cathartic experience to do so (Thoughtfull pause) But then, if you're gonna use these posts to support your fave bands,.......... in the interests of editorial balance...................................(Dry sardonic laughter).

Paq: You don't suppose the endless supply of remakes suggests a lack of ideas in the Hollywood production office? Probably! The italian job, Get Carter etc - all classics, but Sylvester Stallone saying the immortal line "You're only supposed to blow the b****y doors off " sounding like Rambo doesn't really work does it. The banality of it all isn't helped by the mountain of Celeb mags churned out by the minute either. One of the only things I remember from last years Christmas TV (the annual filmathon to digest your yuletide dinner to) was a french film on Channel 4. The French seem to able to make original and entertaining movies without all the gimmicks, expensive 'stars', and hype that saturates so much of the other stuff these days.

TT: Radiohead might evoke criticism from some, but they figured that putting a few songs out on the net before the album release date actually helped promote the finished product. Yeah - record companies aren't exactly supportive of internet exchanges of music by unsigned independant artistes, but their A&R people could break the atrophic state their biz has got into and click into it to see what their over corporatised juggernaughts ignore.

TV seems to play a bigger part in Pop these days with the continuous "Pop stars" "Fame Academy" type shows with a view to giving us the 'stars' of the future. Here, the whole "Pop Stars" formula was made a mockery of by the fact that the winners of the first series (Hearsay) imploded about a year after and their careers have been somewhat eclipsed by the shows runners up (Liberty X). Record companies love these programmes though because they don't have to pay out R&D advances to the artistes who will win - most of that is paid by the broadcaster. So record companies get their performers on the cheap.

The sad thing is that these days people seem to be losing respect for it all, and (apart from a few notable exceptions) it doesn't seem to be doing much to sort that out either. But then Rock and Pop culture is 50 years old and maybe - like anything else - nothing last for ever in it's current form. Having said that, it's an awfully tacky and ignomineous ending to something that gave generations a lot of fun and inspiration over the years!!!

[lighthouse]

.....................and then putting people who may have made valuable contributions to it over the years to the slaughter probably didn't help either. I mean, it's a bit of a disincentive isn't it! Will the person/people who pushed the self-destruct button at some point over the last 10 years or so own up! I'm not sure there's a lot left at all these days, and much has been made about Liverpool being European capital of culture in 2008 - but that's 3 years away. Long enough in the hecticness of normal 21st century endurance, but an absolute eternity in music. It's the same amount of time seperating "Love me do" and the altogether more adventurous "Rubber Soul" album, or "Revolver" and the demise of the band that wrote it. Even that of Monterey and Altamont!

In more contemporary terms, it's the difference between the "Definately Maybe" album - heralded as one of the defining records of the 90s - and "Be here now" - equally famous, but, erm, for less flattering reasons. It's the time it took for Damon Albarn to change from being the Steve Marriot of the last decade to announcing that Blur were no longer a Brit Pop band - proving his point with the raucous 2 minutes of "Song 2" in 97..................And Brit pop generally? - That was 1994 to about 97! Then of course, when the 90s scene(s) imploded it/they took a lot of music press with them. Melody Maker, Vox magazine, Select etc, and the 'Maker' wasn't a bunch of trendy 90s chancers either - they were reviewing early Beatles, Stones, and Small faces albums decades before the era of Merseybeat 2 and a half, and Mods 3. (Merseybeat 2 being the time of the Las, and Mods 2 the 1979-81 revival).

The 90s - Mmmm!?!

Hey but then there's always the Darkness Ok - but do they have the staying power of the 'Maiden' or ACDC, the all out rock and roll credentials of Motorhead? I guess only time will tell !!!

[lighthouse]

....................and then, doing to some of them (if it was) as was done to me isn't much of a thankyou either! Quite the opposite. Gigs over and all that!

Can I go home now?

[lighthouse]

A lot of our musical success is rooted in that thing called the "British invasion". Remember those TV pictures of the Fab 4 and a load of others in and around 1964 - 65, getting off the plane at Kennedy Airport, and the greeting from the gathered crowds? I'm not sure that we could do that again, and 9/11 has altered the American psyche so much that a new entrenchment seems have emerged in the fall-out. Every time a large group of Americans get together you seem to get that chant "USA, USA, USA" - even at a Madonna show - where even the most famous female music star in the world's words of pacifism were met with the collective "USA" response. I'm not sure it's particularly jingoistic, but it suggests a consolidation of Americanism in the hearts and minds of the people that might not have been there before. Would this make it difficult for UK music to maintain its momentum in the biggest rock and pop market in the world, as the most self-contained country on the planet (ethnically and culturally) digs in for the long haul of the 21st century?

Also one of the biggest mistakes Britain made was becoming more americanised. There's nothing wrong with this, but what it means is that we end up effectively trying to sell to the USA something they have plenty of already. In the UK we have an expression "Selling coals to Newcastle" - and it seems a bit pointless trying to convince a country that already has just about every imaginable culture anyway about the virtues of our increasingly homogenised product. Does this mean that when those durable and consistantly popular stalwarts of British music - McCartney, Mick, Keef, Ray etc - really do get too old to rock and roll (and even the 70s lot are in their 50s now) is that really it for Pop UK?

[lighthouse]

I'm looking forward to the Pogues Christmas tour because it's gonna be reminicent of 'the good old days before the ghost town - when we danced and sang as the music played in a de-boom town' (Specials). Y'know, when anyone could go to a gig and enjoy themselves, before things got a bit wierd in the 90s. Popular music seemed to have a bit more to do with the populace in those days and morale was good in the opposition because people were getting R&R (one for John Kerry there - I believe). Oh yeah - check out "And the band played waltzing Matilda" by the Pogues if you're looking for a more contemporary take on the anti-war song than Country Joe's "Feel I'm fixin' to die". It's funny actually - Joan Baez and Geoffrey Shurtleff dedicated "Drug store truck driving man" to Ronald 'Reaganzapp' at that festival, and I wonder whether it's not just the DJs who "Sure don't think much like the records they play" these days. Has the mythos of not mattering who you are etc died in the music scene as well? Probably!!! Do too many yuppies spoil the scene?

Anyone got "I'm goin home" by Ten years after by the way? Ahh - that'll be on the same album

[lighthouse]

I also reckon that it suffers from its own inertia - a sort of metastasis, that after you might have had some involvement with is very difficult to emerge from. It - and the resulting celebratocracy - has become as suffocating as Ceaucescus regime, or Husaks omnipresence in pre 1989 Czechoslovakia. A situation compounded by certain reportage has led to a new monolith that throttles the potential for new ideas, and stifles the enthusiasm for interest in the existing ones. I lost interest in our music because I simply got bored of it. The endless repitition, the total unexcitingness of it, the constantly hearing about peoples lavish lifestyles that might as well be happening on the other side of the universe. It all got desperately tedious, and - as someone who has had an involvemement with the 'biz' - the only time I ever got into anything that had any dynamic about it was when I got away from it. It needs something to revitalise it, but not just another sound, or set of clothes, or even a new street language - it needs a change of attitude and a new honesty. It needs to dispell its own cynicism. The world generally is changing as the 21st century moves through its first decade, and the attitudes within the culture that is supposed to be the most accurate record of that reality has to change with it. It's not enough to simply act as a mirror to reflect the realities of life any more though, because that won't make it a part of that global change. It has to get in there - wherever 'there' might be and play its part in improving that reality. It has to realise that its omnipresence in all our lives affords it many privileges in society hitherto unknown, but those privileges also have certain responsiblities. The world isn't getting smaller, it's the 'biz' that is getting bigger, and it has to adapt to it's new set of circumstances accordingly. If it doesn't then its current incarnation could go the same way as a lot of regimes did in 1989.

[alex_holker]

Originally Posted by lighthouse

One of the only things I remember from last years Christmas TV (the annual filmathon to digest your yuletide dinner to) was a french film on Channel 4.

"The Three Kings" was it? I'll have to have a look around and see if it is possible to buy it. I personally would not judge the entire film industry by the Christmas movies, the above film probably is the first one since "Scrooged" that I've actually liked.

Now back to your regularly scheduled thread.

Alex