FEATURE: Unfinished, Bittersweet: Why Classical Elements Elevate Music to New Heights

FEATURE:

 

Unfinished, Bittersweet

ALL PHOTOS (unless credited otherwise): Unsplash

Why Classical Elements Elevate Music to New Heights

__________

A few days ago…

I wrote a feature that looked at instruments: whether we are still picking them up and if, in a digital age, there is a need to learn one. It was interesting to investigate – I came out of the piece having learnt a lot about buying habits. I feel we are still buying instruments but in a less conventional way. The Internet is dominating and, although there are music shops on the high-street; we prefer the choice and value one gets from online sites. It makes me wonder how music will change in the coming years. Will artists favour machines and simulate instruments on digital tablets?! I wonder whether the conventional Rock sound will be overtaken by Electronic/Pop; a move towards something more colourful and less jagged. That is a simplified definition (of the genres) but I worry there is too much dependability on machines and electronics. I lust after the natural sounds instruments provide. I have been looking back at my favourite songs and there is a common component that comes out: a romance and elegance that can only be produced through Classical strings. It is not only strings, in fact: horns and brass; timpani and orchestral strands help take a song in a new direction. Like Jazz; there is a stuffy sector who feels that kind of music is for a certain person – it is niche and does not warrant any serious acclaim.

The title of this piece refers to two songs that employ some rousing strings: Massive Attack’s Unfinished Sympathy and The Verve’s Bittersweet Symphony. Both songs are considered anthems of the 1990s; they have got into the history books and are songs we, rightfully, hear a lot. It is more complicated than saying the strings helped get the songs to more people. The songwriting is extraordinary and the songs arrived at a time when the public craved something wonderful. Other songs in my rotation – like The Beatles’ Eleanor Rigby and Kate Bush’s The Man with the Child in His Eyes; The Cinematic Orchestra’s To Build a Home and The Streets’ Turn the Page – contain Classical input and instruments that elevate it beyond the ordinary. I am hearing a lot of modern artists assimilate strings and brass into their music. It can be quite expensive hiring musicians – many do not want to reproduce Classical strings and horns through their laptops. Whilst booking a professional musician adds a cost to recording - the result of adding that into the mix can make a huge difference. There is a perception that certain genres/instruments cannot be adapted and crossed. If you hear rousing strings and blossoming horns; teasing percussion and symphonic lust – that does not have to remain in Classical music. Look at the history of popular music and you can see the way artists have incorporated more ‘highbrow’ aspects into their songs.

IN THIS PHOTO: Max Richter/PHOTO CREDIT: Deutsche Grammophon

The reason I wanted to explore it due to misconceptions and underuse. Classical composer Max Richter has been causing earthquakes with his scales; setting his music to the words of Virginia Woolf (her last words, in fact!). All of the bands I grew up with – from The Beatles to Blur; Radiohead and The Rolling Stones to Led Zeppelin – have used Classical sounds in their music. Consider epics like Kashmir (Led Zeppelin) and A Day in the Life (The Beatles); more emotive tracks like The Universal (Blur) and How to Disappear Completely (Radiohead) – shivers are created and one is provided something truly spectacular and spine-tingling. It is the extra ingredient and kick that takes the song to rare heights. Maybe those bands have a bigger budget – and could afford to indulge their ambitions – but hiring Classical musicians need not break the bank. Modern music is utilising a lot of electronic sounds and, whilst that is proving popular, I think there is greater flexibility and potential inherent in Classical avenues. Any emotion can be simulated and produced in this corner; there is so much untapped potential artists are overlooking. There is, as I said, strings and Classical instruments need to score something quite refined and studious. Over the past few years; we have seen various songs and film-scores reimagined by using an orchestra. From Pete Tong’s Classic House project through to the Grime Orchestra/IXtra Grime Prom – there are collisions and unities that have taken one style of music and added new light and potential.

I am not a huge Classical treasurer and someone who grew up on that type of music. My exposure came young but I was always a little off-put by the lack of vocals and variation. There is a range of emotions and styles explored in Classical music: it, in its way, created sub-genres and styles of music we hear today. Bigger, edgier Classical pieces had the element of Grime and Hip-Hop; pastoral suites had a more Folk/Pop vibe; those epic, ever-changing cannons remind me of the Progressive-Rock greats. Transpose that connection and it is clear, consciously or not; artists from the past few decades take from Classical music and the variety inherent. Those who overlook Classical music ignore how complex, intricate and detailed the music is. The amount of work needed to create a Classical piece is immense. Maybe that amount of work – replicating it in the modern age – is quite daunting for anyone trying to update the wonders of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. I am not suggesting every artist needed to hire a forty-piece orchestra and book Abbey Road for a professional record - few have the potential and money to do that! There are artists, through all genres, that sprinkle in a little bit of Classic here and there. The common thread is how much is added down to something simple and unexpected.

Woodwind and brass can take a song in a new direction and provide extraordinary romance and emotion. Strings are nimble and spirited; they have malleability and can project in every direction. Classical music is one of those genres that can fuse with any other type of music. From Grime and Pop to Folk and Blues: there are no reservations; everyone is welcome to use whatever they feel. It can be quite tricky knowing what to incorporate into your music and how much – striking that balance is always hard. What amazes me is how few of the mainstream stars out there realise the potential of Classical. They put huge beats and layer electronics up; lots of fake sounds and synthetic charm to produce something quite anodyne. It can be rather jarring hearing something like that come out of the speakers: there is endless potential available to the songwriter who takes that gamble and breaks from convention. It is only a small group of musicians who are unaware of Classical music and what it can do. Maybe prices are causing restriction and limitation. One needs to get a genuine instrument and player to get the sound just right. It can be hard getting a part how you want it so, with the hire costs and studio time; the final bill can be quite steep – for something quite minor.

PHOTO CREDIT: Getty Images

Rather than consider Classical music as a necessity: it might be worth thinking about it as a treat. Every artist will go through fallow periods and lose a certain spark of inspiration. I feel a wonderful string quartet or horn section can rekindle a passion and vein of creativity. It need only be a bassoon or cello thrown into the mix to give that song unexpected nuance and vivacity. I feel genres like Folk are bonded closest to Classical – that has been the way for a long way – but other genres are starting to get in on the act. Hip-Hop and Grime acts are fusing something dignified and high-class with music that has a distinct ‘swagger’. I am not saying Grime/Hip-Hop is low-rent and scruffy: the genres are all about keeping it real and projecting a sense of reality. Melting these disparate styles of music together could be risky and backfire. If done correctly; the effect is outstanding. I would urge more modern artists to look at Classical music and how, over the decades, it has been used to heighten some of our favourite songs. Classical music has been proved to relax the mind and can increase the I.Q. – a brief spike has been noted in college students (in the U.S.) after hearing a snippet of Mozart. It can nourish and improve the mind; heal the body and help aid those with anxiety.

A couple of articles I have researched online how Classical music have inspired modern artists. One of them, produced late last year, explored how Pop choruses connect with Classical music:

“One of the main ways that classical music has impacted today’s popular music is with the chorus. The chorus, or the short melody repeated throughout most songs, was first seen during the Classical era. A vast majority of songs we hear on the radio today are structured to include a chorus. It’s typically the part of the song we remember the most, and we have the Classical era to thank for it!

The Baroque period, which is often associated with classical music, also had a notable influence on contemporary music – particularly the rock genre. Many modern rock songs copy the original intensity and complexity that you’ll observe in music from the Baroque period. Several rock artists, including Led Zeppelin and Muse, have also stated that composers from the Romantic period influenced their music.

Many of today’s pop songs are based on a handful of chords and sequences that were discovered during the Classical period. When you listen to artists like Adele, you might not even recognize the rich history that has gone into the music. Lady Gaga has also adopted Baroque themes into many of her songs”.

IN THIS PHOTO: Adele/PHOTO CREDIT: Alasdair McLellan

The Guardian, back in 2014, explored another connection between Pop and Classical masters:

“Most pop songs are based on a dozen or so of the most familiar chord sequences that were "discovered" in the late 18th century. In the present age, someone such as Adele is an original singer because of her voice, her attitude and her style. But the chords and sequences she and most pop writers are using have been around for a very long time. Perhaps the originator of the three-minute pop song was John Dowland, way back in Shakespeare's time, but I think the modern pop song was created by Schubert.

Schubert was a remarkable talent. Melodies poured out of him. He wrote 600 songs, and, like today's songwriters, his intention was to write music that would be instantly enjoyable. There's not a moment where he is trying to catch you out or where you have to listen 10 times before you get your head around a song. He wants you to get it first time; there's verse-chorus, voice and piano underneath, and he wants you to remember the chorus”.

There are famous songs inspired by Classical music and the influence is clear. The problem I have is either artists are not aware they are influenced by Classical music – that or they keep the influence hidden. It seems Pop is the biggest proponent of Classical music: songs that hark back to centuries-old music; the same dynamics and structures that delighted audiences so many years ago. That is pleasing to hear and proves you do not need Classical instruments in order to reproduce the sounds and sensations of the genre.

It can be a particular phrasing or a similar melodic progression; the way the song unfolds and the key changes employed. We know the mental and spiritual benefits listening to Classical music. It can release dopamine and open receptors that make one happier. It calms and soothes; it promotes intellectual growth and has been shown to increase the I.Q. In terms of new musicians; we know Classical has played an important role for years now. I feel we can go further and take a more overt approach to Classical. Its benefits are numerous, and so, if you want more people to respond to your sounds and stick with you – it makes sense Classical music is the way to go, right? At the moment; it seems like Classical is being heard here and there; it is more theoretical and supposed than proven and evident. I would like to see the genre take more ground and feed into the mainstream more effectively. If we can do that; we can create a richer scene and one that goes deeper and improves the body and mind. It would compel younger listeners to listen to Classical and, in the process, take up some of the instruments they hear. The benefits are numerous, and so, let’s get a lot more Classical instruments/strands into music – in a more obvious, strident and cross-genre way. I am excited seeing where music can go this year and what trends emerge. My greatest hope – although it might not happen this year – is seeing Classical music play a much bigger role…

IN the sounds of today.

FEATURE: The ’94 Vintage: How a Single Year of Music Helped Change the World

FEATURE:

 

The ’94 Vintage

ALL PHOTOS/IMAGES (unless credited otherwise): Getty Images

How a Single Year of Music Helped Change the World

__________

IN a piece tomorrow...

I will look at the time when MTV ruled the box - and music-television was hugely popular. I do not want to revisit the past too fondly but, instead, ask why we do not have anything as iconic as that in the modern time. You can argue the 1970s was a finer decade than the 1990s (you’d be wrong!); you can debate 1967 produced more iconic songs/albums (see the previous parenthesis...); you can say 1994 was an overrated year (seriously?!) – I admire anyone who is willing to launch into a purely hypothetical argument. I say that because, without bias, 1994 has provided the world of music some of the greatest, most influential records ever. I looked at 1994 last year but, the more music cries for something unifying and legendary – the more my mind goes back to the year. It is not only the music that inspires me: the year saw popular culture boom and enter the stratosphere. Although John Major was in government; there was hope the nation would regain credibility and enter a new phase – Labour came in by 1997 and there was optimism things would improve! Around the Tory wallow was an entertainment industry whose best T.V. shows and films are still being talked about today...

You can make links between album themes and film styles – how diverse the year 1994 was – but the neo-noir captivation of Pulp Fiction was the Grunge-cum-Rock film (with Psychedelia, Disco and Rock ‘n’ Roll tossed in!); The Lion King and Forrest Gump charming Indie/Pop; The Shawshank Redemption a more complex work; Clerks, Four Weddings and a Funeral the comedic, lighter offerings – Heavenly Creatures the immersive and dramatic L.P. Maybe these links are spurious and unconnected - but the vibrancy and diversity of the films (the best of) are obvious. So much quality and originality: a mixture of intense screenplays and humorous concepts. Mix in U.S. comedies hitting their peak – The Simpsons, Seinfeld and Friends among them – and you can practically smell the brilliance of 1994. We have not seen a year like it in terms of entertainment and innovation – shows and films that continue to compel nearly twenty-four years after their release. ER, The X-Files and Beverley Hills, 90210 were filling the screens and, looking back, it seemed like a less troublesome and fraught world. Maybe I am misremembering but the joy projected from the T.V. screens – and film screens – was only surpassed by the music that year.

I mention these T.V. shows and films first to give an idea of what was happening in popular culture. The best music from 1994 took from what was happening in other areas of the entertainment but, if you think about it; maybe the two are unconnected. There was inspiration in the air, for sure, but such is the magnitude of 1994’s music – I am still baffled how it managed to create such an impact. 1993 and 1995 were strong: 1994 was a biblical year that seemed to drop out of nowhere. Maybe the hangover of the late-1980s was over and, inspired by the drive and quality coming from other parts of the world – musicians were on a high and willing to change the world. There is a split between the songs and albums from that year. I will collate it all in a playlist (at the end) but, if you look at the finest songs from 1994 – you get some genius from so many different genres. Chart-riding hits like !I Swear (All-4-One) and The Sign (Ace of Base) might seem cheesy today but, back then, they were massive songs that got into the collective soul Warren G’s Regulate and Black Hole Sun (Soundgarden) showed the contrasts offered up that year: Beck’s Loser and Green Day’s Basket Case provided the best Punk/slacker polemics in American music. Kylie Minogue’s Confide in Me and Boyz II Men’s I’ll Make Love to You, sultry and alluring hits that stole focus.

IN THIS PHOTO: Kylie Minogue 

I will mention standout tracks from the best albums (of 1994) but I loved those phenomenal songs that sound fresh and desirable today. Who can resist the singalong, beguiling qualities of 7 Seconds (by Youssou N’Dour and Neneh Cherry) and the good-at-the-time-but-a-little-dodgy-now charms of The Cranberries’ Zombie?! Away from the Pop mainstream and radio-friendly hits was the incredible Dance/Club sounds that have not been bettered since then. We had the barbed wire of The Prodigy (who I shall talk about soon...) and the more accessible sounds of Reel 2 Reel and Ultra Nate. Although years earlier in the decade produced the biggest anthems from the scene; inclusions from Björk (Big Time Sensuality) and Real McCoy (Another Night) added a certain spice and colour – Livin Joy’s Dreamer a huge song that made November a pretty warm and memorable month! Toni Braxton, Corona and Baby D produced some standout singles; Aswad, Dawn Penn and Sheryl Crow lit up the radio; Salt-N-Peppa (with En Vogue), Take That and Madonna laid down their mark. The best one-hundred songs from 1994 – album inclusions and singles – can rival any year you throw at me! Whilst there was a split between the cool, edgier songs and the user-friendly cuts: look at the arsenal of genius albums and there is even more depth, diversity and wonder.

The albums that arrived in 1994, I feel, are stronger than those of 1967 and 1991. It is a close call but, look at the 1994 inclusions, and you can hardly argue. Sheryl Crow’s Tuesday Night Music Club and Hole’s Live Through This showed how two very different American female (stunning) songwriters (Courtney Love of Hole) could impress and stun in unique ways. The Americans, perhaps, had us pipped when it came to the number of ground-breaking albums that year. Nirvana’s MTV Unplugged in New York was one of their last recordings – Kurt Cobain’s suicide (in the same year) not only affected the Grunge community but inspired a wave of new, compelled bands/artists. Beastie Boys showed they had plenty of magic left in the tank – after the sublime Paul’s Boutique ended the 1980s – with Ill Communication; Weezer’s eponymous album (the first one, at least!) dazzled critics; Green Day’s Dookie remains the Punk band’s finest album to date. We have not really seen an inventive Hip-Hop album like Beastie Boys' Ill Communication in a long while – with samples and so much invention – or something as catchy, intense and hard-biting as Dookie. It is all very well listing albums aimlessly but, look at why they were so popular makes me wonder why we have not tried to replicate them. Pavement’s Crooked Rain, Crooked Rain showed how prolific the band were but, a few years later, it would inspire a flagging British band and provide a new lease of life – I will mention them when I look at the Britpop best.

IN THIS PHOTO: Tori Amos

There was no shortage of quality Rock and anthemic pummel in 1994. Pearl Jam’s Vitalogy did not have the same level of quality as Ten (1991) but, no less, was a wondrous album that got into the public's hearts. Soundgarden’s Superunknown was a biblical statement from a band that was among the forerunners of the Grunge movement. Now, with Chris Cornell (their lead) gone; I hope new bands listen to that album and realise why we sorely need a new version of Superunknown. Alice in Chains brought us Jar of Flies whilst, at the other end of the spectrum, there was something more emotive and tangible from Madonna (Bedtime Stories) and Tori Amos (Under the Pink). R.E.M.’s Monster was an album befitting of its title whilst Beck’s Mellow Gold proved the Odelay creator was starting to hit his stride (Odelay would arrive in 1996). Perhaps the greatest, and most overlooked, American album of 1994 was Jeff Buckley’s Grace. Its year of arrival was slightly unfortunate: mingling with muscular, cool-kids-records that were inspiring Alternative, Grunge and Rock fans. There was some muscle on Grace but, for the most part, it was a romantic and tender thing that appealed more to the lovers and thinkers – at a time when nothing like it really existed. Buckley’s sole studio album would gain the respect it deserved years down the line - but it was implanted into music at a time when the market was looking for something else. Regardless; it showed the diversity of 1994 and how insanely-good music was!

I have mentioned the brilliance of American music that year but, perhaps, I was too rash with my conclusions. 1994 was a year that saw the best of the U.K. align and rouse the people. The acerbic and cerebral Pulp gave the musical world His ‘N’ Hers. The Sheffield band would create finer records – 1995’s Different Class is considered their masterpiece – but any album that contains Babies and Do You Remember the First Time? cannot be ignored! It was a hot time for British bands who dug deeper than the commercial chart acts. We do not really have the same working-class warriors assessing real-life and what is happening in this country. Look back at the glory of 1994 (and how the likes of Pulp and Oasis ruled 1995) and we have a case study of how music should be. Supergrass – who would come into their own on their 1995 debut, I Should Coco – provided a tantalising insight into their world with the classic, Caught by the Fuzz. I will end the piece by looking at why the British Electronica/Dance/Techno is another reason why we need to look at the past – and why the best from the genres surpassed anything the rest of the world was pumping out...

The Britpop movement was in full-swing by 1994 and, although it would peak in 1995; there were outsiders like Suede, Pulp and Radiohead – with core/leaders Blur and Oasis fronting the movement. British music was changing and, whilst there were big hopes regarding The Stone Roses’ sophomore album (Second Coming did not match their debut, ironically); it was all about the new breed and what they were offering. Suede and Pulp produced the more refined, intellectual and dramatic music – flourishes and mini-dramas of modern life and romance. They had their core but were not commercial enough to truly break into the spotlight. Pulp would gain more ground in 1995 – as would Radiohead – but 1994 was all about the battle between Oasis and Blur. For the latter band; Parklife was their third, and finest, album. They got a smattering of applause with Leisure (the 1991 debut); Modern Life Is Rubbish was one of 1993’s best releases: Parklife was them at full-chat; an album that boasted songs like Girls & Boys, Parklife and This Is a Low. Manchester’s Oasis were the working-class alternative to the more middle-class and academic Blur. Unlike the Essex band; Oasis produced their first album in 1994. They did not need a warm-up and gradual ascent to glory: Definitely Maybe was a spectacular debut that many argue is the best record of 1994. It was unexpected and just what the music world needed!

Many felt disenfranchised and dislocated; politicians were not speaking for them and the country they lived in was changing – Oasis came along and provided guidance, anthems and plenty of great times! They were not your average pub-bound band talking about booze and girls with no intelligence and wit. Sure, they covered excess and the Rock lifestyle on a few numbers (Cigarettes & Alcohol and Rock ‘n’ Roll Star among them) but those chunky-riffed songs paled compared to the standout track: the country-uniting Live Forever. If that were waged into the 1995 chart battle between Oasis and Blur then the final result would have been different – both bands put up songs that were not up to their usual high. The cobwebs had been forming since The Stones Roses’ late-1980s debut and nothing had come along to suggest rebellion and revolt. The insouciance and clutter-freeing charge of Definitely Maybe was a swagger and scattershot – mixing Punk, Rock and Glam seamlessly – record that quenched the thirst and created a massive hunger in its wake. Oasis would start a creative decline by 1997 - but Definitely Maybe was the start of a two-year reign that meant they were the most important and celebrated band on the planet. 1995 would see Blur and Oasis compare new tattoos (Blur’s The Great Escape found them blocked in a tunnel and unable to reach the surface; Oasis’ (What’s the Story) Morning Glory? elevated their profile and meant they were untouchable).

IN THIS PHOTO: Oasis/PHOTO CREDIT: Kevin Cummings

By 1997, fortunes shifted. Blur looked to U.S. bands like Pavement and rejuvenated their ranks with their eponymous L.P.; Oasis, instead, looked more into themselves and swapped influential substances: cocaine replaced alcohol. The overblown Be Here Now gave power back to Blur: 1994 was a year when the scrappy and unfiltered northerners owned music and provided us all hope! Whilst Rock and Pop was doing sterling business in the U.K.; the fantastic movement of Dance and Electronic was gaining credibility and crowds in the underground; Bristol innovators Portishead produced Dummy: songs such as Glory Box, Sour Times and Numb became staples and club gems. Away from great British icons like Morrissey (Vauxhall & I was his best solo work to that point) and Manic Street Preachers (The Holy Bible, a remarkable work); we had the daring and high-fuelled pioneers doing something truly fantastic! British Dance and Club music would stagnate later in the decade – Basement Jaxx’s debut provided the colour and cross-pollination it was crying out for… - but, in 1994, we saw another band begin a remarkable one-two. The Prodigy's debut, Experience, was a brilliant record with stone-cold classics like Jericho and Out of Space featured. If Liam and Noel Gallagher drove Oasis’ music to the forefront; Damon Albarn the catalyst for Blur’s glory; Jarvis Cocker the wit and lead that helped mould Pulp into icons – the production and songwriting skills of Liam Howlett brought The Prodigy to the masses...

Music for the Jilted Generation took the brilliance of the debut and notched it up to another level. There were few samples but, rather than rely on other people’s work; Howlett created a dizzying cocktail of sounds that meant cheap music did not need to be poor – it was invaluable, dark and shape-shifting. Voodoo People and No Good (Start the Dance) became two of the biggest bangers of 1994 – both very different songs but each irresistible and defiant. Break & Enter and One Love are instantly recognisable, whilst some of the more minor tracks – Full Throttle and the three-song suite that ends the record among them – still had their place. It is a kaleidoscopic cocktail of ecstasy, marijuana and cocaine; beer, wine and tranquillisers – all mixed in the musical stomach and, somehow, coherent. There is no loss of stomach lining, memory of blood when those contrasting substances unite: it is an effusive and rainbow-bright epiphany that showcased a band like no other! 1997’s The Fat of the Land did not quite match the peaks of Music for the Jilted Generation – even if Breathe and Firestarter become two of the best-known songs from The Prodigy. The fact the band needed three years between releases proved how much work went into the seamlessly 'easy' and ramshackle recordings! 1994 was a phenomenal year - and one that has yet to be surpassed. I am hopeful modern music will make strides to match the brilliance (of 1994) but, twenty-four years down the tracks…

PHOTO CREDIT: Unsplash

MUSIC has not managed to reach such mesmeric heights!  

FEATURE: Tomorrow Never Knows: Vinyl, Plastic, Electronic: The Changing Face of Music Technology

FEATURE:

 

Tomorrow Never Knows

IMAGE CREDIT: Pixabay

Vinyl, Plastic, Electronic: The Changing Face of Music Technology

__________

THINGS might get a little nostalgic today…

ALL PHOTO (unless credited otherwise): Unsplash

as I delve into the history of music/technology - and how incredibly far we have come. Rather than quote from other articles and provide streaming figures: I want to show how formats and hardware have changed over the years. I was born in 1983 and, when I was younger, remembered the joys of picking up a cassette and putting it into the newly-acquired player. This is not the most scientific and business-minded feature you’ll find - but I wanted to look at the way music has shifted through my life – and whether the revolution has been all positive. The tape cassette was invented in 1962: it was a great time for British music: The Beatles were coming through and there was huge excitement in the air. Of course; fans were listening to vinyl and queuing to buy their music (of The Beatles). The invention of cassette did not instantly lead to an advent and transplant. Vinyl was still very much the chosen format of the masses and, from my parents’ record collection; they did not move to the cassette until the 1980s. I was born towards the middle of the decade but, even when I was old enough to produce memories and visions – around 1986/1987 – I remember the house was chocked with vinyl and sleeves. There were cassettes here and there but the honest record was what I heard when I was young.

I am not sure when vinyl came in but I know the first small record was printed in 1888. It was not until 1951 when Ewing Nunn founded Audiophie Records and released a series of 78 R.P.M.-mastered albums that were microgrooved - then, that was when the explosion began. In a weird way; I find vinyl to more capacious and versatile than the cassette. I am glad both are still in existence and, if anything, we are seeing a wave of artists produce their music on cassette. Vinyl has not radically altered the past few decades or so. It has got more expensive but the fact it was pretty damn-near-perfect back in the 1950s means there is no need to reinvent the wheel. Cassette, too, has not had the chance to shift and improve. One of the things that always grated me concerning cassettes tapes was their fragility. One could stick them into a player and, within seconds, hear a winding sound – to remove it and find it was unspooling and ruined. You could try winding the tape back in but, unless you got really lucky; the thing was beyond repair and gone – no real explanation why that particular album/single unwound itself to start with. Vinyl has its negative aspects but one needs to play it pretty vigorously until it scratches and becomes unplayable – the odd scratch and crackle actually add character to a record!

One of the reasons I feel the development of technology/hardware is a good thing is because we can listen to music in a more joined-up, accessible way. Vinyl is great but it is unwieldy and expensive; the record needs to be flipped and, if you are listening to a double/triple-record; you might need to unsheathe a couple of vinyl and stop-start a fair bit. Tape is laughably basic and flawed...If you want to access a particular track then you literally have to put your finger on the fast-forward/rewind button and keep checking – like someone at a petrol pump; you need accuracy and patience to get to the right point. I guess, like reel-to-reel film; it is impossible to add diverts and compartments so one can easily get to that point. It has been a few years since I last picked up a cassette tape so things might have improved; although, judging from the submissions I have sent; I know the technology is not advancing that format one iota! For all the ‘quirks’ and drawbacks; the sensation one got from picking up a tape/vinyl could not be matched. I am not going on some highway nostalgia trip but I miss the physicality of music. When I was younger, and my grandfather built a go-kart in his garage; one of the first accessories for it – it has a bar at the back where someone could stand as the driver peddled it – was a red boom-box/duel-player.

PHOTO CREDIT: Getty Images

There was a double tape compartment where you could put cassettes (slot ‘A’ and ‘B’) and so, within seconds, you could get an album underway and enjoy it at full volume! Not only was there the social side of cassette tapes – when you would swap them in the playground – but, I feel, music feels and sounds different depending on the format. Vinyl has that special quality where you need to be still and experience the music. They have not invented a portable vinyl player (even for seven-inch single) where you can drop the needle and listen to it on the move. Strangely, if one looks at the logistical flaws of music formats; there seemed to be revere-evolution as new technology came in. My earliest experience was with vinyl and cassette but there was new excitement and lust regarding the C.D. It was invented in 1982 but was not really common in my (and my friends’) house until the late-1980s. The 1990s saw a fantastic boom of world-class musicians so it deserved and demanded a full arsenal of technology. Vinyl was still much demanded and the cassette tape was holding strong: a third tentacle of C.D.s meant artists had plenty of options regarding release and distribution. If anything, music has gone back in that sense: C.D.s are the most-common format for new releases; artists release to vinyl but it is less popular than decades like the 1990s (and cassette tapes are pretty rare).

PHOTO CREDIT: Getty Images

I mentioned how physical formats had transposed evolution and fortune as we headed into the 1990s. The Walkman meant one could listen to tapes on the go; the (C.D.) Discman meant you could load a disc into your pocket and discreetly listen to music in the open. Of course, players and recorders simulated that but the mobility issues were clear. That said; one of the most memorable aspects of my musical childhood was one of the most comical: the way, if one moved when they walked, a C.D. would skip. Anti-skip technology did not come in until the 1990 and, for avid music fans like me; it was a relief and revelation. The fact you could listen to cassettes and C.D.s without their skipping, juddering and stopping was a breath of fresh air. It was ‘interesting’ negotiating the technologies of the 1980s but it all added to the fun and memories. I feel, if digital music was around in the 1980s, most of us would not pursue music and have such evocative recollections. It was the way I bonded with the Walkman and cassette; the pleasures of Discman ownership and the hours wiling my time away spinning vinyl that got music into the brain – and meant I would follow its allure and tease to this day! C.D. was the big leap forward that meant we did not have to wrestle with tapes and risk damaging them with ease.

One of the biggest bugbears in all of music is the fact the C.D. has not leapt and improved since the day it came out. A blank C.D. holds eighty minutes of music which, for the most part, is fine. If you have a double-album then you might have to exceed that length but I wonder why C.D.s do not hold more data. Nobody ever records on both sides of a C.D. and the limited capacity meant a lot of people recorded on a second disc. I do not know why there is that eight-minute-limit - but it is quite galling! There were some tried-and-tested-and-failed formats like MiniDisc that had the same time limits but were not as revolutionary and popular as C.D.s/cassettes. The MP3 player was not introduced until 1998 but, like the C.D.; it did not sustain as long as you’d hope (trivia fact: Suzanne Vega’s song, Tom’s Diner, was the first song put into an MP3 format; Karlheinz Brandenburg was experimenting and wanted to see what was possible). C.D.s, to be fair, shared the same sort of vulnerabilities as a cassette tape. I have owned many and accidentally dropped them on the floor. Many survive but I have lost many without any provocation and real attack – they are brittle and can be derailed with a mere smudge or accidental scratch. The infantile frailness of these formats did not matter: the physicality and resonance compensated and it helped bring the most popular sounds of the day to the world.

That unity between handheld devices and physical formats meant music was able to reach more people than ever before – further and wider than vinyl ever could. The biggest step forward was the in the '00s when digital media took over. MySpace (remember that?!) was introduced in 2003; YouTube in 2005 – Spotify the following year. It was quite a quick and competition-led revolt that meant each owner/company wanted to get ahead of the other. If MySpace has fallen at the hurdle and had its leg broken – the ongoing competition between YouTube and Spotify exists in 2018. Spotify offers subscription and has a wide catalogue than YouTube: the visual aspect of YouTube means it is the best place to put videos on. One day, someone will supersede and subsume the mandates of both and integrate them into an all-powerful Godzilla that renders – Spotify and YouTube – obsolete. The first couple of years was all about testing and getting things solidified. I was twenty-one when YouTube was kicked to the world and, having graduated the year before; it was another fascinating development. Like MTV – I will discuss that in a piece tomorrow - we could see all the latest videos on the screen. Unlike the rather right-place-right-time nature of a T.V. channel; the fact we could pick up a laptop and watch a video on the move was the same sort of eye-opener as a Discman – albeit without the cumbersome stop-start issues and the lack of reliability. I cannot claim the digital takeover has been all bad: new musicians do not need a record deal to get their sounds heard and played on the radio.

The best part of the move from physical to digital has been the horizons opening and the market removing barriers. I will not get into a theological, liturgical discussion relating to the worthiness of the physical format – I have written about vinyl and how things were better, then. I am pleased we still have formats like C.D. and vinyl and I dearly believe either will see their final day. We can never replace C.D. and vinyl with streaming. Someone, somewhere wants to hold on to physical possession and there is a danger music is becoming too impersonal and machine-fed. So many new artists are, without irony, reverting to cassette tapes and C.D.s to release their music. They do not want to spend their lives marketing online and being detached from the production and design of the older formats – where an artist could get involved with the entire process and see that finished result come to life! Whilst it is fun to remember and cast back to a safer time: the only way music could ever evolve and come this far is because of the Internet-led charge. I would not be as passionate about music were there no streaming and music-sharing sites. The reason I am writing a few pieces about ‘older’ music is (because) it is important to see where we have come from and how the industry has changed. Technological advancements are taking place but we have reached the limits of what portable devices can achieve.

We can fit thousands of songs into a phone and do so without interference and problem. Things are as smooth and seamless as they have ever been. Sites like Spotify means we can listen to pretty much any song from any year at the touch of a button – can we go further and make another leap?! I feel we have hit the natural wall of what is physical and technologically possible. The greatest development is the access musicians have to get their music out to the world. Social media and streaming mean anyone in the world can discover a small, independent artist and share their music. We cannot live in the past but I think, with music growing by the year; we need to find new ways to accommodate the population and take that next step. I wonder whether a return to the past is, ironically, a way forward? Physical formats have been overtaken because digital music offers more options in terms of accessibility, capacity and affordability. I know we can stream songs for free and create libraries with thousands of songs but, if we do not want to become too electronic and inhuman – maybe finding ways of strengthening older formats would be a good idea. I long to get hold of physical formats with artwork and a unique edge. Maybe it would be too weird returning to past decades but there might be a modern way to make that happen. It is clear the cosmic blast from the dying days of cassette and the full realisation of Spotify has been immense.

I have been experiencing technological changes in music my whole life - and it is amazing to think that, in the past few decades, we have come so far. It would have been baffling, as a young boy holding vinyl and cassette tapes, to think my faithful tape-machine and Walkman would be replaced by something like a streaming site. The Internet did not come about until the 1990s and, when it was brought into every house; the dial-up modem – and its laughable dial-tone and slow speeds – did not seem like it could create progeny such as YouTube! People are always looking to push things as far as possible and see what that next breakthrough is. I am glad streaming and digital music are here and I know there will be that balance of physical and streamed. Let’s not hope the music industry chooses to retire C.D. and vinyl because, as I have shown, those memories and tangible times have made a huge impact in my life. The same can be said of so many others out there, too. Looking back can be dangerous but, in terms of the advancement of music – in terms of the formats that hold it and the way it is recorded – it has been an amazing time. I am thankful to the innovators and musical magicians that brought music to my young, impressionable ears: I am constantly thankful the modern-day innovators have made new and existing music readily available to me and…

THE entire world.  

FEATURE: Capital Punishment: Why, Despite Its Downsides, London is One of the Best Places for New Musicians

FEATURE:

 

Capital Punishment

ALL PHOTOS: Unsplash

Why, Despite Its Downsides, London is One of the Best Places for New Musicians

__________

MY mind is split between the desire to…

live and work in London and, on the other hand, look at music away from the city. I have already reviewed and interviewed a few London artists this year and, as the weeks progress; I will look at other capital-based musicians for inspiration. I have become somewhat inflamed because so many people I know are finding work in London – it is somewhere, and Manchester, I want to live/work. It is always hard finding appropriate work in such a competitive market and getting up there as quickly as hoped – there are some who have figured it out. I will continue to plug but, in terms of musicians; there is a split between those flocking to London and those who are moving to quieter areas. There is this idealised version of London as the home of opportunity and money: where one goes to obtain fortune and success. That is true if you are in a certain industry: for musicians, in such a competitive and low-paid role, that is not always the case. Although rent prices are starting to fall and it is become, gradually, more accessible – I feel an overhaul and review needs to happen so people can afford to live in London. Compared to where I work; the cost of renting in London is actually affordable and reasonable. There is plenty of choice and, depending on where you want to work/gig, you can get somewhere near a Tube line. There are, among the positives, some downsides that are still putting many off.

I was chatting with a photographer I know and she says the reason she lives away from London (Bath) is (because of) the pace of life. I can understand the zeal and determination associated with a music career; getting to the capital and settling in a vibrant hub. With that common mindset is an inevitable outcome: a masses of bodies and little room for movement! Others, when talking about the drawbacks of London, revert to that ‘people-point’: the folk are not as friendly and accepting as elsewhere. Again, compared to where I am; I have not really noticed much of a difference – maybe that is all the more reason to go there. I grant, for the non-musician; there is something daunting and cold about London. A lot of people want to be calm and mingle in an area where you can converse and feel safe. It does not matter which large city you go to – New York, Tokyo or Paris – there is always going to be a certain element of rudeness and cram. That is not necessarily the fault of the individual(s): putting that many people into a small-ish space, all needing to get where they are going, and you are going to struggle for conversation and breath. Musicians, largely, are not as bothered by that: one of the reasons they settle in places liked London is the energy and people.

What worries me, especially with the ascent and dominance of social media, is the fact there is a social split. People are either not going out (and communicating) or, owing to the mass of bodies, finding it hard to connect with anyone. Musicians are among the fastest-growing sector of the professional population. From all around the world; musical peeps are coming to lay roots here. Too many I know are finding the pressure of city-life stressful; there is a lack of available social outlet; they are tiring and seeing a negative impact on their mental-health. Again, maybe this is a sign of the over-populated city: I feel there are solutions are remedies that would make a London lifestyle more appealing. I was reading an article - published in Noisey a few years back - that highlighted the financial squeeze musicians are feeling:

“The decimation of London’s art squats is a metaphor for the city’s recalibrated attitude towards art, and 2015 London has all the spluttering symptoms of a city hurtling towards cultural void. Investors pick up housing estates as if they’re glass ketchup bottles, turning them upside down and smacking the bottom until all the inhabitants fall out. Wages have stagnated, living costs have soared, rents have rocketed, venues are being methodically demolished, 150,000 of us are working two jobs, and everyone with a creative one is considering a move to Woodford.

 Over in the fallows of central London, bankers body pump to “Everybody’s Free” at morning raves, each new bead of sweat more resinous than the previous, as last night’s cocaine residue is taxied out of their bloodstream. The same month London Mayor Boris Johnson launches his #BackBusking campaign, his police force are heavy handedly arresting musicians in broad daylight for doing just that in Leicester Square”.

The author makes interesting points and, perhaps, that is still the biggest drawback: the rent prices are still too high and oppressive. If you look at flat-sharing websites (like Spareroom) and you can get a good impression of rental prices. If you want a double room – most of do, let’s be fair – with enough room to swing a cat; flatmates who are easy to get on with; amenities nearby and a generally good living standard – it does vary depending on where you look! Even if you are looking out towards the more ‘lavish’ parts of the capital: you might be able to pick up a flat for £700 P.C.M. That might sound excessive but that price is for a very good place – it does vary, obviously, regarding location and landlord/landlady.

I am looking for places and most of the good-looking, decent-sized flats are around £650. That is steep compared with other parts of the U.K. but is manageable for most. The biggest issue comes when you throw in travel and living. It is ‘doable’ if you economise and skimp but that leads to a deterioration and mental-health issues. If you want to maintain a steady social life; eat properly and travel – you might have to (nearly) double that rent price. Most of us barely earn that much a month (£1,300-is) and, if you want to save up and travel; it is not going to be possible. Everyone has a different budget/salary – so there will be variables – but it is going to be tight for everyone. Flat-sharing, for a musician, can be a good way to make friends and take away (some of) the pressure of The Big City. Even if you pitch in with three or four others; it still gets a bit costly when you tot-up all the other ins-and-outs of a month.  I will end the ‘negative’ end of the piece addressing music venues and perception; but I wonder: is the gentrification of the music industry itself forcing honest musicians out of the market?! Returning (briefly) to that article and a very good point was raised:

“The growing impossibility of starting from the bottom and actually making it in today’s music industry is mirrored by the ugly portrait of successful British music. As Gavin Haynes wrote for Noisey in January: “We are living in an age where a certain kind of lozenge-folk have come to dominate. It’s no longer just the children of lawyers and architects. It’s the kids of the balls-out elite. Sam Smith’s £500k-a-year banker mother. The Mumfords—Winston Marshall’s dad being the chairman of one of the country’s largest hedge-funds.”

 The pursuit of funding for artists trapped at this level is the much publicized but largely artificial carrot dangled up front. The British government made a song and dance out of their £2.5 million slush fund for musicians last summer. In Kafkaesque fashion, bands were encouraged to fill out endless reams of forms, usually to discover that they were eliminated in round 3,843, and the money would be going to The Wombats”.

Those points were made in 2015 but, looking at this year; can we say things have changed that much?! Artists like Florence & The Machine and Ed Sheeran are still popular and performing – two artists accused of being out-of-touch and lacking working-class ideals – whereas previous ‘accused’ like Mumford & Sons have, I think, bitten the dust. There is still that centrality of middle-class, intangible musicians – those who have more-privileged backgrounds compared to most; they do not possess the struggle and pains most of us take for granted. I have been wondering whether music’s core has become less middle-class and more ‘real – looking out at the mainstream and the answer seems to be (a resounding) ‘no’! There have, sure, been changes and improvements but the constitution of the mainstream favours the better-of and elite. The (more) better-off artists you have coming to London, the higher rent prices get. It also means a certain sound/artist is favoured – and those hard-working, original artists take longer to find acceptance.

London is a dream but it is a city that does not patiently foster and support a struggling artist. Even if rent rises are levelling and stabilising; I wonder whether the predictably middle-class mainstream and gentrification of the city means anyone outside that circle is being ostracised and isolated. It is almost like the state-educated artists are going to a private school and finding that social shift alarming and hard to take. I understand cities need to develop and improve but London is losing some of its honesty and ethics – fewer low-cost properties and working-class/proper areas mean artists who used to fit seamlessly into those parts are either having to adapt or work harder to get their music heard. Back in past decades, when there was a band of working-class bands in the mainstream, there was a rush of artists towards London; rent was not too bad – the city still had its mix of classes, areas and tastes. Things are becoming more homogenised and that is having a detrimental effect on musicians. I will end with my conclusion regarding London: the positives outweigh the bad sides. Even if there is not a mass exodus out of the city; I am seeing many artists go up the M1 and/or take the first flight to other nations! Areas further north are appealing; cities like Berlin are proving to be more hospitable and affordable for many artists – is it only to do with cost?!

In tandem with the expense inherent is the security of music venues. I investigated this yesterday but, when we look at the state of our smaller venues – it is troubling seeing how many are closing and how fragile others are. Artists move to London for those gigs and the chance to get their sounds to the people. Whilst other parts of the country are not immune; I am concerned by the shakiness of the London venue scene. Whether increased noise-pollution will threaten the existence of these venues, I am not sure. There is a feeling things are not as secure and solid as they should be – making cities/towns further north a bit more attractive. I know a lot of artists going to places like Brighton – where there is a great community and a load of great venues. The more compacted and crowded the capital becomes; the more people available to go to gigs and support musicians. If these venues are being closed, and artists are going elsewhere, then that will great a long-term malaise London might struggle to overcome. It is, aside from all the negative prophesies, a city teeming with opportunity, hope and excitement.

London is, like every great city, flawed and over-populated. The only reason it is busy and populous is the attractiveness of living there. For musicians, it has always had that lure and impossible seductiveness. Even with problems and cracks; the advantages and bonuses of being in London outweigh all the bad stuff (in my opinion). The social downsides are evident – venues closing will keep people indoors – but there are so many spaces for artists to play. Pubs and smaller venues are starting to diversify and offer open mic. nights; events and special showcases are being run that allows the new musician the chance to show their wares. I come to the capital to experience the colours, scents and substance. London is unique and is a huge tourist hotspot. A lot of people come to London to see music and embrace the entertainment. This provides a window for artists to take advantage and perform as much as possible. I have suggested venues are closing – and there are fewer than past years – but it is not like the city has closed its doors. Competition might be high but there is somewhere for everyone: put the effort in and you will find a stage with your name on it. London has those transport links; making it easy to travel around the county and get about. It is that endlessly practical city where you can dive into the bustle and hustle or get away somewhere quieter.

Rents are starting to stabilise a bit so I feel, in years to come, the attraction of London will return. Those moving here can enjoy higher wages and a great quality of life. A lot of musicians do need to take a second job. If you are able to get a reasonably-paid job and balance that with your music; the rewards are endless. London has a fantastic buzz and the nightlife is incredible. A musician is never far away from like-minded souls and, given the eclectic nature of the city; the inspirational juices are always flowing. Whereas some areas are homogenous and limited; London has so many different races and nationalities sitting alongside one another. It is a city that wants change and to remain in Europe; it wants to be together and work towards a better way of life – that is not something you can say about other parts of the country! London gets that ‘cold’ tag without proper patience and investigation. If you are caught in the swelter of a rush-hour Tube trip then, yes, your impression of London will be somewhat strained. Most of the time, the reality is different and I am seeing more togetherness and unity than ever before. Maybe this is a counteraction of the Election result or the desire to show positivity – the spirit and bond of the people is stronger and more electric than past years. All of this will combine to create a more harmonious and attractive city.

The biggest attraction, for musicians and non-musicians alike, is the spirit and feeling of London. It does not take a sunny day to get you smiling and fascinated. One can, with proper planning and hard work, make a living here and survive without too much struggle. So many labels and stations are located in London; media eyes are trained here and, whether good or bad, that means you are never too far away from an eager journalist or ready record label – many attending gigs and events to discover that ‘next-big-thing’. The city is large but the spotlight is never far away. Musicians know the periscope is trained to the capital and with good reason: it is a thriving and sumptuous city that is producing some of the best music in the world. Whilst I am keen to see parity in terms of the North-South divide; I cannot resist the heady bouquet of London. It is a place to be inspired by and realise dreams. It may take a while – and hurdles will be placed in the way – but it is a city whose majesty cannot be dented. Tastes will dictate its coolness and relevance (those who will hate London no matter what) but, in pragmatic terms; there is no denying the quality and quantity of great music based in London. Changes are happening and, because of the political landscape; we are unsure how things will work out in the next few years. Against the descent and division is a city that wants to embrace and unify: there is no quarter provided to anti-European, discriminatory attitudes. 

The most ‘divisive’ aspect of London is, actually, its greatest strength: the multicultural communities and composition. The landmarks and tourist attractions compel awe and inspiration; the people are among the most compelling I have ever seen. There is an indoctrinated spirit that runs through the spine of London that has, for decades, wooed artists, musicians and creative. Our capital’s cultural and art is the envy of the world; we have one of the most impressive music scenes in the world – this will never be dimmed or under threat. Everyone knows what London can offer but issues like the high cost of living and crowded streets are understandable concerns. It is not easy to overhaul these problems but, on balance, London offers more benefits and joy than despair - patience and perseverance are virtues one needs if they are to adapt to a London lifestyle. If more can be done to cure issues occurring – more attention to musicians further north; get rent and high prices down – it will be even more appealing to those who want to embroil themselves in the myriad wonders of the capital. It has its faults – and is far from perfect – but, for those ambitious and hungry musicians, there is nowhere…

QUITE like London.  

FEATURE: The January Playlist: Vol.2: It’s a Surprise ANYONE Has Deep Pockets After Christmas…

FEATURE:

 

The January Playlist

 IN THIS PHOTO: Gaz Coombes/PHOTO CREDIT: Getty Images

Vol.2: It’s a Surprise ANYONE Has Deep Pockets After Christmas…

_______

THE best and biggest musicians are wasting no time getting…

IN THIS PHOTO: Skott/PHOTO CREDIT: Getty Images

their sounds out to the people! The hangovers have faded so, with a clearer head; we are preparing our hearts for some great new sounds. This week; Jack White, Skott and Gaz Coombes are armed; David Byrne, Jorja Smith and Sunflower Bean have new material; there are treasures from Manic Street Preachers, Camilla Cabello and First Aid Kit – new cuts from GIRLI and Dua Lipa.

It is a busy and quality week for music so, in that spirit, I have collated the finest offerings from this week's selection – guaranteed to get the weekend off to a banging and fiery start!

ALL PHOTOS/IMAGES (unless credited othewrwise): Getty Images

________

Jack White – Connected by Love

David Byrne – Everybody’s Coming to My House

Manic Street Preachers – International Blue

Franz Ferdinand – Feel the Love Go

The Go! Team – All the Way Live

INHEAVEN – Sweet Dreams Baby

First Aid Kit – Fireworks

GIRLI – Mr 10pm Bedtime

 PHOTO CREDIT: @wangorya

Ezra Furman – Suck the Blood from My Wound

Get Cape. Wear Cape. Fly. – VHS Forever

Jorja Smith (ft. Stormzy) – Let Me Down

Gaz Coombes – Deep Pockets

Troye Sivan - My My My!

PHOTO CREDIT: Jaclyn Campanaro

Alela Diane – Ether & Wood

Dua Lipa - IDGAF 

Marshmello x Lil Peep - Spotlight

The Hunna – Flickin’ Your Hair

Fall Out Boy - Wilson (Expensive Mistakes)

Vance Joy - We're Going Home

ILLUSTRATION: Roy Morales

Nelson Can – Downtime

Jade Bird – Lottery

Rag'n'Bone Man - Die Easy

PHOTO CREDIT: Ed Miles/NME

The Killers - Rut

Wyvern Lingo – Maybe It’s My Nature

Sunflower Bean – Crisis Fest

Skott – Russian Soul

Field Music - Time in Joy

PHOTO CREDIT: Ronan Park

LUCIA - Melted Ice Cream

Andrew W.K. - Music Is Worth Living For

Black Rebel Motorcycle Club – Haunt

Camila Cabello – Real Friends

PHOTO CREDIT: Joshua Halling Photography

Michael Kiwanuka and Karen O – YO! MY SAINT

Nina Nesbitt – Somebody Special

Lo Moon – Real Love

Emily Burns – Bitch

FEATURE: Agent of Change: The Ongoing Desire to Preserve Britain’s Music Venues

FEATURE:

 

Agent of Change

ALL PHOTOS (unless credited otherwise): Unsplash

The Ongoing Desire to Preserve Britain’s Music Venues

__________

IT seems like this is a constant thread of all I do…

but the ever-changing, always-rumbling debate around music venues and their survival attract press and discussion. It has come to the stage where facts have shouted loud: thirty-five-percent of all music venues closed in the past decade (in London). Some of them would have been very small; others would have sprung up – the evidence is still damning and troubling. Artists such as Isaac Gracie and Sir Paul McCartney have come out and spoken about the issue – and how important venues are to the British music scene. The implementation mooted would employ the ‘Agent of Change’ theory. That would mean developers would need to fit soundproofing to all new developments built near music venues. This will start in London but it is hoped it will become law throughout the nation. There are other reasons why so many venues closed in 2017 – aside from noise and complaints – but that is a good start. Many people buy houses knowing full well they are close to a venue. Extraordinary naivety means they move in and, when they hear music coming from the venue, a complaint is lodged (from everyone nearby) and that puts pressure on that spot. Many have closed because it is a lot easier closing the venue rather than getting rid of the flats/houses.

A lot of these ill-fated venues have been in the same spot for years/decades; they were operating fine for years and then, when new houses are erected, that leads to issues. One can say the idiocy of the developers did not take into account the fact a venue would produce noise and pollution – they went ahead anyway; driven by money and greed. Those who move in display a complete lack of compassion and compromise. In a lot of cases; the amount of noise thrown out is not that severe: delicate ears and snobbish residents feel any unwarranted sound is a violation. So, what we have seen is a hose of great venues shutting their doors due to new developments. I realise houses need to be built but, not only is a lot of green land being squashed and covered-up – some legendary, community-uniting venues have been sacrificed. Isaac Gracie was among those to come out recently and profess his love of the live music scene. He highlighted how important they are to the community; the fact they bring people together and can create a lot of tourism and business. People will come to see that band/artist - and having a great venue on your street adds a sense of cool, class and opportunity. It means you are never far from a good night out; there is a place to hang with like-minded people; discover great new artists and have a chance to unwind.

Take (the venues) away and you are causing social deprivation and blighting the landscape of a town/city – that empty venue has to be rebranded and repurposed; it looks ugly and means a lot of money has to be spent putting a new business in there. I am pleased new guidelines are coming in and let’s hope they are implemented as soon as possible. What we need to see happen is, if anyone is building within a certain radius of a music venue; check the sound levels and, if they are seen as too ‘high’; ensure soundproofing is put up. If you are then showing people around said developments; there is a due diligence to inform them that, even with soundproofing, there may be some slight sound-bleed. If every side is compliant and informed then you cannot have any cause for complaint. I feel those who buy houses near music venues know the risks but want to bully others. I do not believe they are unaware of the noise venues produce and did not see them when viewing the place. It is the selfish and myopic minds of those property buyers who have been responsible for so many needless closures. Many might argue that, if you have to build houses a certain amount will be constructed near music venues. That is true but, as we know, even the most raucous venue is not going to be causing that much noise – unless they have their doors open a lot and a load of people are coming in and out.

A lot of pubs have gigs and D.J. nights and you have problems arising – many complain about the noise and it can lead to dispute. It is harder soundproofing existing residences because of the cost the owner will incur. New-build properties need to be more conscious of the need to protect the venues we have. I am hopeful the scheme will conserve a lot of venues and create greater harmony between the owners (of venues) and new home buyers. Whether it is a high-rise block of flats or a rather posh set of houses: getting them soundproofed and insulated is paramount. We cannot see more venues close because of complaints and a lack of foresight. Isaac Gracie was right when he highlighted the community angle: people converging on a venue and able to bond with their fellow man. Sir Paul McCartney raised a more alarming and eye-opening concern: many venues are closing because of other reasons. Whilst that Agent of Change principle will address sound and noise-pollution; one has to ask whether more should be done to protect other structural concerns. Look at the financial struggles and social trends; the increased role of digital streaming – other reasons why so many venues are endangered. McCartney knows the importance of great venues more than most people alive. Imagine if Liverpool’s Cavern Club existed today – or was based in London. I would genuinely fear for its future and the fact it has survived all these decades should be applauded. Maybe it is the wider folk of Liverpool; the fact it has been responsible for launching The Beatles – as they played a lot of their earliest gigs there – but one cannot overlook that landmark.

IN THIS PHOTO: Sir Paul McCartney/PHOTO CREDIT: Getty Images

That space is, of course, housing the new breed and part of the city’s fabric. I know the future of any venue is never certain - but one would hope such an iconic spot would be safe from bulldozers and complainants. McCartney’s concerns related to the shifting landscape and how the live music scene is dwindling and shrinking. There are a lot of us who want to see live music and have that appetite: if there are fewer venues around then where are they to go?! London still has its fair share but I have seen many close down. Some great pubs/smaller venues, who have helped forge the careers of great musicians, have had to close and, in the process, denied the new generation a chance to take to their stages. Sound insulation and pollution are important concerns but there are other factors that need to be addressed and tackled. The price of alcohol and the cost of an average night out/gig is increasing and is especially raw in the city. Throw in the rising train prices and commuting stresses – are people finding it easier staying in and listening to music online?! Music is getting busier by the month so the need to not only safeguard but grow the local scene is essential. No musician can survive on the Internet alone: they need gigs and a chance to hone their craft; get out to the people and earn money. T.V. and film have not gotten any better but, as there are fewer venues – meaning the average punter needs to cover more miles to reach the nearest one – they are opting to stay in and save some money. Inflation is always going to have an effect on any business but there are other factors…

It is great having platforms where any musician can put their music out to the people and get it heard instantly. I fear that openness and huge market means there is less focus put on physical, live music. Anyone can get a song for free and ‘discover’ an artist without leaving the house or parting with money. Established musicians like Sir Paul McCartney know digital outlets are important and essential but that needs to be accompanied by traditional live music. No artist, as I said, can survive online and forgo gigs. The only way they improve, grow and gauge reaction is to gig; bond with the people and get instant, physical response. I will talk about London in a feature later this week but I am worried there is a split between the capital and other areas. I understand London’s music scene is vibrant and exceptional – most of the big labels are here – but, with so many artists moving to the capital fearing they cannot get gigs and visibility where they are; it means there is a centralisation of venues. Cities fare better but nearby towns/villages are suffering because their artists are moving away and finding more life/money/people in London. That creates crowding and, going back to the issue of noise – the more people you put into a city, the bigger the epidemic becomes.

Existing tenants/properties are rallying against the increased noise and issues like Drugs and anti-social behaviour is compromising the security of many venues. I will not throw in figures regarding turnover, closures and arrests: we all know the problems that are affecting our venues and the structural rigidity of the live music scene. All of these factors need to be taken to heart and discussed. A lot of the ‘traditional’ corners – record shops, C.D.s and venues – are disappearing but, like the revival of vinyl; I know there is that extraordinary thirst for live music. The demand is still there but one cannot ignore the financial barriers; the way local venues are closing; why artists are moving to the cities – and the rise of new flats and the noise complaints that come when people move in and grow weary of the musical disruption. The concept/name suggests a Justice League for music: acolytes for parity and happiness that go around and make sure our music scene is secure and warm. That might over-romanticise the notion but I am pleased action is being taken. I feel one of the most insane and infuriating reasons why venues are closed is because of the people who move in near (a venue) and get a shock when they hear a bit of noise coming from it! Whilst you cannot cure stupidity: soundproofing new properties is a much-needed measure.

All musicians and fans want to see venues remain and succeed. Yesterday, it was announced the Agent of Change Bill will get a second hearing in Parliament on 19th (January). It is a step closer to a new law that will make a big difference in music. I am keen to see how far it can go and, when/if implemented, how effective it is. The movement is much-needed and shows a desperation to keep our venues safe. We cannot see them close needlessly and damage the future of music. There are some things the Internet/streaming cannot replace: the raw and real connection with an artist one gets when seeing them at a live venue. I realise there are complexities and unavoidable hurdles; things that will happen that will threaten a certain number of venues. Those all need to be addressed to see if there is a way to minimise danger and damage. Artists like Sir Paul McCartney have expressed their fears for the future. It a worrying time for music but I am glad to see progress being made; proof there is action being taken and a practical step to avoid some of our venues closing. Musicians old and new need venues to cut their teeth and test their material. If we keep the high-profile, established venues – and close down those smaller and less profitable – it means there will be fewer local artists (who move to the cities to get gigs) and that will have an effect on the communities there. We should not fear the future of music: embrace all the changes and have hope the live scene will grow and inspire. The only way we can adopt this attitude is to ensure there are no needless casualties. The Agent of Change Bill, and the musicians backing its implementation, is a huge step towards…

MAKING live music a safer, more stable landscape.  

FEATURE: Tim Smith: Mind and Body: Raising Awareness of Musicians’ Health Issues

FEATURE:

 

Tim Smith: Mind and Body

IN THIS PHOTO: Tim Smith/PHOTO CREDIT: Getty Images

Raising Awareness of Musicians’ Health Issues

__________

A lot has been discussed…

PHOTO CREDIT: Unsplash

concerning the psychological well-being of musicians – and whether enough is being done to preserve their mental-health (and ensure they are okay). It is an oversight that needs a lot more focus and compassionate research this year. I am concerned by the growing number of seriously distressed, depressed and anxious musicians whose health is being compromised by the nature of the business – how demanding it is - and (how) isolating social media can be. It is a tricky and time-consuming crusade we have before us. Curing someone’s mental-health problems takes more time, effort and patience than, say, a physical malady. I have been compelled to write because of a certain Tim Smith. Maybe there is a cruel irony that a productive musician/writer/producer who led a band called Cardiacs should be waylaid and incapacitated because of health issues. In Smith’s case; he suffered a catastrophic brain injury that has, sadly, seen him sidelined from the music industry and unable to create. It is heartbreaking seeing a legendary figure in such ill health; suffering so much and not contributing to the world of music. I will come to a fundraising campaign that has been launched – where you can contribute and help get treatment for Smith – but, since two strokes and (two) heart attacks in 2008 – fans have been rallying and supporting their idol. Back in 2005, when talking about the Cardiacs; Smith professed the meaning and relevance of the band:

“Cardiacs is our life and everything we do, and everything we have ever done since we were tiny. We play a kind of music that we are very, very proud of and love more than life. A kind of music that apparently makes people hate us with a terrifying vengeance, or love us so dearly and passionately that it becomes a worry. No in-betweens . But to us it’s just tunes. Lovely tunes. Tunes are important in life.”

Smith’s passion for music began as early as the mid-1970s when the fourteen-year-old schoolboy procured a copy of The Who’s Tommy songbook. Teaching himself to read and write music; Smith wanted to play music loudly to, as he claimed, make his brother Jim look foolish! Bass guitar-playing Jim and his brother played together in The Cardiacs – it was shortened to ‘Cardiacs’ soon after. There was a sense of retribution and retroactive game-settling regarding the music. Tim Smith saw the band as an opportunity to exact vengeance on a brother who caused unkindness as a youngster – all loving and with no malice but, even from the first days, there was a sense of rivalry and strange ambition. This fervour led to a series of acclaimed studio albums and brilliantly-attended gigs. From their 1980 debut L.P., The Obvious Identity, to the tragedies that occurred in 2008 – the band have been on hiatus. Many count the band’s 1996 album, Sing to God, as one of the finest of the decade – there was high-hopes the group would continue to record music to this day. Before I highlight why it is important to back Tim Smith’s medical treatment – and highlight why musicians’ physical health needs to be highlighted – a statement from Smith himself:

“Most of you are now familiar with the ins and outs of what happened all that time ago during the summer of 2008. But for the sake of clarity, which here and there has drifted a little, let me just state it here for the record.

Tim was indeed felled by a full cardiac arrest (which differs from a heart attack in that the heart stops beating completely) which in turn led to hypoxic brain damage to the parts of his brain that are largely associated with the starting and stopping of all movement. It left him with a little known about condition called dystonia. That’s it. There were no further heart attacks or strokes it turns out and there is no true paralysis…

PHOTO CREDIT: Unsplash

Hypoxia simply means a lack of oxygen to the brain. It causes the cells to die or be damaged in the affected area just as any form of stroke does, be it a bleed or a blockage. Deprived of blood flow, or too much of it and in the wrong places, the result is the same.

It’s pretty rare to end up with this particular condition as a result of hypoxic brain injury. We know of maybe two other cases worldwide. If there are more, it’s still, in all likelihood, a very small number. But you might say that’s just typical of Tim: it’s in his nature to do things others don’t and to do them properly!

As we know, this condition has affected Tim’s movement as a whole, his dexterity, his ability to speak and it has added painful muscle tone and spasms that are a permanent feature of his life these days. These also hamper movement generally. Obviously all medical and surgical options to ease some of his suffering have been, and continue to be, investigated”.

I realise musicians suffer poor physical health but the fact such an iconic and prolific musician suffered a series of strokes and heart attacks seems especially vicious and unfair. I will conclude this piece by looking at another high-profile musician, Solange (Knowles), and a condition that affects her. Regarding Tim Smith; one can help fund vital medical treatment and (help hit) a £100,000 target-figure. The fundraising is strong but, as we read those brave words from Smith; the desire to see him recover and back in the studio is strong.

The Cardiacs’ lead is fighting bravely and ensuring his health problems do not get him down. It is good to raise awareness of a musician’s health concerns because, unless it is very serious, we do not often hear about it. Not only can raising awareness give encouragement and guidance to those similarly-affected: we get to see the human side and show true support. Music, today, seems to be mostly about electronic purchases and a certain amount of detachment. Unless you go and see a band/artist; how often do you connect and relate to them? Even in the live setting; we do not get to know about an artist and what makes them tick. I am not suggesting Tim Smith’s health problems are a positive thing: it does bring us closer to the legend and creates a deeper feeling. I am determined to see Smith back in the studio because Cardiacs have always been a love-hate type of band. Back in the Britpop age (around 1994-1997-ish) they were seen as the outsiders – much like Radiohead but not as revered and respected. That might have something to do with their music: an assortment of unhinged sounds, nursery rhymes and off-kilter angles. It is hard to categorise them (Prog-Punk?!) because there is, and will never be, anyone quite like them. If celebrity fans like Blur and Mark Radcliffe have helped raise the profile of the band: the projectiles and abuse they were afforded during some of their concerts.

PHOTO CREDIT: Getty Images/Press

Especially in the 1990s, when Britpop and a certain musical sound was king; the guys were an oddity and isotope of rebellion – their stage mannerism and presence hardly helped when it came to assimilating and normalising. The band would play a traditional set-closer at the start; they would subvert expectation and change the rules. The tension and rivalry between the two Smiths – some saw it as bullying regarding Tim’s treatment towards Jim – and some controversial requests (the band would try and get the crowd kissing one another) certainly put them in the public imagination. Times are such where we have few ‘memorable’ bands like Cardiacs. In terms of innovation and sound-experimentation; how many artists like them are around?! Aside from a few left-of-centre bands like King Gizzard & The Lizard Wizard; there are not many bands who have such a strange and alluring sound. Some have accused modern music of lacking inspiration and any real development. I am not suggesting a Cardiacs return would get music’s heartbeat strong and in-time: it would provide an influential and established group the chance to keep recording – or Tim Smith recording some solo material. I am confident Smith’s campaign will hit its six-figure target – thus ensuring he can get that all-important treatment and be on the road to rehabilitation and recovery.

PHOTO CREDIT: Getty Images

Another artist, and before I finish, who has publically spoken about their health issues is Solange. The musician posted the below on her Instagram account (last year):

“Wrote, deleted and re wrote this like 5 times... Still not sure what exactly or how much I want to share... However it’s so important to me for the people in South Africa, a place that has tremendous meaning to me and that has given me SO SO MUCH, to know why I won’t be performing at Afro Punk this NYE. The past five months I have been quietly treating, and working through an Autonomic Disorder. It been a journey that hasn’t been easy on me... Sometimes I feel cool, and other times not so cool at all. It’s a complicated diagnoses , and I’m still learning so much myself, but right now, my doctors are not clearing me for such an extended lengthy flight, and doing a rigorous show right after. I can’t put into words how saddened and sorry I am that I am unable to perform for you guys this NYE, there is simply no other place I wanted to be than there with my family to bring in 2018 with you.......but I give you my ABSOLUTE WORD I will come back with AfroPunk and deliver this performance.....

 IN THIS PHOTO: Solange/PHOTO CREDIT: @solangeknowles

…as it is so extremely important to me to connect with the people who have so closely inspired me in so many ways. I can’t thank Afro Punk enough for their support, and to all of the other festivals this past summer/fall who have known about my health, kept it confidential, and gone out of their way to make me feel supported while doing these shows. As a part of the self care that I’ve tried to encourage this past year, it needs to start with myself, and I’m looking forward to doing a better job of this 2018. This past year has been one of the most fulfilling of my life... Performing this record and experiencing the energy exchange with you guys has been astounding, and I’m so excited about continuing to do the work I feel so absolutely humbled and appreciative to be doing next year. It gives me life”.

Not only did Solange cancel her Afropunk headline set; she has helped raise awareness of autonomic disorders and put it into the spotlight. She has not revealed which specific type she has but, by speaking about it so openly; it will make other artists more confident about sharing their health problem with the public. Both artists have spoken out for different issues but we often digest music without thinking about the artist – relating on a human-level and actually connecting. It might sound like an odd way to connect but, as is the case with Tim Smith; people are coming together (from various generations and nations) and helping support a great musician. Solange’s fans have shown their support and love and, fellow autoimmune disorder suffers have a high-profile spokesperson. This year has only just begun but I can feel a need for change and togetherness. I worry we disassociate and disconnect from musicians - and never really consider the person behind the music. I am keen, especially, for people to get behind Tim Smith’s fundraising and get the master back into the studio – and help fund some life-changing medical treatment. If that can happen, and an amazing target can be hit; it means we can ensure a fantastic musician has the change to put…

PHOTO CREDIT: Getty Images

MORE music out to the people.

FEATURE: Mutual Accord: Is Radiohead’s Lawsuit Against Lana Del Rey a Step Too Far?

FEATURE:

 

Mutual Accord

IN THIS PHOTO: Lana Del Rey/PHOTO CREDIT: Getty Images

Is Radiohead’s Lawsuit Against Lana Del Rey a Step Too Far?

__________

THE latest high-profile legal threat in music…

PHOTO CREDIT: Getty Images

has come from Radiohead. A couple of years ago; Led Zeppelin were taken to court – accused of plagiarising Spirit’s instrumental song, Taurus, and incorporating elements into their hit, Stairway to Heaven. These are not the only cases of supposed plagiarism in music: for decades, artists have been taken to court and had to explain some very similar-sounding notes. A lot of the cases concern the most minor infractions. In the case of Lana Del Rey; she has been accused of ‘borrowing’ the chord progression/melody of Radiohead’s Creep for her song, Get Free. That is the closing track to her latest album, Lust for Life, and, if you look at both songs side-by-side, there are some similarities. Of course; Radiohead’s best-known song is a different tempo and sound: Lana Del Rey has not exactly copied everything about the track and produced something blatant. What we have are the slightest similarities many people have passed by. That is the point of my annoyance: it is only the lawyers for Radiohead who have picked up on the similarities. I wonder how involved the band have been in the lawsuit and whether it will actually progress to court. Del Rey has offered to give forty-percent of the publishing royalties to Radiohead: they want the full one-hundred-percent.

Variety explained the situation – and how such cases come about:

“I would say this case does cross the line,” said Bill Hochberg, an attorney at Greenberg Glusker. “This Lana Del Rey song is way too close to what is a rather unusual set of chord changes and a very distinctive melody line.”

Del Rey revealed the dispute in a tweet on Sunday, saying that Radiohead has demanded 100% of the publishing revenues from the song. She said that while her song “wasn’t inspired by Creep,” she has offered up to 40% of the publishing to settle the matter.

Typically in such disputes, the attorneys will communicate and try to reach a settlement without filing a lawsuit. Prior to litigation, both sides may also engage their own musicologists to study the similarities between the two compositions. Two songs may sound similar to the untrained ear, but a musicologist may be able to show that the similarities are trivial or commonplace.

“Musicologists are very good at showing where the note sequence is used in other songs and works going back to the Renaissance,” said Henry Gradstein, of Gradstein & Marzano. “Typically what sells it is where there’s a unique pattern of notes and keys and chords and rhythms.”

Asked about the similarities between the songs, Gradstein played them on his computer. “There’s some changes that sound pretty similar,” he said. “I get it. I get the case now.”

Gradstein thought it was notable that Del Rey offered 40% of her publishing rights, suggesting she may have gotten a musicologist’s report suggesting significant similarities.

 “I don’t think you would offer 40% of your publishing if you believed the claim was frivolous,” agreed James Sammataro, an attorney at Stroock & Stroock & Lavan.

If the two sides cannot reach a resolution, Radiohead would file a copyright suit in federal court, and Del Rey’s attorneys would file a motion to dismiss. Sammataro said Radiohead would likely prevail on that motion. If the case reached a trial, both sides would bring their experts”.

That gives you an idea of what has happened and why it has come about – and what the next steps are. It seems extraordinary someone has taken the time to listen to all music out there in the hope someone will use some melody/chord structure from a Radiohead song. One can only imagine the lawyers have nothing better to do than wait for this opportunity to arrive. I suspect someone brought the case to the mind of Radiohead’s lawyers – maybe an eagle-eared listener or super-fan. Although there is proof and enough evidence to bring a case; I wonder why it has been brought about. Del Rey herself stated she was not inspired by Creep – it is ironic the same song has been the subject of another high-profile legal case. The Hollies sued Radiohead (and won) after noticing similarities between their song, The Air That I Breathe and Creep – and, as such, the linear notes credited Albert Hammond and Mike Hazlewood (The Hollies) as co-writers.

PHOTO CREDIT: Getty Images

This ‘third-generation’ lawsuit, one imagines, has been inspired by the nasty aftertaste Radiohead felt when they were sued: their lawsuit against Lana Del Rey has come about as, if they let it slide, it would be ironic and not fair to them. My contention comes when we are looking so forensically at music and cannot allow the similar notes/melody-lines/chord reflections to come in. If there was a blatant and embarrassing copycat scenario then, sure, a lawsuit would be justifiable. I have heard a lot of other songs floating around where you can hear other tracks in them – quite literally, as it appears. Listen to a band like Oasis and songs like Cigarettes and Alcohol. (A certain T. Rex song springs to mind). The riff from Oasis’ song bears a striking resemblance to Get It On (Bang a Gong). T. Rex’s Marc Bolan is long-gone but his estate lives on – I don’t remember a lawsuit being brought about in that case. I, as I said, here a load of songs where you notice familiar choruses, melodies and chord sequences. Many of them are accidental and, as such, it does not lead to any trouble. I suspect Noel Gallagher’s use of the T. Rex line was a lot more blatant than Lana Del Rey (and her new song). Artists have to protect their songs but there needs to be a line drawn and a chance for ‘offending’ artists to have their say.

PHOTO CREDIT: Unsplash

Lana Del Rey is being taken to court and, one suspects, Radiohead will prevail and get a lot of money from her. I wonder whether they could have entered a discussion and agreed on a co-writing credit between them. Rather than embroil in a long-winded legal process; why not open a dialogue and come to a compromise? You can’t prove a negative so it will be hard for Lana Del Rey to prove she was not inspired by Creep. Rick Nowels and Kieron Menzies have a co-writing credit on Get Free – Dean Reid is listed as one of the producers. Lust for Life is a major-label release so Polydor and Interscope must come into the fray. How much of the culpability lies with Del Rey herself?! I suspect the lyrics were written (mostly) by her – the compositional duties helmed by one of her co-writers. It is Del Rey, mind you, that is being scrutinised and chastised. It is not fair to an artist who, I believe, made an honest mistake and has made an attempt to offer compensation. Radiohead could come out and distance themselves from this controversy: the fact they have remained quiet means they are not willing to let this one pass by. We remember the infamous, multi-million-dollar case involving Robin Thicke and the song, Blurred Lines. The estate for Marvin Gaye noticed Blurred Lines sounded an awful lot like the 1977-released song, Got to Give It Up.

PHOTO CREDIT: Getty Images

Blurred Lines is one of the biggest-selling songs ever and, I wonder, did the commercial success of the song make a difference?! If it were a minor song, and few people shared it/played the song; would Marvin Gaye’s estate have noticed?! In that case; seven-million was handed to the victors: it was a blow to Robin Thicke and to producer and co-writer, Pharrell Williams. Do we draw lines and write up constitutions that provide guidelines to artists? Are we going to listen to every song and note any like-for-like notes/melodies? It seems mainstream artists are more susceptible to legal issues. If an independent band or underground artist cribbed (accidental or otherwise) from another act – either popular or new – I feel they would be immune and okay. The fact they would not have the money to satisfy those who bring about a court case speaks volumes. Radiohead’s lawyers are not looking for parity and ensuring this does not happen again. They are looking for remuneration and restitution. They want money and to set an example. Get Free is not one of the biggest songs (from Lust for Life) so I wonder how much damage will be done in the long-term. If the song were released and gained heaps of money for Del Rey and her writers; maybe, then, one could see just cause for a lawsuit. The royalties from Get Free will be sizable but it hardly seems worth going to all the trouble!

PHOTO CREDIT: Getty Images

There are a certain amount of chords and possibilities in music and, with thousands of tracks in the ether; there are going to be similar-sounding songs and ‘stolen’ lines. Music is looking for the most innovative and hard-working so, naturally, you will get unintentional intellectual theft. Lana Del Rey’s Get Free has some familiar embers but it is not exactly a shameless fraud that hoped to slip under the bar. Get Free does no disservice to Creep and Del Rey will be affected and damaged by the impending court case. I hope, truly, some sort of détente will arrive before it gets that far – it seems Radiohead’s people are determined to get their ‘fair share’. The emotional and physical health of Del Rey is going to be damaged as the case unfolds and progresses. I fear artists like her will think twice when writing songs; to the extent they are taking easy options and having to triple-check to ensure they have not used familiar notes. That may sound wise but are we creating a culture of fear where musicians are scared to make any move? Do we retroactively have to look at artists who might have made errors themselves; look at every song that comes onto the market and study every note?! Those are absurd lengths but why it is fair Lana Del Rey is in the firing-line – whereas other artists, who have employed another artist’s music in a much less subtle way free from jurisprudence and consequence?!

It does look like a genuine mistake by Lana Del Rey and her co-writers. I believe her when she says Creep did not come into her mind. The songs are very different and the fact there are some similarities is purely coincidental. Do we look through Radiohead’s back pages and ensure they have not caused any faux pas?! Their lawyers are doing what they feel is right – and the fact they were sued by The Hollies because of copyright infringement and plagiarism – meant there was special motivation to bring a case against Lana Del Rey. Accidents do happen and, naïve as that sounds; most artists are not deliberately looking to rip-off popular songs/acts. There is dispensation and justification criteria that mean those accused could evade punishment. ‘Access’ states that the infringer can claim they have never heard the original prior to writing their song. ‘Substantial Similarity’ means the average listener cannot tell the difference between the two songs – if they notice an obvious similarity, then it is hard to argue. Lana Del Rey is not the only artist, as we know, to have the spotlight put on them. George Harrison, Beyoncé and Sam Smith have all been taken to task. Smith, in 2014, was accused by Tom Petty’s publishers. They felt Smith’s Stay with Me shared chorus similarities with Petty’s I Won’t Back Down.

IN THIS PHOTO: Sam Smith/PHOTO CREDIT: Getty Images

Smith claimed never to have heard the song – maybe that is a fair point. He is twenty-two (or was then) so it might have passed him by. The fact it is a well-known hit makes me a little suspicious of the claim. Maybe, subconsciously, artists like Smith are inspired by other songs! How can you prove an artist has deliberately chosen to take another artist’s song and use adapt it for their own means? The list of fellow music-related court cases brings into focus the fact we have a problem – I feel it is one that cannot be solved. Artists will, inevitably, listen to a lot of music and that will bleed into their bodies. There are few that go out their way to mimic and deceive. I feel Lana Del Rey has taken a melody-line and sequence of chords that is fairly common – I expect other artists have done the same – and not intended to con Radiohead. I suppose something as high-profile and lucrative as music-making cannot be written off as a playground misunderstanding: artists need to preserve their privacy and ensure others are not using their material. I am not defending all those who have been accused of plagiarism but I feel there are better ways to settle these disputes than taking others to court and seeking financial vengeance. The fact Del Rey will, possibly, have to give all publishing royalties to Radiohead does not make the song go away – it will be out there forever and sound the same.

PHOTO CREDIT: Neil Krug

I know there is certain ignorance on my part – I am not well-versed regarding music law and the inner-workings – but I find it hard to believe Lana Del Rey wanted to rewrite Creep for her song, Get Free. I am not sure how the case will play out but one suspects it will not work out well for the American songwriter. She will learn a lesson from this but I fear the implications will go wider – many artists will reduce their ambitions or go to every artist they think might sue them (to get written consent). Legalities are important but there is a big difference between plagiarising a song wholesale and some chord similarities. Rather than drag things through the courts; a more reasoned and fair-minded approach would be better for everyone? A forty-percent cut (for Radiohead) seems like a good deal for Radiohead, considering – Lana Del Rey has not used any of their lyrics or anything other than melody and chord similarities. Whatever the cure/resolve is regarding plagiarism/similarities; I wonder whether cases like Radiohead vs. Lana Del Rey will extend across all music and we will see other lawsuits being brought. Will lawyers start looking at independent acts and dissecting all their music?! I am sad Lana Del Rey has been accused and Radiohead – or their lawyers, at least – are filing a lawsuit. Whatever your views on this latest plagiarism case; it is clear it sends a very harsh lesson…

PHOTO CREDIT: Unsplash

TO the rest of the music world.

FEATURE: David Bowie at Seventy-One: Music, Genius and Legacy: The Ultimate David Bowie Playlist

FEATURE:

 

David Bowie at Seventy-One

IN THIS PHOTO: The cover of David Bowie's album, Aladdin Sane/PHOTO CREDIT: Brian Duffy 

Music, Genius and Legacy: The Ultimate David Bowie Playlist

________

TOMORROW is a rare day where…

PHOTO CREDIT: Gavid Evans/Sotheby's Press Office

we neither celebrate or commemorate David Bowie. He died on 10th January, 2016 and, as we know; celebrated his sixty-ninth birthday two days before. None of us expected that devastating news to come through a couple of years ago. It began a year that became synonymous with high-profile musicians' deaths and tragedy. We did not know Bowie was even sick - so his death arrived like a thunderbolt out of the blue! That said; we have had time to take the news in and, as we go forward, look at all the artists inspired by the great man. One wonders what could have arrived had Bowie lived and continued to make music. His final album, Blackstar (2016), arrived shortly before his death and was a devastating thing. One of his most adventurous, bold and astonishing albums from Bowie – the fact he recorded a lot of the material as he was dying, and released something THAT good, blew people away. It is sad to think about Blackstar because of the quality – and what could have followed such a momentous record! Many are following in Bowie’s footsteps and the potency and magic of his music will never die. Although nobody will equal the brilliance of David Bowie; I have been thinking about his extensive back-catalogue and how it changed the face of music. To celebrate the seventy-first birthday of the Ziggy Stardust creator; an extensive and career-spanning playlist that collects together all the music pioneer’s….

PHOTO CREDIT: Terry O'Neill/Getty Image

GREATEST moments

FEATURE: Banquo: Where Music Could Go When We Remove the Boundaries

FEATURE:

 

Banquo

ALL PHOTOS (unless credited otherwise): Unsplash 

Where Music Could Go When We Remove the Boundaries

________

I’LL admit from the off…

this is a bit of a vanity-piece (sorry!). I am going to put names and sounds together that would not usually share the same room, mind. I have been thinking about albums and what I would do were I provided limited (translation: affordable but ambitious) resources and permission. This is not a chance for me to open the toy-box and indulge myself: I wonder whether the reason we have not seen any biblically-good albums arrive in the past decade-or-so is (because) it is getting harder to indulge the imagination. Look at the progressive and paradigm-shifting records of the past – such as Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band – and the way the studio was pushed to its limits. Those classic, endlessly fascinating albums have remained in the history books because of the quality and talented expended. One cannot claim the all-time-greatest records claim that position because of any tricky, pampering or trickery. I feel it is becoming harder and harder to break boundaries and ignite discovery because so much ground has already been covered. Consider music in the same vein as scientific discovery. Those world-changing finds and epiphanies occurred because nobody thought of them. That is axiomatic - but there was less pressure and fewer competing minds back then. The same could be said of the earliest musical breakthroughs. Whilst you could never claim The Beatles succeeded and changed music because they started out in the 1960s – and there was more ground to explore and room to manoeuvre.

Now, in 2018; we have seen all the genres unfurl and music has become packed and suffocated. Whilst there is never going to be anything as vital or shape-shifting as Punk, Grunge or Psychedelia: I feel there are ways modern music can expand minds and blow minds. I am not saying I can do that – as I do not write music and have not released material – but the developments will not come in the form of unexplored genres. I feel one reason music cannot leap forward is due to legalities, written consent and a lack of boldness. There are artists who throw everything into the mix and have the talent to hang it all together: most albums work within normal confines and do not break moulds. Maybe it is a matter of cost and concision; others are less willing to take commercial risks and depart from the normal. Music is primed for one of those albums that throws the dice against the wall, takes it trousers down and runs around the room with its todger out! Maybe the idea of a no-holds-barred album would be a psychic wank-storm that could be a huge commercial flop. The best albums of the past (however many) years have had monumental moments but there are few that take music in new directions and change the game.

IMAGE CREDIT: Getty Images

I am not saying I could do that but I wonder what could happen if fewer obstacles were in place; if artists tried something truly experimental and profound. Some of my favourite albums – 3 Feet High and Rising; Paul’s Boutique and Since I Left You – have dug through crates of vinyl and spliced samples together to create something transformative. Whether it is a samples-only creation like The Avalanches’ Since I Left You or a Hip-Hop-cum-samples delight like Beastie Boys’ Paul’s Boutique – these are albums that have gained massive critical acclaim and been a labour of love. That might not sound appealing and, as I type this, realise the time it took to get clearance (regarding the samples) was back-breaking. Even though it was tricky getting clearance; it would be impossible to do that today. There are records that use samples but nothing to the extent of the best albums from the 1980s (2000 in the case of The Avalanches). If I were to suggest an album, and advise how to create something music-altering; it would be loosening the laws regarding copyright – or make it easier to forge an agreement between a song’s creator and those looking to use it on their record. Albums that employ samples, whilst injecting original voice, have stayed in my mind longest. Look at the greatest records from the 1960s-present and you have experimentation and social relevance at the heart.

There are flights-of-fancy and genre-splicing adventures; odd twists and fantastic little asides. To my mind, aside from Kendrick Lamar and Radiohead (In Rainbows (2007) and 2016's A Moon Shaped Pool) there have been few modern albums that have truly moved me – physically, emotionally and spiritually. My mind always goes back to music created before 2000 (most of it from the 1990s; lots of stuff from The Beatles; a healthy smattering of the 1980s’ gold). Maybe that is nostalgia and the comfort of childhood memories – music soundtracked important moments then; that was the last time I felt truly safe – but I feel there were fewer restrictions and greater mobility back then. Perhaps artists are not attacking and vocalising the tensions and fears we all face (some are but most aren’t) or music might be too busy to proffer and uncover albums that reach into the stratosphere. In my mind, the ‘perfect’ album would be a combination of my all-time-favourites and the best from the past couple of decades. If there were no boundaries and I could make any album I wanted (it would not be expensive!); it would unite the albums many of the artists I feature mark as their favourites; samples a-plenty (keeping it cost-effecting); some unique narration and a general concept.

I feel the modern world, and all its brutal scars, is the most compelling and divisive thing available to the musician. The political strife, terrorism and inequalities; the controversies, problems and anger that are circulating around the world are in all our hearts and seconds from being shot from the lips. It is hard for the average person to make sense of their fears and have their voice heard: musicians are in that privileged position where they can get their fears and thoughts out. My pitched album, Banquo, would be a state-of-the-world concept but have room for love and romance. Before certain songs, and during some others, there would be narration and spoken words from certain high-profile figures. Mavis Staples, and that whiskey-soaked, incredible voice, would be the perfect ‘Muse’ – the lead and guiding voice that acted as conscious/God/nature. She would appear in a singing capacity on one or two numbers but, mainly, she would narrate and provide clarity and exposition. In terms of other narration; I would have Charlie Brooker and Aisling Bea. The former would act as a commentator and spectator; a news reporter and observer who provides wit, sardonic cut and observations. There would be comedic input but, unlike Mavis Staples; Brooker would take a more political stance – against the voice of Staples; looking at religion, the environment and love.

IN THIS PHOTO: Mavis Staples/PHOTO CREDIT: Getty Images

Aisling Bea compels me for a number of reasons. Her voice is engaging, alluring and full of life. She would, in a sort of different-concept A Grand Don’t Come for Free, act as the voice of a love interest and heroine. Bea is a witty, acerbic and deeply intelligent talent who has huge dramatic and comedic pull – utilising her abilities and vocal nuances would add a lot to the album. I mention The Streets’ finest album because it is a concept album that succeeds and addresses modern life. Banquo’s narrative arc would address how the world is unfolding and what is occurring: environmental damage and political tyranny; terrorism and religious division; huge conflicts and issues in our country; controversies arising in the entrainment issue – with plenty to tip the balance. There would be moments of love and sexual allure; domestic dramas and realities (a northern version of A Grand Don’t Come for Free mixed with embers of modern Grime) with quirkier, fantasy moments. I have mentioned a few of the popular names I want to throw in – some great new and older musicians adding their voice; great musicians adding their voices to certain songs – but it would be the sampling/breadth of sounds incorporated that makes the difference! The same way Paul’s Boutique sourced from various decades/artists; Banquo would take from mega-big artists (The Beatles, Kate Bush; Steely Dan, Joni Mitchell and Stevie Wonder among them); obscure rhymes and spoken samples (from T.V. and film).

IN THIS PHOTO: Aisling Bea/PHOTO CREDIT: Jillie Bushell Associates/Getty Images

The opening song would address the world and introduce what is to come; what the concept is and how things will progress. It would end in a battle between differences forces and influences – warring leaders and the environment; conflict and the growing plight of mental illness. It would be one of those trippy, head-fuc* endings that leaves the listener stunned and gasping (hopefully).  It is, in a way, a similar narrative/progression as A Grand Don’t Come for Free but mix domestic/local observations with those worldwide concerns and issues. Samples would range from jam-packed (the closing number and a few others) to a well-chosen selection here and there; going through all genres and sounds from the 1940s to now (with some Classical and Blues thrown in). I have a great fondness for the 1980s (an underrated decade!) and would use, if I could, samples from Madonna, Talking Heads and Yes; Pixies, Tears for Fears and The Smiths. The 1990s would get a good look-in and would the classic acts from the 1960s and 1970s. A few titles are already in mind – The Oxford Coma; The Last of the Great Northern Lovers; Kintsugi and Antifreeze in Summer – and I have names (other than Staples, Brooker and Bea) that would be perfect. There would be no central bands/artist (like De La Soul or Beastie Boys) complimenting the samples and mixing their voice into the mix.

Musicians, new and established, would provide the vocals/instruments and, although there is no central gravity and voice; the collaborations and blend of voices would give the album a more unified and interesting vibe. Stories and songs would range from small-time love/flirtations to mass destruction; political, socially-aware protest and fired political statements. It all sounds like a rather expensive and time-consuming project to put together. Throw into the fray the fact I want to do something original and pioneering regarding promotion, release and recording…and it all sounds like it could run away. In terms of the promotion/release surprise; I am thinking something similar to Radiohead’s pay-as-you-like dynamic concerning In Rainbows – only something different and unexpected. In terms of format; there would be different options and, the same way King Gizzard & The Lizard Wizard allowed people to copy and distribute one of their albums as they liked – I would want to do something as bold and inventive. Banquo would be available on all physical formats but even the way one listens to it would be unique. It may sound too complex and, yes, borderline-pretentious but it would not be. Everything would be worked out to ensure it was affordable, possible and not too ambitious. The work needed to pull it all together would be a slog but that is what needs to be done: plan an album that goes beyond the conventional and inspires other.

Getting clearance for samples would be the biggest challenge. Finding a way of bargaining with musicians – so I could use their material, ensure they are compensated and they had some say – is key but I feel it would be possible. The album would involve different collaborations and artists adding their voices from all over the world – recording in a variety of locations (from their home to odd locales and studios) – and record music in different formats (mono and stereo; bending sound and the way music is heard). It is a big ask but I feel modern music needs something that takes gambles whilst keeping its themes relevant and important. Nothing commercial and ordinary would arrive. That said; the record would not alienate anyone but, instead, appeal to as many people as possible. Of course; given the album’s allusion to Banquo; there would be elements of Macbeth and comparable story-strands. So much ground will be covered in the album – sexual identity and gender-equality; animal rights and race – and the musical spectrum would be bright and variegated. It might be a risky gamble but, as I consider pitching it on PledgeMusic/Kickstarter; I am excited by the possibility and what could come from it. I have a lot of ambitions regarding music I want to achieve: some might take a few months; others might take a few more years. Getting people together, celebrated figures and musicians, into a single project (double-album) would be a dream of mine. 2018 is a year to embrace the daring and take a chance so, with that in mind I shall…

GET to work!

FEATURE: Lead Us Not into Temptation… Why the Heart Needs to Rule the Head in 2018

FEATURE:

 

Lead Us Not into Temptation…

PHOTO CREDIT: Unsplash

Why the Heart Needs to Rule the Head in 2018

________

THE next few pieces I am writing will…

PHOTO CREDIT: Unsplash

look at music careers, the way the industry has changed; how music can change and evolve – and why it is important to throw everything into an album. For now, fairly briefly, I want to look at the predictions that have been laid out and why a more intelligent and brave approach to music needs to take place. That might sound insulting, and vague, but it is aimed at the mainstream and the artists that are promising good things; why the themes they sing about (sex, love and struggles) need to come from a deeper and more spiritual place. Before I move onto the final instalment of my 2018-sounds-related pieces; I want to break off and tell a story. We all have regrets, I guess. One of the biggest ones in my life was back in school; back when I was fourteen and was truly popular. My sex-life is not exactly great – don’t need to put the neon sign up to tell you the truth behind those words! – but, when I was riding high in high-school; I was asked out. In fact...that was, actually, the last time I was actually asked out. The girl, Charlotte, was maybe too shy to come forward – I forget her surname but she asked me out via a friend of hers. I was popular back then because I was sporty. I ran cross-country and was athletic; played on the football team – whilst managing to cancel that all out by being a massive nerd!

PHOTO CREDIT: Unsplash

A poet, academic and general outsider – it someone got my name out there, at least. I did not reject that offer of a date because of arrogance and the fact I could do better. The fact is…I don’t know why I turned her down. She was extremely beautiful and has a great, northern voice; she was popular and would have been perfect. She is probably married and happy now; so I doubt she wracks her brain: I have kept it in my head all these years. It actually affects my every move and I wonder whether things would be different if I had said ‘yes’ to her. Maybe life would take me in a different direction and be worse: perhaps I would be further along and where I actually want to be. That might sound like a random detour but if I were to write a love song; I would take from that time and write from the deepest part of my heart. I know there are speculations mainstream music might strengthen and change the tide. The reason I am focusing on this type of music – for the last time in a while – is because that is where most of the attention is paid. It has been a while since mainstream artists, when talking about love, have really impressed me...

IN THIS PHOTO: Cailin Russo/PHOTO CREDIT: Getty Images/Artist

The last artist I got excited about, in that position, was Lorde. Again; I shall try and limit mentions of her for a little while: here is an artist who is very young but able to project issues around relationships in a very mature and different way. I am not suggesting there needs to be a moratorium on all artists who present love and heartbreak in a very lifeless way. I am excited most by female artists coming through and what they can do. I am looking at the artists who have the potential to do something intelligent and soulful; compared to those who might aim for the mainstream dollar. Cailin Russo has appeared in a couple of Justin Bieber videos and is being tipped for great things. September Rose is a song that is personal and fresh but does not suffer the same fate as other mainstream artists might face. Stars like Nadine Coyle, Pixie Lott and Rita Ora are tackling relationships without much distinction and depth. They have writers and producers backing them and are aiming towards the side of the market that wants something urgent and uncomplicated. That temptation and need to embrace something easy is one of the greatest fears I have this year. Certain polls have tipped acts like Billie Eilish and Sigrid to succeed.

IN THIS PHOTO: Nadine Coyle/PHOTO CREDIT: Getty Images/Artist

They are great, young artists that have a sense of self and control. Maybe that is the split we are seeing. Those independent-minded musicians who write their own material (or have a bigger say) who write about relationships with wider emotion and a more compelling edge; those who still go for the trashy and simplistic (and have a legion of others working with them). Throw in the likes of Jessie J to the latter; Jessie Ware to the former; big-name artists like Justin Bieber can go with Jessie J, too. My biggest music-based wish is there is a rearrangement of ideals and order so those compelling young artists replace the established order whose music is rather shallow and populist. It may sound like I am picking on the girls but the fact is, I am being rather positive and complimentary.  The one thing that unites all musicians is personal relationships. That is the commodity and spirit everyone has any puts into their music. The point I am trying to make is moving music from the generic and salacious to personal and inspiring. If artists are going to stick with love/relationships as a majority share; one would hope they inject some new angles and ideas into the pot. I have mentioned some mainstream-lite artists who are less concerned with soul and compelling; they are in it to get quick streaming figures and meaningless popularity.

IN THIS PHOTO: Pixie Lott/PHOTO CREDIT: Getty Images/Artist

Whilst the likes of Pixie Lott, Nadine Coyle and, say, Rihanna provide something aimed more at young audiences who prefer hot beats and polished production over nuance and quality – there are those in a position of power who go a lot further and expend more effort. I know I just mentioned Rihanna in a post celebrating great black artists: I know she has a commercial appeal and is inspiring a lot of people. Lana Del Rey has a huge fanbase but takes subjects of love and desire in a more sensual and cinematic direction. She is someone who has been accused of lacking any real identity and memorability - but you cannot accuse her music of lacking personality. She reminds me of the blue-eyed Soul singers of old; those songs that have romance and shiver but brought you into a unique universe. Maybe there is something fashionable about liking a certain artist. If they seem cool and sexy; they have an edge or a can craft a hook-filled song – is that something you should be focusing on?! Young audiences, in a lot of ways, are still being fed cheap and sterile music because that is what (marketing people and labels) think they demand. Music, in a way, is a form of education. Love, relationships and coping with rejection are subjects people need to know about – it does not matter how old you are.

PHOTO CREDIT: Unsplash

Maybe young listeners are more naïve and having their eyes opened to something new: older listeners are looking for direction and fresh insight. You cannot say music aimed at younger listeners (teens and those discovering music for the first time) is innocent and censored – given the sexualised videos and explicit suggestions. What worries me most is how hollow and shallow a lot of popular music is. Some might say I can walk away and it is not aimed at me. That is true but, as a journalist, I am looking out at the mainstream and hoping it takes responsibility. I am pleased hotly-tipped names like Sigrid and Billie Eilish are getting their dues. They are mature and multi-talented artists who have had their hearts broken but are not willing to cheapen what they do to appeal to the ultra-commercial. It is tempting, if you have lust and passion, to put the purity and openness of those emotions into song. If you are heartbroken and vengeful; that can lead to some rather spiked and direct words. These emotions go through everyone but, for songwriters, there is more relevance and potential. If your fans are, say, ten or eleven - does that mean you have to write something banal or easy-to-remember? You are instantly giving them little credit and assuming they do not want to be moved. Penning those aimless, generic lines might get you up the charts and on certain radio stations – we have seen it too often and, surely, this kind of music will not endure years from now?!

IN THIS PHOTO: Sigrid/PHOTO CREDIT: Getty Images/Artist

I will look at boy-made music in a bit but two artists I have followed for a while, and am excited about this year, are FiFi Rong and Lola Coca. Both are London-based and have colour and passion on their side. FiFi Rong mixes Electronica and hybrid movements; strange textures and epic compositions with that inimitable, striking voice. She has a sense of the beguiling and unusual but, at the heart, deals with personal issues and how love moves her. Lola Coca, by contrast, has a less emotive and intense approach. She uses humour and cheek; some keen wit and an impressive amount of confidence to give the finger to guys that take her for granted. Both these artists have been recording for a while and are unwilling to compromise in order to get a fast passage to the mainstream. I wonder whether mainstream megastars like Ed Sheeran are leading artists down a bad road. He is not the only one whose songs of love and not exactly the work of philosophical genius. I know it is more complex than a binary argument: those artists who put their soul and keener intellect into love; those who are too commercial and scared to try anything with any real depth. Perhaps I am being harsh on artists, in general. They are all in the business for good reasons - and want to move people.

IN THIS PHOTO: FiFi Rong/PHOTO CREDIT: Jamike Latif

What I hope is the new breed of Pop/mainstream artists has the ammunition to compel change. Love and romance are subjects I have attacked in the past – too common when it comes to the music we here. I have made peace with that side of my brain and come to accept there is a definite place and purpose for love songs. If done right, they can inspire people and open minds: if they are lazy and personality-free; it leaves a sour place. I disagree with the notion certain Pop acts have their place because there is a demand out there. There is only that demand because this is the type of act/sound the mainstream has proffered. The fact a band of new artists, male and female, look set to bring something different to music. That is heartening to hear but I worry they might have to wait longer for glory because of the success and place the less-reliable and pioneering hold. Attach whatever word you want to love - but it is a powerful thing and, if done right, can change a person’s life. I have told a story concerning a regretful time; a lot of musicians have (these kinds of tales) in them and, if shared with their audience, it can give them guidance and comfort. There are those who go for the cheap and tasty – songs easy to write that will get them commercially laid – but those who go further and think bigger represent music’s finest and…

PHOTO CREDIT: Unsplash

BRILLIANT best.

FEATURE: Colour-Blind: How Race Is Still an Issue in Music – and Why Black Artists Are Producing Some of the Best Music Around

FEATURE:

 

Colour-Blind

IN THIS PHOTO: JONES/PHOTO CREDIT: Josh Shinner  

How Race Is Still an Issue in Music – and Why Black Artists Are Producing Some of the Best Music Around

________

THIS is another topic I have been compelled…

IN THIS PHOTO: The faces that make up the longlist for BBC's Sound of 2018/PHOTO CREDIT: Getty Images

to revisit and explore. There are few black faces on BBC’s annual longlist - of artists to watch for - this year. There were more last year but, this year, there is an embrace of modern Pop - and less of a reliance on genres such as Hip-Hop, Rap and Grime. Last year was a productive and exciting one for young black artists in Britain. A spotlight was provided and, when you look at the Mercury Music Prize nominations, there were some fantastic black artists on the list. Sampha won it but Loyle Carner was nestling near the higher ranks – almost sneaking it from Sampha. The Grammy Awards have shifted so the main categories have more minority artists than ever. This not only extends to race but music – Hip-Hop and Rap taking over from Pop and commercial sounds. Many bemoaned the lack of Lorde, Taylor Swift and Rock acts: those with common sense recognised the evolution and recognition of great new artists like SZA and pioneers like Kendrick Lamar. New artists like Princess Nokia and Cardi B are coming on strong; Chance the Rapper, Frank Ocean and Beyoncé have created some of the best albums in the past couple of years. In fact; the last four years, I would say, have been defined by terrific black music.

IN THIS PHOTO: SZA/PHOTO CREDIT: SSENSE

I will come to an album that is back in my mind – I consider the best of 2014 – but I feel Kendrick Lamar created the best album of 2015 (To Pimp a Butterfly); Beyoncé in 2016 (Lemonade); many feel Kendrick Lamar’s DAMN. was the best of last year – others feel records from SZA, JAY-Z; Kelela and Tyler, the Creator were deserving. Throw in British efforts from Sampha and Stormzy; U.S. greats like Thundercat, too. Solange created a year-defining album in 2016 (A Seat at the Table) and this year look set to put a great focus on black artists. I worry, mind you, that there is still a racial bias when it comes to music. Maybe it is not as evident as sexualisation and sexism but it is very much there. Overlooked tracks from Rhiannon Giddens deserved more acclaim but, largely, there was good coverage of black music. Although I have listed some great black albums from the past few years; I am still seeing fewer black faces at festivals and being proffered. There are plenty of geniuses in music but, regardless of talent; there is that leer and lure towards white artists, still. I have mentioned the BBC’s longslist of artists to look out for this year. I am glad good Pop is taking focus but there is that issue of racial-genre bias.

IN THIS PHOTO: The cover to Tyler, the Creator's album, Flower Boy/PHOTO CREDIT: Getty Images

Many were excited last year when Grime and Hip-Hop got more attention. The thing is: there are fantastic black artists throughout music. We have mainstream queens like Rihanna and Beyoncé; all genres have great black artists and that is not translating into focus and attention. My headline photo is of JONES: a young British artist who has the promise to make some big strides this year. I put a spotlight on RAYE a while ago; highlighted Eva Lazarus yesterday – have made a special place in my heart for Leon Bridges. Bridges is a stunning Soul voice and someone who puts me in mind of Stevie Wonder and Marvin Gaye. I have expounded the virtues of Michael Kiwanuka and the hot underground of Grime. Whilst there are genres with a larger proportion of black artists – Grime, Hip-Hop and Rap – it is the lack of exposure to black artists in other genres that is troubling. The longlists of ones to watch this year is Pop-orientated but there are so many great black artists in popular music. Why, then, are there so many white faces on display?! Jazz, a maligned and underrated genre, has produced stunning music the past few years. Kamasi Washington’s Harmony of Difference is a staggering odyssey and immersive work that should get more exposure. The fact it did not get the push and oxygen it deserves is not a racial thing: it is the fact Jazz is ignored and seen as too experimental and boring.

IN THIS PHOTO: RAYE/PHOTO CREDIT: Getty Images

I have grown a bit tired of the way certain genres have been marginalised – where there is so much great music that warrants more. The mainstream has some great black artists playing but there is still that dominance of white bodies. Festival headliners, in this country at least, ten not to be black. You might have artists lower down the bill but it has been a while since I’ve seen a mainstream festival give props to a black act. Beyoncé took to Glastonbury a while ago – she will play this year’s Coachella festival and, let’s hope, she plays Glastonbury when it returns next year. There are other festivals that will host black acts but how many will headline?! One can flip the argument and say the general population (in this country) is about eight or nine-percent. That would mean music would not have to boast a higher proportion of black faces, no? You look at the festival acts and those proffered for good things – can you say eight percent of them are black? Talent and music do not follow arbitrary rules and should be based on talent. If there were few black artists in music then you could say it is fair mostly white acts are being promoted. I have provided a long list of black artists doing incredible things. A Mercury win from Sampha is a positive sign – even if there were few other black faces alongside him – and the Grammy rundown is shifting away from a white mainstream to the engineers of musical progression and true originality.

IN THIS PHOTO: Sampha/PHOTO CREDIT: Getty Images

One way of recognising the brilliance of black music is to get out of the perception the charts and mainstream is indicative of what quality looks like – and what the public wants. Music should be equal and, with sexism an issue in entertainment; should we really continue down the same lines when it comes to race?! I am not saying we cheapen the issue but playing only black music and reversing what is happening in the industry. We should not put black artists-only headliners in festivals and not offer constructive solutions. I am concerned we associate black artists with certain genres. Folk and Rock have few black artists but, again, why does it have to be that way?! Maybe this goes back to history and tastes – black artists connecting with their roots and music of their peers – but I think there is an institutionalised homogenisation and compartmentalisation. I am seeing great Rock bands led by black artists and those with a more acoustic-minded nature. If they feel they will not be taken seriously if they go into white-heavy genres; that means they will stick to genres that are traditionally more accepting of black artists. Even the genres with a greater number of black artists – Hip-Hop, Rap and Grime – goes through waves and movements. There is a consistent celebration of Pop, Alternative and other mainstream sounds.

IN THIS PHOTO: Rihanna/PHOTO CREDIT: FentyBeauty.com

Rihanna, in 2015, spoke with the The New York Times - and was asked whether race is still a problem in music.

“I have to bear in mind that people are judging you because you’re packaged a certain way – they’ve been programmed to think a black man in a hoodie means grab your purse a little tighter,” said Rihanna. “For me, it comes down to smaller issues, scenarios in which people can assume something of me without knowing me, just by my packaging”.

Nicki Minaj questioned the voting criteria of MTV and whether there is a favouring of white artists. If white artists writhe around in videos and get loads of streams; they get lots of hits and nominations. She, as a black artist, has fewer nominations and is overlooked:

“Hey guys @MTV thank you for my nominations. Did Feeling Myself miss the deadline or…?,’ she tweeted, before adding: ‘If I was a different “kind” of artist, Anaconda would be nominated for best choreo and vid of the year as well…If your video celebrates women with very slim bodies, you will be nominated for vid of the year”.

Some have argued so-called ‘racism’ is a result of less-nefarious factors such as nepotism and cultural shifts. It is clear politics and the way black people are seen in society has an impact on musicians. Everyone from Solange and Chance, the Rapper have spoken out against isolation and the way those in the White House are ignorant of the plight and necessity of black recording artists. Whilst you can quibble over whether there is inherent racism or sheer ignorance – one cannot argue at the strength and power of black music.

IN THIS PHOTO: Solange/PHOTO CREDIT: Getty Images

I alluded to an album/artist who has come back into my consciousness. I have looked at artists like Beyoncé and Kendrick Lamar and how they are changing music. They can, in many ways, thank D’Angelo. He is one of those artists most of us will not recognise my name – his music will strike a chord when we hear it. Many black artists got into music because of seminal records like Voodoo. To me, it is 2014’s Black Messiah that really connects. That album arrived and blew critics away. The experimentation, confidence and audacity that ran throughout took everyone by surprise. The album connects with me because of its richness and depths. It explores genres like Hip-Hop and Rock; it moves into Jazz and takes in Soul and R&B. The lyrics look at political turmoil and the struggle of the black population; social deprivation and personal frustration. There were songs about love but it was those fired-up mandates that really impressed. Listen to the album and realise what a wonderful thing it is. Look back through music and everyone from Stevie Wonder and Aretha Franklin have investigated social struggle and the realities of black lives – and fusing that with more traditional subjects of love. Michael Jackson, Marvin Gaye and the legends of Soul; the incredible Disco artists and R&B pioneers; some of my favourites like En Vogue, Aaliyah and Lauryn Hill; Neneh Cherry and A Tribe Called Quest; Public Enemy and N.W.A. All of these artists have made staggering contributions to the music world. What stands out is the motivation to address issues overlooked by many white artists.

IN THIS PHOTO: D'Angelo/PHOTO CREDIT: Getty Images

We are at a time when the political machination of Trump and May are causing division; where there is clear inequality and hatred circulating and festooning the lungs. It is not only the black population put-down and ignored. There are deprived and struggling people in all sectors of society. From the mentally ill to the homeless; the poor and those without a voice – music has its role and the power to raise change. I worry whether the new Pop movement has come at a time when we need to promote social change and engineer productive solution. In order for the end of division and the majority coming together; we need to embrace the minority artists who have the authority and passion to make a change. I worry few people are having conversations about race. You cannot write everything off by saying it is nepotism and decades-old problems revolving around ego. If things have not changed since the 1950s and 1960s in regards the make-up and dynamics of the mainstream – how can we claim there is not racism? Maybe it is not overt and profane but there is a severe sense of apathy and unwillingness to bend. Ironically; movements and real change do not happen overnight. We know there are fewer black artists put into the fore; the festivals are not housing them; we still assume there are ‘black genres’ rather than black artists – so many over issues around commercialism, awards and publicity. 2018 is here and, in addition to tackling sexism and addressing wrong; we need to consider areas around race. It should not have to fall to major black artists to highlight the disparity and discrepancies around. The world needs leading and anger articulated and, rather than proffer those artists who can bond the people and properly vocalise what issues are present – we are focusing on artists who do not have the ability to bond the people and shine a light. That is a shame because, in one of the tensest times of modern times; we need these pioneering and strong artists…

IN THIS PHOTO: Leon Bridges/PHOTO CREDIT: Getty Images

TO guide us forward.

FEATURE: Instrumental, Elemental: Are We Still Buying Musical Instruments?

FEATURE:

 

Instrumental, Elemental

ALL PHOTOS: Unsplash

Are We Still Buying Musical Instruments?

________

YOU can claim the history of music has seen shifts…

and new leaders come through. Tastes have changed and the music world has evolved. Last year; I wrote a couple of similar pieces that looked at acoustic music and whether it is relevant. Another investigated Rock and whether that is dying. I am not saying modern music is defined by a lack of instrumentation but it seems fewer young people are picking up instruments. You can debate the local markets and whether, in some regions, the traditional music store is surviving. It is a debate and point that is contentious but one I feel obliged to pull up. Near where I live; there is a music school and there are a couple of music shops. Dig deeper into London and you have some closures but, it seems, there is still a taste for proper, live music. We hear stories of the industry in decline but, when it comes to the D.N.A. of the music; you cannot replace the true spirit and blood of the sound with electronics. I am pleased artists are using laptops and technology but I fear some are taking an easy route. The reality of mastering an instrument concerns time and patience. I have tried picking up a guitar and, aside from a few lessons, I found my interest wane. I wanted to get into the music business but could not get to grips with the guitar.

I was taught fingering and chords; structure and songs – some simple performances to get the confidence up. That didn’t work. I moved to piano and the same thing happened. I am writing a piece about Classical music and how there needs to be more of it in modern sounds. There is compartmentalisation still and I worry artists are taking the easy route. It is hard to get a true impression of the music industry and whether modern electronics will take over from conventional methods. Electronic downloads, we heard, have overtaken C.D.s. Other sources look at the glory of the C.D. and how physical music still holds a place in the heart. Vinyl has been struggling in the past but has faced an upturn. Sales are increasing and it seems the people are not willing to let electronic-made music dominate. In fact; I am a little rash and vague with regards the battle between older and new. My point concerns the relationship between musical formats and how the C.D. boom, when Dire Straits’ Brothers in Arms arrived in the 1980s, occurred. Big, musically-rich albums encourage artists and fans to pick up instruments. The Grunge bands of the late-1980s and early-1990s compelled a million diehard garage-based bands to emulate their heroes. Punk compelled angry musicians to articulate their passion and misunderstood minds through music. Every great wave and movement motivates certain symmetry...

As times have progressed; the more guitar-based formats have been replaced. There are great guitar bands around but most of the mainstream is disconnected. Past heroes such as Oasis and Nirvana got youngsters involved in music-making and picking instruments up. Now, with genres like Pop starting to take more of a slice; it is harder getting a clear view as to whether instruments are still playing an important role. I have mentioned laptops and, with there being little money in it for new musicians; many are producing sounds through technology - forgoing the costs of the studio and the time it takes to make a song. Laptops and new software can mimic instruments and we are seeing a lot of new music that provides the sounds of instruments without one actually being played. Whilst there is enough evidence to suggest modern music places less prominence on instruments; I feel all is not lost. There are some great new bands in the underground that have kept true and are unwilling to fully embrace technology. When they come to fruition; their music will inspire the next generation coming through. Two years ago; The Guardian highlighted a music shop that was doing sterling business. There are others that continue to see sales grow but there is the assumption the decline of the high-street music shop means artists are not picking instruments up.

The biggest shift we have seen, to coincide with the electronic boom, is the shift from the visible shop to the online store. The average musician/member of the public cannot necessarily afford a guitar or drum kit. It takes a lot of saving and the cost of lessons means the price of learning an instrument runs into thousands. People are seeing the way Pop is taking over the how artists who play instruments are getting less exposure than those who rely on others – making their music through technology and producers. There are music classes and lessons but there is a shift towards bigger facilities and colleges. When I was in school, all those years ago, we had music on the syllabus. It was a mandatory part of primary education and, by the time you got to high-school; it was an option available – one that many took. Now, there are fewer primary schools offering music courses and it is not ingrained into the national curriculum. Sure, there are colleges and music schools available to those at a certain point in life – are we ignoring the importance of exposing students to music at a young age? That affects the desire to pursue music but, against the bad statistics is a chance for positivity. Although schools’ music programmes and record shops are less visible than before; we are still seeing instruments bought and played.

Online sales and have increased and, as a companion to the vinyl revival and survival of the C.D.; people are not abandoning music at its pure base. If people are still being instruments and taking them up; does this mean that desire is being translated into music? One of the problems with the decline of record stores – and those that sell instruments – is the competition from online sources. It is more cost-effective buying online but the cost of lessons and the dedication needed is putting many people off. Maybe the questions I posed in the headline should have compared the cost of buying instruments and whether it is affordable. I know there has been a loss of shops and educational programmes but, alas, we are still buying instruments. Figures suggest that side of music is in decline but, in fact, the business has shifted to the Internet. One of my biggest fears does not revolve around sales and the move towards electronically-produced sounds. I am concerned the structure of modern music means a lot of the people picking up instruments will struggle to transition into the business. Popular instruments like guitars and drums are reserved to certain genres. If Pop – with its electronics, machine-made beats and way of working – is riding high; Hip-Hop and Rap are creating ground (less instrument-based; more to do with flow and vocals) then I wonder whether new musicians will have the patience to stick with it.

There are Garage, Punk and Rock bands getting acclaim in the underground. Mainstream artists like Wolf Alice and IDLES are proving how powerful and potent instruments are – and why you cannot get the same magic and emotion from a laptop/electronics. I am all for revolution and change but I do not want the music I was raised on to be a part of the past. Changes will come and there will be a swing back to genres like Rock and Alternative. Until that happens, I fear music-making will be largely electronic. Many new musicians are playing piano and guitar but still leaning heavily on their laptops and trickery. The main point of this article is to highlight how enriching and beneficial playing an instrument is. It might be as simple as learning the acoustic guitar or picking up a violin. At first, if you do not have a band, it might seem a solitary pursuit. In time, when you bond with that instrument; you build a social circle and can join with others. It teaches you a lot about yourself and provides unique expression and perception. You can create language with music and explore what is possible. I do not feel instruments will be replaced by the machine but I am fearful the cost will put people off; the popular scene is not equipped to foster and nurture those who want to play (whether they are in a band or a soloist) and they will struggle to transition as fast as they’d hoped – and lose that passion down the line. I think statistics proffering the decline or instruments are false and misleading.

There is a desire and demand out there but the way we are buying has shifted. Schools are reducing their music programmes but there are options open elsewhere – many of these are paid courses at schools and universities. It is money, making a big impression: laptops might be more affordable and machine-created songs more economical than a traditional, instrumental number. We are still buying instruments and playing them but there has been a slight downshift. The problem is not sales: costs are putting off ambitious creations and the mainstream is not rife with bands playing guitars and drums; there are not many Classical elements in popular music; other genres (more reliant on instruments) are not as popular. I am confident the young and older will take to instruments but many take an instrument up because they see a shop on the street – compelled to go in and explore. They are taught about music at school and, if these elements dwindle; what does the future of music look like? We can never get rid of bands and music that does not need a laptop to make it come to life. My main recommendation is to revert back to the past and reignite the strong music curriculums people like me grew up on. Put more money into the kitty and inject some more cash into the high street – so music stores can survive and breed. Making playing more affordable is important. I love electronic-based music and the way technology has taken a stand. Older sound sticks in my mind because of the physicality and nuance of instruments played. The only way we can get people interested in music and taking to instruments is ensuring bands and lesser-heard genres are back into the forefront. It seems, when it comes to the prosperous future of music we must…

REMEMBER the reason music has come this far.

FEATURE: Vinyl Corner: Steely Dan – Can’t Buy a Thrill

FEATURE:

 

Vinyl Corner

PHOTO/IMAGE CREDITS (unless stated otherwise): Getty Images

Steely Dan – Can’t Buy a Thrill

________

IT has been a while since I ventured into…

IN THIS PHOTO: Steely Dan, 1972: (L-R): Jeff 'Skunk' Baxter, Walter Becker; David Palmer, Denny Dia; Donald Fagen and Jim Hodder/PHOTO CREDIT: Michael Ochs Archives

the dusty nostalgia of Vinyl Corner. The last album, I think, I featured in this spot (last year) was Joni Mitchell’s Blue. The reason for this feature is to highlight albums, I feel, are best heard on a record player. There are a few that have that potential: coming to life when you drop the needle and take them back to their true home. There was another reason I wanted to include Steely Dan’s debut, Can’t Buy a Thrill – two, in fact. The first concerns the timing: the fact the record was released forty-five years ago (last November, in fact). I forgot to feature the record back in November so that is a good reason to focus on it now. The other reason is the fact Walter Becker is no longer with us. The co-founder (alongside Donald Fagen) died suddenly last year and shocked the music world. Although there will be, sadly, no new Steely Dan albums anymore – we can rejoice and preserve the memories and wonderful songs. I go back and forth when it comes to the issue of the ‘best Steely Dan album’. I have been leaning towards Pretzel Logic (their third) because it is, to me, the moment the band became a duo. By that; I mean the sound was cemented and all the experimentation of the first two albums was crystallised into a coherent whole (on Pretzel Logic).

PHOTO CREDIT: Chris Walter/WireImage

I have been leaning back towards Can’t Buy a Thrill because, as I look at the where Steely Dan came from; one is amazed at the confidence and quality that was evident right from the off! My favourite song of Steely Dan’s is my favourite of all-time, ever: Deacon Blues. That song is the jewel of Aja (their penultimate album before they took a long hiatus) and sees Becker and Fagen in full-fat, all-in-the-pot mode. The sumptuous horns and incredible percussion; the luscious backing vocals and the musicianship that makes it a work of genius – it never gets boring and does everything that music should do. The Gary Katz-produced debut was recorded at Los Angeles’ The Village Recorder and, even in 1972, was seen as a luxury. Most big bands have the option to record in esteemed surroundings and pull in as many musicians as possible. That box of toys meant, conversely, it was a challenge and breeze for the ambitious duo. Fagen and Becker were not, strictly, the only members of Steely Dan at that point. They wrote the songs and created the drive but other singers/musicians were present from the off. One of the biggest issues of the album was the numerous bodies! The biggest criticisms levied at the album – very few in total – was the lack of leadership and some ill-advised inclusions.

David Palmer, the soulful, blue-eyed voice you hear on Dirty Work and Brooklyn (Owes the Charmer Under Me) – that was something critics jumped on. The as-yet-solidified band were trying out singers and, in an attempt to fit into the mainstream, perhaps; hiring a popular, conventional singer seemed like a way to get the singles out to the masses quickly. The problem with created spectacular music from the very start meant many could see a distinct sound coming through; a unique personality that was to define future albums. Palmer’s oversung, impassioned performances seemed jarring against the looser, more sardonic performances of Donald Fagen. That said; Dirty Work is seen as one of the best Steely Dan songs ever. Closer Turn That Heartbeat Over Again sees Palmer co-lead with Fagen and Becker – the blend of three voices makes it a more pleasing brew; without the distinct and unaccompanied sound of Palmer alone. If one feels non-Fagen vocals are a bad thing; they might try and explain the brilliant Midnite Cruiser. Some claim the vocal from Jim Hodder – the band’s drummer sadly drowned a few years after the album was released – was not very Steely-esque and did not fit into the ethos. Others protest against the chorus: dropped from nowhere and not as intelligent and complex as other songs on the album. I refuse all assumptions completely. The song is a blissful anthem and, unlike Palmer’s over-earnest and soulful croon; there is enough beard and whiskey in Hodder’s voice to make it stand out and impress. It is the enriching, soul-lifting chorus that, to me, seems to define what Can’t Buy a Thrill is all about: songs that get into the head and remain there for years (decades, even!).

IN THIS PHOTO: The band during a recording session for Can't Buy a Thrill

Originally released in a two-channel stereo format; there was a four-channel quadraphonic mix, too. There are differences between the two mixes but, whatever version you have; it is the sonics and audio richness that makes the music inspire and endure. The lyrics and vocals are sublime and consistently impressive but it is the complete package that makes the album such a scary-good debut – all the players and elements fusing to create a Californian symphonic. A lot of the popularity and renewed interest in Steely Dan’s debut revolves around the sheer accessibility of the record. Its music shifts from Mambo and Soft-Rock to Swing and Rock. It is a fantastic spectrum and freewheelin’ record that manages to have a simple breeze and studious countenance all within the same moment. The lyrics are sardonic, cryptic and humorous; the vocals are varied and nuanced; the music takes you somewhere special and safe. Maybe, in a good and bad way, the album’s cover defines what is contained within. Steely Dan went to create some near-iconic sleeves – Pretzel Logic and Aja spring to mind – but many mauled the debut’s cover because it was messy and crude; childish and garish. In fact; it is the colours, images and tripped-out sensations one discovers that creates intrigue and showcase the tropical flavours of the record. On a song-by-song basis, there are few stronger Steely Dan albums. Can’t Buy a Thrill might not have the coherence and faultless nature of Pretzel Logic; the authority, richness and sheer audacity of Aja; the hidden treasures and layers of Katy Lied – it is, however, their most addicting and record player-perfect creation.

It is a vinyl you hear from beginning to end; immersed in the obvious highs (Dirty Work, Reelin’ in the Years and Do It Again) and underrated gems (Midnite Cruiser, Kings and Change of the Guard). The ten-track L.P. is rife with discovery and brilliance. Do It Again and Dirty Work are the perfect opening one-two. The latter, despite criticisms of Palmer’s vocal, has that swirling organ and amazing chorus. The chorus, in fact, seems to define the album. Every one gets into the brain - but each is different. Do It Again is a sharper, Fagen-sung chorus that contrasts from the semi-operatic qualities of Palmer. That contrast, in lesser albums, would seem like a weakness and lack of focus. Here, in the hands of accomplished musicians; they are natural companions and, in a sense, embodiments of different personalities and lovers (the sharp-tongued and romantic; the soulful and sensitive against the wise and cragged elder). After the two big hits come two corking underdogs: Kings and Midnite Cruiser. The latter, I have talked about; the former is a historical song – almost cliché when it comes to debuts by Californian Jazz bands! – that sees the power-shift from King Richard to King John. The patrons and subjects raise their pitchers and glasses; the scene is set and, with a rousing chorus; it is a song that departs from the love-and-lies predictable and offers something truly different. Only a Fool Would Say That pairs Fagen and Palmer but gives the bigger role to the former. It is one of those Steely Dan songs that could have been taken from their latter, more assured records. On their first outing, it sounds completely alien and alarming – how, like all the other songs, it sounds so confident and free from nerves.

The second side is a little weaker but contains the album’s best-known song: Reelin’ in the Years is the one most highlight from Can’t Buy a Thrill. Those cutting, awesome guitar licks and funky-as-sh*t riffs are breezy and sunny as California but have the smog and danger of a New York neighbourhood. The solo was played by Elliott Randall and is often cited as one of the greatest from all of music! That is another reason Steely Dan succeeded from the off: not only relying on the two creators to produce the music. From Randall’s guitar and Hodder’s exceptional vocals/percussion; Jeff ‘Skunk’ Baxter’s guitar and Denny Dias’ guitar and sitar – all of the bodies that are crammed into the studio add their own textures and D.N.A. The remaining four songs on the record – Fire in the Hole, Brooklyn (Owes the Charmer Under Me); Change of the Guard and Turn That Heartbeat Over Again – provide rises and lows; plenty of lyrical brilliance and some of the finest music that year could handle. In a year where Exile on Main Street (The Rolling Stones), Pink Moon (Nick Drake); The Rise and Fall of Ziggy Stardust and the Spiders from Mars (David Bowie) and Harvest (Neil Young) were released…it would be hard work muscling into the crowd and getting critical attention. Not only did Can’t Buy a Thrill get reviews and attention: many saw the potential that would flourish in future albums; knowing, full-well, Walter Becker and Donald Fagen were onto something!

IN THIS PHOTO: Original album advertising art

There are faults and little knocks here and there – the cover-art and some of the Palmer vocals; the fact the first side is much stronger than the second; the lack of Jazz experimentation and interludes (too many different genres and commercial elements) – but they are excusable for a debut album. They, on their own, do not weight the album down or provide any disappointing visions. Their name might have derived from a dildo from a William S. Burroughs novel but there was nothing crude and sexual about the album. The hard work, quality and maturity come through from the first notes. Each song sounds free and unhindered but, at the same time, the result of perfectionist-pursuit and long nights honing and tinkering. It is a fantastically detailed album that interweaves and delves; it takes you by the arm and gets you to connect with music in a new way. For a debut album from an untested musical force; Can’t Buy a Thrill could have been a big failure and pretentious mess. The result was a record that has stayed in the collective mindset for over forty-five years and started the career of the mighty Steely Dan. I would suggest anyone who has an interest in music, texture and musicianship investigate Can’t Buy a Thrill - and, if you can afford, buy it on vinyl. Place it down, let the needle drop and close the eyes - and let every note wash over you. It would be forgivable to suggest an album like Can’t Buy a Thrill would lose some of its charm and potency so many years from its creation. If anything; the Steely Dan debut has grown stronger…

WITH each passing year.

FEATURE: Spotlight: Eva Lazarus

FEATURE:

 

Spotlight

PHOTO CREDIT: Domas Zinkevicius 

Eva Lazarus

________

LAST year was a productive and successful one…

IMAGE CREDIT: Daniel Córdoba García

for the multi-talented songwriter, Eva Lazarus. My first exposure to the Bristol musician was her track, Bad News. That song looked at the tough times when the lovers were split; the fact the heroine is a bit of trouble but, when they are together, they can be really good (for one another). The song has that laid-back vibe and a mix of Reggae and Soul. Garage, Bass and Pop fuse and infect the music: the lyrics and vocals weave together and create something stunningly vibrant. The chilled-out bliss and tranquil-chill contrasts against the fierce undertones and strident beats. The concoctions get into the head and blood; the song stays in the mind and leaves a sweet taste on the tongue. That track compelled me to get more involved with Eva Lazarus and, through this year, I have been following her developments. Amsterdam was released late last year and features a hook-up with Mungo’s Hi Fi. Other moments from the young songwriter – Live My Life and Bad Gyal – see the heroine shift and shape. The voice remains in the realms of Reggae, Drums and Bass and Soul; able to go from classic sounds to a more urban, retro versions. Backed by urgent production, racing compositions and solid support; the young songwriter retained her personality and core but stretched her talents into new areas. It is amazing to see, over the course of a few songs, the way she can mutate and inspire.

The songs, especially last years, show how far she has come. Eva Lazarus is a name who is getting into the minds of some rather big sources. She has the backing of national radio and media but, as we head through 2018; it seems this will be her year to strike. There is more material coming and, following a successful E.P. campaign; it appears she will be busy and in full attack-mode. I am compelled to see what comes and whether the songs she has already recorded make its way through. Amsterdam and Bad News have similar undertones but are different songs. Each has that devilish grin and sense of the bad girl coming good; wanting to be better and not having any stress in her life. Amsterdam’s sweet-leaf swagger puts me in mind of a smoky and acrid room with no cares and some cool Reggae playing on the stereo – even if the singer had a different idea for the song. Eva Lazarus shows she can work with other producers/talent and people are responding to that! The big-voiced, big-haired talent is an M.C./songwriter who spans genres from Hip-Hop and Jungle to Soul. There is no escaping the fact eyes will turn her way and, with it, hearts will melt.

Having played Glastonbury and BoomTown; performing to record crowds and smashed the local scene – we have an E.P., collaborations with Sam Binga and Zed Bias coming; more airplay and exposure to go with it all. The backing crew, ‘The Afronaughts’, remind me, in a way, of Bob Marley – a modern-day Wailers, perhaps. Instead, we have a very modern-focused musician who wants to get the people dancing and take away the cares. That is a rare thing to find in music. You get some artists who have that agenda but for most; one feels there is a more success/money-driven motive. I have been looking around at the artists who can change things this year; add their own mark and provide music something magical. Eva Lazarus has the soulfulness of Amy Winehouse and the modern Reggae chops of Damien Marley; the flair of the strongest Rock band – the sexiness of the most impassioned Jazz singer. That rich musical heritage, understanding and upbringing stirs in the pot and fires an insatiable, heady smoke that filtrates and dominates. I urge everyone to get involved with her social media and take a look at how far she has come. I have concentrated on her recent work but the music of Eva Lazarus extends beyond that. The Bristol favourite has played around the country and, with her team behind her, has the potential to embark on worldwide gigs.

The stunning confidence and ability to step into any lyrical or musical territory is a talent most musicians would kill for. The themes look at the ups and downs of love; the good-girl-gone-bad and cheating boys; the need to kick-back and indulge once in a while. Above all is the need to embrace love and focus on the positives. Even when Eva Lazarus is looking at scarred relationships and the perils of fidelity; there is an abiding hopefulness and energy. I am pumped to see what the E.P. contains and, as we go deeper into 2018; how many dates will Eva Lazarus get? She will play Bristol but one feels a U.S. tour would be in order. The sort of music she is throwing out has a huge potential and I can imagine American audiences would eat it up. Whatever her plans is; do not bet against the Bad News creator riding high with the best and brightest of 2018. These are exciting and great times for her. I have seen her develop and grow in stature; get those great reviews and spins from D.J.s. The hard work ethic of Eva Lazarus means she played big festivals and smaller venues alike. Tongues are wagging and there is a feeling of expectation in the air. A lot of songwriters might not be able to live up to the hype. When it comes to Eva Lazarus; she will see those rising hopes and meet them with…

PHOTO CREDIT: Amanda Thomas Photography 

MUSIC that takes the breath away.

________

Follow Eva Lazarus

PHOTO CREDIT: @abigalatiaphotos 

Official:

http://www.evalazarus.com/

Facebook:

https://www.facebook.com/Eva-Lazarus-117339965031307/

Twitter:

https://twitter.com/EvaLazarus

SoundCloud:

https://soundcloud.com/evalazarus

Spotify:

https://open.spotify.com/artist/68eE2HHE6By6hOsOcsArcp

YouTube:

https://www.youtube.com/user/evalazarus

FEATURE: ABBA: Super Troupers: An Exhibition That Demonstrates the Importance of a Genius Group

FEATURE:

 

ABBA: Super Troupers

PHOTO CREDIT: Michael Ochs Archives/Getty Images 

An Exhibition That Demonstrates the Importance of a Genius Group

________

IF you take an Internet trip…

ALL PHOTO CREDITS (unless stated otherwise): Getty Images 

and head over to the website of the Southbank Centre - you will find a bit about ABBA. In fact; it is more than a mere ‘bit. It is a full-on passion-exhibit that, as they say, takes you on an immersive and deep road into the back-catalogue and legacy of one of the biggest bands ever. The Swedish foursome of Agnetha Fältskog, Björn Ulvaeus; Benny Andersson and Anni-Frid Lyngstad, in the 1970s, created some of the finest music the world has ever seen. I wanted to write about the exhibit for a couple of reasons. For one; it is a must-see presentation that brings you into a unique world of ABBA. The landscape and mini-universe of Sweden’s best-loved export is narrated by Jarvis Cocker. It is only natural the legendary Pulp frontman should narrate the inner-workings and magic of the band. Many might turn their noses at that assumption but it is well-founded. His voice is a blend of emotions and contrasts; it is something you are gripped by and immerse yourself in. His alluring tones are perfect to take us into the world of ABBA. Make you sure head to the Southbank Centre because it is one of the must-visit events/exhibits of the winter. I am going to get up there because there are more and more music-based ‘galaxies’ forming that provide a deeper and more interactive way of connecting.

It is not only a collection of songs being played as one wanders around. The My Name Is Prince exhibition at the O2 is another case of a musician’s work being treated with respect and passion. Although Prince is not with us; memorabilia and rare artefact were presented to the public back in October. Among the exhibits on show is the orange-cloud guitar that was played at his 2007 Super Bowl halftime performance; Third Eye glasses from 2014; The Raspberry Beret cloud-suit from 1985 – and so much more! ABBA’s layout is a bit different: the Prince exhibit is more traditional in terms of a museum-style layout and, I don’t think, has narration. ABBA are still around – its members, anyway – so many will ask why go to the effort to celebrate a group that have not performed together for years?! That is a good question but, as Pop music starts to come into the ascendancy this year, more eyes are looking back. Pop has been somewhat generic and streamlined the past few years. So many exciting young artists are emerging and, with that, splicing genres and sounds. It will be a bolder scene and one (one hopes) defined by quality songwriting – as opposed to the commercial themes and plastic production. Who knows what will happen but the point is Pop is starting to come back into a credible realm. Many are taking from ABBA and, decades down the line; they are borrowing aspects from the Swedish group.

IN THIS PHOTO: Prince/PHOTO CREDIT: Dave Hogan/Getty Images

The Southbank Centre’s page (on the exhibit) talks about a very special year in the group’s rise:

“In 1974 ABBA catapulted into British consciousness as they won the Eurovision Song Contest at The Dome, Brighton. The Swedish pop group would go on to become a household name across the world, and later this month we celebrate their impact and their legacy with our immersive exhibition ABBA Super Troupers.

ABBA were a breath of fresh air to a 1970s Britain mired in a financial crisis epitomised by strike action, the three-day working week, and the effects of The Troubles. To help get a picture of the year in which the Swedish group arrived in Britain, or indeed to relive it all over again, take a look at our timeline”.

That description pretty much sums up why the group have endured and are celebrated – and why their potency and appeal has never faded. You can look at the timeline on the website and see how their songs fitted with the changing times. To me; their arrival was the European wave of colour and Pop that added something dynamic and fun to the rather strained and grey sky. It is interesting looking back and the industrial strife, political tensions and uncertainty. The same can be said today: we are living in a time when everyone is nervous and not sure how things will work out.

I feel ABBA are not part of the 1970s in the same way other acts are. We have had genres like Glam and Disco; Grunge and the New Romantics. Some of those sounds have survived today but the original pioneers are gone; their music is not as heady and explored as once was – much has moved on and evolved since then. The same cannot be said of ABBA. Although the songwriting was done by the boys of the band – Benny and Björn – it was the complete band that made the music come to life. In fact; many could argue those sumptuous lead vocals made the music come to life. The pressures of touring and the levels of fame – complete with some inter-band issues – meant their lifespan was not as long as many would like. The always-mooted reunion rumour is never far away and it seems the appetite for revival is strong. The official ABBA website shows where it started to go wrong for the group:

“In March 1980, ABBA took their tour to Japan for what turned out to be their very last live concerts in front of a paying audience. The rest of the year was devoted to the recording of ABBA’s next album, Super Trouper, containing classic hits like ‘The Winner Takes It All’ and the title track.

In February 1981 the final blow was dealt to ABBA’s happy-couples image of the 1970s, when Benny and Frida announced their divorce. This still didn’t stop the foursome from working together. At the end of the year, ABBA’s eighth album, The Visitors, was released, with ‘One Of Us’ as its biggest hit single…

…Through the course of 1982 the energy was gradually running out of the group, as Björn and Benny set their sights on writing the musical Chess and Agnetha and Frida were reviving their solo careers. The only ABBA LP release this year was a compilation double album of their hit singles, entitled The Singles – The First Ten Years, including two new songs. Although the single ‘The Day Before You Came’ was one of the group’s most accomplished recordings it failed to become a worldwide hit on the scale they had been used to. At the end of 1982, ABBA decided to take a break. If they wanted to, they reasoned, they could always get back together after a few years.

More than three decades after ABBA’s “temporary break”, there still has been no ABBA reunion. But the group’s music lives on: the 1990s saw the beginning of a major revival, with successful cover versions and high-profile movies using ABBA songs on their soundtracks attracting a great deal of attention. The compilation CD ABBA Gold, released in 1992, has sold more than 30 million copies to date. The 1993 companion album, More ABBA Gold, went on to sell 3 million copies. The box set Thank You For The Music followed in 1994, containing all the hits, selected album tracks, plus rare and previously unreleased recordings”.

That shows, A) why it was inevitable the close-knit group would fall and, B) why the public have been pining for new material and taking the group to heart. It is amazing to think they achieved so much in a short period.

ABBA shot into the public consciousness when they took Waterloo all the way to the Eurovision Song Contest in 1974. A special plaque was fitted in Brighton last year to celebrate their famous win. The affection the British public has for them, especially, is heartening and obvious. There are similarities between the Pop we produced in the 1960s and the variety ABBA brought to these shores. The Waterloo album, their third, was released in 1974 but, aside from the title-track; there was little to suggest the band would endure for this many years. It was a promising collection…but better albums were to come. Their third album (ABBA) was released in 1975 and was a marked improvement from their previous effort. Mama Mia and S.O.S., two staples of the group’s routine, were on that record: there were hardly any filler tracks and a total of seven singles were released from the album. The upgraded sound of 1976’s Arrival saw the band, as the title implies, coming onto the scene with conviction. Dancing Queen, Knowing Me, Knowing You and Money, Money, Money were on that record. They, again, are staples and showed the band were becoming more adventurous and confident. Those big hits saw people all around the world flocking to see the band. They are classics that are in everyone’s head and we all know the words for – even if we do not admit it!

The biggest drawback when confessing an appreciation of ABBA is the stigma and criticism people give. Many see them as cheesy and bland; a band that appealed to a small sect but never really produced quality. The group had to fight these criticisms from the start and were seen, by some, as over-hyped and sterile. The thing is; the band got strong and ABBA: The Album boasted Take a Chance on Me and The Name of the Game. Voulez-Vous had the title-track, I Have a Dream and Does Your Mother Know. 1980’s Super Trouper was their penultimate record and was when the strains started to show. Even though the material was up to its immense standards: tensions and the rigours of touring was having an effect. The title cut looked at the spotlights (‘Super Trouper’ is a name given to spotlights used for stadium concerts) and the glare of fame. There is the loneliness of the road and the rush of performance: all the ups and downs the band has experienced in the seven years before then. Super Trouper and The Winner Takes It All notched up another two number-ones for ABBA and 1981’s The Visitors looked at the band as isolated outsiders on the edge of dissolving. The album signalled a move from the lighter Pop of previous albums and explored the downsides and pains of splitting – more serious songs and music that dug deeper.

Isolation and regret were themes explored through the album and, for a band that were going through challenges and huge strains – the fact they produced one of their (if not the) best albums of their career was amazing. Unlike other huge bands with a short seven-eight year career (The Beatles springs to mind!) it seemed the best music was being made at the end. It led many to ask why they split and how things had gone bad. The relationships within the group and the demands of their daily lives impacted the harmony within. The Gold: Greatest Hits compilation was released in 1992 and became an instant hit. Over thirty-million copies have been sold and it showed, years after the band’s split, there was a huge appetite for their music. That collection of songs showcase an immaculate band who could pen affirmative music with immense choruses; gorgeous harmonies and some of the finest lyrics in modern Pop – far deeper and more profound than many gave them credit for! One can look at the destruction and break-ups that led to the end of ABBA -  we are here to celebrate and commemorate. The ABBA: Super Troupers exhibit is a must-visit for any fans of the band: anyone who is a newcomer to the music should go and see what made the songs shine; how the band came to be and what drove their world. It gives an insight into a once-in-a-generation group who changed music and laid down some of the finest Pop music ever. Maybe they will not back together but they have, in their short career, transformed music and inspired legions of artists. Visit the Southbank Centre and listen to the music; revel in the glamour, glory and gold that means their 1970s/1980s-produced music…

REMAINS treasured and relevant to this very day.

FEATURE: The January Playlist: Vol.1: Decorations Down, Hangovers Easing…

FEATURE:

 

The January Playlist

IN THIS PHOTO: The Vaccines/PHOTO CREDIT: Getty Images

Vol.1: Decorations Down, Hangovers Easing…

_______

THIS is the first Playlist of 2018…

IN THIS PHOTO: Dream Wife

and is no short supply of quality tunes! Dream Wife, Laura Marling and The Vaccines are armed and ready. Throw in Kendrick Lamar, Cardi B and Bruno Mars – and it doesn’t stop there. MGMT and Rae Morris have released new cuts; there are some hot offerings from the world of Rap and Pop; a smattering of underground treasures mingling with those big-league bangers.

It is a great way to kick off a new year and, as this week proves, one that is ripe, ready and ambitious! I have been looking at all the tracks released this week and compiled them into a post-Christmas stocking guaranteed to get the music juices drooling…

ALL PHOTOS (unless credited otherwise):  Getty Images

________

Dream Wife – Hey Heartbreaker

PHOTO CREDIT: Aidan Zamiri

Flying Lotus – Quarantine

Laura Marling – Don’t Pass Me By

The Vaccines – I Can’t Quit

Sea Girls – Heavenly War

A Perfect Circle – Disillusioned

Arlissa (ft. Jonas Blue) – Hearts Ain’t Gonna Lie

BØRNS (ft. Lana Del Rey) – God Save Our Young Blood

Bruno Mars (ft. Cardi B) – Finesse (Remix)

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​

Ferris & Sylvester – London’s Blues

Charlie Puth (ft. Boyz II Men) – If You Leave Me Now

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​

Rosie Carney – K.

PHOTO CREDIT: Deborah Sheedy 

Chloe X Halle – The Kids Are Alright

HOTO CREDIT: Pascal Le Segretain/Getty Image

Sidney Gish – Where the Sidewalks End

PHOTO CREDIT: Hester Konrad

Lil Durk - India

​​​​​​​

Soleima – Low Life

[MV] MAMAMOO (마마무) - Paint Me (칠해줘)

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​

Prelow – Goes to Shit

Dave East - Legendary

Tofer Dolan – Electric Heart

Plies - Rock

il Xan – Wake Up

Tyga - Boss Up

dodie – Party Tattoos

DON BROCO– Come Out to LA

Youngr – Ooh Lordy

Camila Cabello - Never Be the Same

James Blake – Vincent

Justin Timberlake – Filthy

Kendrick Lamar (ft. SZA) – All the Stars

Lilly Ahlberg – Bad Boys

Liam Payne and Rita Ora – For You

MGMT – Hand It Over

Rae Morris – Push Me to My Limit

FEATURE: Lorde, the Good of Israel... Why Rabbi Shmuley Boteach’s Accusations of Bigotry Are Dangerous and Misguided

FEATURE:

 

Lorde, the Good of Israel…

IN THIS PHOTO: Lorde/PHOTO CREDIT: Getty Images

Why Rabbi Shmuley Boteach’s Accusations of Bigotry Are Dangerous and Misguided

________

FOR someone who preaches love and togetherness…

IN THIS PHOTO: Rabbi Shmuley Boteach/PHOTO CREDIT: Getty Images

labelling one of music’s biggest names a “bigot” is a rather contradictory and ironic move! Lorde recently cancelled a concert in Israel because of the tensions and conflicts (Israel has( with Palestine. This boycott is not a new phenomenon: as I will discuss; music figures have passed the opportunity to play Israel fearing (performing there) would send a bad political message. Rabbi Shmuley Boteach put out a full-page advert in The Washington Post following the New Zealand-born singer’s decision to pull out of her planned date in Israel. Lorde decided to cancel because of the poor treatment of Palestinians. Rabbi Boteach claimed her “jew-hatred” was part of a wider idolatry and mindset by Western artists. The New Jersey-based preacher poured scorn on Lorde and claimed that, as a twenty-one-year-old, it was a surprise finding someone so narrow-minded and bigoted. One can write-off the ramblings and misinformed delusions as a way of kicking up prevarication and serving a personal agenda – it does worry me how such accusations will impinge on the music world. Back in July; Radiohead took to the stage in Tel Aviv and were met with protest and derision. It was done and was seen as a deliberate contravention of the boycott of Israel called for by Palestinian civil society and adhered to by leading cultural figures.

IN THIS PHOTO: Jonny Greenwood/PHOTO CREDIT: Getty Images

The band’s guitarist, Jonny Greenwood, has an Israeli wife - so was aware of the situation and complexities present. The protests and abuse - the band had plastic bottles and debris thrown at them – was upsetting and affecting for a group who were only trying to bring their music to the people! Many peddled the line that Radiohead were anti-Semitic and supported the mistreatment by Palestinians: given the same accusation has been levied at Lorde (who showed pacification and boycotted); one can hardly win, can they?! There was the suggestion, after the furore surrounding Radiohead, people conflate Zionism with Judaism. Israeli governments, successive, have claimed to represent Jews in general – something seen as injurious and factually floored. A Time to Speak Out: Independent Jewish Voices on Israel, Zionism and Jewish Identity states:

“Moreover in the United Kingdom those who claim to speak for British Jews collectively (or allow that impression to go unchallenged) tend to reflect only one position on Israel’s conflicts: that of the Israeli government. In reality, however, there is a broad spectrum of opinion among Jews in Britain – just as there is among any other Jewish population in the world – on Israel and on Zionism. Many Jews refuse to view these subjects through a narrow ethnocentric lens. They base their opinions instead upon universal principles of justice and human rights. And they refuse to accept that Israel alone offers a viable identity for Jews.”

PHOTO CREDIT: Getty Images

Radiohead were not supporting the apartheid and civil war happening in Israel. One cannot label every band who takes a stand – either by performing and showing they are there to bring love to the people; boycotting as a stand against the violence in Israel – an anti-Semite. Many who protested, as was noted by critics, waved their flags at Radiohead’s gig but support the governments of Prime Minister Theresa May and President Donald Trump. How is oppression and bigotry in the U.K. and U.S.?! How can they support flawed and divisive regimes and brand a band like Radiohead, who do not support hatred and division, as bigoted?! Some see Lorde’s boycott as a political move. She is a from New Zealand: a nation that has not been involved in the conflicts between opposing sides in Israel. The nation does not support the hostilities and so, to brand one its most-popular artists a bigot seems rather suspect. I can understand why some would see a boycott as a political move, were they British or American – powerful nations making a conscious decision in regards the struggles. Musicians, by and large, do not have a strong opinion regards Israel and what is happening. They are there to play music but, if they feel performing a gig would send a bad message and would stir trouble – why should they put their lives and fans at risk?!

IN THIS PHOTO: Jerusalem, Israel/PHOTO CREDIT: Unsplash

Radiohead made a stand and took that decision – it was not done lightly and did not suggest their playing meant they supported oppression and those living in occupied territories. They were not backing the militant, blood-shedding fighters and the conflicts there. Other commentators have suggested a boycott is only justifiable when those worst affecting are calling for a boycott themselves; when a musician’s boycott has the chance to bring about change and improvement. I will come to look at Lorde’s case-specific omission but, in the past, actions seen as rebellious and ill-advised have yielded backlash. Paul Simon recorded with Ladysmith Black Mambazo (for his album, Graceland) when there was apartheid in South Africa. White artists were not performing in the country and it was seen, if they did, they supported the violence and racism there. Simon recruited Ladysmith Black Mambazo because he backed the black artists and population who were being killed and marginalised. That, at the time, was seen as taking an unwise stand – given the tension between different nations and governments – but his boldness and unwillingness to conform to foolish ideologies broke ground and helped bring about change. Israel is a different situation but one where making a stand either way is going to cause derision. Radiohead performed because they knew about the conflicts and divide and were not saying they were in support of the violence – they simply wanted to bring their music to people who were fans; those who wanted an end to bloodshed as much as they did.

IN THIS PHOTO: Rabbi Shmuley Boteach (in 2010)/PHOTO CREDIT: Getty Images

If one labels Lorde a bigot then they have to look back ant every other artist who has boycotted any country, ever. Faithless boycotted Israel in 2010 in solidarity with the Palestinians. Not only did their boycott, and subsequent ones, send a message musicians are unwilling to visit a nation that allows a race/group of people to withstand such brutality and hatred. It raises awareness of the situation there - when news focuses on domestic affairs and pays comparatively little time to Israel-based news – and shows nations like the U.K. and U.S. do not condone that sort of behaviour. Should a band/artist act on behalf of their government and make that call?! It is down to the judgement of the individual but I do not think anyone who plays/boycotts should be labelled as a bigot and conspirator. Radiohead’s decision to perform was met with derision by high-profile figures like Ricky Tomlinson, Juliet Stephenson and Maxine Peake – an open-letter was signed by South African archbishop Desmond Tutu. Poets, musicians and celebrities added their signature to an appeal that urged Radiohead to reconsider. Many saw Radiohead’s decision to ‘support’ apartheid as a double-standards: they are keen advocates of freedom for Tibetans.

IN THIS PHOTO: A boy in Palestine, Jordan/PHOTO CREDIT: Unsplash

Although Radiohead have not faced much heat and commercial disadvantage since that concert; it is still a controversy that highlighted the risks artists are taking playing in Israel. I can understand the desire to reach fans and not exclude people who are opposed to the violence present. Radiohead are not world leaders; nor are they saying they back the violence. Perhaps a certain self-respect was lost (by Radiohead) but one cannot question their motives. Given the years-long boycotts and pressure exerted by public figures – can anyone blame Lorde for pulling out of her gig?! If she were to attend and be met with protests; that could cause her physical harm and she would be exposed to who knows what! Lorde actually asked her fans what she should do and was unaware of the troubles in Israel. She did not want to offend and was hardly coming out in the press with anti-Semitic views! It was a decision based on feedback, research and caution. She did not want to inflame tensions and provoke any criticism and violence. She made the right choice and, other than a social media post saying she was cancelling the concert; nothing else was said on the matter. Following the reaction Radiohead gained when they performed; Lorde had no other choice but to back out.

PHOTO CREDIT: Andrew Whitton

She would have, if she went ahead, garnered bad press and that would have a detrimental impact on her fanbase and commercial platform – and damaged her wellbeing and health. The young songwriter has never, as far as I know, been to Israel so has no idea how bad the situation is. The fact rabbi Boteach went to such extreme lengths to condemn Lorde and single her out is inflammatory and vicious. She is no bigot and is not making any negative statements. The decision is not an easy one but, when other artists have pulled out of Israeli concerts; they have not been greeted with bile-filled spreads in U.S. newspapers. The fact it even made it to print makes me question the integrity and compassion of the editor. Freedom of speech is justified but (his words) step into libellous territory; designed to spark hatred and judge an innocent musician – somewhat ironic given his tirade and the points he was strictly underlining. Rabbi Boteach’s comment are, given past decisions, sexist, ageist and personal. Paul McCartney performed in Israel in 2008 – he played there as part of the nation’s sixtieth anniversary. Militant activist Nakri Muhammed threatened him with death following that decision: McCartney played in the country because he and his friends supported Israel. Whether you see the South Africa comparison as a false analogy or not; it is clear there are complexities and opposing sides. Boycotting Israel is seen as illegal under French law (according to the French appellate court of Colmar; others see (boycotting) flimsy and ineffective). John Lydon, in 2010, responded to criticism against him by claiming he will not boycott any Muslim country because none of them has a democracy – so you cannot have an issue with the violence there! That comment came in light of Elvis Costello’s decision to boycott playing the country. Gene Simmons felt boycotting was a waste of time: directing anger at Arab dictators was a better course of protest.

IN THIS PHOTO: Madonna/PHOTO CREDIT: Getty Images

Other public figures who have shown their support (by boycotting/protesting) include Elton John, Leonard Cohen; Lady Gaga, Rihanna; MGMT, Madonna and Alicia Keys. Riverdance performed in Israel back in 2011. Madonna’s The MDNA Tour visited Tel Aviv in 2012. She said the concert was designed to promote peace – even offering six-hundred tickets to various Israeli and Palestinian groups. Scarlett Johansson promoted SodaStream in 2014 – an Israeli company that operated in a West Bank settlement. SodaStream is a peaceful cooperation and employs Palestinians and Israelis. There are no easy answers and ‘right’ decision when it comes to playing Israel and what refusal/participation says about your political allegiance. There have been artists who have played as support of the innocent and refuse to be cowed. Those conscientiou-objectors are not willing to play in a country that allows the sort of cruelty and violence aimed at Palestinians. Lorde’s decision was not a rash one or based on any prejudice. She was urged by fans not to attend and, when announcing that decision, rationalised and explained everything. There is an irony when one hears a rabbi, who espouses faith and love, expressing such hate and contradictory values. According to the Talmud; gratuitous hatred is the most vicious form of hatred - and the rabbis denounce it in the most extreme terms.

PHOTO CREDIT: Unsplash

In their view, the Second Temple was destroyed as punishment for this sin (Yoma 9b; cf. Story of Kamẓa and Bar Kamẓa, Git. 95b). It is equal to the three paramount sins of idolatry, fornication and murder (Yoma 9b). Torah explicitly prohibits hatred of one's fellow in the verse "Thou shall not hate thy brother in thine heart" (Lev. 19:17). Hatred is understood by the rabbis as essentially a matter of mental disposition, as implied in the phrase "in thine heart." Torah explicitly prohibits hatred of one's fellow in the verse "Thou shall not hate thy brother in thine heart" (Lev. 19:17). Hatred is understood by the rabbis as essentially a matter of mental disposition, as implied in the phrase "in thine heart." One who expresses hostility to his fellow through word or deed, although he violates the commandment "love thy neighbor" and injunctions against injury, insult, vengeance etc. is not, according to most rabbinic authorities, guilty of the specific sin of hatred referred to in Lev. 19:17 (Sifra, Kedoshim; Ar. 16b; Maim. Yad, De'ot 4:5, Sefer ha-Mitzvot, prohib. 302; Ḥinnukh 238). The Talmud is emphatic in its denunciation of hatred. Hillel taught that the essence of the entire Torah is, "What is hateful to you, do not do to others". I wonder how one who lives his life according to Jewish teachings can so blatantly and explicitly pour hate and scorn on one he does not know?!

PHOTO CREDIT: Getty Images

Those interpretations and explanation of hate should, if rabbi Boteach practices as he preaches, make him pause for thought. It is preposterous calling someone like Lorde a bigot. She has no hatred and prejudice in her heart: her music is designed for everyone and she opens her soul to everyone. Her touring and endless schedule means she plays to Israeli and Jewish audiences; she does not discriminate and the fact Lorde felt bad and gutted to miss the gig means it was not an easy decision – as the accusatory and toxic article (by rabbi Boteach) seems to suggest. He would do good to look inside himself and attack an innocent young musician who was pulling out of a concert – she did not kill anyone or commit any huge sin. It is appalling such a tirade was provided the oxygen of national press – I wonder why The Washington Post allowed the article to go to press. The only person who has come out of this with dignity and respect is Lorde. She has not engaged in retaliation and name-calling. Her reasons (for calling off the concert) are sound and she has the right to change plans without being accused of bigotry and hate. Other artists, who have difficult decisions to make regarding gigs in hostile areas, might make a bad decision if they fear a ‘wrong’ choice will see them assaulted in the press! Lorde should be proud of herself as she has come through a difficult time and not broken under pressure and scrutiny. The Washington Post piece is the opinion of one (ludicrous) human but I fear this kind of thing is doing damage to artists who have done no wrong. Let’s hope lessons are learned and people like rabbi Boteach…

PHOTO CREDIT: Unsplash

THINK before they speak!

FEATURE: 2018: A Stasis Odyssey: Is Artificial Intelligence the Natural Way Forward for Music?

FEATURE:

 

2018: A Stasis Odyssey

ALL PHOTOS (unless stated otherwise): Unsplash

Is Artificial Intelligence the Natural Way Forward for Music?

________

THE title of this piece…

IMAGE CREDIT: Getty Images

refers to the 1968 film directed by Stanley Kubrick – adapted from a short story by Arthur C. Clarke – but, actually, there are comparisons between that Science Fiction classic and exciting developments in music! 2001: A Space Odyssey is about an imposing black structure and the way it provides a connection between the past and the future. When Dr. Dave Bowman and other astronauts are sent on a mysterious mission their ship's computer system, HAL, begins to display increasingly strange behaviour – that leads up to a tense showdown between man and machine that results in a mind-bending trek through space and time. Maybe things are not quite that dramatic and cinematic - but the way man and machine/technology interacts is being explored and evolved. A lot of musicians favour the electronic/digital revolution because it means they can compact and streamline their music into a hand-held device. If you, before, took musicians on the road to provide backing; it would involve ferrying and impractical journeys. Now; many artists can put those backing tracks onto a device and play them at gigs – there are few wage packets and less hauling and work needed by the artist. I will explore the new developments being proposed in music but there are those who prefer things the way they are. There is that human connection and the ability to bond with an audience: music is about the physical revelation and spiritual depth! Songs are written by humans and replacing them with processed vocals and animated figures take away the traditional and obvious joy one would get seeing an actual musician up there.

Many artists see the way music and interaction are becoming distant; the way we play and enjoy music is becoming less physical and connected! Many of us are spoiled and demanding so we always want new music and things right in front of us. A lot of mainstream artists, such as Loyle Carner, feel songs are like chapters in a book: one must wait for them to come together and not be so impatient and greedy. The Internet and streaming mean music can be released instantly and reach millions: people are always on the hunt for something and have lost a degree of patience and discipline. My thoughts have been compelled by an article the BBC wrote that explored breakthroughs happening in the music industry. Developments and advancing music is welcomed: it means we can explore new possibilities and, actually, make music richer and more promising. Technology has been a part of music for a long time but the drive towards new arenas is putting some off. If we continue to explore the limits of modern technology...does that mean the conventional gig risk extinction?! Will we see our favourite artists replaced by holograms (more on that) and watch gigs from our laptops only?! Will we make improvements and steps regarding sound and quality if we remove the physical, human component?! A lot of feedback comes from gigs and the way an artist performs...

Nuances and on-the-fly changes can make a song stronger or different. That decision comes from audience reaction during the gig and it is important having that interaction. We got to gigs (most of us) to experience something real and deep. We bond with the artist(s) and, from the performer’s viewpoint, they want to see the look on people’s faces and get that hit. Many are questioning whether genuine, quality Rock will make a comeback: that is going to be harder to achieve if we feed everything into a machine. It all boils down to those who want to preserve the human element and hear real strings, voices and beats (and other instruments). Whilst I am part of that camp; I am excited by some development occurring. Before I move onto the A.I./holographic point...the technological breakthroughs we have made has provided musicians greater scope and possibility – able to connect with people from their own home. Musicians can record material on a laptop and broadcast shows without having to travel – saving on costs and able to reach more people than performing in a single venue (viewers around the world can log in and watch). In the case of Noel Gallagher’s album, Who Built the Moon? – he recorded and produced a lot of his material on a laptop. Software, laptops and new technology mean artists can produce different-sounding notes and experiment with sounds in a different way.

IMAGE CREDIT: Getty Images

They can create symphonies and huge sounds with the click of a mouse. Were one to attempt that with an orchestra then the cost and logistics of putting that together would be immense. Technology has helped so many musicians reach others and get their music heard: that might not have been possible were they to rely on studios and hiring musicians. Fairly new horizons like block-chain technology mean releases can get sent from the creator to consumer without infringement of copyright and piracy issues. DJ Gramatik become the first artist to ‘tokenise’ himself – meaning fans could buy tokens using cryptocurrency. A lot of these developments are new – so it is hard to know if any problems will arise – but the way music can go from the musician to fan is changing. It is a lot quicker; you can disintermediate distributors and the middle-man and protect the actual product from misuse and any unauthorised copying or distribution. Whilst there are many who want to conserve the heritage and humanity of music; many out there are excited by the greater role A.I. is playing. One of Japan’s biggest Popstars is Hatsune Miku. It is a humanoid singer that has captured the imagination of the Japanese people. It is not a shock such an advanced and technology-focused nation would embrace an alternative in J-Pop. It is, specifically, 3-D holograms that are making the news...

IN THIS PHOTO: Roy Orbison/PHOTO CREDIT: Getty Images

Rob Orbison (‘The Big O’) died in 1988 but he is embarking on a tour this year – good work if you can get it! Backed by the Royal Philharmonic Orchestra; ‘he’ will play Cardiff on 8th April. His son, Roy Orbison Jr., hope this landmark will see the hologram play its own Las Vegas residency. Tupac, Elvis Presley; Gorillaz and Michael Jackson have appeared in hologram form and played ‘live’ gigs. Whilst the projection cannot interact with the audience and, essentially, mimic movements like a robot could – maybe this is where music is headed. Some quarters are uneasy having a dead artist resurrected without their consent – and a bit unnerved by the whole concept. Whilst it is a strange experience; many of us wouldn’t have had the chance to watch artists like Michael Jackson and Roy Orbison play. Not only does the upcoming Orbison concert provide a unique collaboration but a demonstration around holograms and what is possible. The concert will have those live musicians but incorporate Orbison’s music in a more sentient and visual manner. The only way we can connect with departed musicians is watching older videos and listening to their music. It is impossible to watch them in the flesh so, in a way, this is a way of making the impossible real. Long-gone artists can collaborate and, like Orbison, they can have their music backed by orchestras.

Maybe the full capabilities and possibilities are years off but it seems holograms and A.I. are here to stay. We will never get rid of real music and abandon the form as we know it: in many ways; A.I. will bring music to new people and places. If you cannot afford to see an artist or are physically unable; they can be projected in your home and you can experience the concert without leaving your room. Some see that as a gateway to the disbandment of live gigs – where performers and fans share a space – and a step towards human disconnection and sloth. The reason, I feel, holograms and A.I.. can transform music is to make the impossible realised. We can get music to far-off places and revive deceased artists; increase the possibilities of what a live show is and, for many living artists, augment their existing music. M.I.A. was at Meltdown last year and pondered the political activism of A.I. – whether something artificial could provide the physicality and humanity needed to provoke revolution and reaction. That is a downside for sure: the fewer human elements available; the less chance we have of inspiring politically-minded music. That is needed in the modern scene - so we have to be aware of that pitfall. Many bands welcome 3-D mapping and virtual-reality. Artists can make their music more interactive and create spellbinding light displays and electronic sets. It means there is not a guy sitting on stage playing a guitar or scratching records.

IN THIS IMAGE: Gorillaz/IMAGE CREDIT: Getty Images

3-D mapping manipulates objects and creates a completely new feel and look. It means that can come into a set and provide fresh depth and layers. These advancements mean the live set is more immersive and, as such, will bring more people in. I have discussed how fewer people are going to gigs and supporting new artists. It is creating genuine concern but the addition of 3-D and A.I. could provide the same spectacle and entertainment as your favourite box-set. Bands/artists who are getting a bit tired and old – and do not want to keep touring – can, like Gorillaz, go anywhere in the world as often as they please. Whilst Damon Albarn and his crew are in the same venue as their animated selves; they do not have to rely on this in future years. They can sit back and take their music around the world without expending any energy. It will be possible, as the band attests, to preserve the music of artists in a more secure and impressive way than V.H.S. and D.V.D. Many of us have old tapes of our favourite artists from childhood. Gone are V.H.S. recorders so, unless they have been released on D.V.D.; we have lost quite a lot of the past. A.I. is, essentially, the modern-day form of V.H.S. Given, it is more advanced but it means we can ensure music from today is available decades down the tracks.

It is clear the possibilities are very exciting and alluring. These advancements are, literally, the future – they will become more commonplace and continue to grow and solidify. The idea of seeing Roy Orbison come to life in Cardiff is a sight that brings mixed emotions in me. I love the fact new people can see the great man live and right in front of them. I wonder whether the success and popularity of these kinds of concerts will mean every dead artist will come to life and feature on a stage near you. The sense of privacy violation and mawkishness is hard to shake off. As this phenomenon becomes more embedded and ingrained; I guess we will see it as normal and natural. We use virtual-reality and A.I. to simulate dinosaurs, sea-life and specimens we could not otherwise view for ourselves. It seems inevitable that the music world would look to venture into this avenue. My reservations aside – whether it will be expensive to sustain and whether the ordinary person has the technological capabilities to see A.I. concerts from home – I feel economic and ergonomic issues will be addressed and resolved.  It will inspire industries like film and T.V. to use the technology and push the boundaries of what is possible on the big and small screen. It can feed into all areas of the art and the classrooms – used as an educational tool and way of bringing the past (vividly) to life.

I feel A.I. and 3-D is a few years from being viable and truly revolutionary - but its practical advantages are inspiring and very exciting. Musicians can take their music further, physically and audibly, and add new levels and elements in. The amount of data A.I. carries and produces means live performances can be enhanced and elevated – in terms of theatrics, technical possibilities and how we can interact with the past. It is not only about projecting an artist, living or dead, in a unique environment: the way we can collaborate with immaterial forms and technologies can change music for the better and open new horizons. From gigs to recordings through collaborations and the way we hear instruments – all very promising and intriguing. So long as we do not let the machines take over too much – and completely replace physical performance/music as we know it – then that is fine. Knowing how far to go and when to stop is almost as hard as anything else. If a balance can be struck - so we understand why human interactivity is why most people go to gigs and buy music - then there is no reason why A.I., 3-D and other forms of innovation cannot have their place. Unlike disturbing system-error codes and man vs. machine battles; our advancement and curiosity will be much more harmonious (than 2001: A Space Odyssey). Artificial Intelligence might not seem like a natural development and next stage but, for many different reasons, it is…

THE future of music.

FEATURE: Pay-to-Play: Is It Time to Put It to Bed?

FEATURE:

 

Pay-to-Play

ALL PHOTOS: Unsplash

Is It Time to Put It to Bed?

________

THE term ‘pay-to-play’ is exactly what you’d imagine!

It can take one of two forms. Either a label will pay a venue to put their artist up – or get a D.J. to spin music from their artists. More commonly, though, it refers to artists (normally independent) paying a venue so they can play a gig. That might sound insane but it is not being limited to smaller spaces. Venues, larger ones, are still charging bands to play; hoping they (the gig/concert promoters/venue) will not lose money and turn a profit. I can see some sense with regards charging larger bands, perhaps. There is a lot of talk concerning the declining live scene and how it is impacting pubs/venues. I see a lot of musicians change their normal routine and travel further afield to get gigs. A lot of local bars and spots are closing and seeing fewer people through the doors. Dwindling profit and a less visible social scene means there is a definite sense of endangerment in some areas. People are spending more money on their own alcohol and staying in; we are choosing to find our own entertainment and there is not the same culture we saw years ago. Many would say the reduction of people in pubs is good regarding public order and the burden placed on the NHS. That is true but we are still seeing rampant drunkenness and many areas are proposing the idea of a ‘drunk tank’ – where lary drinkers can sleep it off without having to go to their local hospital.

If we are as irresponsible as ever; perhaps we are less sociable and happy – binge-drinking a sign of a nation whose psychological health is deteriorating. That is another matter but I wanted to look at whether the shrinking live music scene is forcing many venues into this pay-to-play scheme. Before I go on; musicians Christine Rage explained the concept of pay-to-play:

“Regardless of whether you're booking a hole-in-the-wall club in a small town, or all 18,200 seats at Madison Square Garden, the process for show promotions is the same. All venues owners want a venue usage guarantee and will require the promoter to pay this fee upfront. Smaller venues may allow a promoter or band to share the door fee in the case they can be convinced that there will be enough of a draw. If, however, the band or promoter don't bring in enough fans then they may still owe the venue money at the end of the night. Clubs and promoters like the Pay-to-Play business model because it guarantees they make the money they want upfront and without any hold ups. If the band has no audience, the venue isn't put out financially. Pay-to-Play is essentially scaled down concert promotions when you get to the heart of the matter. Your band can make money with Pay-to-Play the same way that the big name bands do, through sponsorship dollars, merchandise sales, and creative marketing techniques”.

That is a simplified explanation but it makes sense, definitionally. If there are very few people coming out and drinking then how is one to predict what repercussions that has on a bar/venue’s profit?! If, say, twenty people came out to watch a band for free and only bought a pint each; that might be £200 for a bar. They might pay each member of that band £50 for a set and so, if they were a quartet, that would mean the bar breaks-even. Unless you ask people to pay for a show – and know what numbers you’ll have well in advance – you are running the risk of losing money. A lot of people, because of streaming and less disposable income, are unwilling to pay for gigs and find the total cost of a music-based night out is too steep. I can emphasise with struggling bars but a lot of the pay-to-play implantation is imposed by promoters and outsider forces. Smaller bars might be working with a local promoter who are questing tariffs from artists. Bigger venues might be working off their own back but whoever instigates the scheme; is it something we should look to eradicate?! Before I come to the argument against pay-to-play; returning to that aforementioned article – where Christine Rage explains ways artists can turn a profit and merchandise/get sponsors:

“Sponsors are advertisers that want to get their brand name or product in front of a specific demographic. Some sponsors that might want to advertise to your fan base include:

Musical instrument and pro audio manufacturers

Music schools

Beverage companies

Clothing retailers”.

A lot of artists have their own merchandise stalls so they can make a bit of money on T-shirts, C.D.s and other assorted good. It can be hit-and-miss how much money (if any) they will turn on merchandise. You consider the ‘hidden’ costs of playing a gig and you start to see how the idea of making a profit (under these circumstances) is far-fetched. Most artists do not have the luxury of being walking-distance to their nearest venue. Even if they have a great pub/venue down the road; they will travel to get to other gigs. Some can load all their kit into a car - but many artists have to hire a van and pound a fair few miles. Throw in hire costs, fuel costs and band fuel (eat and drink) and that is only the half of it. You might have your own sound engineer and someone manning the merchandise stall and other assembled crew to help you set up your gig and run the show – maybe a local bar does not have their own security (so another body needs to come along).

Social media is a handy and free tool but many artists will still need to consider an advertising outlay. Facebook offers a service where you can boost a post – get it out to a larger audience for a fee of your choosing. Depending how many people you want to hit depends on the money you spend. Posters and flyers are a quick and easy way of reaching people. Once you have the printing and digital costs tabulated; toss that into a spreadsheet alongside the physical costs; put that with the money you are paying a venue – how much will that run you?! Say you are a solo artist and you are playing a gig twenty-five miles from your home. You can fit your guitar and amp into the car and do not have to hire that many people. Consider the petrol costs £20 (for the return) and promoting has set you back £40. You spent £15 on food/drink at the bar and have to pay the venue £20 to play. That is £95 before you even play a note! I know, from gigs I have put on, unless you are headline-worthy; you are not going to get more than £50 or £60. That means an artist is going to be indebted and in the red – unless their merchandise can tip the scales! That is a single example but a scenario that is not uncommon. Bands might be in a slightly better situation but they have more kit/people to ferry around.

Many might say the fees artists are paid is not a lot to begin with: what does it matter if you are losing a bit of money? I know venues are limited with how much they can pay an artist; they might not be able to charge an entrance fee and they have to think about their coffers. The reason so many speak out against pay-to-play is because bands/artists are not playing gigs to make money. Most of them have to work two jobs and are never going to make a big profit no matter how many gigs they squeeze into a year. They are performing to get their music to people and win fans. Streaming and social media promotion shares music but it does not guarantee you will reach everyone – how do you know which people are listening to your music? Many need to perform to solidify their skillset and ensure they get that experience in their back pocket. Most love the thrill and experience of playing. That excitement and reception they get when performing their music to a crowd – that is what drives them and keeps them going. If you are charging artists to play then that will lead to a few things. Not only will they perform fewer gigs – if they know they will lose money or take home a few quid – and lose that faith in the live circuit; they will struggle to make money and that will impact their mental-health and love of music.

Fans feel uncomfortable knowing venues are charging artists so might stop going to gigs as a protest. That means venues risk closing down and that impacts not only musicians but the local economy. Is this problem limited to smaller acts? Are they the only ones aggrieved and concerned? I have been looking at an article from 2011 - that provided Elbow lead Guy Garvey with the chance to explain his position:

"There needs to be something really strong in place if a promoter is found to be ripping off young bands. It's really, really unfair. It's basically playing on the hopes and dreams of people who are at the very first hurdle of their musical careers."

One man who has experienced gigging on both sides of the fence is Samuel Nicholls, aka Whiskas, guitarist of Forward Russia.

In his late teens and early twenties Whiskas was a promoter as well as a musician and has this advice for young artists tempted by play-to-play deals: "There's no need to do it. Pay-to-play deals never make sense as you're only ever going to play to your mates and family.

"My advice would be to put on your own gig. Buddy up with some other local bands, book a room in a pub, print some posters and do it yourself.

"You're risking your own money by doing it but probably no more than under a pay-to-play. If you do well you'll make more money and get more of the right sorts of people in to your gigs."

Money is a big concern for all new artists. The more music becomes digital and free; the harder it is for any new artists to make a profit and realistically survive. It is not only the unsigned/newer artists suffering: bigger performers are still having to pay venues so they can get their music to the people. It is a scene-wide scar that needs medicating and addressing. It might be obvious saying scrap it from all venues and ensure there are better ways to ensure profit is being made at gigs. At a lot of the problem is with greedy promoters and labels wanting to make money – rather than pubs/venues seeing a chance to get some cash in and taking advantage. I can see the problem regarding smaller venues and them feeling the pinch when only pull in a small crowd. It is clear we need to get rid of the pay-to-play concept. It is less common than years ago but I am reading posts where it is still happening in certain places. Every gig I have organised with a label/P.R. company has seen them do things fairly. They will pay a headliner £100; smaller artists get £50 and they have to play a set of around thirty minutes. They get beer tokens – so they can get booze for free – but they have to arrange all their own travel and instruments (they would be provided a backline and sound engineer).

That sounds like a fair deal because, if you are fairly local to the venue; that means you are still making money (even if it is £10 or £20). Even that set-up is still only turning a tiny profit for artists. I have seen a lot of them set up merchandise stalls but many are going to a gig and choosing to get that artist’s music on streaming sites. Look at the reality of gigs in music and you see what tight margins are present. Only the truly established artists can confidently play a gig knowing they will make a tidy bit of money. Of course, the passion of music and love of performing means many artists will play gigs for a small fee and be happy with that. Given the stress they are under – and the fact they have to work full-time jobs – how can any venue expect to sustain a pay-to-play model and not face backlash?! It is clear abolition needs to occur but, given the shaky future many small venues face; are there alternatives to the problem?! My ethical conundrum arrives when establishing whether it is scrupulous promoters/labels or hard-working venues culpable. The most common infractions are happening in small bars so I think you can split guilt down the middle. If you can only remain in business if you turn a profit; paying artists to perform means some venues suffer losses and, therefore, face closure – is it the only recourse in some cases?!

Some artists are willing to play for free if they are performing for a charity: others will do it in exchange for beer or petrol money. Whilst there are exceptions and room for bargaining; compensating artists for their hard work is only fair. To retain those ethics; if payment is not possible for artists, then some sort of immunity or indemnity must be formulated. As far as I know; artists who have to pay to perform are, unless the venues have a specific policy, not paid after the gig – if lots of people get in and there is a lot of money made behind the bar. There is that assumption, when making them pay, not enough money will be made at the venue that gig. If a contract can be worked up where the payment from an artist is a deposit – that means they can get their money back, and maybe get paid, if more people come in. Perhaps more venues should do the same as many festivals: offer food and drink as a minimum. A lot of artists I know (who have gone down the pay-to-play route) do not even get that. I think there should actually be something a bit more lucrative for artists. Maybe there is no other solution but force every venue to pay their artists fairly. Unless an artist volunteers to play for free then there should be money provided following every performance.

The notion of playing to perform is not exclusive to music – it is present in the entertainment industry and sport – but the issue of financial struggle is more vivid and clear than other industries. I have seen disgusted Facebook posts where artists have had to pay to get a gig and, at the end, have been out of pocket. One would think the rise of streaming and free music would put issues like pay-to-play into the spotlight. It is harder now (than ever) for new and established artists to make a crust from what they do. Unless you are an established act who can command multi-date tours and guarantee a healthy kitty after the end of any run – how much money are you going to make?! It is a testing time for new musicians and the off-putting side-effects of streaming need to be counterbalanced by positive rewards. That can come from passionate crowds and a fantastic network of fellow musicians. When you think about it; there are not that many benefits and obvious bonuses for a new musician. The passion and love of what they do tend to override the bad points. If some venues insist on maintaining their (Scrooge-like) pay-to-play policy then that will put so many musicians off. The music industry is a tough market, I know. Getting gigs, however, is a right (for those deserving) and not…

A privilege.