Britpop : Time For Reevaluation?

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (1554 of them)

Re: Canada

I can see a thread in 3 years: 'What happened with the Canadian indie scene?!'

― zeus, Friday, 9 March 2007 15:37 (seventeen years ago) link

There's probably already one

― Brigadier Lethbridge-Pfunkboy, Friday, 9 March 2007 16:05 (seventeen years ago) link

The reason the Canadian indie scene is so great is for one reason: THEY FREAKING SUBSIDIZE THE F*CK OUT OF IT. Plus the whole protectionism of Cancon on all media channels

― Masonic Boom, Friday, 9 March 2007 16:07 (seventeen years ago) link

So Canadian protectionism is a good thing, but the British protectionism is jingoism? Strange effects.

― zeus, Friday, 9 March 2007 16:21 (seventeen years ago) link

Haven't seen the Arts Council sticking their arm out recently. Mind you, when the emblem of decadence in British music in 2007 is the Horrors, can you really blame them?

― Marcello Carlin, Friday, 9 March 2007 16:48 (seventeen years ago) link

If its not classical it won't get funded, right?

― Brigadier Lethbridge-Pfunkboy, Friday, 9 March 2007 16:50 (seventeen years ago) link

These Canadians win the worst name award though.

― Brigadier Lethbridge-Pfunkboy, Friday, 9 March 2007 16:54 (seventeen years ago) link

Either that or it has to come under the nefarious boundaries of "world music" or "community music."

― Marcello Carlin, Friday, 9 March 2007 16:54 (seventeen years ago) link

Wot, no vernacular music?

― Tom D., Friday, 9 March 2007 16:55 (seventeen years ago) link

That would mean giving public money to Jack McLaughlin.

― Marcello Carlin, Friday, 9 March 2007 16:57 (seventeen years ago) link

Subsidised indie rock would be worse than NME Carling Rock though I'm sure.

― Brigadier Lethbridge-Pfunkboy, Friday, 9 March 2007 17:07 (seventeen years ago) link

It would probably sound like Fat Les.

― Brigadier Lethbridge-Pfunkboy, Friday, 9 March 2007 17:11 (seventeen years ago) link

Canadian indie isn't subsidised for being indie, it's subsidised for being CANADIAN.

That's what you've got to do to keep some kind of national cultural identity when up against the giant cultural monolith next door.

I mean, maybe that's a point. Who are British bands competing with, locally? Breton hip-hop? I don't think so.

― Masonic Boom, Friday, 9 March 2007 17:12 (seventeen years ago) link

Ireland!

― Tom D., Friday, 9 March 2007 17:13 (seventeen years ago) link

There's no Scottish subsidy for jingly jangly bands.

― Brigadier Lethbridge-Pfunkboy, Friday, 9 March 2007 17:15 (seventeen years ago) link

But it there may well be legislation introduced after the forthcoming elections

― Tom D., Friday, 9 March 2007 17:17 (seventeen years ago) link

It would probably sound like Fat Les.

Brigadier Lethbridge-Pfunkboy on Friday, 9 March 2007 17:11 (5 minutes ago)

Fat Les no worse than the horrors.

― Pashmina, Friday, 9 March 2007 17:18 (seventeen years ago) link

Keith Allen isn't in The Horrors though.

― Brigadier Lethbridge-Pfunkboy, Friday, 9 March 2007 17:18 (seventeen years ago) link

I haven't actually heard any music by The Horrors. That's probably in their favour just now. Are they as bad as I imagine?

― Brigadier Lethbridge-Pfunkboy, Friday, 9 March 2007 17:19 (seventeen years ago) link

"Canadian indie isn't subsidised for being indie, it's subsidised for being CANADIAN."

This is not quite true. For bands like You Say Party We Say Die (horrid name I guess, but quite a good band), the only way they are subsidised would be through increased radio/media exposure via the CRTC broadcast requirements. Most stations have to play 35% Canadian Content. However some stations also have a requirement to play a certain percentage of independent releases. At the station I'm with we have to play (if memory serves) 35% Canadian, 60% independent, 60% releases from the last 6 months and 50% female-related artists (ie. at least one member of the band is a woman).

Other stations have various other playlist requirements, the idea being that EVERYTHING gets some exposure. Culturally specific genres like reggae, merengue and yes, even Brit-pop, generally have different Can-con rules - usually something like 10%.

― everything, Friday, 9 March 2007 17:42 (seventeen years ago) link

The Canadian government also GIVES MONEY AWAY IN THE FORM OF GRANTS so that Canadian bands can tour. I know this is true because I've toured on one of these grants, back when I was in a Canadian pop band.

― Masonic Boom, Friday, 9 March 2007 17:43 (seventeen years ago) link

Indie on the rates. Henry Root would be horrified.

― Noodle Vague, Friday, 9 March 2007 17:44 (seventeen years ago) link

Okay, but generally speaking, those grants are not for new bands such as YSPWSD because you must have specialized training in your field and have to already be recognised as a professional musician by your peers (two of the requirements). It's tricky for a new band to comply with those requirements.

However, my point was that in some ways indie music IS subsidized.

― everything, Friday, 9 March 2007 17:49 (seventeen years ago) link

If it's so tricky to get one, then how the heck did a little tiny indie band like mine manage to get one? (Unless things have changed dramatically in the past 5 years.)

― Masonic Boom, Friday, 9 March 2007 17:51 (seventeen years ago) link

By the way, I know Shimura Curves got played on my station a while back, partly because it scored 3 out of 4 of the CRTC requirements.

― everything, Friday, 9 March 2007 17:52 (seventeen years ago) link

Xpost - I'll admit I don't really know what those grants are all about other than what I've heard through the grapevine. I know a couple of people who have been turned down for those reasons I stated. I've never applied for one and don't know that much about it. So, I bow to your superior experience.

― everything, Friday, 9 March 2007 17:56 (seventeen years ago) link

This wasn't Shimura Curves, this was the Lollies - who were totally MAPL by the book despite my passport.

― Masonic Boom, Friday, 9 March 2007 17:58 (seventeen years ago) link

Oh sure. I'm talking only about 3 or 4 months ago we played Shimura Curves a couple of times. The Fem-con requirement is very new by the way - it only came in about a year ago.

― everything, Friday, 9 March 2007 18:01 (seventeen years ago) link

Kate played in two countries on radio. Next stop THE WORLD!

― Brigadier Lethbridge-Pfunkboy, Friday, 9 March 2007 18:02 (seventeen years ago) link

I can't imagine a similar system being implemented in the UK, much though I might think that was a good thing. Though I don't think I would give the money to the arists, but more to keep legendary venues going with Arts Council grants. You look at a super-isolated and yet still historically very vibrant UK indie scene, such as Hull for example - and it's usually down to a venue or a promoter doing everything they can to keep live music alive, not just in terms of local music, but attracting national bands and getting local bands in as support. In Hull that was the Adelphi - bands had a place to play, rehearse, record, half the bands in Hull worked behind the bar at one point or another to pay their rent. Something like that keeps a music scene vibrant on a grass roots level on a way that just giving grants to musicians doesn't.

― Masonic Boom, Friday, 9 March 2007 18:03 (seventeen years ago) link

Hooray! I am in the elite cadre of ILXors who've played at the Adelphi.

― Noodle Vague, Friday, 9 March 2007 18:04 (seventeen years ago) link

x-post, yay! I love Canadian radio!

(Four countries, actually - UK, Germany, Canada and US. Unless Texas counts as a different country...)

The Canadian system, despite its problems, does have a lot to be said for it. But then again, Canadian radio is localised in a way that UK radio is monolithic - the monolithic status of UK radio has some things to be said for it, too, though.

― Masonic Boom, Friday, 9 March 2007 18:05 (seventeen years ago) link

But having grants available doesn't stop those kind of grassroots/collective scenes from happening. The relative isolation of most Canadian cities usually means there is a very strong and supportive local scene too.

― everything, Friday, 9 March 2007 18:09 (seventeen years ago) link

The female artists rule seems weird tho. I would guestimate that women are in no way under-represented in Pop, at least.

― Noodle Vague, Friday, 9 March 2007 18:09 (seventeen years ago) link

(xxxpost, obviously)

― everything, Friday, 9 March 2007 18:09 (seventeen years ago) link

I don't think the female artists rule seems weird at all - though I think it's aimed at redressing the balance in rock rather than pop, which is still overwhelmingly male.

― Masonic Boom, Friday, 9 March 2007 18:10 (seventeen years ago) link

FYI the fem-con thing has only been taken on by those stations who want to support it as a concept. It's not fully official yet. Seems to work pretty well, though, having lived with it for a year. And I was originally sceptical.

― everything, Friday, 9 March 2007 18:10 (seventeen years ago) link

Agreed about Rock, yes - although why not set all sorts of quotas? - but I assumed that most stations would play some version of Pop and then it all seems a bit pointless. I don't like this protectionist thing anyway tho.

― Noodle Vague, Friday, 9 March 2007 18:14 (seventeen years ago) link

I don't know if I like protectionism or not, but you can't deny that the Canadian independent music scene is really healthy in a way that I don't really think the UK is at the moment.

― Masonic Boom, Friday, 9 March 2007 18:18 (seventeen years ago) link

If indie bands were forced to get girls in bands just to be played on radio then The Lex would have to like more indie bands!

― Brigadier Lethbridge-Pfunkboy, Friday, 9 March 2007 18:19 (seventeen years ago) link

I think the idea that the UK indie scene is unhealthy is probably wrong. As people have said upthread "NME bands" does not equal the indie scene in toto.

― Noodle Vague, Friday, 9 March 2007 18:22 (seventeen years ago) link

Compared to what it's like in Canada - the amount of radio play, press coverage (mainstream press coverage), etc. that indie bands get, it is unhealthy. NME/Carling rock has an unhealthy stranglehold on the public face of UK indie, which is not at all representative of the actual creativity going on.

― Masonic Boom, Friday, 9 March 2007 18:26 (seventeen years ago) link

The NME scene is unhealthy creatively but very very healthy commercially. If all those bands died on their arse would NME start covering decent bands again or just hype up some new shit and hope it takes off commercially?
If you read about a band in NME these days you can bet the will be in The Sun etc pretty quickly and played on R1.
Mind you, as Doherty proves, you don't have to have people knowing your music to get famous.
Do any bands get mega without being tabloid fodder?

― Brigadier Lethbridge-Pfunkboy, Friday, 9 March 2007 18:26 (seventeen years ago) link

I can't imagine Snow Patrol provide many thrilling tabloid stories.

― Noodle Vague, Friday, 9 March 2007 18:27 (seventeen years ago) link

To all the musicians on here: would subsidies actually help your bands?

― Brigadier Lethbridge-Pfunkboy, Friday, 9 March 2007 18:29 (seventeen years ago) link

It's more than just "subsidies" though (and let me again say that I doubt that many bands receive cash handouts).

Having lived in both the UK and Canada for many years, I have to say that the Canadian music scene is larger, more eclectic, more inclusive, more friendly and more entertaining than the UK. There are lots of musicians of all ages who can easily find gigs, get media exposure, are supported by music fans of all ages. People just DO more here, and are much less judgemental/ageist/fashion-concious.

― everything, Friday, 9 March 2007 18:31 (seventeen years ago) link

Do you have to be under a certain age though? Do over 40s get help for example?

― Brigadier Lethbridge-Pfunkboy, Friday, 9 March 2007 18:34 (seventeen years ago) link

Subsidising music or musicians wouldn't make a difference to me at my point in life. Subsidising venues and promoters would probably make more of a difference to me, to create more places for my band to play without dealing with awful moneygrubbing promoters. The difference for me would be playing somewhere that has a "get 20 people in the door with flyers" policy vs. someone who has the expertise and time and devotion to actually put together a good club, good bills and actually *promote* - that would be make a difference to me.

I know this may appear to be backwards thinking, as a musician, but honestly, it's not.

I mean, the difference between playing somewhere like the Bull and Gate and playing somewhere like the Windmill really shows this up. Which is a more pleasant -and profitable - experience for bands and fans?

― Masonic Boom, Friday, 9 March 2007 18:35 (seventeen years ago) link

There are lots of musicians of all ages who can easily find gigs, get media exposure, are supported by music fans of all ages.

WHY do you think this is? It's because someone is out there protecting this stuff, and not letting legendary venues be knocked down to build blocks of flats, not letting music papers be sold off to giant media empires who care about nothing but what shifts units, music fans having access to music that stimulates them through radio that actually plays local, independent music, etc. etc. etc.

― Masonic Boom, Friday, 9 March 2007 18:40 (seventeen years ago) link

And would subsidies get spread locally from region to region? That would be one way to keep bands from moving to London I suppose, but then would they still get signed?

― Brigadier Lethbridge-Pfunkboy, Friday, 9 March 2007 18:42 (seventeen years ago) link

Skipping 1454 messages at this point... Click here if you want to load them all.

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.