Hard News: Bean-Counting the Beat
444 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 9 10 11 12 13 … 18 Newer→ Last
-
Isnt that the problem with the music (and movie) industry worldwide? lowest common denominator, play the safe card, forget that the real winners both creatively and financially come from a place of innovation and artistic passion!
agreed, but its not a prime objective of the charter to provide quality content, its a spin off of its prime objective to provide local content, reflecting our culture and identity, ie people creating music to reflect themselves, which since its not manufactured to maximise ad sales hits at a higher level content wise, in theory.
-
The reason they work a lot with mainstream commercial music stations, is that that's what most NZers listen to, and that's the music that most NZers like. That's not being narrow, that's being relevant.
actually nzers exposed to their own music don't hate it as much as programmers think they might, as highlighted by the large number of local hit records that have received absolutely no airplay, as mentioned by simon.
-
Or do you really all believe that NZ music is superior? is the propaganda working?
not necessarily superior but more relevant to us than say a song about drive by shootings in the ghetto.
luckily for those who are well versed in local content there's some pretty great music that has been made in this country and many overseas people are aware of it, some of it quite groundbreaking, probably bought on by our isolation.
The issue nz on air was trying to address is that we as a nation didn't get to see or hear ourselves on air, what we looked and sounded like. our self image and sense of identity suffered because of this and so some sociology graduate thought it was important that we had a better sense of ourselves so decided to address commercial radio's main objection to our music, that the quality wasn't good enough, so throw some cash at it and problem fixed, right? apparently not. -
I'm happily on the edge looking in.
you've got an unnatural interest, and admiration for the big business machinations of major labels and chart ticklers. are you sure you're not a closet suit-wearer?
-
are you sure you're not a closet suit-wearer?
I used to wear one in the eighties, to be sure. Indie label chic and all that nonsense. But the last time I put one on was my marriage as I recall.
I'm just fascinated by the recording industry at every level.
-
__You're taking half of what he said__
Where'd u get this figure of half from.
OK, read before posting. I didn't say 'half of what is spent'. I said, 'half of what he said'.
-
-
OK, read before posting. I didn't say 'half of what is spent'. I said, 'half of what he said'.
oh n, believe me I hang on every word you say, read them over and over again, treasure them,
you words imply that nz on air are getting it half right. that I'm ignoring half of the good work. its 800,000 out of a budget of over 5 mill.
I acknowledged this was important, and then focused on the glaring 4/5ths of a wasted time.so really what you statement should have said was
Again, you're taking 4/5 of what he said (commercial radio), and viewing it in isolation from the other 1/5 (national radio, bnet, kiwi radio). Clearly commercial radio is the focus for the stuff commercial radio will play. There's the other 4/5 of the story for the stuff they won't play.
I still stand by what I imply though, the way the system is run they marginalise the supporters and piss cash away on a brick wall. thats the net effect, be it a 1/5 to 4/5 ratio.
-
ps I realise the ratio is actual less than 1/6 to 5/6 but I was being generous
-
Talking ratios, The Radioscope Top 100 Airplay chart, which I look at once a week or two, is showing 10% NZ this week (which I think its quite high on an average, but nowhere near the 20% touted).
-
brendan said
We don’t say New Zealand music is this or that or sounds like this or that; it is the music that New Zealanders make and, ipso facto, it reflects New Zealand culture and identity, which is a rich tapestry and a coat of many colours, as we all know.
You said:
so you make no effort to reflect all the colours of that coat, to use your metaphor, you allow commercial radio's criteria to dictate the palette, there by failing at your role of reflecting 'nz identity'. essential practicing a form of discrimination.
actually kyle I gotta address this one more time.
they actually do make no effort to address all the colours of the coat in that they don't attempt to identify different genres and make sure each is represented. the only criteria is that its a kiwi playing it.
That system is prone to bias because it doesn't recognise that music is different.
it also doesn't recognise the kiwiness of music.
how do you do that?
Well if a foreigner can listen to a song on a radio overseas and say it sounds like a kiwi band then there must be something to the concept of our national identity.Simon, can you identify qualities of new zealandness in some of our music? you don't have to be specific but does certain stuff sound like us and no one else?
accent would also have something to do with it, and local references, ie not low rider drive by, but possibly pukekos (bats), dominion road (that guy with the no depression song), sjd had some nice ones etc etc,
-
is brendan actually going to participate in a debate or just dump a bunch of sound bites on us. I thought he said he was up for discussion?
he wouldn't lie to us would he?
-
you words imply that nz on air are getting it half right. that I'm ignoring half of the good work. its 800,000 out of a budget of over 5 mill.
No my words don't imply that at all. As I keep saying, if you're going to attack NZ on air for not addressing the types of music that 'commercial radio' won't touch, then you're going to look silly when it's pointed out the other half of what Brendan said, which is that they fund other radio stations to support that music.
I really don't need you to rewrite my words, I'm quite happy with how I do it thanks.
I acknowledged this was important, and then focused on the glaring 4/5ths of a wasted time
I don't get why you think that 'mainstream music' that gets played on commercial radio doesn't deserve the support of NZ on Air. Seems to me that its their job to make sure that the people in NZ who listen to crappy pop groups, have the opportunity to listen to crappy NZ pop groups.
they actually do make no effort to address all the colours of the coat in that they don't attempt to identify different genres and make sure each is represented. the only criteria is that its a kiwi playing it.
Brendan has covered this in his post.
A few people here have mentioned electronica as not getting NZ on Air support. Sonic Smith, who's a live performer who does really funky things with an interactive glove here in Dunedin got an hour long live gig and interview on Radio One here the other week, a NZ on Air supported radio station. I don't know how they fare in mainstream radio, but I'm not aware of a radio station that plays that sort of stuff.
-
is brendan actually going to participate in a debate or just dump a bunch of sound bites on us. I thought he said he was up for discussion?
It's entirely possible he doesn't work on weekends.
-
I don't get why you think that 'mainstream music' that gets played on commercial radio doesn't deserve the support of NZ on Air. Seems to me that its their job to make sure that the people in NZ who listen to crappy pop groups, have the opportunity to listen to crappy NZ pop groups.
But the thing is Kyle, it largely doesn't get covered. Have a look at that Radioscope Chart I posted. The 20% is not applied evenly across all formats and stations.
I agree that all pop music made in NZ is NZ music. I'm not making qualitative judgments but I'd be keen on seeing the airplay percentages once the niche stations are removed from the mix. And there is a reasonable argument, strongly backed by the sales figures I also quoted, that commercial radio is playing some acts because they fit the format, not because they represent any groundswell of popular support. That ain't helpful to anyone.
A few people here have mentioned electronica as not getting NZ on Air support. Sonic Smith, who's a live performer who does really funky things with an interactive glove here in Dunedin got an hour long live gig and interview on Radio One here the other week, a NZ on Air supported radio station.
Isn't that statement a little like cherry picking data to prove that global warming is a myth?
Simon, can you identify qualities of new zealandness in some of our music? you don't have to be specific but does certain stuff sound like us and no one else?
It's a hard one to nail, but there is a 'kiwiness" about most of what you hear recorded in NZ. Wheher it's a clumsiness (not meant as a criticism at all...but tell me a NZ record that sounds slick in US terms) or an inherent naivety, I don't know. When NZ tries to do polished pop it always misses the mark by, I think, about 10%...its not quite right, and I guess I love that about it.
I would exclude the electronica from that but that aside it's a trademark, and you can pick it anywhere.
Supergroove are one of only three NZ acts to have made any impact here in Indonesia ( the others are OMC and Bic). And you hear them often. But even in a noisy street or bar, it doesn't blend, it sticks out as not quite the same. It's a strength I think, unless you are doing back imitations of offshore acts that they do better.
Accents, placenames etc..I love hearing places in NZ namechecked but it's not a defining factor IMO. And bad American accents are a part of what made reggae what it is, as with Scouse accents and classic 60s NZ pop.
-
Talking ratios, The Radioscope Top 100 Airplay chart, which I look at once a week or two, is showing 10% NZ this week (which I think its quite high on an average, but nowhere near the 20% touted).
Perhaps it's updated to the next week:
NZ content on ALL radio this week: 19.35%
-
But the thing is Kyle, it largely doesn't get covered. Have a look at that Radioscope Chart I posted. The 20% is not applied evenly across all formats and stations.
I agree that all pop music made in NZ is NZ music. I'm not making qualitative judgments but I'd be keen on seeing the airplay percentages once the niche stations are removed from the mix. And there is a reasonable argument, strongly backed by the sales figures I also quoted, that commercial radio is playing some acts because they fit the format, not because they represent any groundswell of popular support. That ain't helpful to anyone.
Well I don't know more than half those acts, but probably.
But I can't blame commercial radio for playing the music that fits their station. Beyond dictating what they're going to play, I can't see how you change that.
If there's no medium via commercial radio for a type of music, and they don't fit into national/kiwi/bnet, then where should NZ on Air go to get it on radio. There aren't any other places for them to go. The government rejected the youth radio idea a few years ago (with some reason I thought). Is it NZ on Air's fault that there's no country radio station?
Isn't that statement a little like cherry picking data to prove that global warming is a myth?
I don't follow electronica music at all, I just know Sonic Smith. But obviously there's a medium for that music that musicians can use, I can't imagine he's the only electronica musician in NZ getting on radio.
-
I don't get why you think that 'mainstream music' that gets played on commercial radio doesn't deserve the support of NZ on Air.
Because it says clearly in the nz on air charter that
NZ On Air will allocate funding so that programmes and broadcasts that wouldn't otherwise be made in a commercial market can be produced.
I've given this quote and the link some way back but I'll give it to you again.NZ On Air's Principles and Criteria
That's a pretty crucial point. it also addresses the critisms of cronnyism, of the same people getting grant after grant.
surely commercial radio pap is way down on the list of people nz on air is set up to aid.
that one point is enough to cause concern, let alone deal with the more complex nature of culture and identity and what is or isn't us.
-
__I don't get why you think that 'mainstream music' that gets played on commercial radio doesn't deserve the support of NZ on Air.__
Because it says clearly in the nz on air charter that
NZ On Air will allocate funding so that programmes and broadcasts that wouldn't otherwise be made in a commercial market can be produced.
And previously commercial radio carried what... 2% of NZ music. Now they're carrying up to 20%?
Surely the 2% figure is pretty clear indication that NZ music wasn't making it in the commercial market, and now, in the NZ on Air environment, it's doing a lot better.
-
Surely the 2% figure is pretty clear indication that NZ music wasn't making it in the commercial market, and now, in the NZ on Air environment, it's doing a lot better.
firstly you're assuming that that 20% is made up predominantly of music nz on air funded, and that nz on air created the environment which it occurred in.
There were and are a lot of factors at play which I have addressed in a previous post.
7) In claiming credit for the success of the tenfold increase in radio play of kiwi how much of that increase would you attribute to other factors, such as
- channel Z, with its massively positive Kiwi vibe, on the street presences and in school gigs with local bands,
- local bands breaking through on their own, through hard slog ground up gigging (remembering this was the hey day of Shihad, Salmonella, Fur Patrol, Good Shirt etc),
- old school kiwi music supporters from the 80's now being in positions of power in media such as advertising, who slipped successfully kiwi iconic (but ignored at the time) music into their campaigns.
there has been no independent review to ascertain the effectiveness on NZ on Air, all we know for sure is nz on air existed across the time that local play of nz content rose. As Simon points out we also don't know the true meaning of that 20% figure, what genres, what stations, etc.
secondly you're inferring money designated for a specific role can be used in similar ways with similar results and be right.
apply that philosophy to say victims of a natural disaster.
govt puts aid money toward helping those victims.Then a bunch of people who weren't affected by the disaster move into the area and start consuming the aid.
is it ok for that money to be used by no affected people?
They're people and their benefiting from the money just like a homeless and hungry disaster victim would. by your reckoning thats a good result and everything is ok.
The 2 key points are- music that WOULD Not otherwise be funded in a commercial environment
- to reflect and foster the development of New Zealand culture and identity
that's what the money is for. written clearly on their website.
if the money is used to fund already successful bands then obviously that is a direct contravention of the guide lines.
That takes a whole lot of successful applicants out of the pool and frees up a lot of money to aid lower rung acts.It appears that nz on air have been trying to boost their apparent success by pinning their logo to already successful acts to make them selves look good.I've actually read a statement by Dolf Datsun that says they were approached by nz on air well after they became an international success and asked to apply for funding.
kinda weird don't you think. why go fishing for acts that aren't looking for your help?
-
And previously commercial radio carried what... 2% of NZ music. Now they're carrying up to 20%?
No, they are not. That 20% figure is averaged across ALL radio, including B-Net which is heavily NZ and Kiwi FM which is 100 NZ NZ. All that 2% figure indicated was that they were playng virtually no NZ music. Not a lot has changed. Now they play a couple of radio friendly acts but most is happily ignored.
And the stories of Electronica being turned down for funding are legion. One track in particular was an inner city Auckland anthem around 2004, reaching number one on the bFM chart, and was heard everywhere. It was later a UK top twenty dance track. It was turned down in for all funding. Since it had been made for nothing on a shoe string by a fairly impoverished musician / DJ without a label he was unable to fund a video...although he eventually found someone to do it for nix.
I guess I'm sounding a bit like Gray Bartlett when I whinge about things like that but this was a legitimate soundtrack to a large part of urban NZ culture at the time and there was no interest.
Similarly, a young girl made a documentary series of one hour shows covering the electronic producers in NZ. She made 40 (!) of these with no funding..off her own back. These were picked up and broadcast by stations in Auckland, Wellington and Christchurch as well as being broadcast in the middle of the day on the George FM network which is nationwide. I tried to get her some funding but, although Brendan was sympathetic, it was declined as being outside their brief. I'm at a loss as to how profiling 40 working, creating NZ musicians falls, many with releases both inside and outside NZ was ineligible for funding.
-
A few typos in that last one...ma'af sekali but I just woke.
"..Kiwi FM which is 100% NZ..."
"...creating NZ musicians, many with releases both inside and outside NZ was ineligible for funding." -
Fuck NZ radio
BTW i was reading Katchafire have recieved in the last 6 yrs of NZoA and music commish funding, 14 music grants, 3 phase 4 album grants including a 20k hit to push them onto US radio. All up grants totalling 220 000 dollars.
Not bad for a crap reggae band playing mostly bob marley covers which i heard when they played in jamaica got em booed off stage. I say fuck the music and just become a funding beneficiary
Sure they is maori, which is a good way for the powers that be to get their brownie points and token gestures out of the way in one hit but theres not much kiwi about selling reggae to the world or is there ?
compare that to this
The American deal comes after the success of the song Swing on the sound-track of hit Hollywood movie Knocked Up. It quickly gained cult status.
"The movie is what's snowballed everything," Savage said.
"As soon as it hit the movies, people started Googling the song, and looking for the song on YouTube. They found my MySpace page. That's how we realised I was in demand.
"We asked to put the song on American iTunes. It soon jumped to the top 20 and it's been there for the last couple of months.
"It's something we all daydream about, I guess. For it to finally happen, it feels like it's a dream in itself.
"All the hard work is starting to pay off. But there's still more and more hard work to be done."
"I've got a promo tour. We'll be touring over there starting from the ground up, visiting all the unis and doing shows and pushing the song (Swing remix) over there."
http://www.stuff.co.nz/4560134a1860.html
yeah go on say it ! Not much kiwi about selling hiphop to the world either but the point is, it won't cost 220k of tax payer money to foister savage to a global market cos at least the market wants him to start with.
Whos betting Mr sicc could follow on with no support from home either ?
Lasty, please if anyone has the vid to one of NZ most lush and beautiful vids Micronism/Denver McCarthy can you tube it ? Its the one with old gathering footage.
Whatever happened to denver ???
-
Not much kiwi about selling hiphop to the world either but the point is, it won't cost 220k of tax payer money to foister savage to a global market cos at least the market wants him to start with.
But let's be honest, as much as they might try, it doesn't sound anything like US hip-hop. Which is why it works.
-
Whatever happened to denver ???
In Wellington with the Krisnas I think. Lovely guy, with a huge talent.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.