Yeah...they won't gimme any $$$.
I mean, wtf is commercial radio potential? Throwing dollars after stuff that sounds exactly the same as everything else on the radio?
One of my fave NZ big chart hits of all time is The Heater by The Mutton Birds, but I doubt very much that anything so left of centre would get a look in in today's bland Kiwi charts.
The stars are underground.
how about this for a real crazy, way out there, totally wild idea.
for one round of grant decisions (the next one) per year - no grants get given to over the top commercial music. or music which already has the support of a major label!
and all the bands who have applyed consistently for the last four years all get a special prize pack of a video grant and new recordings all rolled into one.
all music has to sound proffesional, non cliche. and no off tune singing will be accepted.
they could then dedicate one show on c4 to all the videos made from that round.
and lets see all the completely fantastical videos that get created!
it would be a great news story - and it would shut all the complainers up.
coming soon: Jody Lloyd's open letter to Brendan Smythe.
// how would you define that? does distribution count as 'support'?
// are fmr/nun major label?
[assuming we're talking specifically about the new artists funding]
I guess you have to look at it in the framework of what is being applied for - as the NZonAir funding doesn't include any funding for distribution or actual physical production I reckon this wouldn't count as support.
If the band had received funding towards the recording, poduction or post production then, as it overlaps with the things which NZonAir is funding you for, it would count as support.
I think Flying Nun are considered a major label in NZ if I'm not mistaken. Don't know who fmr are though (call me ignorant).
The thing that gets me about it is that the grants are specifically designed for commercial sounding music but there are no checks and balances on wether or not the artist is actually approaching it in a business like manner, and as far as I know there are no reporting requirements on how you spend the money (not sure on this though).
Basically it seems like NZonAir are encouraging bands to write commercial sounding music without providing the same encouragement for them to approach it in a business like manner.
//as far as I know there are no reporting requirements on how you spend the money (not sure on this though).
Ah no, from what I've heard, I'm quite sure the recipients have to provide a pretty good account of how they're spending the money. That's according to one friend that got a new recordings grant.
Ah ha! I stand (or sit as the case may be) corrected! Cheers!
I was just working from information provided to me by a friend who received a grant a number of years ago. Still I find it interesting that though they are looking for 'commercially viable' songs they have no requirement that you are actually trying to get airplay...
// I think Flying Nun are considered a major label in NZ
// if I'm not mistaken. Don't know who fmr are though (call me ignorant).
Festival Mushroom Records (FMR) own Flying Nun. They (FMR) are often talked of as a major, but aren't technically one of the 'big' labels, and are really only considered a major here because they're far and away the biggest indie label.
// I guess you have to look at it in the framework of what is being applied for
Well, let's just say it's video grants and new recording. album grants require substantial input from the label anyway, so we can leave them aside.
// If the band had received funding towards the recording,
// poduction or post production then, as it overlaps with the things
// which NZonAir is funding you for, it would count as support.
I think it's pretty rare that new recording grants go to major label acts, so there aren't really any concerns about that scheme favouring the big labels.
// The thing that gets me about it is that the grants are specifically
// designed for commercial sounding music but there are no checks
// and balances on wether or not the artist is actually approaching it
// in a business like manner, and as far as I know there are no reporting
// requirements on how you spend the money (not sure on this though).
Well, I reckon it's fair enough that you don't tie the bands, little labels and video makers down in red tape for every measly five grand they manage to scrape out of NZOA. Realistically, producing a video or going into the studio to produce any sort of decent song or songs is alway going to cost $5000 or more. I don't think anyone's abusing the grants scheme as a quick way to make money, and doesn't really need to be audited up the wazoo. Having said that, there is (from memory, it's been a while), some basic accountability required of the film company that does the video making. I think. The same may be true of the new recording grant.
Likewise, just because you've never heard of an act before, it doesn't mean they should have to jump through hoops to get their $5000 either. They may record the one song (or make the one video), and then disappear back into oblivion. A lot of the new recording recipients never amount to anything, but some do. Such is the nature of music. Giving music to acts who only have a 'track record' would mean a lot of bedroom composers would be shut out the system.
// Basically it seems like NZonAir are encouraging bands to write
// commercial sounding music without providing the same
// encouragement for them to approach it in a business like manner.
Well, that's because it's not NZ On Air's job, and is why we have a NZ Music Industry Commission.
// they have no requirement that you are actually trying to get airplay
wouldn't that fall into the 'it's so obvious we won't even ask' category?
how many bands try to get new recording schemes or video grants with no intention of ever actually releasing the song or video? why would you bother? (especially when you've got to go the fairly laborious effort of producing a 'commercially viable' song in the first place).
Firstly I already said that all my conjecture was specifically around the new artists recording scheme. So that deals with the framework issue.
// think it's pretty rare that new recording grants go to major label acts, so there aren't really any concerns about that scheme favouring the big labels.
Fair enough, that wasn't my concern. I was simply trying to answer your question as to what would be deemed as support...
//Well, I reckon it's fair enough that you don't tie the bands, little labels and video makers down in red tape for every measly five grand they manage to scrape out of NZOA. Realistically, producing a video or going into the studio to produce any sort of decent song or songs is alway going to cost $5000 or more.
Gah.... no need to jump on the defensive. Though personally I think $5000 is a shit load of money and that you should be able to record an EP eaisly for that sort of money. However that is just my opinion - and I'm known for being extreemly frugal with my money...
Basically these thoughts all came to me after getting dumped with a Creative NZ funding application and seeing how much information and 'proof that you are serious' type material you have to provide (not my first just was a nasty reminder). Whereas NZ on Air needs no proof that you've actually got it together, are actually an artist or intended to ever try for airplay...
Just for the record I was neither promoting nor attacking NZonAir - just making comments from things I have observed.
Anyway the long and the short of it is that we could sit here and debate this all we wanted, find out statistics and look at the differences and talk about it all we want - but in the end we don't have any say on how these things get run...
// Whereas NZ on Air needs no proof that you've actually got it together, are actually an artist or intended to ever try for airplay...
Behold the great pop tradition of the one-hit wonder. Why should New Zealand be deprived of such fantastic sonic fireballs by insisting the the only artists eligible for NZ on Air funding be serious, proper, grown-up musical artistes?
//Behold the great pop tradition of the one-hit wonder. Why should New Zealand be deprived of such fantastic sonic fireballs by insisting the the only artists eligible for NZ on Air funding be serious, proper, grown-up musical artistes?
Way to miss the point that I was making. Quoting a random sentence out of context is great (watch the media do it on a daily basis), but at least make the effort to read the rest of what the person has written before hand...
If you read my previous posts you'd see that I'm not actually suggesting any changes, just simply commenting on the difference between the two schemes.
Who said anything avout serious, proper, grown-up musical artistes? You don't have to be a 'serious' artist to be serious about what you are doing. Financial planning and a marketing strategy would be just as important (if not more so) to a 'one hit wonder'.
// If you read my previous posts you'd see that I'm not
// actually suggesting any changes, just simply commenting
// on the difference between the two schemes.
but people will take some of those points and extrapolate from them.
this is a discussion forum. if you don't want people to discuss the points you want to make, don't post. For example, you say...
// Who said anything avout serious, proper, grown-up musical artistes?
But previously you said...
// ...information and 'proof that you are serious' type material you have to provide...
// ...approaching it in a business like manner...
So my answer to your latter question would be, you did.
//...but people will take some of those points and extrapolate from them.
Yes they will.
But extrapolation is not the repetiiton of things which have already been posted - thats just a lack of comprehension of the previous posts. If I had posed a question then sure those responses would be valid, but they wern't questions, and the information posted was obviously already common knowledge... great we're arguing about arguing :-)
//But previously you said...
One word for ya - CONTEXT.
Yes I did - and when you take it out of context like that it does sound like I brought it up - but when you read back to the post (damn the lack of a decent quoting function) where I posted it is clear that that phrase was used in regards to a Creative New Zealand application....
We could argue this till we're black and blue in the face and it's not going to do anyone any good...
Having said that I was thinking last night about the entire Creative NZ / NZonAir thing and I'd be interested to hear what (realistic) changes people would like too see...
Cheers man... I did think about searching on the topic - but then realised that in the end I have far too much work to do at the moment :-/
Having said that I should probably appologise for being so pedantic, as I'm used to a 'more structured' forum...
It's funny y'know, for all the debate on both sides about funding, we're better off than 90% of places round the world - we actually have an infrastructure for this sort of stuff. The thing that I worry about is that people start seeing it as a 'right' and not as a generous contribution from the tax payers of NZ...
thing is scott, the tax payers have no say whatsoever.
the board of nz on air doesnt get elected!
the panel of experts are business men/women
where does average joe taxpayer come into it.
it's mainly a grant/prop up system for big business.
at least with funding for health, eduction and roads are things that most people use everday.
does jeremys album deserve to be heard?
will he get a video grant?
facts is I can release 10 albums a year. so can you James!
- if there's no music video no ones gonna know they are out.
this has been proven time and time again.
if there is a music video made on a tiny budget it's not going to get chosen
over some high budget big directors clip. why would they?
the station/programme want people to watch.
and they would be afraid people are gonna flick
channels say if 'mogwash' by john white came on.
// does jeremys album deserve to be heard?
// will he get a video grant?
yes, and maybe. There's not actually too much in the way of obvious pop single on the new album, so we shall see. Having said that, we've got grants before, and not always for the tracks we thought would get them, but our ratio of applications to success would be about, ohhh, 10:1. Keep plugging away, and all...
Speaking of which, hell, artwork for the new album is winging its way to you shortly (finally).
jeremys record is one of the most infectious records i've heard in along time. its laden with pop hits. If any of those songs were too be put on high rotate, they'd do well. Prob is, nobody gonna stick them on high rotate cause they cunts.
Mogwash by John White is an incredible video. If i lived in a world where that was on high rotate I would be happy, but also sad, because then my life would have no meaning.
//thing is scott, the tax payers have no say whatsoever.
Yes well thats obvious - the tax payer has no direct say at all over how ANY of their tax money is spent. We all already knew that. So what the hell is your point.
/the board of nz on air doesnt get elected!
/the panel of experts are business men/women
And your point is? Do you think that by electing the board we would get a more skilled and capable group of people? I doubt it, consider the specialised levels of knowledge, experience and skills required and you'll probably find that the NZonAir people would have been the best picks already (or maybe not - I don't know).
Lots of organisations have non-elected boards, especially ones related to the governement. Democracy never solved anything, it just makes the whingers feel better about themselves.
/at least with funding for health, eduction and roads are things that most people use everday.
Oh cry me a river. Go ahead and pick the major utilities which nearly everybody will use at some point great example. There are hundreds of things which tax money gets used for which only a minute percentage of the population will ever use. The approach you have displayed with that comment is basicly selfish in nature - Why is my money being used here? It doesn't benefit me!
So following your logic should we stop funding research into specific diseases because only a small portion of the population suffer from them?
I challenge you to define 'fairly' - bearing in mind that it would need to also meet the madates set our for NZonAir and also meet the goals that they were set up to achieve. I'm pretty sure that after weeks of work on it you would come out with a system pretty similar to NZonAir given their restrictions.
man i havn't seen that mogwash video. is it on the low hum dvd special. I never got a copy of that which is of course my fault.
I now must official never say a bad thing about NZONAIR ever and if you wish to look through old disscusions there was another devil rider (who i am not affiliated with in any way) that was maybe a bit angsty after applying about twenty times in row with no luck.
and hey they funded gasdoline cowboy so they're not all bad
// Way to miss the point that I was making. Quoting a random sentence out of context is great (watch the media do it on a daily basis), but at least make the effort to read the rest of what the person has written before hand...
I did read your entire post, but that particular line inspired me to go off on a tangent, so I thought I'd quote that line to attempt to link it all together. I didn't mean it as a rebuttal to your comment, but I can see how it might have seemed that way.
// I did read your entire post, but that particular line inspired me to go off on a tangent...
Ahhh even I have done that... No stress - I get het up easily and my brain dosen't cope well with the thread structure on NZM... So fair enough [tips hat]...
//going into the studio to produce any sort of decent song or songs is alway going to cost $5000 or more
i cant agree with this comment. James, as an outstanding purveyor of nz music surely you know many many good songs have been done for less than this amount, much less in a lot of cases...
// Basically these thoughts all came to me after getting
// dumped with a Creative NZ funding application and
// seeing how much information and 'proof that you are
// serious' type material you have to provide
well, that's the difference, isn't it? creative nz is much more interested in their recipients being serious, and creating a respectable body of work, as opposed to some one-off pop hit. nz on air don't have that mandate - they just want nz music to be heard and seen on the telly and radio - cultural significance and 'intentions' just doesn't come into it (much the chagrin of a few people). that's why chris knox will get funding for recording his lawn mower and remixing it with some random noise, whereas some new pop star on the scene with, potentially, a massive world-wide pop hit will see their creative nz funding application go straight into the bin.
// // going into the studio to produce any sort of decent song
// //or songs is alway going to cost $5000 or more
// i cant agree with this comment.
yes, sorry, I should have said ...
going into the studio to produce any sort of decent song or songs should alway cost $5000 or more...
I know people get away with doing it cheaper, and I know many fine songs have been recorded for next to nothing. Again, without rehashing arguments that have done the rounds on these boards many times before, if you want to pay everyone properly for the work they do on recording a song, if you don't take short-cuts with catering, hiring equipment, mixing and mastering, then $5000 is a perfectly reasonable amount of money to offer to someone to record a couple of songs, or make a video.
The gist of my argument is that the $5000 sum is what NZ On Air obviously think is a decent sum to get a result. They don't care about how you spend it. Auditing and accountability would just add needless paperwork and impediments to the process. If you can make your song or video for $1500, and spend the rest on new gear or van repairs, then good on you. It wouldn't be the first time.
//They don't care about how you spend it. Auditing and accountability would just add needless paperwork and impediments to the process. If you can make your song or video for $1500, and spend the rest on new gear or van repairs, then good on you. It wouldn't be the first time. //
There is actually a return that needs to be completed and returned to NZOA, along with supporting invoices. Only certain expenses are allowed to be claimed. If your recording/video costs less than the $5,000 (Hah!) then you return the difference. Having said all that with a little bit of creative accounting I am sure you could disguise the van repairs as mastering costs! Heh heh heh!
//well, that's the difference, isn't it? creative nz is much more interested in their recipients being serious...
Well, yes, having just explained that I've actually been through both application process's and read all the required supporting material, you'd think it would be pretty obvious that I'd already clicked to that set of facts (and reading back over my previously posted material I feel pretty sure I have conveyed that impression).
The thing is that all I've done is present some thoughts and a few things that I thought were a bit odd (or at least there seemed like there were better options). I'm not attacking NZonAir - hell they do a fine job considering the way the orgainisation has been set up and it's afore mentioned mandate. They can only operate within the restrictions of the set of rules that govern them but despite this I think they do a very decent job. Shit, even the rules that govern them are better than having no infrastructure at all - but there are areas which could be imporeved. However thats a legeslative process not something decided by NZonAir.
So... errr... now that I've ranted on for a while I think I may just leave it there.
I love it how NZ on Air Funding come up with bullshit excuses like "it's not commercial enough." There are a few bands who are really talented, have a huge fan-base following, yet, can't get funding because it is not commercial enough.
I guess to be commercial you need to be "Rap or hiphop."
Sure, anyone can write a "potentially commercial" song but what does New Zealand really want to listen to?
I listen to the radio. I go to sometimes 2 or 3 shows a week, I look at posters in the street, I go to all the nz music websites yet I've never heard of half the bands who recieved the recording grant.
I agree with you on that one nana, especially with kiwifm on-air now.
nzonair need to start bringing up the alternative side of nz music - what's wrong with alternative? they treat it as a swear word yet they let the faces of today's kiwi "hip-hop" and "punk" (what a joke that is) get away with that sort of crap.
they believe that these categories are the potential money makers, just because the kids listen to it and nag their parents to buy the last 48may or dei hamo CD (excuse me while i shudder). yet they forget those that have acquired a more...mature taste in music and in a more mature age range (ignore the whole easy listening demographic of female 25-45 age group).
yes there is talent in the mainstream but what are they gon' fall back on if they burn-out?
besides you can picture some of the artist's live performances to be absolutely sub-par.
watch this space...finish it off later, have to go to work.
$#@f+, I have found Real Groove extremely helpful and supportive.
Brent Cardy was very good, and the new guy doing Noisy Neighbours seems to be inclusive of quite different styles/artists. If you have an Album finished I'd strongly suggest sending a copy to that column, forthwith.
NZonAir are just supplying what the radio 'heads' insist
on being played inorder for them to attract more clients to buy more
ads. So its your friendly Mechanic, Tyre company or local SteriodGym
that is the deciding factor. For they have a vast musical knowledge
and impressive taste in what they listen and call good music.
All of you who have hundreds of albums from all across the globe
and a like for creative, individual and artistic music are going
to ruin the good buisness that is Radio!
Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Facebook
Google
Technorati
Yeah...they won't gimme any $$$. I ...
Yeah...they won't gimme any $$$.
I mean, wtf is commercial radio potential? Throwing dollars after stuff that sounds exactly the same as everything else on the radio?
One of my fave NZ big chart hits of all time is The Heater by The Mutton Birds, but I doubt very much that anything so left of centre would get a look in in today's bland Kiwi charts.
The stars are underground.
how about this for a real crazy, way ...
how about this for a real crazy, way out there, totally wild idea.
for one round of grant decisions (the next one) per year - no grants get given to over the top commercial music. or music which already has the support of a major label!
and all the bands who have applyed consistently for the last four years all get a special prize pack of a video grant and new recordings all rolled into one.
all music has to sound proffesional, non cliche. and no off tune singing will be accepted.
they could then dedicate one show on c4 to all the videos made from that round.
and lets see all the completely fantastical videos that get created!
it would be a great news story - and it would shut all the complainers up.
coming soon: Jody Lloyd's open letter to Brendan Smythe.
oh yeah - and they ask musicians to be ...
oh yeah - and they ask musicians to be on the board of desision makers.
and I would forfit any trillion grant, to be on the panel!
// or music which already has the ...
// or music which already has the support of a major label!
how would you define that? does distribution count as 'support'?
are fmr/nun major label?
// how would you define that? does ...
// how would you define that? does distribution count as 'support'?
// are fmr/nun major label?
[assuming we're talking specifically about the new artists funding]
I guess you have to look at it in the framework of what is being applied for - as the NZonAir funding doesn't include any funding for distribution or actual physical production I reckon this wouldn't count as support.
If the band had received funding towards the recording, poduction or post production then, as it overlaps with the things which NZonAir is funding you for, it would count as support.
I think Flying Nun are considered a major label in NZ if I'm not mistaken. Don't know who fmr are though (call me ignorant).
The thing that gets me about it is that the grants are specifically designed for commercial sounding music but there are no checks and balances on wether or not the artist is actually approaching it in a business like manner, and as far as I know there are no reporting requirements on how you spend the money (not sure on this though).
Basically it seems like NZonAir are encouraging bands to write commercial sounding music without providing the same encouragement for them to approach it in a business like manner.
//as far as I know there are no ...
//as far as I know there are no reporting requirements on how you spend the money (not sure on this though).
Ah no, from what I've heard, I'm quite sure the recipients have to provide a pretty good account of how they're spending the money. That's according to one friend that got a new recordings grant.
Ah ha! I stand (or sit as the case may ...
Ah ha! I stand (or sit as the case may be) corrected! Cheers!
I was just working from information provided to me by a friend who received a grant a number of years ago. Still I find it interesting that though they are looking for 'commercially viable' songs they have no requirement that you are actually trying to get airplay...
// I think Flying Nun are considered a ...
// I think Flying Nun are considered a major label in NZ
// if I'm not mistaken. Don't know who fmr are though (call me ignorant).
Festival Mushroom Records (FMR) own Flying Nun. They (FMR) are often talked of as a major, but aren't technically one of the 'big' labels, and are really only considered a major here because they're far and away the biggest indie label.
// I guess you have to look at it in the framework of what is being applied for
Well, let's just say it's video grants and new recording. album grants require substantial input from the label anyway, so we can leave them aside.
// If the band had received funding towards the recording,
// poduction or post production then, as it overlaps with the things
// which NZonAir is funding you for, it would count as support.
I think it's pretty rare that new recording grants go to major label acts, so there aren't really any concerns about that scheme favouring the big labels.
// The thing that gets me about it is that the grants are specifically
// designed for commercial sounding music but there are no checks
// and balances on wether or not the artist is actually approaching it
// in a business like manner, and as far as I know there are no reporting
// requirements on how you spend the money (not sure on this though).
Well, I reckon it's fair enough that you don't tie the bands, little labels and video makers down in red tape for every measly five grand they manage to scrape out of NZOA. Realistically, producing a video or going into the studio to produce any sort of decent song or songs is alway going to cost $5000 or more. I don't think anyone's abusing the grants scheme as a quick way to make money, and doesn't really need to be audited up the wazoo. Having said that, there is (from memory, it's been a while), some basic accountability required of the film company that does the video making. I think. The same may be true of the new recording grant.
Likewise, just because you've never heard of an act before, it doesn't mean they should have to jump through hoops to get their $5000 either. They may record the one song (or make the one video), and then disappear back into oblivion. A lot of the new recording recipients never amount to anything, but some do. Such is the nature of music. Giving music to acts who only have a 'track record' would mean a lot of bedroom composers would be shut out the system.
// Basically it seems like NZonAir are encouraging bands to write
// commercial sounding music without providing the same
// encouragement for them to approach it in a business like manner.
Well, that's because it's not NZ On Air's job, and is why we have a NZ Music Industry Commission.
// they have no requirement that you ...
// they have no requirement that you are actually trying to get airplay
wouldn't that fall into the 'it's so obvious we won't even ask' category?
how many bands try to get new recording schemes or video grants with no intention of ever actually releasing the song or video? why would you bother? (especially when you've got to go the fairly laborious effort of producing a 'commercially viable' song in the first place).
Firstly I already said that all my ...
Firstly I already said that all my conjecture was specifically around the new artists recording scheme. So that deals with the framework issue.
// think it's pretty rare that new recording grants go to major label acts, so there aren't really any concerns about that scheme favouring the big labels.
Fair enough, that wasn't my concern. I was simply trying to answer your question as to what would be deemed as support...
//Well, I reckon it's fair enough that you don't tie the bands, little labels and video makers down in red tape for every measly five grand they manage to scrape out of NZOA. Realistically, producing a video or going into the studio to produce any sort of decent song or songs is alway going to cost $5000 or more.
Gah.... no need to jump on the defensive. Though personally I think $5000 is a shit load of money and that you should be able to record an EP eaisly for that sort of money. However that is just my opinion - and I'm known for being extreemly frugal with my money...
Basically these thoughts all came to me after getting dumped with a Creative NZ funding application and seeing how much information and 'proof that you are serious' type material you have to provide (not my first just was a nasty reminder). Whereas NZ on Air needs no proof that you've actually got it together, are actually an artist or intended to ever try for airplay...
Just for the record I was neither promoting nor attacking NZonAir - just making comments from things I have observed.
Anyway the long and the short of it is that we could sit here and debate this all we wanted, find out statistics and look at the differences and talk about it all we want - but in the end we don't have any say on how these things get run...
Yeah we(PSIONIC) missed out..and i ...
Yeah we(PSIONIC) missed out..and i thought we had a pretty good track..
// Whereas NZ on Air needs no proof ...
// Whereas NZ on Air needs no proof that you've actually got it together, are actually an artist or intended to ever try for airplay...
Behold the great pop tradition of the one-hit wonder. Why should New Zealand be deprived of such fantastic sonic fireballs by insisting the the only artists eligible for NZ on Air funding be serious, proper, grown-up musical artistes?
//Behold the great pop tradition of the ...
//Behold the great pop tradition of the one-hit wonder. Why should New Zealand be deprived of such fantastic sonic fireballs by insisting the the only artists eligible for NZ on Air funding be serious, proper, grown-up musical artistes?
Way to miss the point that I was making. Quoting a random sentence out of context is great (watch the media do it on a daily basis), but at least make the effort to read the rest of what the person has written before hand...
If you read my previous posts you'd see that I'm not actually suggesting any changes, just simply commenting on the difference between the two schemes.
Who said anything avout serious, proper, grown-up musical artistes? You don't have to be a 'serious' artist to be serious about what you are doing. Financial planning and a marketing strategy would be just as important (if not more so) to a 'one hit wonder'.
// If you read my previous posts you'd ...
// If you read my previous posts you'd see that I'm not
// actually suggesting any changes, just simply commenting
// on the difference between the two schemes.
but people will take some of those points and extrapolate from them.
this is a discussion forum. if you don't want people to discuss the points you want to make, don't post. For example, you say...
// Who said anything avout serious, proper, grown-up musical artistes?
But previously you said...
// ...information and 'proof that you are serious' type material you have to provide...
// ...approaching it in a business like manner...
So my answer to your latter question would be, you did.
//...but people will take some of those ...
//...but people will take some of those points and extrapolate from them.
Yes they will.
But extrapolation is not the repetiiton of things which have already been posted - thats just a lack of comprehension of the previous posts. If I had posed a question then sure those responses would be valid, but they wern't questions, and the information posted was obviously already common knowledge... great we're arguing about arguing :-)
//But previously you said...
One word for ya - CONTEXT.
Yes I did - and when you take it out of context like that it does sound like I brought it up - but when you read back to the post (damn the lack of a decent quoting function) where I posted it is clear that that phrase was used in regards to a Creative New Zealand application....
We could argue this till we're black and blue in the face and it's not going to do anyone any good...
Having said that I was thinking last night about the entire Creative NZ / NZonAir thing and I'd be interested to hear what (realistic) changes people would like too see...
sorry Scott, I was just rarking you up ...
sorry Scott, I was just rarking you up with that last post.
try the link at the bottom of this post for some previous ideas that have been bandied about,
That discussion also contains a wee directory to previous NZ On Air 'debates', which I may as well reproduce here...
http://www.nzmusic.com/topic.cfm?show=all&i=5892
http://www.nzmusic.com/topic.cfm?show=all&i=6923
http://www.nzmusic.com/topic.cfm?show=all&i=4961
http://www.nzmusic.com/topic.cfm?show=all&i=4118
http://www.nzmusic.com/topic.cfm?show=all&i=2833
http://www.nzmusic.com/topic.cfm?show=all&i=2902
http://www.nzmusic.com/topic.cfm?show=all&i=1605
[ http://www.nzmusic.com/topic.cfm?i=7286 ]
Cheers man... I did think about ...
Cheers man... I did think about searching on the topic - but then realised that in the end I have far too much work to do at the moment :-/
Having said that I should probably appologise for being so pedantic, as I'm used to a 'more structured' forum...
It's funny y'know, for all the debate on both sides about funding, we're better off than 90% of places round the world - we actually have an infrastructure for this sort of stuff. The thing that I worry about is that people start seeing it as a 'right' and not as a generous contribution from the tax payers of NZ...
thing is scott, the tax payers have no ...
thing is scott, the tax payers have no say whatsoever.
the board of nz on air doesnt get elected!
the panel of experts are business men/women
where does average joe taxpayer come into it.
it's mainly a grant/prop up system for big business.
at least with funding for health, eduction and roads are things that most people use everday.
hand out the money fairly
OR DON'T HAND IT OUT AT ALL!!
// it's mainly a grant/prop up system ...
// it's mainly a grant/prop up system for big business.
ah, come on, we've had that debate before too. indie acts are far and away the biggest recipients of nz on air grants.
haha - well lets scrap the whole nz ...
haha -
well lets scrap the whole nz on air grants system then!
that is the fairest way.
then music videos will all be a certain equal (tiny budget) standard.
does jeremys album deserve to be ...
does jeremys album deserve to be heard?
will he get a video grant?
facts is I can release 10 albums a year. so can you James!
- if there's no music video no ones gonna know they are out.
this has been proven time and time again.
if there is a music video made on a tiny budget it's not going to get chosen
over some high budget big directors clip. why would they?
the station/programme want people to watch.
and they would be afraid people are gonna flick
channels say if 'mogwash' by john white came on.
// does jeremys album deserve to be ...
// does jeremys album deserve to be heard?
// will he get a video grant?
yes, and maybe. There's not actually too much in the way of obvious pop single on the new album, so we shall see. Having said that, we've got grants before, and not always for the tracks we thought would get them, but our ratio of applications to success would be about, ohhh, 10:1. Keep plugging away, and all...
Speaking of which, hell, artwork for the new album is winging its way to you shortly (finally).
jeremys record is one of the most ...
jeremys record is one of the most infectious records i've heard in along time. its laden with pop hits. If any of those songs were too be put on high rotate, they'd do well. Prob is, nobody gonna stick them on high rotate cause they cunts.
Mogwash by John White is an incredible video. If i lived in a world where that was on high rotate I would be happy, but also sad, because then my life would have no meaning.
God I love John White.
// jeremys record is one of the most ...
// jeremys record is one of the most infectious records
// i've heard in along time. its laden with pop hits.
ya reckon? great!
maybe I'm just listening to the plod-plod basslines too much. ;)
but no luck with video grants so far. still, another round, another song...
//thing is scott, the tax payers have ...
//thing is scott, the tax payers have no say whatsoever.
Yes well thats obvious - the tax payer has no direct say at all over how ANY of their tax money is spent. We all already knew that. So what the hell is your point.
/the board of nz on air doesnt get elected!
/the panel of experts are business men/women
And your point is? Do you think that by electing the board we would get a more skilled and capable group of people? I doubt it, consider the specialised levels of knowledge, experience and skills required and you'll probably find that the NZonAir people would have been the best picks already (or maybe not - I don't know).
Lots of organisations have non-elected boards, especially ones related to the governement. Democracy never solved anything, it just makes the whingers feel better about themselves.
/at least with funding for health, eduction and roads are things that most people use everday.
Oh cry me a river. Go ahead and pick the major utilities which nearly everybody will use at some point great example. There are hundreds of things which tax money gets used for which only a minute percentage of the population will ever use. The approach you have displayed with that comment is basicly selfish in nature - Why is my money being used here? It doesn't benefit me!
So following your logic should we stop funding research into specific diseases because only a small portion of the population suffer from them?
I challenge you to define 'fairly' - bearing in mind that it would need to also meet the madates set our for NZonAir and also meet the goals that they were set up to achieve. I'm pretty sure that after weeks of work on it you would come out with a system pretty similar to NZonAir given their restrictions.
What Jeremy character are we talking ...
What Jeremy character are we talking about here?
I just want to be nosy....if blink says its good.
man i havn't seen that mogwash video. is it on the low hum dvd special. I never got a copy of that which is of course my fault.
I now must official never say a bad thing about NZONAIR ever and if you wish to look through old disscusions there was another devil rider (who i am not affiliated with in any way) that was maybe a bit angsty after applying about twenty times in row with no luck.
and hey they funded gasdoline cowboy so they're not all bad
phoenix foundation ownz nzoa!...
phoenix foundation ownz nzoa!
[ http://www.dancing.now ]
i was wondering if you were gonna say ...
i was wondering if you were gonna say anything, mr rider.
:-)
// Way to miss the point that I was ...
// Way to miss the point that I was making. Quoting a random sentence out of context is great (watch the media do it on a daily basis), but at least make the effort to read the rest of what the person has written before hand...
I did read your entire post, but that particular line inspired me to go off on a tangent, so I thought I'd quote that line to attempt to link it all together. I didn't mean it as a rebuttal to your comment, but I can see how it might have seemed that way.
// I did read your entire post, but ...
// I did read your entire post, but that particular line inspired me to go off on a tangent...
Ahhh even I have done that... No stress - I get het up easily and my brain dosen't cope well with the thread structure on NZM... So fair enough [tips hat]...
//going into the studio to produce any ...
//going into the studio to produce any sort of decent song or songs is alway going to cost $5000 or more
i cant agree with this comment. James, as an outstanding purveyor of nz music surely you know many many good songs have been done for less than this amount, much less in a lot of cases...
// Basically these thoughts all came to ...
// Basically these thoughts all came to me after getting
// dumped with a Creative NZ funding application and
// seeing how much information and 'proof that you are
// serious' type material you have to provide
well, that's the difference, isn't it? creative nz is much more interested in their recipients being serious, and creating a respectable body of work, as opposed to some one-off pop hit. nz on air don't have that mandate - they just want nz music to be heard and seen on the telly and radio - cultural significance and 'intentions' just doesn't come into it (much the chagrin of a few people). that's why chris knox will get funding for recording his lawn mower and remixing it with some random noise, whereas some new pop star on the scene with, potentially, a massive world-wide pop hit will see their creative nz funding application go straight into the bin.
// // going into the studio to produce ...
// // going into the studio to produce any sort of decent song
// //or songs is alway going to cost $5000 or more
// i cant agree with this comment.
yes, sorry, I should have said ...
going into the studio to produce any sort of decent song or songs should alway cost $5000 or more...
I know people get away with doing it cheaper, and I know many fine songs have been recorded for next to nothing. Again, without rehashing arguments that have done the rounds on these boards many times before, if you want to pay everyone properly for the work they do on recording a song, if you don't take short-cuts with catering, hiring equipment, mixing and mastering, then $5000 is a perfectly reasonable amount of money to offer to someone to record a couple of songs, or make a video.
The gist of my argument is that the $5000 sum is what NZ On Air obviously think is a decent sum to get a result. They don't care about how you spend it. Auditing and accountability would just add needless paperwork and impediments to the process. If you can make your song or video for $1500, and spend the rest on new gear or van repairs, then good on you. It wouldn't be the first time.
//They don't care about how you spend ...
//They don't care about how you spend it. Auditing and accountability would just add needless paperwork and impediments to the process. If you can make your song or video for $1500, and spend the rest on new gear or van repairs, then good on you. It wouldn't be the first time. //
There is actually a return that needs to be completed and returned to NZOA, along with supporting invoices. Only certain expenses are allowed to be claimed. If your recording/video costs less than the $5,000 (Hah!) then you return the difference. Having said all that with a little bit of creative accounting I am sure you could disguise the van repairs as mastering costs! Heh heh heh!
Or you could use the suspension ...
Or you could use the suspension bottoming out as a percussion track...
or film your vid *in* the van. oh wait, that's been done already
//well, that's the difference, isn't ...
//well, that's the difference, isn't it? creative nz is much more interested in their recipients being serious...
Well, yes, having just explained that I've actually been through both application process's and read all the required supporting material, you'd think it would be pretty obvious that I'd already clicked to that set of facts (and reading back over my previously posted material I feel pretty sure I have conveyed that impression).
The thing is that all I've done is present some thoughts and a few things that I thought were a bit odd (or at least there seemed like there were better options). I'm not attacking NZonAir - hell they do a fine job considering the way the orgainisation has been set up and it's afore mentioned mandate. They can only operate within the restrictions of the set of rules that govern them but despite this I think they do a very decent job. Shit, even the rules that govern them are better than having no infrastructure at all - but there are areas which could be imporeved. However thats a legeslative process not something decided by NZonAir.
So... errr... now that I've ranted on for a while I think I may just leave it there.
I love it how NZ on Air Funding come up ...
I love it how NZ on Air Funding come up with bullshit excuses like "it's not commercial enough." There are a few bands who are really talented, have a huge fan-base following, yet, can't get funding because it is not commercial enough.
I guess to be commercial you need to be "Rap or hiphop."
or be shit, dated pop punk...
or be shit, dated pop punk
pants down you are the dumbest north ...
pants down you are the dumbest north shore rep ever to cross these boards.
i thought he was from mt roskill...
i thought he was from mt roskill
North shore, please dont offend me. ...
North shore, please dont offend me.
Dumbest? What brought that on?
Sure, anyone can write a "potentially ...
Sure, anyone can write a "potentially commercial" song but what does New Zealand really want to listen to?
I listen to the radio. I go to sometimes 2 or 3 shows a week, I look at posters in the street, I go to all the nz music websites yet I've never heard of half the bands who recieved the recording grant.
we're quite chuffed we got one; only ...
we're quite chuffed we got one; only our 29th attempt !
I think it's time for NZ on Air to ...
I think it's time for NZ on Air to alter their focus. The industry has changed and its time for NZ on Air to adjust to that.
don't know what on earth we need to do ...
don't know what on earth we need to do to get reviewed in real groove tho
leap forward 40 yrs?...
leap forward 40 yrs?
I agree with you on that one nana, ...
I agree with you on that one nana, especially with kiwifm on-air now.
nzonair need to start bringing up the alternative side of nz music - what's wrong with alternative? they treat it as a swear word yet they let the faces of today's kiwi "hip-hop" and "punk" (what a joke that is) get away with that sort of crap.
they believe that these categories are the potential money makers, just because the kids listen to it and nag their parents to buy the last 48may or dei hamo CD (excuse me while i shudder). yet they forget those that have acquired a more...mature taste in music and in a more mature age range (ignore the whole easy listening demographic of female 25-45 age group).
yes there is talent in the mainstream but what are they gon' fall back on if they burn-out?
besides you can picture some of the artist's live performances to be absolutely sub-par.
watch this space...finish it off later, have to go to work.
bye
oh get over it already...
oh get over it already
$#@f+, I have found Real Groove ...
$#@f+, I have found Real Groove extremely helpful and supportive.
Brent Cardy was very good, and the new guy doing Noisy Neighbours seems to be inclusive of quite different styles/artists. If you have an Album finished I'd strongly suggest sending a copy to that column, forthwith.
NZonAir are just supplying what the ...
NZonAir are just supplying what the radio 'heads' insist
on being played inorder for them to attract more clients to buy more
ads. So its your friendly Mechanic, Tyre company or local SteriodGym
that is the deciding factor. For they have a vast musical knowledge
and impressive taste in what they listen and call good music.
All of you who have hundreds of albums from all across the globe
and a like for creative, individual and artistic music are going
to ruin the good buisness that is Radio!