Where's U.K. Pop?

Posted by: ejl on 11 June 2002

At dinner with a visitor from Sheffield last week, my wife mentioned (with an eye-roll) that I listen to a lot of rock. Our guest asked what's new from the U.K., and I damn near drew a blank. "Umm, the latest Clinic, Mogwai, the last Radiohead, and um ...". The guest seemed unimpressed. I later remembered a few more (the newest Neil Halstead, Arab Strap, the Reindeer Section comp.), and it's all good stuff, but there's not a lot of it.

Then I hear that no British band appeared on the Billboard top 100 (I think) last week -- first time in 40 years. Not THAT big a deal, and maybe meaningless, but still... .

I'm worried. U.K. artists have defined the lion's share of what I've been listening to for much of my life. Possibilities:

i. I'm just out of the loop. So what am I missing?

ii. The good stuff isn't making it abroad (I'm in the US).

iii. It's a lull, just like '74-5. We'll soon be enjoying contemporary equivalents of the Pistols, Damned, Clash, etc.

There are other possibilities, some of which I choose not to contemplate. So for those of you closer to the U.K. scene, wassup?
Posted on: 12 June 2002 by ejl
quote:
For example, Shpongle, Cosmic Rough Riders, Cornershop, Eliza Carthy, Catatonia (gone off rcently though).


This is what I wanted to hear -- names. Thanks.

"I suppose I don't really care where good music comes from any more - why should I care if a band come from Boston Lincs or Boston Mass.?"

In one sense you shouldn't care. But put it this way; if what had historically been a major source of talent suddenly seems to have (more-or-less) dried up, that's a source of concern for everyone, no?
Posted on: 12 June 2002 by Martin Clark
Interesting this, not least because I've had a similar experience recently, naming bands who on reflection... haven't done much in the last five years. Out of touch? Hmmm; I seem to hear quite a lot of new 'stuff' just nothing in the charts.

quote:
Then I hear that no British band appeared on the Billboard top 100 (I think) last week -- first time in 40 years. Not THAT big a deal, and maybe meaningless, but still...
No not the end of the world but signifies a lot about the sort of, er, product, which British labels are promoting (I'd go so far as to say well done for notbuying it). Contrast with:

quote:
I think a quiet revolution is happening, with more and more people getting involved in creating their own music on computer, and losing interest in chart music.
That, I think, is the most positve way of thinking about it; and a reminder that the way to hear new music is to chase it down at live sets. If you want a range of new things to listen too, and don't possess the talent to make your own, the people at the sharp end need supporting. The major labels/promoters appear uninterested, preferring instead to pursue only those acts which might provide the enormous revenues the music industry considers it deserves. But EMI got burned by Ms. Carey...

quote:
I suppose I don't really care where good music comes from any more - why should I care if a band come from Boston Lincs or Boston Mass.?
You shouldn't; but the fact that there's no music apparently coming from Boston Lincs does not mean that people there have stopped making music. The billboards, charts and radio playlists are the marketing tool of the labels - and always have been. What seems to be happenng is that the web, and the ease with which music can be recorded and disseminated in digital form (whatever you think of the quality vs analogue methods ;-) is finally a realistic alternative to major-label hegemony.

It's like swapping mix tapes with yer mates, writ large.

Of course it means that the labels moan that sales are falling (boo hoo!) and in all probability the many 'little' bands in the groundswell won't _ever_ appear in the Billboard 100. Yet why should they wish too, if the alternative might build a following, provide income yet leave control in the hands of the musicians?