Last Dinner Party

darthed1981

monquixote said:

There have been articles in the music industry press that when acts like Coldplay, Foo Fighters etc stop touring there is absolutely nothing to fill the void and it's going to be impossible to fill the bill at festivals etc. 

Genuine issue to be sure.

Even simple things, like a solo artist at least gets all the money, a band have to split it five ways etc.

monquixote

darthed1981 said:

monquixote said:

There have been articles in the music industry press that when acts like Coldplay, Foo Fighters etc stop touring there is absolutely nothing to fill the void and it's going to be impossible to fill the bill at festivals etc. 

Genuine issue to be sure.

Even simple things, like a solo artist at least gets all the money, a band have to split it five ways etc.

The argument goes that there is no money for bands, fewer venues, fewer people going to pubs, fewer people who can afford to not be working and so being in a band becomes impossible.

Also apparently given social media its much easier to market yourself as an individual who people can make a personal connection to rather than a band.

If you are a songwriter it's very easy to just get a laptop and make the music yourself and not have to worry about a band.

I see it in myself. I've given up on bands because all the pubs that have live music have shut down and so the only option is playing weddings in a function band which I can't be arsed with anymore. Once upon a time I might have tried to set up a band for writing, but I don't see the point given I can do it all myself. 

Mattharrier

monquixote said:

The argument goes that there is no money for bands, fewer venues, fewer people going to pubs, fewer people who can afford to not be working and so being in a band becomes impossible.

But surely the annals of rock n roll are full of people that survived on, basically, nothing, living hand to mouth, in squats, in their cars, doing odd jobs or stealing or selling drugs to get through to tomorrow, playing gigs in shitty bars to audiences they outnumbered, until they got their big break (or didn't, of course).

While that sort of life is more difficult now than it used to be, is it more that people have different expectations from life, and those expectations require income?

Or is it that living that sort of life isn't possible now, as driving around in a death trap car, and living in said car, will get you arrested and the car scrapped.

monquixote

Mattharrier said:

monquixote said:

The argument goes that there is no money for bands, fewer venues, fewer people going to pubs, fewer people who can afford to not be working and so being in a band becomes impossible.

But surely the annals of rock n roll are full of people that survived on, basically, nothing, living hand to mouth, in squats, in their cars, doing odd jobs or stealing or selling drugs to get through to tomorrow, playing gigs in shitty bars to audiences they outnumbered, until they got their big break (or didn't, of course).

While that sort of life is more difficult now than it used to be, is it more that people have different expectations from life, and those expectations require income?

Or is it that living that sort of life isn't possible now, as driving around in a death trap car, and living in said car, will get you arrested and the car scrapped.

Think back to art schools, student grants, unemployment benefit you could live on, affordable places to live. All gone now. 

Even in the early 2000s when I was taking it seriously the vast majority of people in bands were trustafarians public school boys living off mummy and daddy (same in TV as well) and even if you make it you simply can't afford to live. There are many people in bands you've heard of who still work (I know one or two)

You might be able to slum it for a couple of years, but it can't be your whole life.

Mattharrier

Anyway, on the subject of The Last Dinner Party, what I've heard I've liked. It's not set my world on fire, but they clearly have talent and have worked hard. There will, inevitably, be lots of people saying something along the lines of "yeah, well, if they weren't good looking they wouldn't get anywhere" because there will always be people who say that sort of thing, but to try and lump them in with Girls Aloud or whoever, groups whose members were specifically picked for their looks as much as their abilities - because people like Simon Cowell and Louis Walsh know that pretty people make money - is incredibly unfair.

I am, for some reason, a little uncomfortable with the lyrics - specifically one word - from Nothing Matters, because I am literally old enough to be the dad of any of them, and I'm getting bizarrely prudish as I get older, but it's a good song and it keeps playing in my head.

There will probably be comparisons to Wet Leg (and possibly WL have blazed a bit of a trail for them), although they seem to be a bit more polished than WL. Regardless, good luck to them.

ToneControl

stickyfiddle said:

I actually wonder if part of the weird feeling is simply that it’s been such a long time since a major label put real money behind any sort of new rock band in their early career we’ve collectively forgotten what that feels like? 

yeah, could be that, and the review I read said they had a big-name producer

Their debut full-length album, Prelude to Ecstasy, produced by the legendary James Ford (Arctic Monkeys, Florence + The Machine)

hence the comparisons there I suppose

Also after looking, it seems 2 of them have Pro musician training (guitar and keys), so explains how polished they are.

I liked that "On your side" song a lot more 
I don't like the mash-up 2 different songs sort of style that Sparks did a lot of, it can get tiring when the elements clash

I like their witty quote:

As ringleader Abigail Morris puts it, neatly summarising their stylings: “We’re just five dads trapped in gorgeous young bodies.”

ToneControl

Mattharrier said:

ToneControl said:

I am also suspicious about how they formed a band, given the assumed financial investment that has been made

Five people, all of whom own and can play an instrument, and/or can sing, decide to make music together. What does it cost to form a band? Some money for a rehearsal space? If they were students, that would be peanuts if not free.

They get lucky and the right person sees them, and thinks "five attractive young women who have some talent - I could make a boatload of cash here," offers them a contract and voila.

I just don't trust the music industry, there is so much track record of the money-providers splitting bands up or replacing people to make the product more sellable. Since there's clearly been some considerable cash been spent here, it makes me wonder, that's all.

I do object to the cliche of asserting that every female musician or female band are "attractive". 

ToneControl

darthed1981 said:

ToneControl said:

I am also suspicious about how they formed a band, given the assumed financial investment that has been made

I think it's fair to assume Bill Gates was involved, and some of that "the Earth is round" lot.

Or alternately, they met at university, were all into music and formed a band, and it turned out they were very good at it.  Abigail is a natural lead singer.

They didn't get a recording deal with Island from their first gig, but they did get a deal with an influential manager from their first gig, seems to be the actual story.

The hype around them always needs to be backed up by the actual songs in the end, and like the aforementioned Monkeys and Libertines, and of course "girls in indie" megastars Wet Leg... they have the songs to get some streams and to fill some venues.  They are playing the same kind of venues as some of the bigger legacy indie acts, like Suede, so its pretty clear they have a big old bar to jump - straight to headlining!

Now they get to do the crushingly intense global world tour, then they get to try and make a decent second album... and if they survive all that and are still selling... they might pay back all the money they owe their label.

I'd probably not want to be in their shoes, but good fucking luck to them, they seem great girls and I wish them very well indeed.

Now, I'm really bugged which song "The Feminine Urge" on their album is ripping-off quite badly - bugging the crap out of me.

yeah, good luck to them

ewal

I asked my daughter who's in a great band, if she gets frustrated when a band gets hyped like The Last Dinner Party. 'A bit' is the obvious answer. But you always notice the bands that gain success - there's far more chugging along like hers. She does get annoyed that they're marketed as an indie band which they obviously aren't, and the made up stories about all the gigs at the George Tavern (they've played there once, my daughter's band has played maybe 20 times).

There's an awful lot of nepotism and luck at play. As there always has been.

darthed1981

ewal said:

I asked my daughter who's in a great band, if she gets frustrated when a band gets hyped like The Last Dinner Party. 'A bit' is the obvious answer. But you always notice the bands that gain success - there's far more chugging along like hers. She does get annoyed that they're marketed as an indie band which they obviously aren't, and the made up stories about all the gigs at the George Tavern (they've played there once, my daughter's band has played maybe 20 times).

There's an awful lot of nepotism and luck at play. As there always has been.

Only a bit?  I would imagine the collective tooth-grinding on the "scene" is positively hazardous in the post-NHS-dentistry era.

I've got a mate who is in a couple of bands in the Southampton-Portsmouth sorta area, so when Wet Leg made it big I asked him if people on the local scene were happy that a local band had made the big time......

No, they were in fact quite unhappy, all the usual complaints, musicians are a competitive bunch and some people rushed right past them simply by being vastly, vastly more unique, talented and interesting.  

Because, really, although one can chug along for fun while doing a day job and have a lovely time, people really want to be screaming "Hello Glastonbury" to 130,000 people, a level of course only a handful of signed bands reach.

I'm not sure if any of LDP are related to anyone, but they have of course been lucky.

euan

ewal said:

I asked my daughter who's in a great band, if she gets frustrated when a band gets hyped like The Last Dinner Party. 'A bit' is the obvious answer. But you always notice the bands that gain success - there's far more chugging along like hers. She does get annoyed that they're marketed as an indie band which they obviously aren't, and the made up stories about all the gigs at the George Tavern (they've played there once, my daughter's band has played maybe 20 times).

There's an awful lot of nepotism and luck at play. As there always has been.

Again much like the Libertines who completely staged part of their back story to seduce record companies into signing them. 

Theres plenty of great band out there, but they will never get signed. And if the goal is to get signed, chugging on as the same band and always being seen by the same people won't do it. They've already made their minds up. A fresh face will always be viewed better.

monquixote

Sour grapes is obligatory in unsigned bands.

When I was playing in Camden every single band used to complain that talent wasn't recognised but the truth was they weren't good enough.

I saw thee unsigned bands that made it: The Darkness, Hard Fi and The Magic Numbers and they were all so much better than everyone else I saw on the scene that it was just obvious they were head and shoulders better.

darthed1981

monquixote said:

Sour grapes is obligatory in unsigned bands.

When I was playing in Camden every single band used to complain that talent wasn't recognised but the truth was they weren't good enough.

I saw thee unsigned bands that made it: The Darkness, Hard Fi and The Magic Numbers and they were all so much better than everyone else I saw on the scene that it was just obvious they were head and shoulders better.

Exactly.

Looking back at those bands and how strong their debuts were, no way the "average" band who are chugging along have songs that good.

If you are chugging along, and genuinely have a handful of songs as good as "Nothing Matters" - then you CAN make it, assuming you are also young and pretty.

Now, whether you do, that's the old luck again.  But 99.999% of songs written are not bad per se, but they are outrageously average.

jimmyd

darthed1981 said:

Now, I'm really bugged which song "The Feminine Urge" on their album is ripping-off quite badly - bugging the crap out of me.

There's a section in that one that sounds like a lift from Long Haired Lover From Liverpool though I'm not sure that's the vibe they were intending. 

I think it's good to see an all girl band doing well, although their song Caesar on A TV Screen has the most clunking, clumsy tempo changes in it...

The style of the main vocalist generally reminds me of Marina from Marina and the Diamonds....

ToneControl

Mattharrier said:

monquixote said:

The argument goes that there is no money for bands, fewer venues, fewer people going to pubs, fewer people who can afford to not be working and so being in a band becomes impossible.

But surely the annals of rock n roll are full of people that survived on, basically, nothing, living hand to mouth, in squats, in their cars, doing odd jobs or stealing or selling drugs to get through to tomorrow, playing gigs in shitty bars to audiences they outnumbered, until they got their big break (or didn't, of course).

While that sort of life is more difficult now than it used to be, is it more that people have different expectations from life, and those expectations require income?

Or is it that living that sort of life isn't possible now, as driving around in a death trap car, and living in said car, will get you arrested and the car scrapped.

AFAIK the idea of being a professional musician, without any other job, is quite a new idea.
I'd think that having a solid day job would protect a musician from being bullied into things by a record company or other pressures

Grangousier

Am I right in thinking their video was shot at the De La Warr Pavilion?

That's a fine bit of architecture. 

TheBigDipper

ToneControl said:

<snip>

AFAIK the idea of being a professional musician, without any other job, is quite a new idea.
I'd think that having a solid day job would protect a musician from being bullied into things by a record company or other pressures

European musical history is full of composers who were funded by patrons and did little else for income apart from produce what their patrons asked for - potentially trying to sneak their own passions in under the radar.

I can only agree that having a day job stops you from being pressurised by record companies, venues, etc. That independence also protects you from them even being interested in you, because what's in it for them? 

One of the nice things about being an old, amateur guitarist in an original music band is that I know no-one will book us into their venue. It's purely a creative, vanity pastime for us all. 

If I wanted to get lots of paid bookings I'd be in a functions band or a covers band. If I wanted to get signed by a record company I'd be a lot younger and better looking. :-) 

TheBigDipper

I quite like what I've seen of Last Dinner Party, FWIW. Edges towards some of the music I seem to like and they're clearly well-trained (that's a good thing) and working together. 

ToneControl

I lament the lack of enthusiasm for older artists in modern music.
Jazz and classical music never ignored older players and vocalists

Last night I watched the 50th anniversary Tubular bells Live show on the TV.
The older (and younger) players were all great.
But for me it was great to see the Lead guitar and bassist

Jay Stapley – Guitar, played so well, ,very good at doing Oldfield-style solos, nice to see a PRS SE in use on a big stage

Lisa Featherston – Bass, I loved her playing, good to see her playing barefoot if that's her preference, and very impressed to see her stepping up to take the lead vocal for this one:

ToneControl

TheBigDipper said:

ToneControl said:

<snip>

AFAIK the idea of being a professional musician, without any other job, is quite a new idea.
I'd think that having a solid day job would protect a musician from being bullied into things by a record company or other pressures

European musical history is full of composers who were funded by patrons and did little else for income apart from produce what their patrons asked for - potentially trying to sneak their own passions in under the radar.

I can only agree that having a day job stops you from being pressurised by record companies, venues, etc. That independence also protects you from them even being interested in you, because what's in it for them? 

One of the nice things about being an old, amateur guitarist in an original music band is that I know no-one will book us into their venue. It's purely a creative, vanity pastime for us all. 

If I wanted to get lots of paid bookings I'd be in a functions band or a covers band. If I wanted to get signed by a record company I'd be a lot younger and better looking. :-) 

I know about the composers.
I was meaning the actual playing of music - with no radios or CDs, all music was live.
Each village and town and even family would have musicians, to cater for events at the pub, festivals, church etc.
AFAIK this was usually a second income thing