Time to take a time out!

Underground In Prydain is currently on a sabbatical.

This is mainly due to the content creator having a high demand on time in other areas.

All activity will return to normal in early August.

In the mean time, please feel free to have a good read through the other articles available in the post archive below.

Thanks!

UP

The Speed Of sound

Last week, UP gave an overview of the advantages and draw backs of releasing a continuous stream of music. Is it the best way to keep your band in the public eye in an environment where attention spans are even shorter than they were at the birth of MTV? Or does it detract from the impact which one bigger push could have every once in a while.

In the past 7 years, bassist Chris Ryan has been involved in double figures of releases, most notably with death metal misfits Party Cannon, who are working on their first full-length for 2015 and have stomped their way around Europe with very little external support. UP bothers him for a suitably quick shooting interview about his persistent prolificacy.

(A sure fire approach to sticking out from the DM crowd)

Chris Ryan: Hey!

UP: Hello there, how are you tonight?

CR: Not too bad man, yourself? Ready to do this interview?

UP: I think so! If you saw the brief article I had circulating this week, you'll have noticed it was discussing the amount of music artists release. So, 11 releases for you, is it, in 7 years across various bands? The first question that begs to be asked is ‘are you possessed’? Who writes that many songs?

CR: Is it really 11?

UP: I think so, including EPs, demos, albums. I take it you lost count?

CR: I never actually thought about this, I'm sitting counting on my fingers all the recordings I can think of. Eh, well the only band that I've written songs for that has released anything is Party Cannon, so it's not so much as being "possessed" more just, piggy backing on other peoples' writing

UP: Even so, it's a fair few releases to be involved with, and Party Cannon isn't looking like slowing that pace down any, is it?

CR: I hope not anyway! This year has been the busiest for us in terms of gigs

UP: Yes, and some quite significant ones on the underground scale

CR: You could say so, but I'm just happy that we're managing to frequently get to Europe and see new places

UP: It's something a lot of bands struggle to get nailed down

CR: Luckily for us, our genre is so niche and small that it's easy to network and move around. The fans of the style are usually really understanding of the effort put into  travelling by bands like us and are very appreciative

UP: It is nice to see your hard work getting credit! I'd like to pull you back to the issue of rate of releasing music, though. Party Cannon has been active for about four years now. According to online sources, that's 2 singles, 2 demos, an EP and a live album, with a studio full length planned for 2015.That's still some pretty quick work for an underground band

CR: You think? I feel the recording side of Party Cannon has been going at a snail's pace. We've had so many line-up changes that it's made getting new material solidified pretty difficult. For example, our 2013 EP was meant to come out in 2012. Like, the middle of 2012

UP: So you’d rather be going faster?

CR: It's hard to say, I'd rather things took the time they need to be right, but at the same time, it's fun having new songs

UP: Is it actually a decision you make, or made, or do you simply churn out song after song after song?

CR: In the past when we've recorded it's always been a case of having session drummers, so we've always had to focus on what little material we had at the time. At the moment we're in a better position to start churning out songs now that we have a consistent line-up.

(Be prepared to party. And slam. Again. Soon.)

UP: It’s interesting that you previously mentioned the songs taking as long as they need. The only place this seems to be heavily discussed in music is in rap, R&B communities. It’s probably far more extreme, considering the ease with which you can roll out a mix-tape. There, the theory is circulating that the quick succession of releases is linked to a poorer standard of work. Do you think the quality suffers working at such a high rate?

CR: It's down to the people producing it I guess. Personally, if I had to work to a deadline and produce say, 8 songs a year, then the quality would definitely suffer. But I'm sure there's people out there that just excrete good songs.

UP: It also becomes harder to better yourself as you go on

CR: Yeah for sure, trying not to repeat yourself is the hardest part about writing

UP: What about the other side of that coin? Do you think that consistently providing new content  helps to build a relationship, or a better relationship, with listeners?

CR: It definitely helps to put out stuff semi-regularly, keeping you fans waiting a long time isn't good. Look at Necrophagist

UP: I'm not so familiar with their story, actually. Could you fill me in?

CR: Their last album came out in 2004 and they kept making statements saying they were going to release a new album in 2012, then completely disappeared

UP: Ah, so you think this had something to do with their lacking consistent output?

CR: More than likely, they haven't made an update in years

UP: Then again when is a lot too much? Could a band stumble into overkill?

CR: Definitely, I know some bands that have an obscene discography full of random splits, demos, promos, EPS. It just gets to the point where you have no idea how to keep track

UP: Have you ever given up on a band because of this?

CR: Not really given up, but it kinda puts me off exploring their discography a bit. I'll end up just listening to whatever the first material I found was. But that's just me, I'm sure there's people that love bands with hundreds of obscure 7" splits, demo promos, etc.

UP: It seems a bit of a balancing act

CR: Ideally, I'd like to keep things to around one release a year, be it an album or a split

UP: I noticed that in the same month as announcing Party Cannon will be putting out a debut album, you’ve also started some drum play through videos. Was it part of the plan to keep the ball rolling while you build up to something bigger?

CR: People have been requesting play through videos for a while, and we all personally enjoy it when bands post stuff like that. I guess it keeps people interested until the album is ready

UP: Would you have done it if they hadn’t asked?

CR: More than likely. Martin, our drummer, has been making play through videos for his other band for a while now

UP: I must admit, I like behind the scenes videos as a way to connect with the audience

CR: Yeah man for sure, I absolutely love making-of documentary and tour diaries

UP: Have you done this with your other bands?

CR: Iniquitous Savagery attempted to make a diary of our US tour, but all the footage turned out pretty boring, There's a recording video of Party Cannon, but it's mainly a compilation of us fucking up takes

UP: I think Pantera, for example, were really good at this. Those guys took cameras everywhere

CR: You know, I've never actually seen the Pantera home videos

UP: It’s basically a lot of crazy mucking about with some music videos in there!

CR: Sounds pretty good! 

UP: I like it! Let’s go back to yourself as a ‘musical entity’ - Do you think the more or less continuous stream of music you’re personally involved with helps build up all the projects, or do they each stand on their own?

CR: I would definitely think they stand on their own, I don't think Party Cannon has been boosted by me being in Iniquitous Savagery and vice versa

UP: So, equally, the amount you put out from one band is unlikely to swamp fans of the other?

CR: I doubt it would. I don't think fans of either band think about me too much when listening to the music

UP: You're my gateway to both, since the Psychoanalysis days

CR: That's due to being a local thing though!

UP: True, it could be a local/social thing. Again, that's somewhere where there is more pressure to be 'present' now, with people constantly on social media

CR: Totally, especially with the way Facebook works. If you don't keep posting 'like-able' content, your posts' reach diminishes

UP: Do you tend to get more feedback on new stuff online?

CR: Definitely man, especially with the majority of our fanbase being aborad

UP: How do you mean?

CR: From what I've found, the majority of our fans seem to be in Europe and America, and the only way for them to give us feedback really is online

UP: Got you! The positive side of the internet for musicians, especially those in niche genres.

CR: If it wasn't for the internet, I would not be into death metal

UP: Wow! That’s a significant statement to make!

CR: HMV doesn't exactly stock Repudilation CDs

UP: I actually worked in Virgin Megastores when they were in Perth, and you know what? I found a great stack of fantastic heavy stuff that just hadn't been put out!

CR: Really? Anything like Disgorge or Digest Flesh?

UP: There were a couple of quite obscure death and black metal albums, but I remember Napalm Death gathering dust in the stock room

CR: There used to be a Music Zone in Dunfermline and that pretty good for getting stuff like Cannibal Corpse and Obituary, but for the bands I'm really into these days their stuff is only available through dedicated online distros

UP: And I suppose those labels can only afford to carry so many releases

CR: I think their stock is made up by trading with other labels

UP:And again we come back to the social aspect. Which has been largely enabled by the internet

CR: Definitely

(This is Chris: He wants all the gigs. Aaaaall the gigs)

UP: So, you’ve got recorded output, touring, behind the scenes content, and connecting with your audience via social media, all coming under pressure to perform: not too much, or people turn off. Not too little, or a band could just disappear in a puff of smoke. Is there any real way to decide how to balance all these things out, individually or against each other?

CR: It's really hard to say what is the best way as it seems to vary from band to band. For example, we were talking about Necrophagist not releasing anything and that being bad for their fan base, where as Guttural Secrete took ~6 years to release their second album and they only got more popular during the wait. Then you have bands that only put out releases and don't perform live that are hugely popular. What I've found works for my bands is gigging as much as possible in as many different places as possible. As long as you're hitting different places with bands that a draw a crowd, you are likely to gain a following

UP: Just get out there and do it, and let the rest develop naturally?

CR: As long you have one or two decently recorded songs, then pretty much. Look at Cerebral Bore, they only put out a demo and a single and then toured everywhere for years

UP: Well Chris, thank you very much for lending us your experience. It’s been fast and friendly! I can’t wait to hear your full length when it lands next year, and wish you all the best with it and with taking the party on the road!

CR:  Thanks for taking the time to interview me, had a lot of fun! Can't wait for Hordes Of Belial In September!

Rapid fire vs sharp shooting

(Ballistic surgery or spray and pray?)

This is a huge era for digital development. That much can be taken for granted. It has various implications for different cross-sections of society. Perhaps most famously to those likely to be reading UP, it has been hoisted up as the heretic responsible for the decline of the music industry.

The access to digital music files, largely free of charge, has at once enabled any artist to reach out to the world with their music, whilst hammering in the first nails to the coffin of recorded music’s golden age. However, the relationship the musician has with new media technology is only one half of the equation. Even the poorest can take flight online, soaring into the ether with ease, but what about the people who maintain the landing strip: the listeners.

With the vast oceans of audio options available, the theory that listeners see music as a disposable commodity has received a lot of support. It’s an easy thought to support if like Fleet Foxes you’re touring Japan and playing O2 venues all over the place, but maybe a little harder to embrace for the emerging or developing artist.

However, if one thing is indisputable it’s that the sheer amount of music which is accessible means there are millions of songs clamouring for attention. The advantages of providing music for free as a promotional tool start to slim down significantly. Without something else, the whole process is reduced to a small scale version of the competitive interruption marketing it should have circumvented. Not that adverts and email campaigns have to be a bad thing, they’re just better when they’re handled with a bit of humanity in mind.

This brings us to the focal point for this article: in a community where everyone is shouting to be heard, is shouting more often the best approach when aiming to break through? This doesn’t mean the methods mentioned above, but is rather concerned with the volume (pun intended) and frequency of an artist’s output. It’s something that has already been discussed regarding other art forms, including film, literature, and more recently, blogging. Music, however, is a little fuzzier in this respect, with widely varied public opinion more prevalent than industry standards.

Whereas in the past the norm was to base contracts around the number of album/tour cycles or years – the approximation being that these were around the same time period – the freedom of unsigned artists combined with nostalgia touring has utterly changed the rules. While a good read, this article on Live Unsigned is a good example of how diverse the options are, ranging from a song a week to an album every odd year.

UP’s mission for this week is to take a look at the pros and cons of prolifically turning out musical content. On the one hand, it keeps the artist out there, available for the public. On the other, it could mean a drop in quality or loss of impact from constant exposure. As usually, we’ll be seeking out a real life example in order to dig deeper.

Catch you next week! Or maybe sooner… Would that be over-kill?

Goes around, comes around

As stated in the last article, UP has been scouring around the ol’ interwebs in search of some interesting underground stories relating to ‘off-stage audience interaction’ (the word ‘fan’ has been seeming a little odd of late). One band that keeps popping up again and again in a positive way, despite their relative ‘newbie’ status, is Reign Of Fury.

(Reign Of Fury - A rising force in UK thrash)

Since releasing their debut album in 2012, they have gone from strength to strength, and are gradually becoming somewhat of a household name on the UK underground. UP cornered ROF bassist and doer of all things self-management related, Andy Pilkington for his take on building a band’s musical family.

UP: Hi Andy! Thanks for joining us!

UP: This last week, spurred on by some rather unexpected antics from Eric Clapton, UP has been looking into a theory of respect as a commodity for the underground artist. What are your initial thoughts on that?

AP: Respect is everything for us as an emerging band, as without respecting the people you want to listen to your music you can't expect them to respect you. Pretty simple really. We've built our band around engaging with our fans as much as possible, letting them know we're there to talk to them, answer questions and just banter via social media, and we always make sure we're front of stage at our shows to meet people. It's the only way, or who's going to care about you? They won't find your music in mainstream magazines; you have let them into your space to get your music heard.

UP: That's pretty concise! You've obviously thought about this as well!

AP: Definitely. We're music fans too. Treat other people the way you want to be treated. Nothing simpler.

UP: You’ve been managing ROF for a while now, but you’ve only just joined as a member this year. Did you feel a significant shift in your responsibility in representing the band at this stage?

I don't think I felt any change to my feelings or approach in terms of managing the band at all, as the relationship we all have is a family. I only manage the band because I love the guys - we all know there's no money to be made, and I don't ever want it to be for any reason other than enjoyment. It has been strange picking up the bass though, as suddenly I'm more vulnerable in terms of my position once I'm playing, as I'm the new boy, and I'm playing catch up to a certain extent. It's exciting to have that pressure among guys who have been looking up to me as manager. It really opens your eyes wider to the whole band vibe doing both jobs. In terms of the work I'm doing, I'm at rehearsals and shows as manager anyway, so there's not a huge amount of difference playing along rather than tapping me feet when they play. It's a lot of fun to be playing again. I hadn't been on stage in over 20 years until we started this year's shows!

UP: It is true that those two roles can feel very different. What I'd like to look into though is the relationship between the band and the off-stage audience for a member compared to a manager. Do you think there are benefits in now being in the position to connect people directly to the band, rather than as a representative?

AP: I think there would be bigger differences with a more 'traditional' manager role, but my position has always been pretty much a non-playing member of the band from the start. I came into the fold when I shot a couple of videos for the guys, then I built a website for them, started handling their design and brand, so my viewpoint has always been from within the band to be able to convey the band essence in the right way. When they asked me to become manager that position never changed, and I've always managed in a very inclusive way to ensure everyone is happy with my plans and decisions. Even at our shows I was always meeting people and communicating alongside the band, not as an unseen cog, being dragged into band photos and the like.

When I picked up the bass the response from our fans was pretty much "yeah that was always going to happen" as people already knew me as one of the band, not someone separate.

What it does allow me to do a little more is talk about the music a little more confidently with the fans. As manager, despite being given full reign to talk about the music, I tried to ensure I wasn't encroaching on the creative chatter with people as that felt like the band's territory. Now, as an equal part of the creative process, I feel I qualify to talk about the music much more.

The differences are probably only in how I feel about my role, I don't think anything has or will physically change in how we as a band connect to our fans. People know me by name, not by role. It's quite a unique position to be in I think.

UP: Maybe this is exactly what's required of the modern manager for underground bands.

AP: I think it probably is. If a manager is looking for financial reward, then they don't understand the music landscape. If they don't connect with the band fully, then they can't possibly convey personality to the public. I think the way music is for emerging bands these days you need to be able to grasp the minutiae, as broad sweeps just won't help them progress. There are so few opportunities for a band to take that the old methods just don't work. You need to be able to live and breathe what a band is, and use that to find the opportunities unique to that band, or they will just become one of the many bands doing the same thing, never managing to get ahead of the others and break away. I think we've managed to get a good reputation by being honest, and showing we care about music and life outside of it. A manager who simply 'connects the dots' won't be able to do that, I believe. Managers need a brother to brother relationship, not a child / parent relationship.

UP: Obviously, there are only so many hours in the day, and only some of them can be dedicated to the band. How much of the time that you put in would you say you spend on trying to connect with your audience when you’re off stage?

AP: It really depends on how much we've got to say to people. We've all agreed that we don't want to be a band that just talks for the sake of it, so when we don't have any real news we're a little quieter and that's fine, but similarly we don't want to lose people's attention so we make sure we stay active, so when there are no shows or no new music developments we work on merch lines and new bits and pieces for the fans. We like to include them in those decisions so we ask them what they want to see. When we have shows coming up, or we're in the studio, we like to get updates out as much as we can.

The main issue I'm facing right now is how social media is limiting our reach to fans. We use Facebook a lot as there are few other ways to engage so freely with people, but now only a fraction of people are seeing our updates, we have to come up with new ways to reach them.

As a band we're also centred in our charity project Headbangers Balls, so a lot of our time, and specifically my time, is spent working on that too. I would say 25% of my work is planning and 'doing' and the rest is just keeping fans interested, talking to them, poking them in the eye if they fall asleep!

(A great work of underground charity)

UP: That leads neatly into another question I wanted to ask. Headbangers Balls is a fantastic idea, and people seemed to really get behind it. You’ve already mentioned there are no real financial motives for the band, and the project was clearly launched for all the right reasons. However, and I realise I’m at risk of sounding cynical here, do you think it helped ROF in other ways?

AP: Yes definitely, I'd be a blatant bullshitter if I didn't admit it has been great for our profile, but I'm not ashamed of that at all as I know it wasn't the reason behind it, just a great by-product of all the work we put in. Similarly, if it had fallen on its ass and become the target of derision we'd have had to take the brunt of that too, so it's not like we've not earned the respect it's brought about.

We did have a couple of snipers in the first instance, one being a band from our hometown who clearly thought Bison's experience with testicular cancer was a very convenient tool to be used. The truth of the matter is, we've all been very close to cancer and we take it very seriously. Headbangers Balls was initially going to be a one off, small, local show to celebrate Bison's survival; raise a hundred quid, have a party. But me being the person I am, and I've been working with charities for a long time now, I wanted to push things to see how far we could take it. I'd spent a lot of time building connections for the band, so there were doors waiting to be knocked on.

I would say we've got an increased respect, a bigger fan base, and our name is better known as a result of the tour... but the hidden side is that each and every one of us uses 90% of our annual leave to play the shows. We finance a lot of the travel and accommodation ourselves, and personally, I would say I've worked well over 1000 hours on the project since it started. On top of that, we're playing free shows in locations where we could be playing paid shows. There are a huge amount of sacrifices we've all made, and I'm very proud of the work we've done. If we earn people's respect from that then I'm not going to act coy about it, but when you've tried to do something this big, learning on the job, you know that the sacrifices are far greater than the personal rewards. But the rewards for the cause are huge, and that's the ONLY thing that I care about. Thankfully people in the vast majority know we're sincere about what we're doing.

UP: It sounds very much like a clear cut case of reaping the incidental benefits of being honest and human, and showing you care about something bigger. A karmic approach to being a band, if you like

AP: I think that's exactly right. For me, karma is simply unplanned cause and effect. You smile at someone, and you feel good for doing it, but the next time you see them they'll probably smile back. What we do as part of Headbangers Balls is try and help everyone who helps us. If a band plays our show we're hugely grateful, whatever their motivation for playing might be, and we do absolutely everything we can to ensure we help them in return. We get them airplay radio stations, interviews, and help share their music and news as much as possible with our own audience. This year alone we've managed to get at least 20 of our bands other shows at small festivals or support slots. We want to build a community of collaboration. The cause isn't just the cancer awareness, it's 50% about the music. I could raise far more money by just working the equivalent hours doing my day job and donating the pay, but that doesn't help grow the project. We want to do as much as we can to help everyone involved, and as a result people are coming back to us to offer us shows, or donating time and effort to raising money for our cause off their own backs. We had seven people competing to raise money with the loser shaving all their body hair off this year, and they raised £6k between them. That only happens because people want to share in what you're doing and it feels fantastic.

UP: So, to wrap up, let’s revisit the initial question. Respect, honesty, integrity, karma or whatever we can now call it: in light of what we’ve been discussing here, it is worthwhile for a band to ‘invest’ in it, right? Can it be realistically termed a ‘commodity’?

(Andy Pilkington - AKA 'Sarge')

AP: In terms of it being a raw material, a valuable asset, then it's not just a commodity in my view it's the essence or spirit of what being in a band is all about for me. There are undoubtedly those who don't use it as such, but I think fans see through it - be it consciously or not - and relate far more to those bands they feel have invested in them, care about them, and show that they value them. I think most bands have it to a certain extent when they start out as they're coming into music from the fan perspective, but some lose it as the stresses and strains of being in a band take hold.

I see bands being warped by the obstacles they come up against, and sometimes bitterness takes hold. I see bands blaming fans for not buying music or merch, or not coming to shows, but ultimately none of us have a right to be in a band and we have to remember why we do it. If we play half empty shows or don't sell albums we think are worth buying, we need to work harder, change approach and keep going... or just give up. We don't have a right to play music to people, and we're not owed anything. If we forget how important the fans are, and stop treating them as the centre of the music world, we become something that I feel rock and roll was created to fight against.

UP: Well, Andy, thank you very much for taking time out to do this interview! It has been  good one! Before you go, I'd just like to wish you all the best with Headbangers Balls and ROF - Long may the Reign continue!

AP: Thanks mate, have really enjoyed it. Really refreshing to have some though provoking questions mate. Cheers