Jack FM: The Next Big Thing Final

I’ll leave aside any debate as to the ethics and point (or pointlessness) of band competitions, as that’s a dissertation in itself. Instead, I’m wondering why tonight’s Jack FM/107.9FM/SEA/Oxfordshire Music Scene Magazine/Wychwood Festival Next Big Thing final feels less like a gig and more like a Butlin’s Talent Show, with all the attendant forced jollity that suggests, including a Jack FM DJ, Trevor Marshall, as compere and with obvious designs on the Radio 1 breakfast show hot seat.

Mind you, irritating as he is, he’s not a patch on Quadrophobe‘s singer, who spends their entire fifteen minute set gurning and mugging like a children’s party entertainer and squawking like a flustered  parrot, while his band kick out a passable but dated funk-rock-cum-ska-pop groove that marks them out as perennial college ball fodder. The brass section and keyboard player give it all a bit of life and muscle but while they possibly see themselves as the meeting point between Dexy’s and Madness, they’re really Jamiroquai fronted by one of the Chuckle Brothers.

By contrast singer/songwriter Beck Lanehart is genuinely funny, with a downbeat patter that involves a joke about funerals. Which she then spends half the rest of her set apologising for and thus ruining the whole effect. She’s got a great voice too, but perhaps too much of the kind you’d expect to hear coming out of the Brit School and with a tendency to over-emote in that Celine Dion way. She leaves her best song until last, but it’s ironic it finds her warbling about being reckless-because-it’s-all-she-knows, when really music doesn’t get much tamer.

Echoboomer and InLight are virtually interchangeable – creatively moribund rock of no discernible character, shape or virtue, just overly-serious arena-indie with occasional nods to Snow Patrol. No, scrap that, Echoboomer sound like Dire Straits and make up in bombast what they lack in actual tunes, while the slightly more epic InLight sound like Keane and rock out with all the off-putting passion of rutting rhinoceroses.

After which, Witches are a class apart. They genuinely rock out. With maracas and trumpet and a chaotic sense of joy that’s been missing all night. In fifteen short minutes they’ve covered bases as diverse as hardcore, Mexicana, alt-country and indie rock with a sometimes ludicrous sense of theatre, like a puppyish mash-up of Sonic Youth, Sparklehorse and Calexico. And then, after an interminable wait, and against the odds and expectations (and wishes) of the majority of the crowd, they’re declared the winners. Which demonstrates a heroic victory of taste and common sense for the judges. And also means the night, which threatened early on to be a triumph of commercially ambitious efficiency over real potential, ends on a high.

By Zoë Herriot

Other stuff that may be related to this page

  • DrBob

    ‘bland’, or ‘equivocal’? My god no…..

    By all means rave about, rage against, wax lyrical, educate, discuss, debate.

    All I’m trying to get across is that without context reviews can mislead.

    Example….

    “the band last night we rubbish”

    could be stated

    “heavy metal isn’t my bag, I didn’t enjoy the show last night but the bands many fans obviously did”

    That’s all….

  • Beaver Fuel

    Dr Bob, why not put yourself forward to do some reviews for the site? I’m not being funny but you’d be able to set an example, and there is a good chance your best intentions will rile someone and we can all see how difficult it is to please people!

  • Joe

    DrBob,

    You are treating people as if they are idiots and can’t make their own mind up about a review. They can and they do.

    Ultimately many people will make their own mind up about a band or gig anyway, regardless of what 1 person writes about it.

    It’s only if you don’t get that music is subjective that things can go a bit wrong.

  • Phill

    I don’t see what’s unbalanced about Zoe’s review. She’s said good and bad points about all the acts. If she didn’t like the bands, why lie? Just look at the good points she found:

    Quadraphobe: “The brass section and keyboard player give it all a bit of life and muscle”

    Beck Lanehart: “…is genuinely funny, with a downbeat patter that involves a joke about funerals…..She’s got a great voice too”

    Echoboomer: “make up in bombast what they lack in actual tunes”

    InLight: er…..”epic”

    And then for Witches, which she clearly thought was the best act of the night, she says that “against the odds and expectations (and wishes) of the majority of the crowd, they’re declared the winners” – which shows that they didn’t go down too well with the crowd.

    All in all, a fairly balanced review. People should stop complaining if they think this is a bad review for their band. This is a review we once got in nightshift:

    “Never, under any circumstances watch this band; the guitarists even wear fake sport arm casts and shameful ‘arena rock ’ stage moves and gurning. Never mind they ’re the ‘talent ’,the ‘cream of the crop ’ Oxford supergroup. Supergroup’s just another word for “stick to your own band ”.Terrible stuff. Terrible.”

    Now that’s a bad review for a band to get so lighten up!

  • Beaver Fuel

    Phill – out of interest, who wrote that?

  • http://www.gappytooth.com gappy

    Of course, “last night’s band was rubbish” could translate as “I do like metal, in fact I like lots of music, that’s why I write about it for free, but last night’s band was, in actual fact, rubbish”. Heh heh.

    I must admit I don’t believe that a bad review at this level is going to make any difference to the number of potential listeners an act has, but I suppose I can’t prove that. But I certainly know that bad reviews can’t “close shows”, because reviews tend to come out after the event has finished.

  • http://www.gappytooth.com gappy

    I had a Nutshaft review many moons ago that called me a “smug oaf” & ended, “isn’t there some sort of benevolent dictatorship that could wipe out this kind of thing, preferably by force”. Wonderful. I had it on my fridge for years, & the fact I can still quote it shows what esteem I hold it in.

    Facts

    a) bad reviews well written are great, even if they’re about you
    b) some of you milksops wouldn’t know a bad review if it bit you in the arse & then acknowledged whether bystanders enjoyed the spectacle
    c) none of this matters, not even a tiny tiny bit

  • jamess

    c) none of this matters, not even a tiny tiny bit

    ..is the most relevant comment so far….

  • DrBob

    ha ha…my work here is done.

    farewell sweet things and tender faces….

  • jamess

    i’m certainly not a sweet thing, and there’s nothing tender about gappy’s face……

  • Joe

    How strange, a lightbulb has suddenly appeared over Leigh’s head :)

    Welcome to Joe World.

  • Joe

    “ha ha…my work here is done.”
    You said that last time, then came back.

  • thin green fred

    alphabet backwards a popular crowed pleasing band who did not get slated by local reviewers and they also don’t post on her or nightshift.

  • Phill

    Leigh: It was Pascal from Fee Fi Fo Fum who wrote that nightshift review – whihc was ok cos I don’t like his band either so I can see why he wouldn’t like mine.

    Fred: Alphabet Backwards don’t post on her? What do they do on her and can I get a video?!

  • Beaver Fuel

    I only saw them once and only caught the last song of their set – not enough to form much of an opinion, which is a shame as I wanted them to be crap so I could make the Fee Fi Fo Fumble joke…

  • Beaver Fuel

    In the light of my previous post I’d like to point out one fact before the baying dogs tear into my legs and soft tissue: I DON’T DO REVIEWS

  • http://www.myspace.com/borderville joederville

    “The single most disappointing night in living memory.”

    That’s the worst review I’ve had…

  • Sir Ian

    I think a good reviewer should be able to say anything they write in a review to the person’s face! Of course, this would never happen…

  • http://www.joechapman.org/ Joe

    “I think a good reviewer should be able to say anything they write in a review to the person’s face! Of course, this would never happen…”
    What’s this thing about having to say thing to people’s faces? It’s rubbish. It’s commonly accepted that a review is written on paper, not given by word of mouth face-to-face with the band being review, what possible reason could there be for a band to want a reviewer to come up to them and start reviewing you to your face? Is it because you want to have a go about something? If you have a problem with a review or reviewer, and it looks like a case of sour grapes, then that’s your problem, as long as the review isn’t libelous then I see no reason to get worked up, if someone simply doesn’t like your music or your band then tough, getting into a confrontation about it would be a bit childish. “yeah come on, see that to my face”. Seriously – wind your neck in.

    I’m assuming “Sir Ian” isn’t your real name either, are you prepared to practice what you preach and put your real name to your comment? No? Well if you can’t do that then how can you expect other people to “tell it to your face”?

  • http://www.gappytooth.com gappy

    Tell it to my heart
    Tell me I’m the only one,
    Is it really love or just a game?

  • Sir Ian

    Woah – chill! No Sir Ian is not my real name ‘Joe’ and btw I’m not in a band so I have never been reviewed. I was simply making a light hearted point that reviewers often hide behind their ‘pen’ and therefore develop venomous personae… much like your reply to my comment!

  • http://www.joechapman.org/ Joe

    “No Sir Ian is not my real name” – Sir Blair
    You made a sarcastic comment clearly directed at a particular reviewer, the comment was about saying things to someone’s face yet you made the comment under a pseudonym which indicates that you would not say your comment to the reviewers face, can you not see the issue there?

    Yes I have developed a venomous personae, it’s very useful. Fortunately I don’t feel the need to use it much.

  • Sir Ian

    I see your point but I don’t think I’m alone in using a pseudonym in a forum!

  • http://www.joechapman.org/ Joe

    No, you aren’t alone.

  • Jay

    Bloody hell i cant possibly read all the above comments but i presume thers some anger with Zoe’s review?

    I dont get what the problem could be asides from comparing Inlight and Boomer to Snow Patrol and thats only a bad thing if like me you think Snow Patrol are some kind of horrible diet U2.

    Its only the opinion of one person sureley the fact you made it the top 5 should soften the blow of the review?

    i wasnt there so i cant say who was good or who was bad but i think Witches are a good band so well done them.