Sign In:
Login with Facebook
58996

Drinking Red Bull with the Devil - DiS meets RBMA



Anyone with a passing knowledge of the Red Bull company could be forgiven for thinking that their raison d’être is, firstly, to sell caffeinated soft drinks and, secondly, to sell more caffeinated soft drinks. Apparently this is not the case. The Red Bull company exists to rock out, party hard and give up-and-coming young musicians wings. At least that’s the impression their press release gave me. I had come to a nondescript building near London Bridge to find out what sort of musicians would sign up to be part of a rock brand.

I found myself stood in the lobby of the Red Bull Music Academy. Each year the Academy hand-picks sixty young musicians from all over the world to come together and make music, and it can count the likes of Mr Hudson, GoldieLocks and Flying Lotus among its alumni. A different city plays host each time, and the last three have been held in Melbourne, Toronto and Barcelona respectively. This year, it came to London.

It came, specifically, to a spacious building on Tooley Street. Bought to house Red Bull’s new London HQ, it was first transformed into a musical playground that looked like it had been designed by Nathan Barley. There were brightly coloured sculptures that resembled those toy car rides you see outside arcades. There were Macs sat in the cafe loaded with GarageBand. There was a piano with all the wires pulled out into bushy eyebrows. It looked as if someone was trying to show the guts being ripped out of music, but it seemed rude to mention this to the pleasant PR guy showing me round.

As he talked, I became increasingly embarrassed of my own cynicism. Reading Naomi Klein’s ‘No Logo’ had taught me all about ‘cool hunting’, corporations piggy-backing on the talent and creativity of young artists to boost their own sales, and it seemed pretty obvious that that was what was going on here. But as he showed me the recording studio fitted out with one of Rammstein’s old mixing desks, the basement rehearsal space and the storeroom filled with every kind of instrument or music-creating gadget you could dream of, along with plenty of private rooms in which to experiment, I began to see why competition was so fierce to get a place here. The glaring omission from it all was the Red Bull logo. There were plenty of cans about, but elsewhere the branding was always subtle and understated and the PR guy was at pains to point out that the Academy’s participants were given access to the facilities with no strings attached. They weren’t asked to hand over rights to their music or to make it a certain way. They weren’t even actually required to make any music at all. If this is selling out, it can never have tasted so good.

I wanted to find out how the artists felt about the promised land they’d found themselves in so I left the PR guy and found a 20-year-old Mexican girl going by the name of Teri Gender-Bender. Teri is the singer and songwriter in a band called Le Butcherettes and is the most energetic human being I have ever met. She carries herself like a natural rock star and instantly begins telling me self-mythologising tales of onstage excess. Meeting her, I’m even more baffled about the fact that, in her words, “music, and Red Bull, have brought us together.” She does have an off-brand confession: “I haven’t had one Red Bull. I don’t drink caffeine.”

I ask her how she feels about the Academy, and she says:

“It’s amazing. There’s a lot of investment in computers and stuff. It’s like a taste of heaven.” At the same time, she’s aware that she finds herself in an odd situation: a self-described punk-rocker being supported by a soft-drink company: “It’s ironic, in a way, because the history of punk rock is rebelling against the White Man’s industry, the White Man’s market. But the White Man’s market is also helping music. It’s crazy.”

She says she doesn’t think about how she’s going to make a living out of music in the age of Free, so I ask her how she’d feel about writing a song for Red Bull.

“I don’t know if it’s ‘selling out’. If you’re going to sell your soul to rock’n’roll, at least try to take advantage of it. I know it sounds weird. People try to make us feel bad for doing something that has to do with big stuff like Coca-Cola or Red Bull, but if Red Bull asked me to do a song for them I would do it because they’re doing this for me. Maybe I wouldn’t do it for anyone else. I’d just have to feel comfortable with it. I don’t drink caffeine, but I like what they stand for, which is why I would do it. If it’s selling out then cool. At least I’m going to get bread, get fed and I’m going to give milk to my children. Everything’s a business nowadays”

Jorge Read agrees. He’s a DJ from the Dominican Republic who calls the Academy “a dream come true.” He tells me:

“It’s incredible, man. They pay for your trip, they pay for your hotel, they pay everyone who works here, they pay for everything. It’s sixty people, two terms, a big fucking huge building with all the equipment, drivers, cars, events. It’s such a massive project.”

Unsurprisingly he’s all for Red Bull supporting struggling artists who’d never otherwise have access to this calibre of studio equipment. He’s not going to look a gift horse in the mouth, and reminds me of the lack of corporate branding going on. “You can go through the building and you don’t see one Red Bull sign. Everyone walks by and is like ‘What is this place?’”

As well as the access to equipment and all-expenses-paid lifestyle, one of the attractions of the Academy is the private lecture series they run, featuring established musicians and industry figures. I sit in on a talk by Pedro Winter, the guy behind Ed Banger records. Among the anecdotes about hanging out with Daft Punk, he has some sage advice for his rapt audience. He tells them about his move into producing merchandise with Cool Cats and says “finding money with brands is the new game today.” He asks them rhetorically how they could ever turn down Nike: “They are monsters, but sometimes it is good to play with monsters. Nowadays brands understand it is not about putting a logo on your flyer. It is about being part of something.” He tells them simply: “Take life with a smile and sell out. Mainstream and underground is over. You are all mainstream now.”

So there you go. There’s no shame in corporate arts patronage. It’ll surely be soon forgotten anyway. No-one remembers the patrons of Shakespeare or Da Vinci, but they both took money from the wealthy to fund their work. Samuel Johnson once described a patron as “one who looks with unconcern on a man struggling for life in the water, and, when he has reached ground, encumbers him with help”, but that’s not a charge you can level at this Academy. It’s surely better for music that Red Bull plough their money into unknown creatives rather than slapping their logo onto an established band’s mega tour.

The question, then, is what Red Bull are getting out of this? I find the PR guy again and ask him straight: what’s the catch? He concedes that the company is not running the Academy out of altruism. For Red Bull it’s about a notion of authentic involvement, or as he puts it, the brand having to “earn its place on the scene”. They think the way to do that is by stepping in where record companies are failing. “Record companies don’t nurture anyone anymore,” he says, “Brands can play a part in music.”

The Red Bull Music Academy is testament to that, yet despite their enthusiasm it still leaves me feeling somehow sorry for the talented kids making righteous noise in the next room. They’ve been dumped into a brave new world that the most experienced heads in the business are struggling to make work. All they want to do is make a living making music but they’ve been raised on dreams of rock stars they can no longer possibly emulate. The rules of the game have changed and you can’t blame them and other struggling artists for feeling like there’s nothing left for them to do but grit their teeth and take the corporate bull by the horns.

 

"...the branding was always subtle and understated..."

At the 'Red Bull Music Academy' - good grief.

"Anyone with a passing knowledge of the Red Bull company could be forgiven for thinking that their raison d’être is, firstly, to sell caffeinated soft drinks and, secondly, to sell more caffeinated soft drinks."

That's because it is. I don't imagine the shareholders at the AGM are asking how Teri Gender-Bender is these days. By sponsoring activity like this Red Bull establishes a notion that to purchase Red Bull is to support music. I presume you're aware of this based on your introduction, but the article almost sounds like you've been persuaded otherwise.

Of course I'm aware of that.

What I'm interested in is the artist's perspective: Can they justify taking corporate dollar to develop their music, if record labels are no longer willing to financially support people while they experiment?

For those taking part, the branding was "subtle and understated". That was how the artists experienced it. Now that's almost certainly because Red Bull want them to forget that they're part of a branding exercise - but it also means the music they're producing isn't 'branded' as such. No one links Flying Lotus's mixes with Red Bull, but he benefitted from their support at an early stage in his career, when perhaps record labels wouldn't have given him that backing.

I don't think you can blame artists for wanting to feed from the corporate cashcow. What is more insidious is that if this sort of backing becomes more normal, corporates get to limit the musical discourse - but then big labels always did anyway.

Quite

It's about how much control and integrity people are willing to exchange with the sponsors in exchange for the material benefits they receive. This case appears to be relatively minor, so far as there is no explicit requirement to be involved beyond the term of the academy, but certainly other cases in future may require releases to be made on the company's own label etc. So obviously Red Bull is satisfied at this stage with the publicity of their name being repeated ad nauseum and attaching to youth culture. The other question, as you mention at the end, is whether this is much worse than the existing form of taking the corporate dollar (major labels). I think that it must represent an additional compromise, where musical output is not simply censored and re-worked to sell music, but also to sell other products. The benign end of a slippery slope, which Flying Lotus did well to benefit from while the takings were easy.

You are missing the point spectacularly

So you would have been more satisfied with an article that simply said 'RBMA is a way for Red Bull to convince people it is a cool brand supporting music but it's a slippery slope so don't ever trust them'...

Then what? Do you want to warn people off or something? Are you worried that the mere existence of RBMA is going to pollute your pure DIY spirit? Seriously, what exactly is your criticism of the article other than reactionary dogmatism?

The thing that baffles me about such holier than thou attitudes is why you are so concerned. You, clearly, are too sophisticated to ever take part in RBMA or to sign to a major label, because this is too much of a 'compromise' (of... I don't know, whatever it is you think can't be compromised. Religion or something). OK, so don't do it. Figure out some other way. Be Ian MacKaye for the internet generation. That'd be really cool.

But I think what's stupid is the implicit idea that some objectively pure 'youth culture' is under attack. It realy isn't. Here's the thing - it doesn't really exist. This, RBMA, actually is the reality of youth culture being produced today.

Yuck. It's nasty. And I'm not trying to promote this idea or defend it. Of course I think it's mostly puerile and depressing nonsense, a new loss leader marketing technique. What I find depressing and what I object to is the kind of knee jerk dogmatism that infests so much of the DIY scene.

You actually have no evidence or experience of how much 'control and integrity' anyone is exchanging to take part in such things. You just assume that there must be. But hang on. Do you really think some Red Bull exec is going to come around editing peoples' music? Of course not. The fact is that the music market - such as it is - will decide what's going to be popular and cool. RBMA just provides the platform for it to be made and distributed, and that's their pay off, the gratitude and the kudos for providing every musician's ideal starting point. Making the investment.

So you could go in there and make whatever dirgy dark noise based post hardcore angular whatever crap you like. No one will need to tell you to change it or compromise, because no one will ever hear it enough to give a fuck anyway. You're free to make whatever you want. They only need one or two Goldilocks to come out with something fun and cool and popular to make it worthwhile. That's how they win.

So the only difference between keeping out of RBMA or going into it is entirely in your own head. If you want to be popular and make a living at music, this is the new way to do it. I think that's ok because frankly I love music and sometimes it does need investment and professionalism. I also love DIY music and the freedom and weirdness and energy it engenders. It's not about money. But that's the whole point of DIY. It always has been. That's no reason in itself not to take advantage of FREE stuff paid for by some stupid drinks company.

Get in, take them for all they're worth, try having some fun, then get on with being the new Ian MacKaye or greg ginn etc.

Whoa there BK

"So you would have been more satisfied with an article that simply said 'RBMA is a way for Red Bull to convince people it is a cool brand supporting music but it's a slippery slope so don't ever trust them'..."

That's far from the extent of it, but that statement is in essence entirely true (with 'don't trust' not meaning 'don't engage' but 'engage with scepticism').

"The thing that baffles me about such holier than thou attitudes is why you are so concerned."

I'm not "so concerned", I'm contributing to a discussion on an interesting article. My interest is primarily philosophical. Other people are free to take whatever actions they please, and of course my judgment of their choices would be merely subjective moralism - I'm just interested in the consequential analysis of the terms of the exchange, especially where hidden costs might affect the ability of people to accurately gauge their cost/benefit balance.

"You actually have no evidence or experience of how much 'control and integrity' anyone is exchanging to take part in such things. You just assume that there must be."

I don't claim any evidence of how much control anyone is exchanging, I'm saying that it's an essential part of the equation to consider, and that an element of control will always be traded when engaging with others.

"Do you really think some Red Bull exec is going to come around editing peoples' music? Of course not. The fact is that the music market - such as it is - will decide what's going to be popular and cool."

Not in this case of course, but if it's good enough for Sony/EMI et al, I don't see why a future version of this type of initiative wouldn't consider themselves entitled to edit the product of their investment. Especially given your assertion that the 'music market' will decide what is popular - better hope the music made at the [future] academy is popular then huh?

"RBMA just provides the platform for it to be made and distributed, and that's their pay off, the gratitude and the kudos for providing every musician's ideal starting point. Making the investment."

Red Bull doesn't pay shareholders in gratitude and kudos. Its sole reason for operating the RBMA is because they consider it to be an effective marketing strategy, one which ties in nicely with their core demographic and helps them sell more cans of energy drink.

So what I'm saying is to consider these factors as a musician, not to assume that the compromise is too great, a sentiment you've misattributed to me in your comment. Like I said, Flying Lotus got in while the going was good and the cost was low. Good on him, and good on you too - it sounds like you enjoyed the experience, and I'm not trying to take that away from you. Take them for all they're worth, as you say. But caveat emptor - the terms might not always be so favourable.

Way late to the party.

Agree with BK that DIY puritans are annoying. That dogmatic materialism which just harps on about production conditions really misses the point of the pop text. And spot on about the the illusion of purity. At it s worst it's a strange and mad abnegation to pursue. Messianic, and in its refusal to engage; paradoxically quietist.

Not that i'm accusing the sane and considered WLWC of any of these.

My take on the RMBA? Sure by all means get in and rinse it, but better than that, for the right sort of band, get in there and piss it off with your music.

Go in everyday dressed in a massive red bull can with holes cut for your genitals. Paint your car in red bull livery and mount a massive missile covered in health warnings on the roof. Record a hit concept single called 'Jolt cola is the best energy drink, only 1.19 from most shops' or 'Red Bull damages your children's nervous systems' with a video skilfully mocked as a health research promo, with subliminal edits of a scientist pissing into a red bull can. As long as you think it's got "viral mileage" and RedBull really really don't, you've won.

But equally, there's no reason why encroaching corporate control won't turn RBMA into the next brill building, and instead of some sweaty necktied exec having a fiddle on the console (which frankly doesn't happen), we got the next Goffin and King, or Spector, or Norman Whitfield, or Timbaland or whatever. It might not be the place for radical pop, but it may well be place for great pop.

And just think of Eno for label balance, or better Genesis P Orridge who trashed gender regimes while maintaining a federated group of producers and being signed to WEA and CBS. And in the post-Major landscape that might never actually arise, where the twin edifices of DIY and Major have collapsed, that kind of mobility is even more plausible.

Add your comment

Reply


 or Abandon