Introduction
The New South Wales (NSW) regional city of Armidale has had a long and at times distinguished reputation for live music. Although a relatively small city (approximately 24,500 people in 2018), it has a university (University of New England) with a small music department, a conservatorium of music (New England Conservatorium of Music), an active amateur musical theatre group (Armidale Drama and Music Society), 13 public schools, five private schools and one independent school in the area, all of which offer some sort of music programme as part of their curriculum. The city also boasts a symphony orchestra that performs three times a year, a Choral Society and a chamber choir (Fiori Musicali), a Music Foundation that supports local musical activities, an Eisteddfod Society, a city Brass Band (the oldest continuously running brass band in NSW) and a Pipe Band. There is also music associated with the many and varied churches in and around Armidale, yearly music festivals (e.g. Black Gully) and special concerts by visiting and local artists. The city supports a small music shop, recording studio, sound, light and stage technicians and private music teachers, among other hard and soft infrastructure. Historically, Armidale can lay claim to such musical luminaries as Peter Allen, Gary Shearston, Mike McClellan and Don Walker (keyboardist for Cold Chisel), and boasted a vibrant pub rock scene at the end of the last century (see Djubal Reference Djubal2014).
With such an illustrious history and established music ecosystem one would expect that Armidale would currently have a flourishing commercial venue-based popular live music scene. Yet, for the most part, it does not and has not for some time (although in recent times things have improved). While it is not the purpose of this article to explore the reasons behind the decline in venue-based live music in Armidale, the decline nonetheless served as a catalyst behind the research on which this article is based. In short, the research came about after an important dedicated live music venue, The Armidale Club (also known as The Armidale Musicians’ Club), was burnt down in September 2016 and not rebuilt or replaced. The Armidale Club had been operating as the premier live music venue in Armidale for local and visiting bands since about 1988 (Djubal Reference Djubal2014). Although its fortunes had waxed and waned over the years, it was said to have been ‘trading well’ at the time of the fire, which remains under investigation (Dingwall Reference Dingwall2018). The closure of another iconic venue, The Red Grapevine, in late 2018 followed the demise of The Armidale Club. Other than the weekly live music organised by a couple of the registered clubs in the area for their patrons and local hotels (primarily soloists and duos with occasional ticketed shows), venue-based popular live music has existed for the past few years on an ad hoc basis, with pop-up events occurring intermittently. With the loss of these key venues and the decline in music-based venues generally across Australia (see Johnson and Homan Reference Johnson and Homan2003; Kovacevic Reference Kovacevic2016), the cultural vibrancy and socioeconomic benefits live music provides the community in which it operates (see Australian Council 2014; Hoeven and Hitters Reference Hoeven and Hitters2019; Martin Reference Martin2017; Skånland Reference Skånland2013) were considered by many to be in jeopardy.
This article presents findings and analysis from a field research project carried out in 2018 into the barriers and challenges small to medium-sized commercial venues located in the NSW city of Armidale faced in promoting and hosting live music.Footnote 1 These venues constitute a significant part of the infrastructure of the live music scene in Armidale, connecting musicians with audiences and developing and shaping their music experiences. As the Live Music Office (2018, p. 29) notes:
Venue-based live music acts as an incubator for emerging artists/performers. The ability to perform and trial new material with smaller audiences assists artists with their development. While new technologies are providing different ways for artists to reach audiences, live performance is critical for artists’ technical and creative development, income generation and networking with fans and industry. Venue-based live performance is often the first step in furthering an artist's international career.
Literature review
Venues play an important part in cultivating musicians and bringing them and audiences together and the literature on the subject generally acknowledges this. However, as Bennett and Rogers (Reference Bennett and Rogers2016, p. 491) point out, much of the research carried out on music venues in Australia tends to be descriptive and ‘linked with particular formative conventions’, such as pub or stadium rock, or around policies and regulations (see below). Notable exceptions include the work of Shane Homan (Reference Homan2008, Reference Homan2010, Reference Homan2011), Dawn Bennett (Reference Bennett2009, Reference Bennett2010), Christina Ballico and Dawn Bennett (Reference Ballico and Bennett2010), Ben Gallan and Chris Gibson (Reference Gallan and Gibson2013), Andy Bennett and Ian Rogers (Reference Bennett and Rogers2016), Ben Green and Andy Bennett (Reference Green and Bennett2019), and Andy Bennett, David Cashman and Natalie Lewandowski (Reference Bennett, Cashman and Lewandowski2019). Nonetheless, the bulk of the research has been conducted in urban settings: either large or medium-sized metropolitan cities (see, e.g. Homan Reference Homan2003, Reference Homan2014; Johnson and Homan Reference Johnson and Homan2003; Gibson and Homan Reference Gibson and Homan2004; Lobato Reference Lobato2006; Burke and Schmidt Reference Burke and Schmidt2012; Gallan Reference Gallan2012), reflecting the issues urban venues face.
In contrast, this case study seeks to investigate more specifically the music scene in a predominantly small regional city, although one distinguished and influenced by the university embedded within it. Few scholars have explored live music and the role venues play in regional Australia. Notable exceptions include Bennett et al.'s (2018) research into popular music scenes in central Queensland, Dawn Bennett's (Reference Bennett2009, Reference Bennett2010; Ballico and Bennett Reference Ballico and Bennett2010) research into scattered venues across Western Australia, and research by Ben Green and Andy Bennett (Reference Green and Bennett2019) into the challenges live music faces on the Gold Coast.
Reflecting the urban bias in the research literature, a number of important industry and government reports have also focused on regulatory policies associated with live music venues. These include Ernst and Young's (2011) oft-cited report into the economic contribution made by the venue-based live music industry in Australia, a Live Music Office (2015) report that outlines the economic and cultural value of live music in Australia, a Music Australia (2016) report into the contemporary music industry, initiating the National Contemporary Music Plan and the report into the Music and Arts Economy in New South Wales (NSW Parliament 2018). In addition, various live music and performance action plans (e.g. City of Sydney 2014), economic and regulatory reports have focused specifically on live music venues (e.g. Muller and Carter Reference Muller and Carter2016; Music SA, 2016; Music Victoria 2017). The Music Victoria (2014) report is one of the few to conduct a live music census into regional live music performance (discussed further below). As to be expected, all of these reports tended to focus on regulatory matters, with the recent NSW Parliament (2018) report exploring the imposition of the controversial lockout laws in Sydney and Newcastle.Footnote 2
While this research sought to identify the major barriers live music venues faced in Armidale, I found that regulatory-related matters (e.g. noise, licensing, planning) were not currently considered the dominant hurdles venues face. It is the contention of this article that the barriers faced in producing and sustaining a vibrant live music scene in small regional cities like Armidale are different in a number of respects from those faced in larger metropolitan cities and that these differences are important and warrant more concerted consideration.
Methods
Cohorts and recruitment
Sixteen venues in the city of Armidale were identified as currently hosting or with the potential to host live music. The owner/licensee, manager or designated events/entertainment coordinator/manager of these establishments was approached either in person or via email with an outline of the project and an invitation to participate in the research. Thirteen venues agreed (a response rate of 81%); the three venues that did not participate did not respond to the request.Footnote 3 All venues were licensed and were either currently hosting live music one or more nights a week, or had done so in the past (and thus had potential to do so in the future).
In many respects, the city of Armidale is typical of regional Australian towns in terms of retail and hospitality services and layout. The central part of the city is laid out in a grid of streets with most of the hotels, cafes and bars located either in Beardy Street (the main street, which includes the city mall) or in Marsh Street (which runs perpendicular to Beardy Street). There is no entertainment precinct or hub; rather the majority of live music emanates from venues in or close to these two main streets (although there are a few outliers of note). The venues participating in this research were of different sizes and types and included one small craft beer bar (capacity 80–100 people), one small cafe with bar (80), one small cocktail bar (40–60), one mid-sized university student bar (600), six small to mid-sized hotels (100–400) and three small to mid-sized licenced and registered clubs (140–1000).The bigger clubs tend to accommodate larger-sized package shows when offered and soloists or duos on a weekly basis. The hotels tend to utilise DJs and Karaoke nights and/or soloists/duos on a semi-regular basis, although one has maintained its reputation for larger and louder (rock and derivative genres) bands. The smaller cafes and bars tend to promote soloists, duos and small bands (e.g. trios or quartets), covering folk, bluegrass, jazz, Latin, pop, Celtic, MOR and country, with some mixing originals with covers.Footnote 4 No one style of music currently dominates the scene (as pub rock once did in the 1970s to 1980s, and country music does in neighbouring Tamworth). Public entry to regular music nights is usually free, with a guarantee provided by the venue. Most of the participants were directly engaged in booking their artists in one way or another.
In-depth, face-to-face, semi-structured interviews with participants were conducted and recorded between August and September 2018 with the exception of one who responded in writing to a list of the questions asked (for the sake of convenience). Participants were asked to respond to 50 questions, around half of which were open-ended. This allowed participants to elaborate and shape the discussion. Most questions were asked or covered and responded to in the session. Interview lengths ranged from 50 to 90 minutes.
Analysis
Following Thomas’ (Reference Thomas2006) analytic approach, an inductive thematic analysis was employed to determine the primary and secondary themes and categories most relevant to the research objectives. The data obtained by the interviews were first transcribed and then coded into tentative themes. These themes were revised in comparison with other emergent themes, the questions asked and the research objectives. The revised themes were then ordered and ranked in terms of the frequency they appeared in relation to the questions asked, producing in turn primary and subthemes (indicated below). Alternative and contradictory views were also noted. Analysis and interpretation followed. Selected extracts from the recorded interviews are presented below.
Findings
With relatively long interviews covering a wide range of relevant topics, the focus for this article is on the reasons why some managers and entertainment coordinators host live music and others are reluctant, and the obstacles they encounter.
Reasons for hosting live music
Not all venues hosted live music, and even fewer hosted music on a regular basis. Those venues that did host live music either regularly (weekly) or intermittently were asked why they did so. Three main themes emerged (of descending rank):
(1) something personally meaningful to the owners/managers;
(2) part of the venue's identity, marketing strategy and service to their patrons;
(3) an intrinsically worthy endeavour.
Although there were explicit and implicit responses to this question throughout the interviews, responses can be divided into three basic motivational categories:
(1) subjective (personal preference/enjoyment);
(2) instrumental (a means to an (economic) end);
(3) intrinsic (a good in itself).
From a subjective view, those who offered live music on a weekly basis also personally enjoyed music. Asked why they host music:
Because we love it! We basically like music; yeah, just because we love it. We like everything, we listen to everything. [V4]
Because I like it! I like instruments, I like musicians … I really like musicians that play their instruments and stuff like that. [V17; also V5]
This subjective view, one influenced by the manager/owner's personal enjoyment of music, corresponds with the ‘enthusiastic promoter’ category identified by Frith et al. (Reference Frith, Brennan, Cloonan and Webster2013, p.15). They make the distinction between the ‘enthusiastic promoter’ and the ‘commercial promoter’, with the former being someone who promotes music ‘because they want to, because they enjoy the music’ (Frith et al. Reference Frith, Brennan, Cloonan and Webster2013).
From an instrumental view, live music was seen as something extra that the venue could offer its patrons and a marketing strategy to bring people to the venue. For instance, one participant of a mid-sized venue used live music said:
To attract people to the hotel! It is part of a marketing strategy. Given that other hotels have similar food and beverage … music can give a place the edge, a reason for people to go to one hotel rather than the other. [V6]
Another respondent, who intermittently hosted live music in a small venue, simply stated:
Because we've got to try something every now and then, because if we're having a slack period, we've got to try something again. [V11]
For these participants, music was a strategic means to a material (economic) end. This instrumental view, lying at the opposite end of the spectrum to the enthusiast/subjective views expressed by some venue owners, corresponds with Frith et al.'s (Reference Frith, Brennan, Cloonan and Webster2013, p. 15) categorisation of the ‘commercial promoter’. Whereas commercial considerations were considered secondary (if at all) by ‘enthusiast promoters’, profits are at the forefront of commercially motivated promoters. Sometimes these categories overlap. For instance, a few respondents noted both the subjective and instrumental value of live music:
Initially, because I couldn't travel after taking over the business, I wanted to keep up with what was happening: you know if I can't go to the acts, I'll bring them to me. But it has remained profitable and so we keep doing it – it's become part of what we do here. [V2]
Well, I enjoy live music and it gives a benefit to people who come out to music, they enjoy doing that. And you want to create a place where people want to come to, so it's about getting the right artist that people want to come and see, and that could then add to your business. [V8]
For some respondents live music was also something they thought was intrinsically important, something that ‘should be supported’. [V1]:
… I think it's really important to have [live] music because how boring would life be without it. [V16]
In this, the value of live music lies within the activity or experience itself (Behr et al. Reference Behr, Brennan and Cloonan2016, p. 405). Intrinsic value also lies at the other end of the spectrum to instrumentalism and is much more difficult to quantify (Behr et al. Reference Behr, Brennan and Cloonan2016, p. 408),Footnote 5 but even those venues expressing instrumental motivations appreciated the intrinsic value of music. As Behr et al. (Reference Behr, Brennan and Cloonan2016, p. 414) point out, ‘instrumental value always derives from intrinsic value’. In other words, venues use music to make money because music has value in and of itself that attracts music lovers to live music venues. In the following response from a small bar owner all three views – instrumental, subjective and intrinsic – are expressed:
It's a different offering for our patrons – something else we can offer. I personally like music. I think it should be supported … When The Armidale Club burnt down, we didn't necessarily see it as an opportunity but more as an obligation to have music of some form … [V1]
As such, there are often a number of motivations associated with hosting live music that cannot be reduced to instrumental/commercial factors alone. These are businesses, often under significant commercial pressures, but people are running them who act according to a range of motivations, including a genuine love of music that, as some would declare in the interview, goes back to their childhood.
The obstacles to hosting live music
Venue participants were asked to identify what they thought were the main obstacles to hosting live music in Armidale. The three major impediments were (with the first two themes equally ranked):
(1) finding, organising and managing the appropriate bands for the venue, including (for some) getting a system in place and someone knowledgeable and experienced to help run the event;
(2) costs involved in hiring bands (and, in a few instances, security costs); and
(3) getting people to attend the event
Once again, all three concerns are very much interrelated: venues need to find, book and organise bands/musicians within their budget that will attract audiences to the venue and spend money to cover the cost of the band.Footnote 6 Nonetheless, certain venues tended to emphasise certain aspects of this trifecta. Some venues (usually the smaller ones) were happy to manage the live music component themselves (e.g. finding and booking bands), while others thought that more knowledgeable and experienced people would be advantageous. Time needed for this task was also noted. One respondent of a large venue emphasised the difficulty of finding and managing the appropriate musicians:
I guess [not] having a direct avenue as to where to find musicians. And so if I don't know you're a musician, I'm never going to find you, unless you go to those booking [agents] … and from what I see, they only have a select range. And so if you wanted anyone new or different you still don't have an avenue there to reach them … And so, that's been my biggest obstacle. [V15]
Another respondent of a small venue pointed to the time necessary to organise weekly music events and the knowledge required:
[The problem for me is the] general management of musicians. With people contacting you it was difficult to know when to say yes or no; or conversely, if you were to start it up [a regular music night], how to go about it, how to maintain it – you would have to allocate a staff member [to arrange things] or do it yourself and constantly checking with them. Just the general management of things; there's a lot of time goes into this. As small business owners, there are so many things to do and if it isn't central to your business, then it's put on the back seat. [V1]
Other respondents (small to mid-sized venues) added a budget caveat (including the potential cost of security – V6) and the necessity of attracting audiences (paying customers):
Finding consistent and good acts within a budget that is suited to the club's crowd. [V14]
Cost! Getting people to come to the venue and spend money. [V11; also V5; V6].
In short, for many of the participants, without reasonable audience attendance and fiscal patronage, the cost of hiring bands cannot be justified, at least on economic grounds.
An example of these overlapping themes is illustrated in the following response from a mid-sized venue that was not regularly hosting live music:
And it's hard to find the right musicians as well [and] … having to organise them. And I'm not sure what the cost is, I know that sometimes it's not cheap, it can be $500 to $1000 bucks for the night, and when you're looking at a return or spend on that – obviously you've got to look at that, what's that returning me – it is worth it, that sort of thing? And I think that ties into the question of whether that's the right musician [to entertain patrons and attract a paying crowd]. [I]f you just have the musician there and it's [sic] not bringing in any additional business or that sort of thing, then you've got to look at it: was the $500, or whatever it is, a good investment, in a return for dollar sort of thing. [V8]
In sum, finding and managing affordable and attractive bands that will bring in audiences who will spend money constitute the primary concerns for venues that host or have hosted live music. Although there is nothing especially novel in these concerns, as discussed below, they are often usurped by regulatory concerns in the literature on the subject.
Reticent views
For the most part, the views of venues that either regularly host live music or do so intermittently have been highlighted. There were, however, a few venues that have either rarely hosted live music or had once hosted live music (some for a short period of time) but no longer do so. The views of these participants are also informative and provide further insights into some of the obstacles of hosting live music.
Three overlapping themes, in no specific order, emerged from the interview with these venue participants:
• maintaining the status quo;
• controlling the environment;
• space and time concerns.
Maintaining the status quo
Whereas venues that did host live music tended to see music as something attractive to both regular and potential customers, those who did not or no longer do tended to see live music as a potential problem, especially, but not only, vis-à-vis existing customers. One respondent stressed how important their regular customers were and how important it was to keep them happy. This respondent emphasised the social aspects of the environment:
It's very social. You have all different groups … They'll all talk and interact with each other, so it's a very social environment. And I don't want to take that from them either. [V10]
For this participant, the diverse social milieu is central to the enjoyment of patrons and the (financial) success of the venue, which relies on regulars to maintain their enterprise. Any externally introduced factors, such as live music, would have to fit into this pre-existing environment. Rather than using bands to help construct and shape the environment, helping bring the community together, as they have the potential to do in live music venues (Bennett et al. Reference Bennett, Cashman and Lewandowski2019; Frith et al. Reference Frith, Brennan, Cloonan and Webster2013), for this venue manager, bands were perceived as an intrusion that could potentially disrupt the status quo. Introducing a new factor into the social scene, like live music, might upset the delicate balance between looking after regular customers and accommodating new ones. As some managers argued, even if music brought more people into the venue it might be detrimental in the long term if regulars, considered the lifeblood of small businesses like hotels and bars, went elsewhere because their social milieu had been disrupted or they did not like the music.
Another respondent of a mid-sized venue was also concerned about interior noise and the type of music played. Asked what sort of problems or issues they envisaged were they to hire bands:
Noise issues! The wrong sort of music annoying the crowd and we don't know what sort of crowd it's going to be. On a Saturday night, for instance, it might be a 21st party who would love the music, then you might have a 60th and they might hate it. So it can be very polarising whether they like it or they don't. And it depends on how much scope the artist has in playing different sorts of music. [V8]
In this view, musicians need to accommodate the existing environment rather than generating a new one (e.g. bring to the establishment people who might like to experience live music). Envisaged like this, live music is not so much an asset to be exploited but rather a potential liability, a problematic and dispensable supernumerary to be managed or rejected.
Controlling the environment
Linked with the theme above, some venues reticent in hosting live music emphasised the importance they placed on being able to control the music, not just the volume but also the type of music played and its concordance with patrons and their desires. As one participant of a mid-sized venue responded when asked why the venue did not host live music:
We have considered it. Obviously food being such a big component of our business it can be hard to find the right sort of person to play that's not going to offend, polarise or make it too noisy, and especially because we have our own background music running and such … [I]f you have someone playing, it can create problems. It's that whole balancing act, getting that ambience and being comfortable, right? [V8]
In this, music is seen as auxiliary, something to contribute to but not dominate the milieu. Nonetheless, this participant was well aware of the capability of music to influence customer behaviour, as increasingly acknowledged in the research literature (see Areni Reference Areni2003). Referring to the DJ nights they occasionally put on, the manager noted that you could control the behaviour of the crowd by the type of music being played:
With DJs, when you had that late night crowd, they'd all be dancing and if you put something that was a bit slower on, they'd come to the bar … You could actually control the crowd by what music you were playing. So it's like very subconscious, but people didn't actually realise that we were controlling where they went by controlling the music. [V8]
This participant went on to suggest that managers could also use atmospheric music to shape customer behaviour and experience. Asked what sort of issues they would face if they had bands, the participant expressed the view that not being able to control the volume or type of music was central to their decision to maintain the status quo:
By being able to control the music you can control the experience for people because they're getting what they want to hear. [V8]
This manager extoled the virtues of being able to control the music, as well as other atmospheric variables, such as room temperature, in order to achieve the most suitable environment throughout the day, as different people come and go. The respondent acknowledges the power of music to shape people's experiences, but is less confident in the capabilities of independent live bands to produce the desired outcomes.
The value of music to these participants was primarily symbolic and mood setting or atmospheric. Given that many of the hotels, bars, clubs and cafes utilise soloists or duos, it is unlikely that such music/performers will by themselves attract large groups of people (although there are notable exceptions). The use of soloists and duos is partly a matter of the lower hiring costs involved (in some instances), but also one of space and control; that is, soloists and duos are arguably easier to accommodate and control than larger ensembles, in terms of size, volume output and personalities.
Space concerns
Space was also a concern for some of the venues reluctant to host live music. Asked whether they thought having live music in the eating area for people to listen to and enjoy while eating, one participant who managed a small venue responded:
By the time I put a duo out the back [eating area] I lose eight to 10 seats, and we only have 80 seats, and so you're back down to 70, and so you're taking away the possibility of a couple of hundred dollars straight away … And if the music's not right, [it] could possibly turn away people that were going to stay a little bit longer anyway. [V10]
Another participant who managed a mid-size venue expressed similar concerns over limited space. Asked whether they could put a band in either the restaurant or bar area to enhance the experience for patrons, they replied:
I think that would depend on who it was. [In this bar area] I'd put them down near the dance floor, but it's all tiled and … could create too much noise … [And in the restaurant,] with all their stuff [equipment], they might take up four to 10 seats. [V8]
There are no easy answers to the problems identified above, but for some they serve as substantial barriers to experimenting with live music.
Discussion
In this section, we consider the key issues facing live music venues as identified in the available grey literature, and compare and contrast these with the issues identified in this present research. A focus on the grey literature (reports, action plans, evaluations, guidelines, frameworks, etc.) helps us to identify and evaluate research that has been instrumentalised and actioned, as well as areas that have been overlooked. In relation to this research, an analysis of the grey literature indicates that the issues facing regional live music venues are often qualitatively or quantitatively different from those facing their metropolitan counterpart.
Regulation
We turn first to an influential survey of live music venues in Australia conducted on behalf of APRA (the Australasian Performing Right Association). For their wide-ranging survey, Ernst and Young asked venues to identify what they thought were the ‘barriers to owning/operating a live music venue’ (2011, pp. 26–7). The survey found that the regulatory environment was considered by participants to be the biggest hurdle (69.1%), followed by the cost of talent (61.7%) (Ernst and Young 2011). Another key document reiterated the concerns venues had around ‘government regulation and enforcement’, identifying these as ‘restricted opening hours, licensing conditions, sound abatement and the costs associated with compliance’ (Live Music Office 2015, p. 32), with specifics varying between cities. The City of Sydney (2014) Live Music and Performance Action Plan draws on the Ernst and Young (2011) document to identify four challenges: (1)‘development controls and noise’; (2) ‘building codes’; (3) ‘liquor licensing’; and (4) ‘audience and sector development’.
More specific to regional Australia, research carried out by Music Victoria (2014, p. v) noted that the majority of venues surveyed in regional Victoria were impacted by regulatory issues similar to their metropolitan counterparts, including licensing (74%), noise (56%), parking (35%), zoning (32%) and development (32%). Subsequently, Music Victoria (2017) has produced a Best Practice Guidelines for Live Music Venues document, which focuses on the primary regulatory issues of noise, security and safety, and liquor licensing, among other things. Other surveys and commentary point to noise-related and developing/planning issues being of high concern both in Australia (e.g. NSW Parliament 2018), including regional Australia (e.g. see Green and Bennett Reference Green and Bennett2019), and in comparable countries overseas (e.g. Cohen Reference Cohen2007; Cloonan Reference Cloonan2010; Webster Reference Webster2010; Webster et al. Reference Webster, Brennan, Behr, Cloonan and Ansell2017).
With this in mind, and following the Music Victoria (2014, Appendix B) survey, participants of the current research were asked whether they were currently affected by any of the following regulatory issues:
• noise restrictions;
• zoning/planning issues;
• licensing issues;
• building/development issues;
• health and safety issues;
• parking/loading;
• other.
Of the 13 venues that participated in this research, five (42%) had had some issue with noise, one with licensing and one with building and development issues. The noise issues, however, were all qualified in some way or another, distinguishing them from the issues faced by urban venues. For instance, one mid-sized venue noted that noise could be a problem on DJ nights, but something that was now generally managed [V6].Footnote 7 Another small venue had a ‘no drums’ restriction on their POPE (Places of Public Entertainment) licence when they took over the venue (over 10 years ago), but said that it was never really a problem [V10]. The most definite response came from V11 (small) who said: ‘Yes, noise is still a concern. We've had the police here a few times, but we've stopped all that [i.e. excessive noise]’ [V11]. The only other response that reflected noise concerns commonly experienced in large metropolitan areas like Sydney, Brisbane and Melbourne was when new occupants moved into a house close to an existing, although somewhat isolated, mid-sized music venue and complained [V17]. In short, noise had, at times, been an issue for some venues but not one of the magnitude or type usually experienced in cities like Melbourne, which found that 67% of venues had been affected by noise-related issues (Music Victoria 2017, p. 7).
While it seems that licencing, noise and planning issues are relevant to some regional Australian towns (e.g. Bennett Reference Bennett2009; Music Victoria 2014), they are more typically associated with gentrification, an urban phenomenon, and were not found to be significant barriers in this research. In fact, this research did not confirm many of the issues identified in research carried out by Music Victoria (2014, p. v) on live music in regional Victoria (although the research methodologies are differentFootnote 8). There are possible reasons why licensing and noise were not major factors identified in this research. For instance, two of the premier music venues are relatively new and the others well established, having perhaps dealt with these issues earlier on. We can rule out geographic isolation. As noted earlier, there is no de-facto entertainment precinct and some venues border on residential zones. Even those venues in the heart of town are less than 1 kilometre (0.6 miles) from residential homes. There is also a certain self-regulation that comes into play in small-to-medium non-dedicated live music venues that serves to moderate volume levels around the comfort and health and safety of patrons and staff. These venues and many of those who patronise and work in them do not tolerate ‘excessive’ volume. Thus volume levels tend to be an internal rather than external issue and are controlled accordingly.
By focusing on regulatory issues as most commentary and research tends to do (e.g. Burke and Schmidt Reference Burke and Schmidt2012; Homan Reference Homan2011; Lobato Reference Lobato2006; Shaw Reference Shaw2013; Wardle and Cunningham Reference Wardle and Cunningham2015), subsequently instrumentalised and actioned in industry and government reports, action plans, guidelines and the like (e.g. Music Victoria 2017; City of Sydney 2014), other problems or issues risk being ignored. Given that the regulatory issues did not appear central to the participants in this research, the analytical focus of this research turned to other problems facing regional live music scenes, including those of finding and accessing affordable quality bands that can attract audiences, and motivating regular and sizeable audience attendance. Although these are problems that all live music venues are likely to face at some time or another, or indeed, on an ongoing basis, it is argued that they are amplified as we move out from the metropolitan centres. This is not simply the ‘tyranny of distance’, but also that of smaller population sizes, making it more difficult to host and sustain live music on a regular basis. The more people who attend live performances, the more valuable those performances, bands/musicians and venues that host them become, creating a positive feedback loop between audiences, bands and venues. Such dynamics are highly interdependent with audience sizes influencing the number, quality and type of bands and venues and vice versa. To this we can add the influence of the local economy (i.e. the context). As Bennett et al. (Reference Bennett, Cashman and Lewandowski2019) note, regional economies are volatile and subject to local economic booms and busts that influence people's disposable incomes.
Cost of talent
There is a range of costs associated with hosting live music, including infrastructural, administrative, marketing and promotion, and in some instances, accommodation, drinks and meal costs. Some reports duly recognise the cost of talent (e.g. Ernst and Young 2011, pp. 26–7), while intriguingly others do not (e.g. Live Music Office 2015). Although such costs were a factor in this research, cost of talent was not always identified as the main outlay, and when mentioned, part of this cost had to do with bringing talent to Armidale from other cities (e.g. Sydney, Newcastle) and the added cost this produced, something urban venues do not usually have to consider. The issue is worth considering in more detail.
Firstly, where costs were identified as a factor, they were not usually considered the primary factor, often ranking second to some other factor. For instance, referring to the question of whether the costs associated with hosting live music were sustainable over the long term, six venues answered in the affirmative [V1, V2, V5, V14, V15, V16], although often with qualifications (e.g. ‘providing business continues to be strong’ [V14]); two answered in the negative [V11 and V17] and two were unsure [V4 and V6]. Further, asked what constitutes a good (i.e. rewarding) night for the venue, customer enjoyment and satisfaction came before good sales or covering financial costs (although the first is often a means to the second). When asked what challenges regional venues face compared with those located in metropolitan settings, the majority placed the lack of options limiting what can be done ahead of the cost of bands, with the latter's costs identified as the costs incurred bringing outside bands to Armidale [V10, V11, V14]. Nonetheless, lower band costs were the primary response when answering the question of what would make it easier to host live music. One respondent thought that bands were pricing themselves out of the business [V11].Footnote 9 As small businesses, these venues stressed that they did not have wide profit margins and so needed to be vigilant of their outgoing costs. Some currently hosting live music said that they either made a small profit from the music night or broke even. The medium-sized venues that were more intermittent in their use of live music tended to make a loss, and those that did not currently host live music tended to articulate the reason in terms of costs/benefits (see below).
Secondly, there are no professional booking agents currently working out of Armidale. Rather, those venues that use agents (or had used them) tended to use agents located in Tamworth [V5, V11, V15], Newcastle or Sydney [V17]. In addition to the added expense of using an agent/agency to procure bands (something all venues that use agents, regardless of location, have to contend with), the bands tend to be drawn from the agent's host location, adding further to the cost of travelling to Armidale to cover such things as transport, accommodation (if needed), time, production, etc. [V11]. Only one venue thought that there were advantages to using outside agents (cf. Gallan Reference Gallan2012). This venue accessed bands from agents located in Newcastle and Sydney, arguing that the advantages were: ‘Access and contacts within the industry to get the bands that we are kind of after’ [V17]. However, most thought it was simply an added cost that could be eliminated, especially if there was an alternative, such as a central site (e.g. webpage) where venues could go to access local bands. The two often went together, as expressed by one venue: ‘A central site to find the musicians, that's the main thing for me at the moment; finding the right people for the right price’ [V16].
As such, cost of talent is considered an important factor in operating live music, as reflected in some literature, but often for reasons different from those faced by their metropolitan counterparts (e.g. added travel and accommodation costs). Furthermore, some of the venues participating in this research were reluctant to host live music not simply because of the costs associated with talent, but also because of certain financial implications associated with the loss of valuable space in accommodating live music, the potential for such music to alienate regular customers, the lack of control over the music and thus the environment, and so on [e.g. V8 and V10; see below].
Availability of talent
Availability of talent was mentioned in the Ernst and Young's (2011, p. 27) survey, ranking a low third place (27%), although nothing else was written on the subject in this and similar documents. In contrast, this issue featured strongly in this study, with many of the themes identified connected to the availability of talent in one way or another. Most explicitly, when asked what venues thought were the obstacles to hosting live music, finding, organising and managing bands ranked first (with costs ranked second). Asked what sort of things would make it easier to host live music, the challenge of finding the right bands ranked second (after costs). Difficulties of finding and accessing bands was ranked third when asked what challenges small venues based in regional cities face compared with those based in metropolitan settings (with costs second). However, the dominant theme to emerge from this question identified the reduced options regional cities have in terms of audiences, bands and venues, thereby limiting what can be achieved in these locations. Further, when asked whether participants thought there were limits to the number of live music venues Armidale could successfully sustain, some suggested that the finite pool of musicians/talent would naturally limit the number of venues able to host live music.
Other factors
There were other interesting factors that emerged from this research, in part because the focus was not directed towards mainstream regulatory issues (e.g. noise, licensing, planning), factors associated with the micro-dynamics of running a venue that some participants considered barriers to hosting live music. One of these barriers was mentioned in the Ernst and Young (2011, p. 27) report: the ‘need to sacrifice space for performers’ was recognised by 13.9% of respondents, but ostensibly ignored in this and subsequent reports. It was also one of a number of small but significant factors identified in this study, along with concerns over disrupting the venue's regular patrons (i.e. disrupting the status quo); the time needed to organise music events; and the wish to maintain or have more control over the venue's social milieu. Perhaps some of these issues are subsumed under the category of ‘other’, but in the Ernst and Young (2011, p. 4) report, the most common reasons falling under ‘other’ were ‘music licence fees and cost of security’. In short, while some of these issues rate a mention in the influential grey literature in Australia, they are rarely explored in any detail.
Conclusion
The major issues for venues in Armidale attracting and securing live music centre around finding and accessing affordable quality bands in the numbers and styles needed to keep audiences coming to gigs, and getting audiences to regularly attend and spend money in the numbers needed to sustain the gigs. The first is exacerbated by the limited number of musicians and bands in regional cities like Armidale, as well as the limited number of live music venues bands can work in to develop their music, repertoire, performance skills and such needed to sustain a productive live music scene. Venues are usually small, independent and have limited time and funds to spend on live music unless it pays (financial) dividends, although, as this study has identified, there are other factors considered in hosting or not hosting live music. In small regional cities such as Armidale, there are real risks of musicians and bands being overexposed as well as diluting patronage through competition with other venues, bands, simultaneous events and such.Footnote 10
The second general problem identified in this study, motivating regular and sizeable audience attendance, is also exacerbated by the limited potential audience available, the competing demands on their time and their disposable income. Providing musical variety, as well as regularity and stimulation is central to this, but contingent upon the factors mentioned above (limited number of bands, musical genres and venues). Venues are unlikely to regularly host live music without a pool of experienced bands/musicians to call on who can attract the attention of the limited and discerning audience pool available.
Of course, major urban-based venues have similar problems in wanting to keep the music interesting and diverse to attract larger audiences, but with so many more and varied bands and genres to choose from, a larger pool and network of audiences to draw upon, smaller distances to travel, a greater number and selection of venues and so on, the issues that face regional centres are often qualitatively and/or quantitatively different from those facing their metropolitan counterpart. In one sense, it is a quantitative issue associated with critical mass: there are more bands and audiences to call upon in the larger cities (although more competition as well). Nonetheless, these quantitative differences help produce the qualitative differences we see distinguishing metropolitan and regional music scenes. For instance, it is more difficult to get musicians of the same calibre within a genre together in regional cities, especially if the genre is non-mainstream or specialised (e.g. jazz, avant-garde, original) or a larger ensemble is desired (e.g. big band or orchestra). Similarly, it is difficult for a venue to specialise in one genre or subcultural style in regional cities or towns (could a dedicated jazz venue sustainably exist outside of the major cities?). It is also often disadvantageous to have competing musical events happening, especially, but not only, if they are of a similar genre, given the limited pool of audiences and musicians. It is difficult to have a successful dedicated music venue operating three or more nights a week in regional Australia. Where this happens it is likely that other music venues either suffer or cease offering live music.
Even costs associated with hiring bands differ between the metropolitan and regional. For instance, the capability to generate the funds needed to hire bands is limited by the size of venues, with two of the most successful regular music venues currently operating in Armidale holding an audience capacity of between 60 and 100 people, with neither regularly operating at full capacity (although they, nonetheless, do quite well). This often limits both the size of ensembles and the amount that can be paid to musicians; there is neither the space nor funds to accommodate larger ensembles in these venues given their size and revenue potential (unless cover charges are used, which, in the past has had mixed results and is often criticised by regular patrons, who may not be there for the music). Furthermore, in general, people living in regional areas generate smaller incomes (Daley, Wood and Chivers Reference Daley, Wood and Chivers2017; Australian Bureau of Statistics 2018) and thus have less disposable income to spend on recreational or leisurely pursuits. This serves to limit the size of audiences and the regularity of attendance to live music events. Touring bands also play an important role in helping to keep the local music scene fresh and interesting, although this usually incurs extra costs to either the venues or bands as the musicians seek to cover or subsidise travel, production and accommodation expenses (Bennett Reference Bennett2010). Small venues in particular have difficulty supporting touring bands, unless a cover charge is added.
Moreover, the music scene is arguably more fragile in regional areas. There is an ever-present potential risk of reputational damage from poor band or audience experiences. Whereas urban venues can arguably absorb intermittent setbacks given the wider pool of musicians and audiences they can draw from, regional venues are more exposed. A bad gig experience can have a long-lasting detrimental impact on a venue, band or the already precarious music scene in general. Regional areas also have to contend with the out-migration of young talented musicians as they seek to expand their experiences and working opportunities by moving to the major metropolitan centres (or overseas).Footnote 11
Finally, although the Australian music scene has its challenges regardless of geographical location, the research emphasis on regulatory issues (noise, licensing, planning, etc.) in metropolitan settings, although important, has inadvertently impeded research into other non-regulatory issues in rural and regional areas. This research not only considered some of the barriers to hosting live music by venues that did, but also some of the reasons why venues that could host live music (and perhaps had done so in the past) did not. For these venues, live music was seen as a potential liability to manage rather than an asset to exploit (or celebrate). The reasons given had little to do with the regulatory issues highlighted in much of the literature; rather, their concerns were threefold. One was about maintaining a particular social milieu that encouraged companionship and interaction between regular patrons, something regional pubs have traditionally acknowledged as significant (Hunt and Satterlee Reference Hunt and Satterlee1986; Cabras and Reggiani Reference Cabras and Reggiani2010). These venues, primarily small to mid-sized, independent (family-owned) hotels, see themselves as social facilitators first and foremost, and music as a potential disruption to this. Even if music could attract new customers, they were viewed as transient with the potential to upset regular patrons (cf. Lobato Reference Lobato2006).
Another area of concern was the use of space, especially in relation to small venues that would need to compromise money-generating tables for music. The third area of concern was around the lack of knowledge some managers expressed when it came to finding and employing bands. In the UK this manifested as a DIY culture that pushed back against the interests of big business (see Frith et al. Reference Frith, Brennan, Cloonan and Webster2013). We find a variation of this here. In this research, some venues compensated for a lack of live music know-how by using pre-programmed background or atmospheric music, through which they could more easily control the type and volume of music and customer behaviour (see Areni Reference Areni2003), while circumventing the hassles of dealing with musicians, agents and promoters. For some regional-based venues, improvements in the regulatory environment would make little difference as to whether or not these venues choose to host live music. As important as state regulations are to instrumentalising live music (see Frith et al. Reference Frith, Brennan, Cloonan and Webster2013), no policy advances in licensing, planning or noise are likely to address the concerns articulated above.
Although this research has provided insights into the challenges venues face in one regional Australian town, such challenges are not unique to Armidale or regional cities in general but are very likely to exist in different degrees across the nation. As such, more research in these non-regulatory areas and regional differences would benefit live music scenes across Australia and elsewhere. As such, we also need to start asking those who could but do not host live music why, as this research has done, to explore ways to address their trepidations. It is promising to see that music scholars are turning their attention to rural and regional Australia, and more broadly, to the complex interplay that comprises a live music ecology. This can only be beneficial to Australia's labouring music scene.
Acknowledgements
The author would like to acknowledge the generous contributions of all who took part in this study, especially the venue owners, managers and entertainment coordinators, who freely gave their time and expertise in the hope of providing a stronger music scene for all to benefit. I would also like to thank Stephen Harris, Ben Green and the two anonymous reviewers for their valuable feedback on earlier and later drafts.
