IT makes for depressing reading.
With industry figures suggesting 35 per cent of UK music venues have closed in the last 10 years, the roll-call in Scotland is sobering. It includes Aberdeen’s Downstairs and Gilcomston Bar, and such Edinburgh stalwarts as Studio 24 and the Picture House. When Studio 24 announced it was to shut in May last year, it didn’t mince its words.
Management said they had spent years “investing thousands upon thousands in sound-proofing and legal fees in order to stay open”. But it was no use: “Complaining neighbours and harsh council-enforced sound restrictions” had won the day.
“Calton Road once pulsed with music – from The Venue, to The Bongo on New Street to Studio 24,” the venue added in an emotional Facebook post. “This part of the Old Town is almost silenced now. It’s the heart of the city, but the beat has been silenced.”
In Glasgow, King Tut’s Wah Wah Hut – where Oasis were famously discovered – has raised concerns about planning applications that could affect its future. There have been three in the last five months alone.
It’s a problem the Scottish Government recognises, and earlier this month it confirmed the “agent of change” principle would be included in future planning guidance. This means whoever introduces a change to an area – for example, a developer building flats – will be expected to mitigate noise complaints. Ministers even wrote to councils directly, asking them to act now. The move was warmly welcomed by campaigners. UK Music chief executive Michael Dugher described it as a “landmark victory for all those who fought so hard to safeguard the future of music venues in Scotland”.
Geoff Ellis, CEO of DF Concerts & Events, said it was a huge step in protecting Scotland’s live music scene, adding: “It removes a crippling threat that loomed over our music venues for too long.”
But some worry it doesn’t go far enough. It is, after all, only guidance – not legislation.
Creating cultural quarters in Scotland’s cities is one idea that was floated. Could Sauchiehall Street in Glasgow or Edinburgh’s Cowgate soon be designated cultural hubs? It’s an interesting idea.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here