Right, I don't understand why Kula Shaker since they have returned aren't pushing themselves more than they are at the moment.

Releases seem to be badly promoted and the tours are equally poorly promoted.

Now is this choice of the band or is it just poor management? We are talking about a very talented band here that at around 96-98 were one of the most famous bands in the country, yet the majority of the public don't even know they have reformed.

Kula should be playing at festivals like Glastonbury etc year in year out but despite the fact their name crops up as 'someone people wish would play' on countless occasions they still don't even seem to get mentioned.

Why is it all a bit of a wimper rather than the roar of the lion you would expect from a band of Kula's talent and history?

Some interesting thoughts. Here are some of my own in response:-

You say releases and tours have been badly / poorly promoted, but what do you mean by that? Bear in mind Kula Shaker's size, budget and the fact that they are regarded as a bit of a joke in the mainstream music press.

Another thought; this is Crispian we are dealing with. Don't automatically assume the apparent reticence is all the management's own doing. One might argue that it's a manager's role to promote the artist how they want to be promoted. Even going back to the days of the Jeevas this has been the perennial question: 'are management dragging their feet, or does Crispian just want it this way?'. Many comments since the Kula reformation from Crispian suggest he might prefer a more subtle approach than the maximum all out promo level that might be possible.

Finally, according to all accounts the band actually have new management, so, who knows, maybe we will see some changes when we enter the fourth album cycle.

I get the impression that commercial pressures were one of the reasons that the split occurred in the first place. I wouldn't be surprised if they are making sure they don't make the same mistake again.

As long as the quality of the music remains high, who cares?

To nitpick, I don't think I would use the term "half hearted", I think the term "low key" ir probably more accurate.

As for the reasons, other than what was already said, it might also be the simple truth that the music world in 2006/7 isn't the same as it was in 1996/7...

I understand everyones comments but surely letting the masses know that the group has reformed and are making music would be a good move.

I know the press hate Kula Shaker butI don't think thats a bad thing as people tend to be atracted to those they are told not to like.

Maybe its just me wishing for the old days but you would be amazed at how many people don't realise that they have even reformed yet alone made a third album!

quote:

Originally posted by Mr Flow:
I understand everyones comments but surely letting the masses know that the group has reformed and are making music would be a good move.

I know the press hate Kula Shaker butI don't think thats a bad thing as people tend to be atracted to those they are told not to like.

Maybe its just me wishing for the old days but you would be amazed at how many people don't realise that they have even reformed yet alone made a third album!

Well, they did have that huge advert in Glasgow and had a review about Strangefolk (and the gigs) in most papers, if I'm not much mistaken....

At first I thought, why are these guys not playing stadiums and stuff? Now I’m of the opinion that they are doing exactly what they want.- No bosses pushing their own agenda. Now I think how lucky they are to be doing what they want and how privileged I am to get to see them at such close quarters and not as one of thousands staring at a huge video screen ‘cause the band are miles away. I’m probably selfish but to be honest I like it this way and if the band are happy with the way things are then I am too.

It's obvious that the band quality and big success don't cross too often.How many great bands there are that just can't make it.I think Kula Shaker only care about their music and not promotion.Promotion is something other people should do.

i think it's much better to remain low key. C'mon, who wants them to turn into a sold out stadium rock band? Bands who have been pushed to make money for others and themselves lose all creativity really early on. I think it's great that KS arent' in that category and can give all their effort to making music that reflects themselves and that the fans can relate to.

Also, you know fine well how bored you get of people that are in your face all the time. Low profile means that they'll attract genuine appreciation by people who will seek them out, and by playing to smaller audiences they'll have more of a rapport with their fans.

That's what methinks anyway...

quote:

Originally posted by ivanoff:
It's obvious that the band quality and big success don't cross too often.How many great bands there are that just can't make it.I think Kula Shaker only care about their music and not promotion.Promotion is something other people should do.

Of course this is true. But there's two sides to it. I don't think that they can really live from what they earned in the past two years - seeing Strangefolk didn't sell to well and that they played rather small venues (especially outside UK).
Crispian already said the new album will be promoted like K back in the day, so expect more to come. Promotion is everything nowadays.
Besides, I'd surely like them to stay this "club band" cos everything is a bit more intimate. But I can understand if they aim for more. Especially since they've experienced how it is to be much bigger in the UK.
It is funny, I found one of my Kula video tapes today. All those TOTP performances and being one of the headliners at Glastonbury! Think about that now! But who knows? Maybe we'll get back to that one day. They'd surely deserve it!