# Hootenanny Pub  and noise problems



## Ginkogirl (Sep 10, 2010)

We live around the corner from the Hootenanny pub, who are making our lives unbearable because of the loud music etc. 

We are keeping a noise diary with a view to having their licence conditions reviewed and would be very grateful to hear from any other local residents who are having similar problems. We have tried dialogue and negotiation, which have produced no result. We feel that losing their late licence might make them realize that it's not a good idea to f*** the locals totally.

We know we're not the only people affected and will treat all contacts in the strictest confidence.


----------



## Kanda (Sep 10, 2010)

I nearly bought around the corner from there. Realised that the pub has been there for years and to move next to a pub and then complain about it would be fucking stupid. No offence like....


----------



## Ginkogirl (Sep 10, 2010)

No offence taken - as you're clearly a moron. I have lived here for 25 years so it isn't a case of buying and not realizing that there is a pub there.r I have seen the pub go through many changes in that time. In 1985 is was a nice old skool south London pub that no one would have minded living near. You were probably in kindergarten then. Lucky you that you didn't buy a property next to the pub. Count your blessings!


----------



## Hocus Eye. (Sep 10, 2010)

I have never understood people who buy a property near to a music pub with a late licence and then complain. The purchase price will have been affected by the proximity of this pub. There is a pub in a street local to me that used to have a late licence and play music. In the last round of licence extensions it was refused one because of a local resident who moved in long after the pub had established itself as a late night music pub. My sympathy is entirely with the pub.


----------



## Orang Utan (Sep 10, 2010)

have you read the op's post, hocus eye?


----------



## Ginkogirl (Sep 10, 2010)

*Please read carefully*

I have lived in the area for 25 years, that's years not days.
The pub has gone through many managers/owners since then. I have never had to make a complaint about it until recently. I have lived in this area when there were shebeens a few doors away, an illegal poker place, a brothel etc. etc. 
I don't need lectures on why people shouldn't buy properties near a pub from people who were probably in babygros when I started living here.

The pub, in it present incarnation, is an anti-social nuisance. I am posting this here in the hope that other people, who may be suffering the same, feel encouraged to either get in touch, or continue with their own complaint process.


----------



## tarannau (Sep 10, 2010)

25 years you've lived here and you're under the impression that the Hootahob used to be 'nice old skool south London pub that no one would have minded living near?' 

I'm sorry, but that's absolute nonsense. The George Canning had an (almost justified) reputation for lawlessness and chaos - so much in fact that my better half's brother, a magistrate bod, still refers to it as a den of inequity, full of scumbags. It certainly was no quiet boozer full of shrinking violets.

FWIW I can trump you on the number of years lived in Brixton (30+) and the Hootahobcanning, in it's many incarnations, has been been my first choice local for around 15 years now. I don't recognise your characterisation of the pub in the slightest tbh - it doesn't seem based in reality.

Yes, the gigs at the Hoot are more regular now, but it's generally a better behaved crowd and they make some effort to restrain noise. It's a far cry from the days when soundsystems were a comparatively regular feature in the beer garden, so much so that the shoodily-installed windows of the houses above Khan's used to rattle in a carnival style. 

I live just round the corner from the pub too (St Matthews) and I certainly won't be joining this campaign, which seems to be based around dishonest assertions and a distorted view of the past. I'm sorry to hear that pub noise is affecting you, but I'd hate to see somewhere that's a valued community boozer lose its licence and have its future endangered. It's been here for longer than either of us, and I suspect it was even more noisy in the past


----------



## nat1 (Sep 10, 2010)

I'm going to stick up for you Ginkogirl as I really feel those people who've replied to your post are being pretty shi**ty.  It's not a bloody competition of who's lived in Brixton longest or who knows the history of a pub better.  Please.  I live on Brixton Water Lane, and if i'm honest i'm frequently woken up at 1/2/3am with noise.  I'm never entirely sure whether its neighbours or the hootenanny but either way, its very frustrating, especially when it's during the week and your alarm goes off for work at 6am.  So no, I may not be pushing for the pub to lose its late license but i can totally understand your frustration at the noise which i agree, until recently, hasn't been an issue.


----------



## tarannau (Sep 10, 2010)

Pretty shitty? Not a competition about who's lived here longest? I agree fwiw, but there again I didn't start my first reply to others' posts like this: 


> have lived here for 25 years so it isn't a case of buying and not realizing that there is a pub there...You were probably in kindergarten then.



I'm sorry, but Ginkogirl's getting the reaction her posting style deserves. I'm still a little staggered that she's claiming that the Canning was some kind of gentle, quiet boozer that anyone would have loved in their neighbourhood - the reality was very different indeed. It just seems a really false and/or dishonest memory

I'm glad that you're not pushing for the pub to lose its licence nat1, but there again why would you when you're not even certain it's causing the noise?


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Sep 10, 2010)

I do sympathise OP, not getting your sleep when you need it is a frustration that can result in real misery.

The Hoot's become quite a success over the past couple of years, some great acts have played.

I've still yet to fathom why the headline bands are not on untill around 11.30 - 12 (other than the management wants to keep people in) so I often feel a bit trapped in there and waiting (There is only so much standing about drinking I feel happy doing!)

I don't see a reason why the management couldn't have bands finishing around 11 - 11.30 and have DJs past that point until 2am - this may enable the noise to be more measured after midnight.

I agree with tarannu that's it never been a nice little boozer in any of it's incarnations, always a slightly deranged, damaged and chaotic species of pub and clientele....

......I like the current version (it'll always be the Canning to me!), the live music, and the recent crowds are a lot less dangerous than in previous times.

I trust a happy compromise can be found that enable locals to snooze and punters to booze in a way they've become accustomed in recent years.


----------



## Ginkogirl (Sep 10, 2010)

*@Tarranau*

"I'm sorry to hear that pub noise is affecting you, "
Clearly you're not. 

As I said, I'm asking people with similar issues to contact me or to be encouraged to continue their own process towards solving it.

If you want to use my thread as therapy for your arsy, hormone-fuelled, chavvy self-righteousnes, please go somewhere else.


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Sep 10, 2010)

Ginkogirl said:


> chavvy self-righteousnes


 
Charming.


----------



## killer b (Sep 10, 2010)

you massive chav tarranau


----------



## Kanda (Sep 10, 2010)

This'll go well now....


----------



## ajdown (Sep 10, 2010)

Is the problem the noise from the bands in the venue, or the noise from people congregating outside?

If it's noise from the venue, then that's fair enough because they should be soundproofed sufficiently in a residential area so as not to inconvenience the residents nearby.

If it's noise from people outside, there's probably not much you can do about it because one of the major downsides of the smoking ban in pubs is that now they all stay outside making a noise although it does make the outside a no-go area for non smokers instead of the outside and inside the pub.

I live near the now-closed Telegraph on Brixton Hill and I used to have similar problems until it shut down - rather than installing suitable air conditioning/ventilation they'd just open the fire door at the back and let all the noise out - not only breaking noise laws but also fire exits should not be wedged open, apart from the fact it wasn't disabled accessible anyway.

It is unfortunate that people seem completely oblivious to the fact that not everyone wants to, or can, stay up partying till 3am whenever they feel like it, and have no concern for those around them.


----------



## editor (Sep 10, 2010)

To be honest, I can empathise a certain amount with Ginkogirl.

We live opposite used was a small cafe/bar called My Father's Place. In the last three years it's turned into a full on nightclub, with people hanging around till 3/4am in the morning several days of the week, shouting - and I mean _shouting_ - drinking, slamming doors and making a right ruddy racket. 

Happily, I'm a fair distance away and have double glazing (which has to be employed because of the noise they make), but for the residential properties nearby it must be a nightmare. Sure, they moved in next to a bar, but it's now nothing like it was a few years ago - and it's fair to say that the Hoot has changed considerably too. 

I hope a compromise is found for Hootenanny because it's a great pub that has managed to find a winning formula when so many are closing. Take away its late licence and it may end up joining that number, and the area will be much, much worse off for a losing a great community pub.


----------



## teuchter (Sep 10, 2010)

This will be a fun thread


----------



## teuchter (Sep 10, 2010)

Nanker Phelge said:


> I've still yet to fathom why the headline bands are not on untill around 11.30 - 12 (other than the management wants to keep people in) so I often feel a bit trapped in there and waiting (There is only so much standing about drinking I feel happy doing!)
> 
> I don't see a reason why the management couldn't have bands finishing around 11 - 11.30 and have DJs past that point until 2am - this may enable the noise to be more measured after midnight.


 
It's kind of funny you say that because I often feel that the bands finish too _early_ in the Hootananny.


----------



## Ginkogirl (Sep 10, 2010)

*The kinds of noise*

Weirdly enough, we can't really hear the people at all. Even when the beer garden is full. It's only the music, and only the bass levels, the treble just doesn't have the carrying power.

One bright spot on the horizon for anyone affected by a licenced premises - 
my other half works in policy. The government has just closed a consultation on licencing with the view to making radical changes to premises licencing asap.
Among many provisions they consulted about, which are changes they want to make are:
Removing geographical distance as a factor. This means that you don't have to live very close to a pub/premises to be affected by it, and the licencing committees are obliged to take your views into account.
Widening the anti-social/nuisance meanings to include residents' perception that there is a problem rather than just relying on police/environmental officers reports.
Introducing a 'medical'  or health-based criterion. This means, potentially, that a local doctor/hospital or surgery could object to a licence based on things like, an increase in people being admitted to A&E for alcohol-related issues. An increase in people being treated for sleep disturbances or stress relating to a licenced premses and so on.

Not all of these provisions will make it into the final bill, but the government are pretty serious about empowering communities to shape what kind of neighbourhoods they want to live in. So if you are affected by these things, it might be better to take action when the law changes and the presumption is much more on your side.


----------



## dessiato (Sep 10, 2010)

Only seven posts and already able to piss off people so effectively!

Shouldn't someone welcome gg with the traditional offers of hobnobs, and accusations of Firky?

Can I have the deckchair concession on this one? I think it is likely to run for a while and there's money to be made.


----------



## teuchter (Sep 10, 2010)

Ginkogirl said:


> Weirdly enough, we can't really hear the people at all. Even when the beer garden is full. It's only the music, and only the bass levels, the treble just doesn't have the carrying power.


 
How far away are you? Are you on Brixton Water Lane or Effra Road?


----------



## gabi (Sep 10, 2010)

what a dick (the op)

Clapham >>>> 'atta way


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Sep 10, 2010)

teuchter said:


> It's kind of funny you say that because I often feel that the bands finish too _early_ in the Hootananny.


 
I turn a bit sour after 10pm.

I'm a  morning person see.

Falling in love with live music was a bit silly considering.


----------



## teuchter (Sep 10, 2010)

Nanker Phelge said:


> I turn a bit sour after 10pm.
> 
> I'm a  morning person see.
> 
> Falling in love with live music was a bit silly considering.


 
Ah well I certainly amn't a morning person. My idea of what time a band should be on is based on this:

Finish work 6 or 7
Home by 7 or 8
Have something to eat
Out of the house and at the venue at 8 or 9
Bit of time to have a drink/chat with whoever you're there with
Bands start at about 9 or 10
Headline act about 11 or 12
Bands finish about 12 or 1.


----------



## tarannau (Sep 10, 2010)

Ah well, it didn't take long for the mask to slip, did it?

'Chavvy self righteousness' though - flipping fantastic. Still, at least I'm not some delusional flapjack who'll happily make up fantasies about the Canning being some kind of restful local that anyone would be happy to have had in their backyard. It's lies and distortions like that, along with the chavvy comments, that make me think that you're an intolerant snobby fruitloop with a line in deception. What, out of interest, did you think of the old Hobgoblin and Canning when it used to have sound systems in the garden itself, or the drum and bass sessions that saw 30k of turbosound brought into the back room? 

I'm all for encouraging the community to shape their own neighbourhood - indeed they are, with significant numbers of neighbours being regulars of the Hobgoblin (next door even) and managing to maintain good relations with the management. Why should you, and what seems to be a handful of sneery fragiles, get to potentially ruin what's a much loved local pub for many, many others?


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Sep 10, 2010)

teuchter said:


> Ah well I certainly amn't a morning person. My idea of what time a band should be on is based on this:
> 
> Finish work 6 or 7
> Home by 7 or 8
> ...



This is a schedule I could live with, but Bad Manner's (2nd time they played) didn't appear on stage at the hoot until 12.30am.

By which point most of the audience were twatted beyond themselves.

Pissed dancers can be fun. Totally munted dancers are just a pain in the arse.

Saw Bombskare a couple weeks ago. On stage 11ish. Good audience. good dancing. Home by 12.30. Sorted.


----------



## Orang Utan (Sep 10, 2010)

tarannau, you're being a bit of a tit. sounds like the OP has a genuine grievance


----------



## Tricky Skills (Sep 10, 2010)

My community has been working together over the summer to try and stop the very same problem happening around here in the first place. The new owner of Kelly's along Clapham Road put in a variation in licence request for 10am - 5am Fri - Sun  and 10am - 1am at all other times. The pub closed as a traditional Irish boozer two years ago and has been squatted since. The existing licence is for 2am at weekends, and midnight during the week.

As a community, we really wanted to see Kelly's have a use as a venue, and not as overcrowded flats. A planning application for flat conversion was rejected on the grounds of over-crowding. The existing licence is not ideal, but as has rightly been pointed out in this thread, many locals around here moved in, knowing full well that a pub is in the area.

We organised here locally with other residents, our local councillors and the Safer Neighbourhood Team. This led to the landlord withdrawing the variation in licence. It seems now that the venue is going to re-open, trading under the existing licence.

The advice we have been given now from Licensing at Lambeth Council is to monitor the situation, rather than resist it. Once again - I am fine for the venue to trade under the existing licence, as long as this is not breached. Licensing also told us about the change in law proposals, which apparently give more power to residents.

As for Hootenanny - well, if it really is causing a nuisance to your community, then my advice would be to monitor and then organise. The difference here is that the Licensing Committee felt it was acceptable to grant the current licence. Unless this is breached, then there isn't a great deal you can do. All the usual checks such as sound proofing, noise of punters leaving etc can be made reference to.

At the extreme level, we were told that you can investigate if the full licence is being adhered to by monitoring the number of bouncers employed, the number of smokers outside, disabled access etc. This seems like a dirty tricks campaign to me, and not an extreme that I would like to go down. Licensing basically told us that there are ways to question the licence that effectively make it uneconomical for the business to trade.

Like I said - I really want Kelly's as a venue that will work here locally and benefit our community. Co-operation between locals and the owner is essential. So far none of this has happened.


----------



## T & P (Sep 10, 2010)

Help yourselves


----------



## hendo (Sep 10, 2010)

> If you want to use my thread as therapy for your arsy, hormone-fuelled, chavvy self-righteousnes, please go somewhere else



Well you had me up until this point.

My sixpence worth is that pubs are part of the community and need to respect people's sleeping hours.
It's not a question of 'who moved in first' or even 'what the pub was like in 1989'. This is an overcrowded city and people live where they can, in constricted conditions which are often far from perfect.
In that situation there has to be compromise and if the Hoot's management cannot meet with the locals and arrive at a mutually agreed bargain then they open the way to tougher campaigning measures from sleep deprived residents, who have a right to a degree of peace and quiet wherever they live. 
That being said the OP's rudeness is certainly alienating and if her negotiating and persuasion skills on here are anything to go by the Hoot need not worry until the coalition carries out their threat to revise the licensing laws.


----------



## Ginkogirl (Sep 10, 2010)

I don't think it's rude to stand up to bullies. 
If you fell over in the street and broke your arm would be be cheered up by someone telling you that:
A/ they had walked over that bit of pavement a thousand times
B/ they had never fallen there
C/ they didn't have a broken arm
D/ there must be something wrong with you if you did break your arm

I have a problem with noise from the pub. If you live far enough away that it isn't a problem, lucky you. Please don't try to tell me how I should feel about sleepless nights.
This is my experience. I am not arguing about the right of the pub to play music, or to exist. Their right to exist does not trump my right to have a good night's sleep.
If this is difficult to understand, perhaps you should ask yourself why you feel the need to deny another person's experience, while scoring points off their distress and plea for help.
I never said that the George Canning was 'gentle' or any of the other rubbish attributed to me by tarrannau. I said is was an old skool south London boozer, with all the rough and ready that is implied in that. My point was that the noise problem was never an issue then, and has only started relatively recently.


----------



## wurlycurly (Sep 10, 2010)

Orang Utan said:


> tarannau, you're being a bit of a tit. sounds like the OP has a genuine grievance


 
No he isn't, it's the OP who is being absurdly aggressive. Two posts in and she's coming across as some intolerant NIMBY with too much time on her hands, one who's willing to spin the facts to suit her argument. I'm no great fan of the Hoot and its inflated prices but to suggest noise is significantly worse now than at any period over the past quarter century is patently absurd. There's less violence, less drug-taking, it attracts a much more diverse group of people and puts on some good music and decent food. Pubs are disappearing left, right and centre, so bucking the trend is admirable (despite the hefty bar prices).


----------



## quimcunx (Sep 10, 2010)

Of course he is.  It's his MO along with misrepresenting what the  OP has said to suit whatever argument he's decided to make be it on pasta or dinner parties or pubs. 





Ginkogirl said:


> I don't think it's rude to stand up to bullies.
> If you fell over in the street and broke your arm would be be cheered up by someone telling you that:
> A/ they had walked over that bit of pavement a thousand times
> B/ they had never fallen there
> ...


 
Good post.   Well done on calming down.  


I'm not very happy about the closures of pubs and clubs round these parts but then it's not me who is losing sleep.   Getting a group together and trying to come to an agreement with the Hoot would be preferable, if possible, IMO.  I wouldn't want to see it lose its licence.


----------



## teuchter (Sep 10, 2010)

Ginkogirl said:


> Removing geographical distance as a factor. This means that you don't have to live very close to a pub/premises to be affected by it, and the licencing committees are obliged to take your views into account.


 
This should work both ways though.

One of the many reasons I live in Brixton is that there is stuff on late. I don't want to live in some ghost town where everything closes at 11 or 12, or live music has to finish before midnight, or where people can't sit outside anywhere after a certain hour. 

I'm not saying that means that everywhere should just be able to make as much noise as they like when they like. I know what it's like to be kept awake at night by noise and while I happily tolerate that now and again when neighbours have parties or whatever, if it happens a lot that's entirely different. Obviously a reasonable balance has to be struck. 

I have to say that I agree with Tarannau to some extent though: I find it hard to believe that the Hootananny is now a significantly greater menace than it has been in the past. There's been a pub of some kind in that location forever. It's also on a fairly main road and pretty close to the centre of Brixton. I think that if you are going to move in somewhere like that (whether it's now or 25 years ago) you have to accept there is going to be a bit of disturbance. Is it possible perhaps that you have just aged a bit and your priorities have changed and what might not have bothered you 25 years ago does now?

I work in Westminster and they seem to enforce pretty strict licensing conditions on the pubs round here. One of the consequences of this is that for some reason if you want to stand outside to drink your pint, you have to be herded into a tightly packed crowd on the pavement. This is actively enforced by men in hi-vis jackets. I'm not entirely clear what the point is - whether it's to stop people from drinking outside generally and making a noise, or what. This is in a little public square with several pubs and restaurants around - it's not even a primarily residential area. And this is at 6 or 7pm.

Anyway, the consequence is that it's simply not very enjoyable to stand about outside in the summer like it would be, so I go somewhere else if there is the option. The stupid rules basically kill what could be a really nice little corner of London to hang around in of a summer evening. I doubt it would go that far in Brixton but I'm sure you can see why people get a bit ratty when you start talking about trying to get late licenses removed and so on.


----------



## Badgers (Sep 10, 2010)

I am right across too and have not had any noise issues, nor have the two people I share in the single glazed house. 
Also often stroll past late on a weekend evening and it is lively for sure but not threatening.


----------



## Orang Utan (Sep 10, 2010)

wurlycurly said:


> No he isn't, it's the OP who is being absurdly aggressive. Two posts in and she's coming across as some intolerant NIMBY with too much time on her hands, one who's willing to spin the facts to suit her argument. I'm no great fan of the Hoot and its inflated prices but to suggest noise is significantly worse now than at any period over the past quarter century is patently absurd. There's less violence, less drug-taking, it attracts a much more diverse group of people and puts on some good music and decent food. Pubs are disappearing left, right and centre, so bucking the trend is admirable (despite the hefty bar prices).


but the only grievance the OP has is the noise


----------



## wurlycurly (Sep 10, 2010)

Orang Utan said:


> but the only grievance the OP has is the noise



As Badgers says, when you pass late on Saturday it's 'lively but not threatening'. That sums it up pretty well, surely? The OP should trundle her super-sensitive ass round to the Escape Bar in Herne Hill at 2am on a Saturday if she wants to experience some Licensed Neighbours From Hell. May help her to put things in perspective. (Apologies to said Escape Bar if things have chilled in the past few weeks).


----------



## Orang Utan (Sep 10, 2010)

you and other posters are telling the op what they should or should not perceive, which is a tad unreasonable.
if they've been there nearly 30 years and are only now complaining about the noise, perhaps it is too loud?


----------



## tarannau (Sep 10, 2010)

They've reduced the opening hours, are much better at folowing licence conditions (say with bouncers), comply with the noise regulations and don't even have rowdy lock-ins.  Like her description of the Canning, I'd say that the OP has a distorted perception of the current regime. 

Given the fact the she's already implied that she want the pub licence removed, largely to teach them a lesson apparently, I have few scruples in thinking of the OP as vindictive, aggressive and out of step with a hefty chunk of the local community who enjoy the pub. It'd be a horrible shame if such an intolerant minority could help destroy the livelihood of a good neighbourhood pub.


----------



## wurlycurly (Sep 10, 2010)

Orang Utan said:


> you and other posters are telling the op what they should or should not perceive, which is a tad unreasonable.
> if they've been there nearly 30 years and are only now complaining about the noise, perhaps it is too loud?



The OP can, of course, call the council's anti-social S.W.A.T team whenever she feels the noise is too loud. They will  generally be there within an hour and their decibel-readers are impressively accurate. If it's too loud they will take action, as has already happened at the Escape Bar. Simples.


----------



## Ax^ (Sep 10, 2010)

Ginkogirl said:


> Weirdly enough, we can't really hear the people at all. Even when the beer garden is full. It's only the music, and only the bass levels, the treble just doesn't have the carrying power.
> 
> One bright spot on the horizon for anyone affected by a licenced premises -
> my other half works in policy. The government has just closed a consultation on licencing with the view to making radical changes to premises licencing asap.
> ...


 

woohoo to killing the pub trade

yusum


----------



## Chemical needs (Sep 10, 2010)

I don't understand why people are using this loaded terminology of 'menace' and 'threatening' when the OP has only described a noise nuisance, as opposed to anti-social behavior, drug-taking, fights, etc.


----------



## gabi (Sep 10, 2010)

Jesus christ. enjoy it. or turn your own tunes up louder (my standard approach)

anyway i suspect this is just another slightly elaborate troll.


----------



## Orang Utan (Sep 10, 2010)

people are putting words into other people's mouths and constructing many straw men


----------



## wurlycurly (Sep 10, 2010)

Orang Utan said:


> people are putting words into other people's mouths and constructing many straw men


 
Yeh, thanks for introducing some clarity into the debate. Did you have cliches for breakfast?


----------



## tarannau (Sep 10, 2010)

I don't think they really are tbh. This is from the OP on the very first post:



> We feel that losing their late licence might make them realize that it's not a good idea to f*** the locals totally.



You've got to love the royal 'we,' calling for the pub to lose its licence and its suggestion that the locals are being 'totally' fucked.

I don't think you need to use any strawmen to criticise that view, let alone its presumption that I and many other locals are being done over by the pub. Even the pub's immediate neighbours, right next to the main room, don't seem to think that way


----------



## Orang Utan (Sep 10, 2010)

wurlycurly said:


> Yeh, thanks for introducing some clarity into the debate. Did you have cliches for breakfast?


 
i had raisins and oreos.
it may be clichéd but it's the truth


----------



## trashpony (Sep 10, 2010)

Orang Utan said:


> i had raisins and oreos.
> it may be clichéd but it's the truth


 
We aren't allowed biscuits for breakfast in our house


----------



## paulhackett (Sep 10, 2010)

Nanker Phelge said:


> This is a schedule I could live with, but Bad Manner's (2nd time they played) didn't appear on stage at the hoot until 12.30am.



 Lip Up Fatty at that time when you don't want to hear it.. How was Buster?


----------



## wurlycurly (Sep 10, 2010)

trashpony said:


> We aren't allowed biscuits for breakfast in our house


 
Casual biscuit-crunching is loud in the morning. Call the cops!


----------



## Onket (Sep 10, 2010)

I'm with the OP on this one. There have been some sensible responses but quite a few people making themselves looking like right bellends.

Welcome to U75.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 10, 2010)

Can the OP get The George IV shut down as well as the music from their late weekends is keeping me awake.  It's the base.  You can hear it even with the windows shut.

Only joking, I have no intention of complaining as I'm not going to be responsible for another pub possibly ending up closed.

Anyway



> 25 years you've lived here and you're under the impression that the Hootahob used to be 'nice old skool south London pub that no one would have minded living near?'
> 
> I'm sorry, but that's absolute nonsense. The George Canning had an (almost justified) reputation for lawlessness and chaos - so much in fact that my better half's brother, a magistrate bod, still refers to it as a den of inequity, full of scumbags. It certainly was no quiet boozer full of shrinking violets.



Agree with tarannau.  I used to drink there 25 years ago and it was often full of people piling out from other pubs that had just closed (ie. the ones shutting at 11.00) so who were half-pissed anyway.  Many of these people then went on to Mingles which opened later than the Canning.

However, the Canning did shut earlier then and I suppose so you didn't have base blasting out at later hours


----------



## wurlycurly (Sep 10, 2010)

Onket said:


> I'm with the OP on this one. There have been some sensible responses but quite a few people making themselves looking like right bellends.
> 
> Welcome to U75.


 
Are you seriously suggesting that people should dilute their opinions while discussing a topic with a new poster?


----------



## matt m (Sep 10, 2010)

Hootenanny is a big business, with several different venues up in Scotland. Have you tried contacting their head office? 

They certainly have the cash to instal soundproofing. 

It's totally irrelevant whether or not someone has 'moved next to a pub' or not. It's not just a pub, it's a live music venue with a late license,  a big rig and loud acts. If it ain't properly soundproofed it'll risk losing its license. End of story.


----------



## Orang Utan (Sep 10, 2010)

wurlycurly said:


> Are you seriously suggesting that people should dilute their opinions while discussing a topic with a new poster?


 i don't think he is. he's just saying that people are being bellends about it, which is correct


----------



## Onket (Sep 10, 2010)

wurlycurly said:


> Are you seriously suggesting that people should dilute their opinions while discussing a topic with a new poster?


 
Not at all. I'm not even sure where you're getting that from.


----------



## tommers (Sep 10, 2010)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> However, the Canning did shut earlier then and I suppose so you didn't have base blasting out at later hours



Which is kind of specifically exactly what she's upset about.


----------



## wurlycurly (Sep 10, 2010)

Orang Utan said:


> i don't think he is. he's just saying that people are being bellends about it, which is correct


 
Could you maybe be a bit more specific please?


----------



## tarannau (Sep 10, 2010)

it's as if the OP never lived in the area in the time of the Canning, nor ever stepped inside of the pub. How anyone can read that statement about the Canning being a pub 'that no one would have minded living near' with a straight face is beyond me. It still carries a rep over a decade since it closed. And Stringfellows was a high quality intellectual hang out for the feminist set I guess

Either this poster is being heavily economical with the truth or this is a giant troll. Sadly I suspect the former.


----------



## Orang Utan (Sep 10, 2010)

wurlycurly said:


> Could you maybe be a bit more specific please?


 
tarrannau, gabi and you are being bellends


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Sep 10, 2010)

paulhackett66 said:


> How was Buster?


 
Fat!


----------



## tarannau (Sep 10, 2010)

tommers said:


> Which is kind of specifically exactly what she's upset about.


 
The Hob (incarnation between the Canning and Hoot) was open as late, for longer, and brought 30k of turbosound in on occasion. It also sometimes had rigs in the garden and had a more jazzy interpretation of opening hours and licensing regulation. The Hoot has more gigs perhaps, but it's also more professionally run


----------



## keithy (Sep 10, 2010)

I live above a pub and can't sleep til after 2am on friday and saturday nights because the bass shakes the room and the music is soooooo so so loud. Doesn't matter so much now cos I just go out or whatever but it was horrible when I had to work at 7am on weekends  

I can't do much about it though because if we complain we'll just get evicted.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 10, 2010)

Nanker Phelge said:


> Fat!


 
How was his tongue?


----------



## keithy (Sep 10, 2010)

tarannau said:


> The Hob (incarnation between the Canning and Hoot) was open as late, for longer, and brought 30k of turbosound in on occasion. It also sometimes had rigs in the garden and had a more jazzy interpretation of opening hours and licensing regulation. The Hoot has more gigs perhaps, but it's also more professionally run


 
maybe it's less sound-proofed now as the building has got older? I dunno. Don't know anything about it really.


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Sep 10, 2010)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> How was his tongue?


 
Long!


----------



## Lord Camomile (Sep 10, 2010)

Orang Utan said:


> it may be clichéd but it's the truth


If I ever record an album, this is on the shortlist for titles.


----------



## tarannau (Sep 10, 2010)

Orang Utan said:


> tarrannau, gabi and you are being bellends


 
Oh please. So the OP isn't making stuff up about the past, implying that she wants the pubs licence removed or claiming to act on these locals (like me and other posters here) behalf, to stop us being 'totally' fucked over apparently.

What's wrong about objecting to that ridiculous portrayal and intolerance? The woman's clearly a frothingly intolerant loon, as the spittle-flecked unpleasantness about 'chavs' suggests


----------



## goldenecitrone (Sep 10, 2010)

Get the landlady's son addicted to crack cocaine and Bob's your uncle, the pub will be just glowing embers in a matter of weeks.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 10, 2010)

Nanker Phelge said:


> Long!



So he's still "large" with a long tongue that he obviously likes to stick out.  Doesn't sound like he's changed much


----------



## Orang Utan (Sep 10, 2010)

tarannau said:


> Oh please. So the OP isn't making stuff up about the past, implying that she wants the pubs licence removed or claiming to act on these locals (like me and other posters here) behalf, to stop us being 'totally' fucked over apparently.
> 
> What's wrong about objecting to that ridiculous portrayal and intolerance? The woman's clearly a frothingly intolerant loon, as the spittle-flecked unpleasantness about 'chavs' suggests


 

you seem to be reading a lot into a few words


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Sep 10, 2010)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> So he's still "large" with a long tongue that he obviously likes to stick out.  Doesn't sound like he's changed much


 
That's ska-business!


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Sep 10, 2010)

Lord Camomile said:


> If I ever record an album, this is on the shortlist for titles.


 
Didn't the Manic Street Preachers already use this title?


----------



## wurlycurly (Sep 10, 2010)

Orang Utan said:


> tarrannau, gabi and you are being bellends


 
Yes, I know that's your opinion but you're hardly moving the discussion on with inane statements such as 'people are being bellends' etc. Why don't you take some time to elaborate on why you think we're acting improperly? I gave my opinions in the way I did because I thought the OP was absurdly rude - and needlessly aggressive - in her opening salvo to tarannau, I thought her points were without merit, had no facts to back them up, were directly contradicted by a poster who lives adjacent to the bar and - to top it all off - there was a mild whiff of Daily Mail about the whole thing. At no point have I tried to be offensive to the OP and it riles when someone chips in with a throwaway accusation re bellends and then just leaves it at that.


----------



## ringo (Sep 10, 2010)

Spot on Tarannau.

The HootaHobCanning has become a reggae venue. Should it come as a surprise to anyone who's lived here for 25 years that Brixton is a good place for a reggae venue? For many residents of the area this is the best thing to happen for years. This is just the same old Not In My Back Yard crap.

As it happens last night was Rodigan Vs Black Scorpio sound system. The sound system in the Hoot is not adaquate for this kind of clash, in fact the crowd complained and Cecil Reuben, the promoter, apologised to the audience before the final 4 tunes and explained that the Lambeth noise team had been in and adjusted the limiters that week. For those of who appreciate these things, the bass was pretty weak and for some even ruined the night. To petition them to turn the bass down is so ridiculous it's hard to fathom. The place has absolutely no choice, both financially to keep operating and for it's reputation, but to try and keep the system sounding good for reggae while trying to stay within the db limits enforced by Lambeth. And that means bass.

It should also be remembered that reggae does not and never will start at 7pm and finish at 11pm. The culture surrounding reggae shows goes back over 50 years and the bands, sound systems and punters will always be getting warmed up at midnight and be ready to continue until 5 or 6am. That's the way it is and always will be, these crews just won't go on stage before that.

And the stuff about the way Canning used to be a genteel pub is just hilarious. I'd have had some sympathy for you if you hadn't tried that one.

If the place remains a reggae venue you will achieve nothing with your complaints, you'd be better off moving if you don't like it, save yourself a lot of wasted time, effort and grief.


----------



## tarannau (Sep 10, 2010)

Orang Utan said:


> you seem to be reading a lot into a few words


 
Airy sounding bullshit fella. How and why am I reading anything extra into it - the OP does specifically mention trying to get the pub's licence revoked, does use the royal 'we' and 'totally' fucked and did have a chav-based outburst.  With all that unpleasantness why the fuck would I need any more ammunition. I

The whole, obvious lie about the Canning is a total giveaway. Either this person will stop a no distortion for effect, or they're a giant troll.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 10, 2010)

From what I remember the governor 25 years ago was Frank Hennessy (or was it Hennelly), an Irishman.

He used to have a very short bouncer/doorman.

There was plenty of drugs and fights there.

There wasn't much bass though.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Sep 10, 2010)

Nanker Phelge said:


> Didn't the Manic Street Preachers already use this title?


Do you mean "This Is My Truth Tell Me Yours"?

I'll be honest, that comment was something of a bookmark/deckchair


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Sep 10, 2010)

Lord Camomile said:


> Do you mean "This Is My Truth Tell Me Yours"?
> 
> I'll be honest, that comment was something of a bookmark/deckchair


 
I was joking.


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Sep 10, 2010)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> From what I remember the governor 25 years ago was Frank Hennessy (or was it Hennelly), an Irishman.
> 
> He used to have a very short bouncer/doorman.



Didn't he get stabbed or cut at the bar one Sunday night?

I was in there, and I'm sure it was the landlord at the time......blurry times.


----------



## paolo (Sep 10, 2010)

ringo said:


> Spot on Tarannau.
> 
> The HootaHobCanning has become a reggae venue. Should it come as a surprise to anyone who's lived here for 25 years that Brixton is a good place for a reggae venue? For many residents of the area this is the best thing to happen for years. This is just the same old Not In My Back Yard crap.
> 
> ...



Do you mean it should - to properly function as a reggae venue - open until 6am?


----------



## Orang Utan (Sep 10, 2010)

wurlycurly said:


> Yes, I know that's your opinion but you're hardly moving the discussion on with inane statements such as 'people are being bellends' etc. Why don't you take some time to elaborate on why you think we're acting improperly? I gave my opinions in the way I did because I thought the OP was absurdly rude - and needlessly aggressive - in her opening salvo to tarannau, I thought her points were without merit, had no facts to back them up, were directly contradicted by a poster who lives adjacent to the bar and - to top it all off - there was a mild whiff of Daily Mail about the whole thing. At no point have I tried to be offensive to the OP and it riles when someone chips in with a throwaway accusation re bellends and then just leaves it at that.


OK, take your OP:
Two posts in and she's coming across as some intolerant NIMBY with too much time on her hands, one who's willing to spin the facts to suit her argument. I'm no great fan of the Hoot and its inflated prices but to suggest noise is significantly worse now than at any period over the past quarter century is patently absurd. There's less violence, less drug-taking, it attracts a much more diverse group of people and puts on some good music and decent food. Pubs are disappearing left, right and centre, so bucking the trend is admirable (despite the hefty bar prices). '
talk about twisting someone's words to fit your own agenda! 
and this bit: 'to suggest noise is significantly worse now than at any period over the past quarter century is patently absurd' - what's absurd is you telling someone who's complaining about a noise problem that there isn't one. you're telling them not to trust their own ears.
it's not very welcoming behaviour and if i'd been treated the same, i'd have been a lot ruder to tarranau than the OP was.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 10, 2010)

Nanker Phelge said:


> Didn't he get stabbed or cut at the bar one Sunday night?
> 
> I was in there, and I'm sure it was the landlord at the time......blurry times.


 

Sounds familiar but I can't be sure.  I may have stopped drinking there by then (sort of barred myself after a friend had an argument with him and threw a bottle at the window)


----------



## Lord Camomile (Sep 10, 2010)

Nanker Phelge said:


> I was joking.


Balls


----------



## quimcunx (Sep 10, 2010)

ringo said:


> And the stuff about the way Canning used to be a genteel pub is just hilarious. I'd have had some sympathy for you if you hadn't tried that one.



She didn't.  Tarannau just talked as if  she did to suit his own argument.


----------



## Orang Utan (Sep 10, 2010)

tarannau said:


> Airy sounding bullshit fella. How and why am I reading anything extra into it - the OP does specifically mention trying to get the pub's licence revoked, does use the royal 'we' and 'totally' fucked and did have a chav-based outburst.  With all that unpleasantness why the fuck would I need any more ammunition. I
> 
> The whole, obvious lie about the Canning is a total giveaway. Either this person will stop a no distortion for effect, or they're a giant troll.


or maybe they're just very tired.
if i'm being kept awake by others, i get VERY unreasonable.


----------



## ringo (Sep 10, 2010)

paolo999 said:


> Do you mean it should - to properly function as a reggae venue - open until 6am?



A bespoke reggae venue would open until at least 6am and have an in house sound system in excess of 10K. Something like Brixton Rec used to resemble in the old University Of Dub days. Sadly it's not going to happen, which is why I appreciate the Hoot for doing what it does.


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Sep 10, 2010)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> Sounds familiar but I can't be sure.  I may have stopped drinking there by then (sort of barred myself after a friend had an argument with him and threw a bottle at the window)


 
I think he did, and then it closed for a bit.

When did it become the Hobgoblin. That's gotta be nearly 20 years ago???


----------



## ringo (Sep 10, 2010)

quimcunx said:


> She didn't.  Tarannau just talked as if  she did to suit his own argument.


 
Rubbish, she said "In 1985 is was a nice old skool south London pub that no one would have minded living near. " 

I was responding to that.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 10, 2010)

Nanker Phelge said:


> I think he did, and then it closed for a bit.
> 
> When did it become the Hobgoblin. That's gotta be nearly 20 years ago???


 
No, I don't think it was that long ago was it?


ETA:  Just searched and on Wiki it says



> A Brixton public house on the corner of Effra Road and Brixton Water Lane was called the George Canning until *renamed the Hobgoblin in the late 1990's.*



That would sound more correct I reckon


----------



## wurlycurly (Sep 10, 2010)

Orang Utan said:


> OK, take your OP:
> Two posts in and she's coming across as some intolerant NIMBY with too much time on her hands, one who's willing to spin the facts to suit her argument. I'm no great fan of the Hoot and its inflated prices but to suggest noise is significantly worse now than at any period over the past quarter century is patently absurd. There's less violence, less drug-taking, it attracts a much more diverse group of people and puts on some good music and decent food. Pubs are disappearing left, right and centre, so bucking the trend is admirable (despite the hefty bar prices). '
> talk about twisting someone's words to fit your own agenda!
> and this bit: 'to suggest noise is significantly worse now than at any period over the past quarter century is patently absurd' - what's absurd is you telling someone who's complaining about a noise problem that there isn't one. you're telling them not to trust their own ears.
> it's not very welcoming behaviour and if i'd been treated the same, i'd have been a lot ruder to tarranau than the OP was.




Mate, no offence but we're  just gonna have to leave it at that because you're reminding me of a recent conversation I had with a Creationist. My head's totally done in. Enjoy the rest of the post.


----------



## quimcunx (Sep 10, 2010)

ringo said:


> Rubbish, she said "In 1985 is was a nice old skool south London pub that no one would have minded living near. "
> 
> I was responding to that.


 
Someone describes a pub like that to me I don't think genteel.  

She also said she happily lived next to a brothel.     It's the noise she says that is bothering her and has only started bothering her recently.   If she's bothered by the noise she's bothered by the noise.  

I don't know if she's a troll or twisting the truth or what.    People have different truths.     Maybe it hasn't changed but she has.


----------



## Orang Utan (Sep 10, 2010)

wurlycurly said:


> Mate, no offence but we're  just gonna have to leave it at that because you're reminding me of a recent conversation I had with a Creationist. My head's totally done in. Enjoy the rest of the post.


 
you're rubbish at arguing. clear off then.


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Sep 10, 2010)

Orang Utan said:


> you're rubbish at arguing. clear off then.


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Sep 10, 2010)

quimcunx said:


> People have different truths. Maybe it hasn't changed but she has.


 
Was this a Manics album title too?


----------



## tarannau (Sep 10, 2010)

quimcunx said:


> She didn't.  Tarannau just talked as if  she did to suit his own argument.


 
Bullshit I did. I've directly quoted her words on more than one occasion on this thread - the idea that the Canning was a 'nice' pub 'no one would have minded living near' is clearly false and implies a very different pub than the one that existed in reality. I'll happily stand by my portrayal of her posts on this thread, particularly when they're backed up pish about chavs and other ridiculous claims.


----------



## ringo (Sep 10, 2010)

quimcunx said:


> Someone describes a pub like that to me I don't think genteel.



Fair enough. I did.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 10, 2010)

I think OP needs to go to the pub management there (which it sounds like they've done already) or over their heads to the management and talk about soundproofing stating that complaints will be made to the council.  She can point out other pubs that have been closed in the area (ie. The Telegraph) and other pubs that once closed, have become flats and maybe they'll have a rethink.

But without fighting first with the management, I wouldn't go to the council unless you really do want another pub closed, and that would be heartbreaking.  Once a pub's closed, how many do you ever see re-opening.  It could be lost for life.  Ok, lots do after licences/opening hours/noise levels have been restricted but I really think stronger complaints need to be made to the management first before approaching the council.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Sep 10, 2010)

Nanker Phelge said:


> Was this a Manics album title too?


 Do you mean "This Is My Truth Tell Me Yours"?


----------



## quimcunx (Sep 10, 2010)

tarannau said:


> Bullshit I did. I've directly quoted her words on more than one occasion on this thread - the idea that the Canning was a 'nice' pub 'no one would have minded living near' is clearly false and implies a very different pub than the one that existed in reality. I'll happily stand by my portrayal of her posts on this thread, particularly when they're backed up pish about chavs and other ridiculous claims.


 
Yet in this very post you've protracted what she said to misrepresent her.


----------



## wtfftw (Sep 10, 2010)

Orang Utan said:


> or maybe they're just very tired.
> if i'm being kept awake by others, i get VERY unreasonable.


 Innit


Nanker Phelge said:


> Was this a Manics album title too?


 


Pub near me has got seriously annoying since the smoking ban with fucking students shrieking outside. My plan this year is to make friends with the bouncers. Also either the staff or regulars have motorbikes which they like to rev very loudly at whatever o'clock. 
What with that and the surrounding building being a building site in the day time I'm developing frown lines.


----------



## matt m (Sep 10, 2010)

Let's try that again... 

Soundproofing.

Nothing to do with genres of music. Nothing to do with NIMBYism.


----------



## tarannau (Sep 10, 2010)

there is absolutely no misrepresentation in that post. Nothing that I have omitted changes the context, intent or meaning.

I'm not sure you know what protracted means


----------



## teuchter (Sep 10, 2010)

You do have a somewhat operatic posting style tarannau, it has to be said.


----------



## teuchter (Sep 10, 2010)

matt m said:


> Let's try that again...
> 
> Soundproofing.


 
Difficult and very expensive. Especially somewhere with big windows all round two sides. I'm not any kind of soundproofing expert but I wouldn't be surprised if the cost of doing anything meaningful to the Hootananny would simply be infeasible.


----------



## tarannau (Sep 10, 2010)

teuchter said:


> You do have a somewhat operatic posting style tarannau, it has to be said.


 
It's a bulletin board innit - there's no point being entirely dispassionate when people are spouting off a load of old cobblers and giving it the royal 'we' about your neighbourhood. There is, however, no misrepresentation - or protraction for that matter - in that last post. I'm more than happy to let the OP's unbalanced, inaccurate and unpleasant words stand for themselves here. I did quite enjoy the chav outburst to be fair.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 10, 2010)

teuchter said:


> Difficult and very expensive. Especially somewhere with big windows all round two sides. I'm not any kind of soundproofing expert but I wouldn't be surprised if the cost of doing anything meaningful to the Hootananny would simply be infeasible.


 

The Windmill had to do it.  Fair enough, it's a lot smaller and I'm not sure The GeorgeHobNanny would look right with windows boarded up


----------



## OpalFruit (Sep 10, 2010)

Sorry, not read whole thread, I sympathise because as far as I can see the OP is exactly the kind of resident, like thousands of others living near pubs, who suffered when Tessa Jowell brought in 24 hour licensing and Premises Licenses. If late licences (rather than just longstanding pub noise) cause a nuisance and disturbance then it is fair that they be withdrawn.


----------



## gaijingirl (Sep 10, 2010)

I have sympathies for both sides - the fence is firmly between my thighs but I did rather enjoy this particular put down...



tarannau said:


> Still, at least I'm not some delusional flapjack...


 
and GC's



goldenecitrone said:


> Get the landlady's son addicted to crack cocaine and Bob's your uncle, the pub will be just glowing embers in a matter of weeks.


----------



## ringo (Sep 10, 2010)

OpalFruit said:


> Sorry, not read whole thread, I sympathise because as far as I can see the OP is exactly the kind of resident, like thousands of others living near pubs, who suffered when Tessa Jowell brought in 24 hour licensing and Premises Licenses. If late licences (rather than just longstanding pub noise) cause a nuisance and disturbance then it is fair that they be withdrawn.


 
Not really buying that. The govt just relaxed outdated licensing laws brought in during the 1940's for war/munitions reasons. Pubs have been opening late for hundreds of years.


----------



## OpalFruit (Sep 10, 2010)

ringo said:


> Not really buying that. The govt just relaxed outdated licensing laws brought in during the 1940's for war/munitions reasons. Pubs have been opening late for hundreds of years.


 
LOL - fair enough, the licensing laws were based on strictures that went back to Oliver Cromwell! But in my experience (born after the Blitz...) late night openings of pubs took place rather thrillingly with the blind drawn and the lights dimmed, and in the case of the Hamilton Arms lock-ins, the possibility that you might have to lie on the floor behind the pool table if there was loud knocking on the door after midnight! The OP could not necessarily have predicted a reverse of these (in)discretions. Is business and drinking so important that any resident anywhere should shut up and put up if a new factor (granting of a late license) causes disturbance at 1, 2 a.m night after night?


----------



## Orang Utan (Sep 10, 2010)

tarannau said:


> It's a bulletin board innit - there's no point being entirely dispassionate when people are spouting off a load of old cobblers and giving it the royal 'we' about your neighbourhood. There is, however, no misrepresentation - or protraction for that matter - in that last post. I'm more than happy to let the OP's unbalanced, inaccurate and unpleasant words stand for themselves here. I did quite enjoy the chav outburst to be fair.


 
what's with this royal we nonsense?


----------



## pedantophilia (Sep 10, 2010)

*quimcunx posting...  *


tarannau said:


> I'm not sure you know what protracted means



I do know what it means. I can only blame a lack of sleep for using it there, mind.    I must have been thinking of contracted although that's not ideal either.


----------



## ringo (Sep 10, 2010)

OpalFruit said:


> Is business and drinking so important that any resident anywhere should shut up and put up if a new factor (granting of a late license) causes disturbance at 1, 2 a.m night after night?



I think the point here is that it isn't really a new factor. That pub has always been a magnet for rotters.


----------



## kyser_soze (Sep 10, 2010)

Hmm. What I don't get is why the noise complaints are happening _now_. When Hootahob was still the Hobgoblin, I used to go to their regular FREE! Drum & Bass night on Fridays, and you could hear the sounds of deep, rolling bass easily as far as Brazzas on Tulse Hill til 1am - which is clearly as loud as it the OP is complaining it is now.

I also visited the pub when it was the Canning once when I was a student (amazingly enough, to score) and it was borderline scary. In comparison, the Hobahoot as it is now is a great, welcoming place that's turned a potentially disastrous decision (Celtic theme pub in Brixton) into a great venue for a really wide range of musics (reggae predominating, but there's also the folksy/punk/Celt nights & artists - not my cup o' tea but I can see the value in it).


----------



## TopCat (Sep 10, 2010)

Onket said:


> I'm with the OP on this one. There have been some sensible responses but quite a few people making themselves looking like right bellends.
> 
> Welcome to U75.


 
Your getting old!


----------



## TopCat (Sep 10, 2010)

I think the OP is a wind up merchant who has successfully poked the U75 ants nest.


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Sep 10, 2010)

Lord Camomile said:


> Do you mean "This Is My Truth Tell Me Yours"?


 
Oh yes, my mistake.


----------



## Orang Utan (Sep 10, 2010)

kyser_soze said:


> Hmm. What I don't get is why the noise complaints are happening _now_. When Hootahob was still the Hobgoblin, I used to go to their regular FREE! Drum & Bass night on Fridays, and you could hear the sounds of deep, rolling bass easily as far as Brazzas on Tulse Hill til 1am - which is clearly as loud as it the OP is complaining it is now.
> 
> I also visited the pub when it was the Canning once when I was a student (amazingly enough, to score) and it was borderline scary. In comparison, the Hobahoot as it is now is a great, welcoming place that's turned a potentially disastrous decision (Celtic theme pub in Brixton) into a great venue for a really wide range of musics (reggae predominating, but there's also the folksy/punk/Celt nights & artists - not my cup o' tea but I can see the value in it).


 people call it 'the hoo' now


----------



## teuchter (Sep 10, 2010)

Some people I know call it "that ******* Scottish place"


----------



## strung out (Sep 10, 2010)

teuchter said:


> Some people I know call it "that ******* Scottish place"


 
ouch!


----------



## editor (Sep 10, 2010)

Surely the main difference is that the Canning only used to put on loud, late music events _occasionally_, but now it's several times a week throughout the year, and then often running later than it used to?

I like the Hoot and I'd hate to see it being forced to change, but if residents are complaining about the bass bins keeping them up all night (and not the noise from the people outside), then surely it's just a matter of the pub opening a dialogue with those concerned and investing in better soundproofing?


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Sep 10, 2010)

editor said:


> better soundproofing?


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 10, 2010)

teuchter mentioned cost considerations in soundproofing the pub with all those big windows.

I'm thinking if the music was restricted to the back room and the doors shut, it couldn't cost that much to sound proof just that end of the pub?


----------



## editor (Sep 10, 2010)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> teuchter mentioned cost considerations in soundproofing the pub with all those big windows.


You can big heavy soundproofing curtains that are pretty effective. They use them in the Dogstar.


----------



## TopCat (Sep 10, 2010)

You need huge bass with the Hoots sort of music. You can't sound proof the bass away. I love the hoot and enjoy going there. I would not want it at the end of my street though. I am glad it is where it is. Near the OP! Rodi turn it up!


----------



## grit (Sep 10, 2010)

TopCat said:


> I am glad it is where it is. Near the OP! Rodi turn it up!


 
I literally laughed out loud at this, fucking quality. 

Yeah I'm a fan of hoots aswell, long live hoots!


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 10, 2010)

editor said:


> You can big heavy soundproofing curtains that are pretty effective. They use them in the Dogstar.


 
I'm guessing you mean buy  

As for cost considerations, it'll cost them a lot more in lost revenue if they don't have music so it has to be worth a go at either boarding up windows or having soundproof curtains or both, and making sure the doors aren't left open


----------



## Onket (Sep 10, 2010)

If anyone was wondering what U75 was like, then this thread should serve as a perfect introduction.


----------



## TopCat (Sep 10, 2010)

Onket said:


> If anyone was wondering what U75 was like, then this thread should serve as a perfect introduction.



Spell it out Onkey.


----------



## editor (Sep 10, 2010)

Onket said:


> If anyone was wondering what U75 was like, then this thread should serve as a perfect introduction.


The good, the bad and the ugly. Or should that be the mad, the bad and the dangerous to know?

Or, in my case, the 'unable-to-string-together-a-coherent-sentence'.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 10, 2010)

It's alright Editor, the sun is past the yard arm


----------



## Onket (Sep 10, 2010)

editor said:


> The good, the bad and the ugly. Or should that be the mad, the bad and the dangerous to know?
> 
> Or, in my case, the 'unable-to-string-together-a-coherent-sentence'.


 


TopCat- I did. 

p.s. Editor- I do actually own this album-


----------



## linerider (Sep 10, 2010)

TopCat said:


> You need huge bass with the Hoots sort of music. You can't sound proof the bass away. I love the hoot and enjoy going there. I would not want it at the end of my street though. I am glad it is where it is. Near the OP! Rodi turn it up!


true you can't sound proof the bass away,but from my time doing squat parties,i know that you can reduce sound leakage by how and where you place the speakers.i.e. not all facing the same way but spread around the room.
As to it being a new problem it was a party every friday and saturday night with banging music for years.


----------



## GarfieldLeChat (Sep 10, 2010)

I wonder as it doesn't seem apparent if you've made the pub aware that their bass levels are the issue and that you'd like them to do something about it...


----------



## editor (Sep 10, 2010)

linerider said:


> As to it being a new problem it was a party every friday and saturday night with banging music for years.


I've been there on weekends when it was the Canning/Hobgoblin and it was anything _but_ banging. For a while the place was really struggling.


----------



## linerider (Sep 10, 2010)

editor said:


> I've been there on weekends when it was the Canning/Hobgoblin and it was anything _but_ banging. For a while the place was really struggling.


For quite a while it was the place where my weekend started and it was a drug fueled madhouse.It's had it's ups and down over the years though.


----------



## DJWrongspeed (Sep 10, 2010)

I'm all in favour of defending venues against the ludicrous licensing laws but I have to say with the Hoot you have a point.  It's gone a bit OTT.  I've cycled by a fair few times well after midnight and it does seems a bit raucous mainly because of the beer garden and the accompanying bass from within. I think it's the fact that it opens well after 2am that's the problem.  How did Lambeth give them that kind of licence ?  It wouldn't kill them if it all started/finished a bit earlier.


----------



## tommers (Sep 10, 2010)

linerider said:


> As to it being a new problem it was a party every friday and saturday night with banging music for years.



She's not saying it's a new problem.

People said "don't buy a flat near a noisy pub and then complain"

She said "when I bought the flat it wasn't noisy"

Other people have then started talking about how it was really noisy when it was the hobbygobby, but that's not the point.  She didn't buy the flat when it was the hobbygobby.


----------



## lang rabbie (Sep 10, 2010)

I haven't been in since it became a regular reggae venue, but during its early days as Hootananny, they seemed to be putting the PA for gigs in the largely glazed room on the southern side closer to Brixton Water Lane.  

When it was the George Canning, wasn't the PA in the mostly enclosed (and often overcrowded and overheated) room on the north side of the pub?

Are they still putting the PA in the street side of the pub - is that they cause of the problem?


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 10, 2010)

lang rabbie said:


> I haven't been in since it became a regular reggae venue, but during its early days as Hootananny, they seemed to be putting the PA for gigs in the largely glazed room on the southern side closer to Brixton Water Lane.
> 
> When it was the George Canning, wasn't the PA in the mostly enclosed (and often overcrowded and overheated) room on the north side of the pub?
> 
> Are they still putting the PA in the street side of the pub - is that they cause of the problem?


 

Not having any sense of direction, I have no idea what you're talking about.

When I used to go there in the mid-80s, the music was at the back.

The back being, if you were walking up from Water Lane from Brixton Hill towards the Canning, then the left hand side of the pub facing you, not the bit where you have the door on the corner


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Sep 10, 2010)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> Not having any sense of direction, I have no idea what you're talking about.



Was this a Manics Album title?


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 10, 2010)

Nanker Phelge said:


> Was this a Manics Album title?


----------



## killer b (Sep 10, 2010)




----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 10, 2010)

killer b said:


>


 
Still


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Sep 10, 2010)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> Still



You have to read the whole thread.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 10, 2010)

Nanker Phelge said:


> You have to read the whole thread.


 

I have, but I'm afraid I no longer listen to music so it would go straight over my head


----------



## co-op (Sep 10, 2010)

TopCat said:


> You need huge bass with the Hoots sort of music. You can't sound proof the bass away. I love the hoot and enjoy going there. I would not want it at the end of my street though. I am glad it is where it is. Near the OP! Rodi turn it up!


 
Yeay! Drop it 'eavy selecta!


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Sep 10, 2010)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> I have, but I'm afraid I no longer listen to music so it would go straight over my head



You 'no longer' listen to music? How does that work then?


----------



## killer b (Sep 10, 2010)

from the following three sentences, pick two manic street preachers song or album titles:

a) this is my truth, tell me yours
b) if you tolerate this then your children will be next
c) Not having any sense of direction, I have no idea what you're talking about.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 10, 2010)

I don't have a radio.  No jukebox in my local.  Don't watch music tv.


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Sep 10, 2010)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> I don't have a radio.  No jukebox in my local.  Don't watch music tv.



You don't stick a record on from time to time?

You're making me sad.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 10, 2010)

Nanker Phelge said:


> You don't stick a record on from time to time?
> 
> You're making me sad.


 

I was burgled about 20 years ago.  They took the sound system.


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Sep 10, 2010)

20 years. Get a new one.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 10, 2010)

Nanker Phelge said:


> 20 years. Get a new one.



Nah, can't be arsed.  Get to listen to enough music in my local


----------



## strung out (Sep 10, 2010)

if you move closer to hootenanny, you won't even need to leave your house to listen to the music in your local


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Sep 11, 2010)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> Nah, can't be arsed.  Get to listen to enough music in my local



So you do listen to music.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 11, 2010)

strung out said:


> if you move closer to hootenanny, you won't even need to leave your house to listen to the music in your local


 
I can listen to the bass from the George IV/Southside/Music Bar.  I don't need to live near the Canning


----------



## teuchter (Sep 11, 2010)

lang rabbie said:


> I haven't been in since it became a regular reggae venue, but during its early days as Hootananny, they seemed to be putting the PA for gigs in the largely glazed room on the southern side closer to Brixton Water Lane.
> 
> When it was the George Canning, wasn't the PA in the mostly enclosed (and often overcrowded and overheated) room on the north side of the pub?
> 
> Are they still putting the PA in the street side of the pub - is that they cause of the problem?


 
No. The bands and PA are always in the north side. ie. on the left when standing on Effra road facing the pub.


----------



## teuchter (Sep 11, 2010)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> I can listen to the bass from the George IV/Southside/Music Bar.


 
What is happening in that place these days? I don't walk past it twice a day anymore so haven't been paying attention.


----------



## AnnO'Neemus (Sep 11, 2010)

.


----------



## tommers (Sep 11, 2010)

killer b said:


> from the following three sentences, pick two manic street preachers song or album titles:
> 
> a) this is my truth, tell me yours
> b) if you tolerate this then your children will be next
> c) Not having any sense of direction, I have no idea what you're talking about.



even though the conversation has moved on... this still deserves a


----------



## T & P (Sep 11, 2010)

Nanker Phelge said:


> So you do listen to music.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 11, 2010)

Nanker Phelge said:


> So you do listen to music.


 
Well a lot of the music in the Windmill I consider to be more of a "noise" than music.  

*hopes Twisted isn't watching this thread*


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 11, 2010)

teuchter said:


> What is happening in that place these days? I don't walk past it twice a day anymore so haven't been paying attention.


 
I don't know, but funnily enough, I didn't hear any bass last night.  Maybe they've had complaints?


----------



## Gramsci (Sep 11, 2010)

Ginkogirl said:


> We live around the corner from the Hootenanny pub, who are making our lives unbearable because of the loud music etc.
> 
> We are keeping a noise diary with a view to having their licence conditions reviewed and would be very grateful to hear from any other local residents who are having similar problems. We have tried dialogue and negotiation, which have produced no result. We feel that losing their late licence might make them realize that it's not a good idea to f*** the locals totally.
> 
> We know we're not the only people affected and will treat all contacts in the strictest confidence.


 
I havent been online for the past few weeks . so didnt see this thread. 

However popular or not a pub or entertainment venue should not be the issue. These are commercial premises and should be run in such a way that does not cause disturbance .

They are run to make a profit.The fact that they do not soundproof properly is just a way to save money for there business.

I have dealt with such issues before - either entertainment venues or noisy shops.

Normally conditions are put onto a late licence. For example a noise limiter has to be installed and soundproofing up to a required standard.

I may be repeating advice already given but have you been in touch with noise control? Also have you looked at there late license requirements? they should be in writing.


----------



## ska invita (Sep 11, 2010)

Ginkogirl said:


> Weirdly enough, we can't really hear the people at all. Even when the beer garden is full. It's only the music, and only the bass levels, the treble just doesn't have the carrying power.


very suprised by this as when it was Hob i put on a couple of parties there and the pub has one of those internal sound meters that limits the music if it goes over a limit - IIRC the council install these things. we had an annoyoing time and couldnt turn it up like wed like. when i was in there a little while back it still had that thing in there. 

Unless the new management have somehow rewired it this thing should still be working to stingy council approved sound levels. <im sure someone knows about the rules relating to these things - quite a few pubs have them.

still, if your being annoyed by the noise im not arguing with you - jsut a bit suprised is all.


----------



## Rushy (Sep 12, 2010)

ska invita said:


> very suprised by this as when it was Hob i put on a couple of parties there and the pub has one of those internal sound meters that limits the music if it goes over a limit - IIRC the council install these things. we had an annoyoing time and couldnt turn it up like wed like. when i was in there a little while back it still had that thing in there.
> 
> Unless the new management have somehow rewired it this thing should still be working to stingy council approved sound levels. <im sure someone knows about the rules relating to these things - quite a few pubs have them.
> 
> still, if your being annoyed by the noise im not arguing with you - jsut a bit suprised is all.


 
The sound limiters are only effective if everything is properly set up though. I have intermittent problems with Mass and Babalou which are both pretty well sound proofed to be fair and I think also have sound limiters in place. Problem is that in order for limiter levels to be set as high as possible they are set when the clubs have all their doors and windows closed and the sound proofing is at its optimum. However promoters regularly leave these open to allow people outside or just to cool down. The clubs tend to apologise and then do it over and over again.


----------



## Rushy (Sep 12, 2010)

Gramsci said:


> However popular or not a pub or entertainment venue should not be the issue. These are commercial premises and should be run in such a way that does not cause disturbance.
> 
> They are run to make a profit.The fact that they do not soundproof properly is just a way to save money for there business.


 
I agree with that in principle although I find it pretty surprising how inconsistently disturbance seems to be interpreted. I seem to remember the old landlord of The Trinity (whose name is frustratingly escaping my Sunday morning brain) getting in all sorts of trouble when he had a bloke playing a guitar once a year between 8 and 10.30 on his birthday - hardly a raucous affair. Conversely, as much as I love the Hoot and White horse for having late night beer gardens and doors wide open I cannot understand how they get away with it!


----------



## Fingers (Sep 12, 2010)

Kanda said:


> I nearly bought around the corner from there. Realised that the pub has been there for years and to move next to a pub and then complain about it would be fucking stupid. No offence like....



This


----------



## Gramsci (Sep 12, 2010)

ska invita said:


> Unless the new management have somehow rewired it this thing should still be working to stingy council approved sound levels. <im sure someone knows about the rules relating to these things - quite a few pubs have them.



Im afraid this is what happens. I remember a case when the Council noise people were called to a premises and found that the reason there was so much noise was that the limiter was not working. They could not prove it had been tampered with but off the record were sure it had been.


----------



## Gramsci (Sep 12, 2010)

Rushy said:


> I agree with that in principle although I find it pretty surprising how inconsistently disturbance seems to be interpreted. I seem to remember the old landlord of The Trinity (whose name is frustratingly escaping my Sunday morning brain) getting in all sorts of trouble when he had a bloke playing a guitar once a year between 8 and 10.30 on his birthday - hardly a raucous affair. Conversely, as much as I love the Hoot and White horse for having late night beer gardens and doors wide open I cannot understand how they get away with it!


 
Because different areas are dealt with in different ways in practise. An active residents association will make a difference.


----------



## Gramsci (Sep 12, 2010)

DJWrongspeed said:


> I'm all in favour of defending venues against the ludicrous licensing laws but I have to say with the Hoot you have a point.  It's gone a bit OTT.  I've cycled by a fair few times well after midnight and it does seems a bit raucous mainly because of the beer garden and the accompanying bass from within. I think it's the fact that it opens well after 2am that's the problem.  How did Lambeth give them that kind of licence ?  It wouldn't kill them if it all started/finished a bit earlier.


 
Because the Government changed the licensing laws to allow pubs and bars to extend there opening hours. 

The Council are in a difficult position. The Council can refuse or limit opening hours if residents oppose an extension. However the bar owner can appeal to a magistrate that this was unfair decision. This takes it out of local ( democratic) hands. The bar owner can make all sorts of promises about noise control. Knowing full well that once they have the licence it is difficult for Councils to take away. If it goes to appeal ( and ive seen one) the lawyers the Council uses are pretty useless. Or in the case i saw lazy and didnt look at the case until half and hour before the appeal started. The bar owners lawyer turned up fully briefed. And won the case. The Councils lawyer wasnt that bothered. He was going to be paid for that day anyway.

The only reason a late license will not be given or a licence taken away is if the police object. ( They are asked there opinion). The police will only do this if they think there is drug dealing going on or the person who runs the pub is not a fir and proper person in there eyes.


----------



## Gramsci (Sep 12, 2010)

tommers said:


> She's not saying it's a new problem.
> 
> People said "don't buy a flat near a noisy pub and then complain"
> 
> ...



Well im glad someone pointed this out.

The pub near me does not cause us serious noise problems now. The previous owners were a nightmare. The ones before that were ok. It really depends on who is running it.

Nor when I was first in Brixton was there late licensing. Also must pubs were pubs. They were not night clubs. There is no distinction in licensing between pubs/ bars and nightclubs.


----------



## Gramsci (Sep 12, 2010)

teuchter said:


> Difficult and very expensive. Especially somewhere with big windows all round two sides. I'm not any kind of soundproofing expert but I wouldn't be surprised if the cost of doing anything meaningful to the Hootananny would simply be infeasible.


 
However when the late license was granted there should have been conditions put on re noise. A combination of soundproofing and a noise limiter should have been agreed between applicant and licensing officers at the time. If the applicant thought that soundproffing was to expensive then that would have limited what he could do with the premises. Well that is how the process of licencing is supposed to work in practise. It should all be written done somewhere.


----------



## Gramsci (Sep 12, 2010)

ringo said:


> Not really buying that. The govt just relaxed outdated licensing laws brought in during the 1940's for war/munitions reasons. Pubs have been opening late for hundreds of years.


 
Yes but as Opal fruit says these were lock ins. They were quiet. Im not against late opening but what has happened is that pubs have become ( with late opening hours) "vertical drinking establishments". They are designed in such a way as to maximise profit. Loud music stops people talking to much to each other and so they drink more. Having the mimimum number of seats means people have to stand more etc. Its not the Meditterenean drinking style that came about , as the Government hoped when it relaxed licensing laws.


----------



## teuchter (Sep 12, 2010)

The Hootananny has loads of seating space. The whole of the back room and the beer garden.


----------



## Gramsci (Sep 12, 2010)

really? I have been in there and its not easy to find a seat if it is at all busy. Though admittedly that was a long time ago. I remember when it was the Canning.


----------



## Gramsci (Sep 12, 2010)

teuchter said:


> The Hootananny has loads of seating space. The whole of the back room and the beer garden.


 
And also there is that wonderful new square the Council have kindly built for us to sit in.


----------



## teuchter (Sep 12, 2010)

Gramsci said:


> really? I have been in there and its not easy to find a seat if it is at all busy. Though admittedly that was a long time ago. I remember when it was the Canning.


 
Even if it's packed in the music bit, it's usually still possible to find a seat in the other room. If I'm doing vertical drinking it's because I want to, not because there's nowhere to sit.


----------



## ringo (Sep 13, 2010)

ska invita said:


> very suprised by this as when it was Hob i put on a couple of parties there and the pub has one of those internal sound meters that limits the music if it goes over a limit - IIRC the council install these things. we had an annoyoing time and couldnt turn it up like wed like. when i was in there a little while back it still had that thing in there.
> 
> Unless the new management have somehow rewired it this thing should still be working to stingy council approved sound levels. <im sure someone knows about the rules relating to these things - quite a few pubs have them.
> 
> still, if your being annoyed by the noise im not arguing with you - jsut a bit suprised is all.


 
As I mentioned above, the promoter on Thursday night mentioned that Lambeth council had been in that week and reduced the level on the limiter again. Nobody is rewiring anything, Lambeth have set a new lower threshold and the Hoot are keeping to it.


----------



## Badgers (Sep 17, 2010)

Anyone fancy a quick pint there? 
Say about 18:30 - 19:00? 
Will keep the noise down


----------



## paolo (Sep 17, 2010)

Will be there in five. Just loading the Turbo Sound into the van.


----------



## editor (Sep 17, 2010)

The pub's just won Best Live Music Pub:
http://www.southlondon-today.co.uk/News.cfm?id=32815&headline=Brixton pub voted best in England


----------



## Badgers (Sep 25, 2010)

It has drawn a big crowd tonight.
Was planning to go but sadly the chap I was going with had to cancel. No doubt it will be good but a queue to see pub band is a bit lame.


----------



## editor (Sep 25, 2010)

Queues are bad enough, but when they're accompanied by a full security pat down, my enthusiasm wanes a little more.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 25, 2010)

well it does attract some dodgy sorts of course so it's only to be expected


----------



## tarannau (Sep 25, 2010)

Heh. I don't like the implication frankly. You'll be calling me a chav next.



The security ain't too bad as a group to be honest, but the stupid policy on reggae thursdays is fucking petty. The security come in mob handed at 8pm and shovel all non gig-paying customers into the side bar and lock them in, forcing you to smoke on the pavement opposite the charming graphics of Just Wok. Really shit - especially since it's now Winter a coming and there's not the same pressure on the beer garden. The staff don't like, most of the security don't like it - it fucks customers right off for sure -  and I'm guessing it's Cecil the promoter behind this daft, petty policy. Sort it out and stop being a knobber if you're reading this. 

Yes, I can almost certainly get round it with some red card business, but not everyone's in the same boat, particularly friends who are drinking in the beer garden and getting hussled along by impatient bouncers with marginal politeness skills. It'll cost customers and leave a bad impression with plenty. Really daft - sod knows why the management are letting this one go on. 

The ousted drinkers on the pavement will probably charm the neighbours too overlooking that side of the pub, no doubt.  The pub are trying to alleviate the vexatious moaning about the noise by building an ugly internal wall inside the windows of the main bar fwiw. I confidently predict it'll do very little to please those most likely to complain.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 25, 2010)

tarannau said:


> Heh. I don't like the implication frankly. You'll be calling me a chav next.


 

Oh, I'm sorry.  Do you drink there then?  I never realised


----------



## tarannau (Sep 25, 2010)

Yeah, I'm close to the king of the chav hill there. They give me a real glass glass rather than plastic, _even when the football's on._


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 25, 2010)

tarannau said:


> Yeah, I'm close to the king of the chav hill there. They give me a real glass glass rather than plastic, _even when the football's on._


 
I know that's your second home  

Mine's The Windy.  We don't need bouncers because we're a respectable lot don't you know


----------



## Badgers (Sep 25, 2010)

I like the ramshackle style (still no noise issues) but they have to know that there is a finite amount of room? I bet they have a good take tonight but Khans was getting endless people going in wanting to piss while I was there. Not very good management really.


----------



## tarannau (Sep 25, 2010)

I'm not that bad - few times a week really, sometimes a fair bit more if the sun's out. Just adds up over the years I guess.

I think the bouncers thing is foisted on them by the licence conditions as much as anything else. It seems to have built up a reputation for trouble over the years, from the Canning onwards. Not really deserved ime - it's a chaotic mix that indulges more nutters tolerantly than most perhaps, but there are a lot of kind people there.


----------



## tarannau (Sep 26, 2010)

Badgers said:


> I like the ramshackle style (still no noise issues) but they have to know that there is a finite amount of room? I bet they have a good take tonight but Khans was getting endless people going in wanting to piss while I was there. Not very good management really.


 
What was on tonight btw? I was in earlier, but went home for a little beer-induced nap after much afternoon drinking. By the time I came out a _little_ later - to get a fine brown stew fish from the friendly chaps at Real Taste no less - there was a much bigger crowd around. Couldn't be arsed to revisit really.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 26, 2010)

tarannau said:


> I'm not that bad - few times a week really, sometimes a fair bit more if the sun's out. Just adds up over the years I guess.





I'm teasing tarannau


----------



## tarannau (Sep 26, 2010)

I'm not taking it to heart you sausage. I insist that you remove the palm from your forehead, or I'll do one of these things:


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 26, 2010)

tarannau said:


> I'm not taking it to heart you sausage. I insist that you remove the palm from your forehead, or I'll do one of these things:


 


palm duly removed boss


----------



## Badgers (Sep 26, 2010)

tarannau said:


> What was on tonight btw? I was in earlier, but went home for a little beer-induced nap after much afternoon drinking. By the time I came out a _little_ later - to get a fine brown stew fish from the friendly chaps at Real Taste no less - there was a much bigger crowd around. Couldn't be arsed to revisit really.


 
The Correspondents and some others are on. I had not heard them before another urb said we must see them but have been endorsed.


----------



## boohoo (Sep 26, 2010)

The correspondents are very good! They've been doing the festival circuit for a few years. They sold out their gig last week. So a free one was going to be mobbed. Aprox 6,000 friends on facebook.


----------



## paolo (Sep 26, 2010)

Played the main stage at Bestival.

They are ascendent. And jolly good too.


----------



## wemakeyousoundb (Oct 6, 2010)

Ginkogirl said:


> Weirdly enough, we can't really hear the people at all. Even when the beer garden is full. It's only the music, and only the bass levels, the treble just doesn't have the carrying power.
> 
> One bright spot on the horizon for anyone affected by a licenced premises -
> my other half works in policy. The government has just closed a consultation on licencing with the view to making radical changes to premises licencing asap.
> ...


 
lovely...


----------



## Rushy (Oct 8, 2010)

Ginkogirl - I have PM'd you.


----------



## kyser_soze (Oct 8, 2010)

> One bright spot on the horizon for anyone affected by a licenced premises -
> my other half works in policy. The government has just closed a consultation on licencing with the view to making radical changes to premises licencing asap.
> Among many provisions they consulted about, which are changes they want to make are:
> Removing geographical distance as a factor. This means that you don't have to live very close to a pub/premises to be affected by it, and the licencing committees are obliged to take your views into account.
> ...



Fucking NIMBY charter more like it.


----------



## editor (Oct 8, 2010)

kyser_soze said:


> Fucking NIMBY charter more like it.


So you wouldn't have any complaints at all if the pub which you've lived next to for 15 years suddenly started putting on regular and very loud, late night music events that went on till 3am and later?

I'm all for supporting the night economy and having more venues open late, but the venues can't just simply ignore legitimate complaints about noise from long standing residents. It seems in this case that an acoustic curtain would go some way to alleviating the bass problem. Surely you can't be against residents lobbying the venue to restrict their noise pollution?


----------



## tarannau (Oct 8, 2010)

kyser_soze said:


> Fucking NIMBY charter more like it.


 
The thing is that I know the chair of one of the residents committees locally. He even lives next door to the bleeding pub. 

Strangely enough he doesn't share the OP's convenient reimagining of the pub's past, nor her basic complaints. His view is that the bass is rarely a problem - particularly given the sparse bands during the week and most of the weekend - but noise from the garden raises real concerns. 

It's fair to say that he and many local residents certainly wouldn't recommend that the pub lose it's licence to 'teach it a lesson.' How  should the whines of an often unreasonable and inaccurate (that line about the Canning being a pub that anyone would be happy to live near was a real cracker) few be balanced against masses of other local residents - myself and many other St Matthews folks for a start - who are happy with the current arrangements? It certainly isn't noisier musicwise than it was before - hell I know the sound setups and limiters all too well - but there seems at least one of two people determined to teach the place a lesson since it got more popular.

The reality is that it'll likely get noticeably quieter during winter too.


----------



## editor (Oct 8, 2010)

To be fair, the poster said she had no problem with the noise from the outside drinkers.


----------



## Badgers (Oct 8, 2010)

editor said:


> I'm all for supporting the night economy and having more venues open late, but the venues can't just simply ignore legitimate complaints about noise from long standing residents. It seems in this case that an acoustic curtain would go some way to alleviating the bass problem. Surely you can't be against residents lobbying the venue to restrict their noise pollution?


 
What confused me is that I literally live 10-15m from this venue with single glazing and NEVER here a thing.


----------



## tarannau (Oct 8, 2010)

editor said:


> So you wouldn't have any complaints at all if the pub which you've lived next to for 15 years suddenly started putting on regular and very loud, late night music events that went on till 3am and later?
> ?


 

It doesn't have a later licence than before, nor have half as many gigs as you seem to make out. Believe me, the sound rig brought into the Hob was way louder than the present set up. I know the limiters are much lower now. And besides, there have been periods when the pub has had equally regular club night and far more lock in to boot.

I'm more than willing to accept that the place is busier and that concerns over increased noise from the garden and customers there remains a concern. But this whole idea that there's a massively noisier rig powering out every other night is basically measurably untrue.


----------



## kyser_soze (Oct 8, 2010)

editor said:


> So you wouldn't have any complaints at all if the pub which you've lived next to for 15 years suddenly started putting on regular and very loud, late night music events that went on till 3am and later?
> 
> I'm all for supporting the night economy and having more venues open late, but the venues can't just simply ignore legitimate complaints about noise from long standing residents. It seems in this case that an acoustic curtain would go some way to alleviating the bass problem. Surely you can't be against residents lobbying the venue to restrict their noise pollution?



When this policy becomes some hash of actual legislation, and you start a thread promoting a campaign about how it's going to to kill the live music scene and/or the few remaining pubs in the UK, I'm going to quote this back to you.



> To be fair, the poster said she had no problem with the noise from the outside drinkers.



Ah yes, but what if other residents _do_? You'd have the combination of people complaining about the noise made by music and patrons. And they'd have the power to get the pubs hours significantly diminished, affect it's ability to host live music and even close it down if it got so far that the landlord lost his liquor license.

Let's look at the geographical thing, for example. I live on a street which gets a lot of people walking back up it from the Railway and Swan pubs. They litter the place, I've seen a few taking a piss against people's walls etc - and I live .5km from the place. If my fellow residents and I decided to get arsey, we could use this proposed legislation as the basis of a complaint, as _could anyone who could argue that their home is on a route back from a pub_.


----------



## editor (Oct 8, 2010)

It's a lot, LOT busier than it used to be and there's bigger bands playing there more often. If you have more people in a venue, you need a bigger PA and there's a fair bit of clout to the Hoot's PA (I know this because I've DJd there!). Older sound systems may have been physically bigger, but that definitely doesn't mean they were more powerful.


----------



## tarannau (Oct 8, 2010)

And besides, as I said earlier, they're attempting to build an internal wall in front of the window of the main bar, as they already had thick(ish) curtains. It's an horrible looking thing

I confidently predict it will do fuck all to stop vexatious or unreasonable complaints, let alone the noise from the beer garden which seems to be the biggest bugbear formany


----------



## tarannau (Oct 8, 2010)

editor said:


> It's a lot, LOT busier than it used to be and there's bigger bands playing there more often. If you have more people in a venue, you need a bigger PA and there's a fair bit of clout to the Hoot's PA (I know this because I've DJd there!). Older sound systems may have been physically bigger, but that definitely doesn't mean they were more powerful.


 
There was 30k turbosound brought in there on occasion, plus other other assorted South London rigs. It definitely has been more powerful in the past, take it from me. The noise limiters were higher too

They've upgraded recently, but it's still far from a mighty rig now.


----------



## editor (Oct 8, 2010)

kyser_soze said:


> Let's look at the geographical thing, for example. I live on a street which gets a lot of people walking back up it from the Railway and Swan pubs. They litter the place, I've seen a few taking a piss against people's walls etc - and I live .5km from the place. If my fellow residents and I decided to get arsey, we could use this proposed legislation as the basis of a complaint, as _could anyone who could argue that their home is on a route back from a pub_.


I think people have a right to complain if their front door is being used as a toilet (don't you?), but I've only been arguing about _this specific poster's complaint_. And you can quote my comments back to me as much as you like. 

If you read the thread it becomes pretty clear that she's not a 'Fucking NIMBY' and has tried to get a dialogue going with the pub. If it turns out that the Hoot now takes action to sort this out, then that's great.

FYI, I live opposite an unbelievably loud venue in a residential area where people shout at the top of their heads, piss in the gardens, throw bottles, play car stereos and generally make a right fucking racket till 3-4am several nights a week.

I'm amazed that they're still open to be honest, but I've never complained once.


----------



## editor (Oct 8, 2010)

tarannau said:


> There was 30k turbosound brought in there on occasion, plus other other assorted South London rigs.


Yes, _on occasion_, but not permanently installed

I know it's your local, but come on! - the old in-house PA was nothing like the large sound system they've got installed in there now. I might even have pictures of it somewhere..


----------



## twistedAM (Oct 8, 2010)

editor said:


> If you read the thread it becomes pretty clear that she's not a 'Fucking NIMBY' and has tried to get a *dialogue* going with the pub.



That's the key word in here. Hasn't been much of it on the thread.


----------



## tarannau (Oct 8, 2010)

Indeed, the OP came up with a fantastically inaccurate picture of the pub as it used to be - that Canning comment will still make pretty much anyone snort in derision who knew the place and called for the pub to lose its licence in her very first post. Add to that her hair trigger ability to round on established posters and get busy with the chav insults. Real classy frankly

I really have very little sympathy for distortionary NIMBY campaigns that use these boards to spam their more than slightly questionable take on things.


----------



## tarannau (Oct 8, 2010)

editor said:


> Yes, _on occasion_, but not permanently installed
> 
> I know it's your local, but come on! - the old in-house PA was nothing like the large sound system they've got installed in there now. I might even have pictures of it somewhere..


 
But when there's a limiter on the rig now, one set at a lower level than the older system, then it really makes very little difference wouldn't you say?

It was way noisier musicwise on occasion in the past, even down to the occasional setup in the garden itself.


----------



## DJWrongspeed (Oct 8, 2010)

Can someone illuminate me.  What powers don't the council & police have to restrict venues already.  I don't think it needs any more bloody legislation, just better enforcement.  The labour party have already made live music technically illegal without a licence , what more does anyone need ?


----------



## editor (Oct 8, 2010)

I think she has a point worth listening to, but it seems that you're only interested in rubbishing her opinions, slagging her off and insisting that your recollection of events is the only correct one. 

Personally, I don't think that's the best way forward for pubs to deal with concerns of long standing local residents and I hope -for the future of the Hoot which is a fantastic venue - that they're a little more responsive than you.


----------



## editor (Oct 8, 2010)

tarannau said:


> It was way noisier musicwise on occasion in the past, even down to the occasional setup in the garden itself.


That's the bit you're failing to grasp. 

Yes, there were *occasional* big nights there, but not _every single weekend_ and into the week. I used to go to Canning a fair bit, and on many weekends  there wasn't a great deal going on - and it would be very rare to see a loud band playing in the week days.


----------



## paolo (Oct 8, 2010)

kyser_soze said:


> Fucking NIMBY charter more like it.


 
Quite. There's only direction that will head - an increase in licence refusals.

There's people in my road who dislike a bar they can neither see nor hear. It only opens about a twice a week.

The pub opposite, with the same licensing hours and music license, but open 7 days, receives no criticism from those people.

One of these two venues is slightly shabby with an almost totally black clientele, the other more upmarket and predominantly white. Guess which is which.

My point here is that extending the complaint area is an invite for people to complain based on an underlying dislike of the aesthetic, rather than any real impact on quality of life.


----------



## tarannau (Oct 8, 2010)

editor said:


> I think she has a point worth listening to, but it seems that you're only interested in rubbishing her opinions, slagging her off and insisting that your recollection of events is the only correct one.
> 
> Personally, I don't think that's the best way forward for pubs to deal with concerns of long standing local residents and I hope -for the future of the Hoot which is a fantastic venue - that they're a little more responsive than you.





What genuine point? The pub has volume limiters and db levels have measured by council enforcement bods on more than a few occasions. It is demonstratably no noisier than it was before when it comes to the music levels.

Which of course is the only thing the OP complained about - apparently the noise in the garden is not a problem. You seem to be throwing all sorts of other irrelevant bits and claims in tbh

 That is nothing to do with personal recollection, although the OP's remarkable claim about the Canning make me doubt her honesty and commitment to any level of accuracy. And it's not as though many of us on here and beyond, also neighbours of the pub, have not contradicted her opinion. Unlike you it seems I'm far less inclined to take the word of a distortionary OP one that uses her first post on the boards to spam a NIMBY campaign that seeks to have a pub's licence removed on very shaky ground.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Oct 8, 2010)

I'm stuck in the middle with this one. I work a lot of venues where the noise limits are strictly enforced, which from an engineering point of view is a pain in the arse. But a quiet show is still better than no show in my book.

The problem is people's expectations as to what is an acceptable volume nowadays. Shows have got louder and louder, with certain musical styles asking for stupid amounts of bass. The trouble is that with the current growth of live music, many venues simply aren't cut out for it.  Moaning that a dubstep night is too quiet when it's being held in a pub is idiotic.  It should be in a club, in a building that has been designed to minimise sound propagation.

I don't have a problem with gigs/nights in pubs, the more the merrier. I just think that punters need to accept that they might not get the full on clubbing experience there.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Oct 8, 2010)

tarannau said:


> What genuine point? The pub has volume limiters and db levels have measured by council enforcement bods on more than a few occasions. It is demonstratably no noisier than it was before when it comes to the music levels.


 
This is a tricky area as well, as there are various ways of measuring noise, with a surprisingly large number of councils that don't really understand them.

Musical style has a huge influence on perceived levels - a highly compressed drum and bass track will sound a _lot_ louder than a folk tune, even if you turned up the latter to give significantly higher peak readings. 

The growth in dance and modern rock music has brought with it a lot of problems that older music simply doesn't have when it comes to noise issues.


----------



## tarannau (Oct 8, 2010)

Oh I'd agree with that Bees. But it's also worth bearing in mind that the Hoot has, if anything, moved away from heavier musical styles in the main. Whereas the Hob occasionally brought in Topcat and Congo Natty crew, it's more instrumental now. Even the more popular reggae tends to be ska and rocksteady based rather than the harder edge of dancehall and more modern variations


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Oct 8, 2010)

What's needed, like so many things, is for people to meet in the middle.  As punters/bands/engineers we need to accept that certain venues simply can't have the volumes we've grown accustomed to. The idea of a 30K Turbo rig (as mentioned earlier) in _any_ pub is just daft. 

However, local residents need to accept that living in a large city will involve a degree of noise you won't get if you lived in the suburbs, with once quiet areas potentially changing over the years. Cities aren't static places, if you can't deal with that it's time to move.

The major problem at the moment is that the system seems geared up to produce the result of complaints = shutdown, rather than complaints = open a dialogue between the affected parties.


----------



## tarannau (Oct 8, 2010)

True, but calling for the pub to  lose its licence on your first contribution is by no means meeting in the middle. Indeed, the residents associations locally (thankfully) seem a lot more balanced

I agree about the turbosound fwiw - it was daft (but fun whilst it lasted). The current management are responsible and organised in comparison to the past


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Oct 8, 2010)

tarannau said:


> calling for the pub to lose its licence on your first contribution is by no means meeting in the middle


 
Indeed. My sympathy for the OP isn't quite what it could be...


----------



## Rushy (Oct 8, 2010)

Worth remembering that it might be their first post on Urban but that there is likely to be considerable history. None of us knows what the OPs attitude was when they started negotiating with the Hoot. But if their experience was anything like mine elsewhere I would give them an allowance for venting little steam. In my case I had discussions with the club, the club made promises, never kept any of them, threatened me ("do you know who the fuck you are dealing with?"), noise control said it was a licensing matter, licensing said it was a noise control matter, police and various other individuals eventually became involved and temporarily sorted the problem. But it took YEARS of persistence. I have never asked for or even wanted the club closed but I recall saying things all sorts of things out of frustration!


----------



## editor (Oct 8, 2010)

tarannau said:


> True, but calling for the pub to  lose its licence on your first contribution is by no means meeting in the middle.


I know you're keen to discredit her as some whining, killjoy NIMBY, but I think some context is called for.  

From her opening post: "_We have tried dialogue and negotiation, which have produced no result."_

And her next post: _"I have lived in the area for 25 years, that's years not days. The pub has gone through many managers/owners since then. I have never had to make a complaint about it until recently."_


----------



## tarannau (Oct 8, 2010)

Given her remarkable description of the Canning I'm far from convinced that she's telling the truth. You try and find anyone of the era who would describe the pub in anything approaching those terms and a pint or thousand would come your way. Equally, given her distortions and haste to slag off others as chavvy, I'm happy to write her off as an intolerant fruitloop with an unbalanced side.

I'm more than aware of the resident commitees negotiations with the Hoot and I can honestly only suggest that the women is either not involved, or is mounting some kind of splinter faction unrepresentative of others. That's certainly not their experience of the pub of late - limiters are enforced, fire doors are routinely shut and meetings are regularly held

I'm not sure why you keen to cut this intolerant spammer more slack than her OP deserves tbh. There's more than a slight whiff of bullshit about the original post, compounded by a staggering ability to rub people the wrong way and act superior to others. If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck...


----------



## editor (Oct 8, 2010)

tarannau said:


> I'm not sure why you keen to cut this intolerant spammer more slack than her OP deserves tbh.


I'm not sure I'd put 'tolerance' at the top of your list of personal attributes to be honest, but I'd be obliged if you could explain on what grounds you're dismissing her as a 'spammer,' please.

Would you like her banned?


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 8, 2010)

you're way out of order this time t


----------



## tarannau (Oct 8, 2010)

Really, so someone using their first post for a campaign to get a local pub to have their licence removed and that hasn't posted since isn't effectively a spammer then? Yep, she's shown real commitment to this community before jumping in two footed.

And fuck this bollocks that I'm out of order. The woman was clearly having a go at contributors, pulling rank about being there 25 years, making stuff about the past and talking about others being in 'babygrows' even before I entered the thread. She got the reception her posts deserve frankly


----------



## editor (Oct 8, 2010)

tarannau said:


> Really, so someone using their first post for a campaign to get a local pub to have their licence removed and that hasn't posted since isn't a spammer then?d


Eh? She's actually posted *SIX* times in this thread as well as contributing to another thread. 

Again, how does that make her a spammer, please?


----------



## tarannau (Oct 8, 2010)

Let's turn it around Ed; what do you define a spammer as? Because there are more than a few previous examples of folks being accused of being a spammer who contribute repeatedly to their own (one) thread and throw in another one or token posts elsewhere

For me it's someone using the board's popularity for one specific purpose and showing little wish to engage either before or after. She certainly lives up to that criteria.


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 8, 2010)

tarannau said:


> Really, so someone using their first post for a campaign to get a local pub to have their licence removed and that hasn't posted since isn't effectively a spammer then? Yep, she's shown real commitment to this community before jumping in two footed.
> 
> And fuck this bollocks that I'm out of order. The woman was clearly having a go at contributors, pulling rank about being there 25 years, making stuff about the past and talking about others being in 'babygrows' even before I entered the thread. She got the reception her posts deserve frankly


i don't think perceiving a situation differently to you means they are making stuff up


----------



## editor (Oct 8, 2010)

tarannau said:


> Let's turn it around Ed; what do you define a spammer as? Because there are more than a few previous examples of folks being accused of being a spammer who contribute repeatedly to their own (one) thread and throw in another one or token posts elsewhere.


You called her a spammer because you said that she had only made one post and "hasn't posted since." That was incorrect.

In fact, she has posted many times since, and engaged with other posters here to argue her position. That is not spamming by _any_ definition of the word. 

Your attempt to discredit her other contributions as "token posts" are nothing short of bizarre, too. Her contributions to the Arlingford Road thread are _exactly_ the kind of thing that makes these boards such a great local resource.


----------



## marty21 (Oct 8, 2010)

slightly off topic - but my father-in-law was a regular in the George Canning during WW2, he has fond memories of the place .


----------



## Rushy (Oct 8, 2010)

marty21 said:


> slightly off topic - but my father-in-law was a regular in the George Canning during WW2, he has fond memories of the place .


 
Can he remember whether it had a 30 giggazillion turbo gramophone in those days?


----------



## tarannau (Oct 8, 2010)

editor said:


> You called her a spammer because you said that she had only made one post and "hasn't posted since." That was incorrect.
> 
> In fact, she has posted many times since, and engaged with other posters here to argue her position. That is not spamming by _any_ definition of the word.
> 
> Your attempt to discredit her other contributions as "token posts" are nothing short of bizarre, too. Her contributions to the Arlingford Road thread are _exactly_ the kind of thing that makes these boards such a great local resource.



Apologies for that. I somehow entirely failed to spot her previous two posts in a brief search today at work. My mistake.

I would however quibble with the portrayal of 'many' subsequent posts and the impression left of genuine engagement. 6 posts on this thread, all on the first page - the second calling the first responder a 'clearly a moron,' third talking about others wearing 'babygros' when she moved here, fourth calling me a chav iirc and so on.  

The OPs's grand total of two other contributions on another thread a good few months are fine and dandy. With the gift of hindsight I would withdraw the spammer tag, but equally it's hardly as night and day a difference as you're making out.


----------



## marty21 (Oct 8, 2010)

Rushy said:


> Can he remember whether it had a 30 giggazillion turbo gramophone in those days?


 
I think they complained about the old joanna after a right good singalong on a Saturday night, but they were a little busy fending off V2s to be that bothered.


----------



## TopCat (Oct 11, 2010)

editor said:


> Would you like her banned?


 
ban her for not liking very loud reggae at 1am.


----------



## Brixton Hatter (Oct 23, 2010)

Just noticed this on beerintheevening.com


> I'd love to say that this is my favourite pub as I live around the corner from it. But frankly, it's a dive. These people don't give a flying f**k about anything but their profits.
> The noise from Thursday through till Sunday night is a major annoyance to many locals. Despite many calls, complaints etc. it's pretty clear that the Hootenanny is just another carpetbagging bunch of exploitative gobshites who want to get rich on the "Brixton vibe" while treating the locals like shit.
> I've lived here for 25 years and have seen the "Canning" through all its phases - this is the worst so far.



http://www.beerintheevening.com/pubs/s/32/32374/Hootananny/Brixton

I had a great time in there last night watching Prince Fatty. 

But it wasn't loud enough and the basslines were virtually non-existent 

More volume please!


----------



## DJWrongspeed (Nov 14, 2010)

There's no bass at all.

Popped in on my home last night to catch 'Step 13',   the sound was abysmal , the DJ was complaining .  The band mix was appalling,  it really ruined their set. Felt really sorry for Ishu.  OK if you want to make it quiet but at least make a good mix.


----------



## editor (Nov 14, 2010)

DJWrongspeed said:


> There's no bass at all.
> 
> Popped in on my home last night to catch 'Step 13',   the sound was abysmal , the DJ was complaining .  The band mix was appalling,  it really ruined their set. Felt really sorry for Ishu.  OK if you want to make it quiet but at least make a good mix.


Surely that's down to the sound man, no?

Mind you, the time I DJ'd there their sound engineer was particularly clueless.


----------



## DJWrongspeed (Nov 14, 2010)

Yes, sorry, that was my point,  the sound engineering was well bad regardless of noise limitations.


----------



## editor (Nov 14, 2010)

DJWrongspeed said:


> Yes, sorry, that was my point,  the sound engineering was well bad regardless of noise limitations.


OK, gotcha. Sorry for getting the point wrong!

 When I DJd there with Nipsla the sound man was unbelievably rude - until he fucked the sound up so much he asked me to help him fix it!


----------



## colacubes (Nov 14, 2010)

editor said:


> OK, gotcha. Sorry for getting the point wrong!
> 
> When I DJd there with Nipsla the sound man was unbelievably rude - until he fucked the sound up so much he asked me to help him fix it!



It's funny how he became friendly when he realised you had more of a clue than he did   I don't mind grumpy if they know what they're doing but the sound for the bands that night was unbelievably awful   To be honest I've never really heard a band with decent sound there unless they've been a big group (i.e. The Top Cats) where the sound carries through regardless just by the sheer volume of people on stage.


----------



## wemakeyousoundb (Nov 14, 2010)

Grumpy is a contractual obligations for sound engineers, otherwise they're just hacks.


----------



## colacubes (Nov 14, 2010)

wemakeyousoundb said:


> Grumpy is a contractual obligations for sound engineers, otherwise they're just hacks.


 
You're not *that* grumpy


----------

