Interview
with Michael Dearing and Carl Groves of Salem Hill
Interview
copyright 2007, The Lazarus Group
CG:
The title is Mike's so I'll let him reveal that. The content
is a full live show performed at our first annual Hillionaire's
Weekend in October of 2005. There's a video interview and there's also footage
from an acoustic set we performed. We experienced the usual and ubiquitous
delays associated with anything Hillion, but we
anticipate a release date in May 2007. As to what we've been doing...I've been
building a house and moving. I've done some work with Glass Hammer, but only
recently have I really gotten back into musician mode.
MD: Unfortunately there’s nothing of great cosmic import in the title –
just a play on words I thought sounded good. Sounds pretty proggy, eh? I’ve been in the usual “road mode” with Rockie Lynne all year on top of selling a house and dealing
with my wife’s recent health battles, which are hopefully getting better.
CG: Of course,
he left out the title which is “Mystery Loves Company.”
2. It's been almost three years since you signed
with ProgRock Records despite prior interviews
telling us that you have nothing but contempt for record labels. So tell us how
your association with PRR has impacted Salem
Hill.
CG:
I'm not honestly sure. PRR has great vision and is run by
an individual with great passion for progressive rock. But in all honesty, I'm
disappointed that our relationship hasn't markedly boosted our presence in the
music-buying world. I truly believe that "Be" and "Mimi's Magic
Moment" are stellar pieces of work, and not just because they're ours. In
fact, I felt that "MMM" would sell about triple the copies it has. So
I'm disappointed. I'm not sure that pinning it on PRR is fair, but after these
last two albums and the years we've been with the label, I had expected much
more.
MD: Disappointed probably sums it up well for me, too.
3. Salem Hill has released seven
studio albums. Does the band or individual members
revisit these recordings from time to time? Are there things you would like to
change? Specifics?
CG:
I rarely listen to the first two or "Not
Everybody's Gold". But I do revisit every year or so. I listened to
"Catatonia" and "The Robbery of Murder" around Thanksgiving
just to refresh my memory. And there were millions of things I would change. I
think "Cat" moves at too slow a pace. I think that some of the
instrumentation choices were poor. I'd like to redo almost all my keyboard and
vocal work. On TROM, in many ways I feel we captured lightning in a bottle as I
love the warmth of the production. I think the vocals are really strong. I
think the violin is incredibly tasteful and not overblown. I like all the
performances. I guess if there is a criticism, I think I'd redo the Interlude
as it could've been played better and recorded a bit less "in your
face." And I think the ending--where Mike sings "...and to live for
forever with you" should have been much more theatrical. A deeper retardando and more of Kev and me oohing....but other
than that, not so much. "Be" and "MMM" are so new, I
don't really consider spinning them a revisiting so much as a futile review
after they've already been sent for replication.
MD: Those are the three I almost never listen to, either. The guys
in the band on my “day gig” are big fans of the first album so I hear that one
more – our drummer likes to play Fool’s Gate at soundchecks
a lot. I agree that the Robbery is special and I also agree about the
Interlude, but if we ever remaster it we can fix the
level, which is the only problem I have with it. “Be” is far enough away
now that I can hear it and enjoy it without being nitpicky, but “Mimi” is still
too close. The one I break out most often is “Puppet Show” - I’m always a
sucker for a good live album.
4. Carl is now singing with fellow
CG:
I hope not. Nobody's said anything to me. Mike has been
associated with other musicians basically all of his adult life which has taken
him all over the world and, thus, away from us for great periods of time. That
has impacted SH as far as our ability to accept performance engagements and
such. But we've weathered it. And although that's caused us friction, I don't
think me singing with GH is comparable, probably because I don't anticipate SH's schedule being altered because of any time-consuming
commitments I have to GH.
MD: It hasn’t affected us that I know of - it might raise our profile
some, which is obviously positive. Carl just loaned me the DVD of their
5. Prior interviews have revealed
individual band members' thoughts on Christian music and being a Christian
musician. However, globally in 2007, religion and religious fervor are no
longer as innocuous as in years past. Without making any of you uncomfortable,
would you care to weigh in on this topic? What challenges or comforts do you
find in being a Christian in this day and age?
CG:
Speaking only for myself, I derive very little comfort
from collective or corporate Christianity. Nevertheless, I am still a believer
and find Christ to be the solution to Man's problem: his fallen state. So
although the last several years of my "religious" life haven't been terribly
positive, I believe that it has driven me to seek Christ in a more personal
way, without the baggage of a "church" weighing me down. I don't
condemn corporate worship. In fact, I think a strong case can be made that God
instituted corporate worship as part of the pattern for acceptably serving Him.
But, here in the Bible belt of America, the typical "church" isn't
anything I'd even remotely like to be a part of, much less lift up as an
acceptable form of praise to God. As to religious fervor
screwing up the world...agreed. And at the risk of offending one-fifth
of the globe's population, I believe if you look at pain and destruction caused
by religion in the last 50 years, one particular group suspiciously keeps
appearing in 99% of it. "Religion of peace"?
Show me, don't tell me.
MD: Being a Christian is always challenging, but there’s a difference
between simply being a Christian person and being some sort of wild-eyed
zealot. Unfortunately the latter is the way we’re most often portrayed in
the media, where there’s an unbelievable double standard when it comes to
fanaticism and what constitutes it. My first wife was the one who turned
me to Christianity - she didn’t try to shove what she believed down anyone’s
throat, but she genuinely lived it. I try to do the same.
6. Compare Salem
Hill 2007 with Salem Hill 1997.
CG:
Grayer. Less anxious. We
really wanted to "make it" and be seen back then. But since we
reformed in '03, I don't feel there's this big push to write and release
"Son of Sergeant Pepper". Not to say we're content to fade into even
deeper obscurity, but I believe we are more relaxed and at peace with our
microscopic part in the macrocosm. We want to write and release good music. We
don't feel the need to wank.
Most people know we can play. Those that don't eventually will,
and those that think we should be more "showy" aren't musically
mature enough to know they're wrong. But, again, they eventually will. I think
that the best example of SH now as compared to SH ten years ago is that even
though there is major disagreement on probably the biggest project idea we have
presently, it won't spell the demise of the band. I think the differences are
probably insurmountable at present--and that may mean a Salem Hill record with
less than all four of us. But, after boasting of our maturity, I would feel
silly insisting that every one of us needs to "obediently consent" to
things they don't groove on. I know for a fact that I did that on
"NEG" and the record suffered. In retrospect, although I believe that
the record had to be done (for reasons that had, sadly, little to do with music
making), it probably would have been better not to force Mike into doing things
he had no passion for. And to my shame, there are performances of mine on a
couple of tracks that I thought were dog shit...and here, 7 years later, when I
listen (as infrequently as possible), I really think the song would have been
better had I just stayed away. Even on "Mimi", we really struggled
with one of Pat's songs...tried to work it, tried to make it fit. The
difference is that in the end, we possessed enough musical maturity to do what
was best for the band and, more immediately, for the album. And Pat was
absolutely cool with it. With musical maturity, there is also a great, great
chance of tastes and directions which grow farther apart. That's usually the
thing that spells the end for most bands, and I think it probably would have
spelled a split for us as well ten years ago. In fact, I feel that the Pat,
Mike and Kevin today are absolutely nothing like they were in 1992...or even
last year, for that matter; it would be sad if they hadn't changed. The
challenge within Salem Hill is in trying to stay true to who the band is for our
audience, as well as to what it is--and needs to be, quite frankly--for
us as writers and performers.
MD: I would second a lot of that. In fact I think it would be fun
to go back and remix NEG and significantly “de-clutter” it. That and a
couple of choice deletions might make me like it more! Having said that,
you can see in the two studio albums we’ve made since then that we learned our
lesson – even though “Mimi” is a very dense record it doesn’t sound cluttered.
I guess the biggest difference is maturity, musical and otherwise.
As Carl said I was very much the squeaky wheel in making NEG and it was
very uncomfortable. The project we’re discussing now is a concept album
that doesn’t resonate with me at all and I’m the odd man out again.
Although it’s a little uncomfortable (being the lone voice of dissent
usually is), it’s not painfully so – no one’s taking it personally. We’ll
see how it turns out...
7. Please share individual or
collective musical plans/ideas for the upcoming year.
CG:
We've got lots of stuff ready to embark on. Besides the
project mentioned above, I'd like to convert a solo project I've been working
on for several years into a SH album. Plus, Pat has an idea for an acoustic or
acoustic-flavored release. And then there’s the behemoth we’re fighting over.
The solo project is about 60% complete, and it could really be much cooler if
the other guys jumped on board. I have several ideas for an acoustic thingy
since Pat suggested it. And I’ve been working on the behemoth since 2002…
MD: It depends on whether or not I can convince them of the error in
their thinking on the project we’re currently discussing! Seriously, I’m
ready to break in the new studio as soon as possible. Since
it’s more convenient now it’s not inconceivable that we could work on more than
one project at once. I don’t know if the world is ready to have a
SH album more often than once every two or three years, but it will be nice to
find out.
CG: …and I’ve
been working on the behemoth since 2002…Mike. Mike? Mike?!
8. With the imminent arrival of the
CG:
Being filmed didn't bother me at all. We had a great
crew and they didn't trip over us or our gear. I think we're all very good
performers and if we did it more frequently as a band, we could be excellent
performers. As for doing it regularly or doing true videos, I think it'd be cool.
In fact, I envision a much more interactive and visual website in the next
year. I think our music really lends itself to visual interpretation and we
have some things in the works which I'd love to see come to fruition. As for
true music videos...I suppose I'll have to buy some spandex.
MD: It was very enjoyable. If this DVD generates enough interest to
make it feasible to do another one I’d love to – maybe since we went through
all the headaches getting this one done we can get the next one done in less
than a year! I like the Fish/McCartney/Rush etc. model of putting out a
video for every tour. Since we don’t tour, maybe for every burst of
activity...
As for making a video in the traditional sense I don’t see the point – who
would show it? I’ve done a few of them and they’re not a lot of fun,
anyway. I do still have my spandex from the 80s in a box somewhere
though, so you’ve been warned!