IDM Mailing Archive

Wow, three replies in one! What will he think of next? (Seefeel's "Pure/Impure" for those keeping score.)

quoted 1 line From djkc@blkbox.com

> From djkc@blkbox.com

quoted 8 lines Of course, Sire could do the easy thing and pay MTV to make "On" a "Buzz

>> Of course, Sire could do the easy thing and pay MTV to make "On" a "Buzz >> Clip" or something (and I'm sure this is how clips get into that >> situation), but they obviously feel that it won't come back to them in >> record sales. What does that tell you? > > I dunno, maybe they think he's high-risk? What does it tell you? > Why do they obviously feel that way? Because Sire has NOT made it a > "buzz clip"?

It tells me that Sire doesn't think it's worth spending the cash to make AFX a superstar at this moment in time because they don't think it will work. By signing him, they have made some investment in him, and they want to see how hard they have to push. They may feel that if they push heavily right now it will not come back to them in record sales, so they are playing it safe. Maybe later in the decade (or even later this year) they'll feel differently about it.

quoted 2 lines so who are some examples of BIG label techno spanners that don't fit the

> so who are some examples of BIG label techno spanners that don't fit the > case?

Well, truthfully, "Rhythm Is A Dancer" is an *atypical* top-40 song and I was surprised to see it do as well as it did. It is incredibly repetitive, is not terribly imaginative, and isn't much more catchy than any other techno tune out there (and is less catchy than many IDM songs, like "Chime" IMHO). But it is techno. Granted, most top-40 is repetitive and unimaginative, but the degree to which "RIAD" is these things is even beyond that.

quoted 4 lines Hm, I see. Well, why did you expect it to go only this far?

> Hm, I see. Well, why did you expect it to go only this far? > Is it due to the industry, or the music quality, or expected popular demand? > Who or what is to blame? And how can we solve the problem and get what we > listen to (and what's played at raves) up in the charts?

Well, first off, I agree 100% with Jon; it's not a *problem* at all, and if it never gets more popular than it is now, I'll be a very happy camper anyways. It's not that important in the grand scheme of things. However, there are a couple of reasons I think that might limit IDM's top-40 chart potential: 1) Few (if any) words. Not many instrumentals make the top-40. 2) Long songs. If it's over 5 minutes, it makes it difficult to chart. 3) Repetitiveness. If you don't listen carefully (and most people don't) you won't *feel* the song. It either becomes background music or a headache-inducing thud-thud-thud. Neither is ideal for radio situations. Also, the frequency bandwidth of FM radio does not lend itself to IDM, IMHO. 4) Current trends. Right now, people want in-your-face gangsta-rap or "grunge" or saccharine ballads, and not much else. 5) Lack of originality. *Many* techno songs sound identical. I thought for a long time that the artist that did "Rhythm Is A Dancer" and the artist that did "More And More" was the same. And it's even more the case when there's no vocals. The average person won't take the time to differentiate. 6) The good stuff is too *challenging* (in terms of making the listener actually *listen*) for radio.

quoted 3 lines Industry & Consumer go hand-in-hand when

> Industry & Consumer go hand-in-hand when > it comes to an artist's success I suppose...but for the artist, it must be > like trying to climb a greased pole most of the time!

It probably is. The artist always gets screwed. This you can count on.

quoted 5 lines They obviously think they can make it happen, as the signings of Moby and

>> They obviously think they can make it happen, as the signings of Moby and >> The Aphex Twin clearly indicate. > > What do you think? Do you think they CAN make it happen? Do you think it > WILL happen? Do you (personally) want it to happen? I sure do!!!!!!!!!

I think they can make it happen, but whether they will is another matter entirely. It would be nice if it did, but I'm not sweating over it. I always like to see artists I like become more appreciated by more people, if only so that when I bring my Aphex Twin CDs into work people don't go "Who the hell is that?!?" :-)

quoted 1 line How can we either make this industry better

> How can we either make this industry better

We can't. The masses are the masses, and they like safe and easy music, and the industry is more than willing to heap tons and tons of it onto them. The way to make the industry work that way is to make it financially advantageous to do so. That isn't going to happen any time soon.

quoted 1 line From: 8bit@vlad.bowker.com (Dan Nicholson)

>> From: 8bit@vlad.bowker.com (Dan Nicholson)

quoted 3 lines exactly! exactly! we need a larger variety of content going out over the

> exactly! exactly! we need a larger variety of content going out over the > same high-volume distribution and communications channels that currently > largely confine their bandwith to the status quo.

Agreed. And if we can get 500 cable channels, certainly some of them can be used for good music.

quoted 1 line Many record companies currently do this with MTV.

> Many record companies currently do this with MTV.

Yes they do. And I stated so in my previous post. But they do it with an eye towards future sales. If there is no advantage for Elektra to pay MTV to play the new Metallica clip over the new Moby clip, then the new Moby clip will end up being paid for some portion of the time. But it isn't, and this is probably because Elektra does not feel it will see a return on the investment.

quoted 5 lines exactly. it's ridiculous to expect the listeners to dictate what succeeds

> exactly. it's ridiculous to expect the listeners to dictate what succeeds > and fails *unless* the listeners are exposed to something. if no one has > seen an aphex album in a store, heard the song on a radio show, or seen a > video, how are they supposed to dictate whether or not he succeeds? they > can't.

I'm not denying that the labels have to give new music a push. No doubt. But how much of a push will result in higher profits? If I were Sire I have the option to spend a gazillion dollars and get Aphex Twin ads plastered in every major music (and some non-music) magazine, get the "On" clip into MTV's "Buzz Bin" (and probably even to get Beavis & Butt-head to critique it), get huge store displays in every major record store in the country, and threaten radio stations that if they don't play "On" at least twice a day they won't get the new Madonna record. But what is the expected return on that investment? The fact is, it's not a hell of a lot at this point. And that's why Sire's not doing it.

quoted 4 lines for Adam, who likes Pearl Jam :-), i have no problem that you like Pearl

> for Adam, who likes Pearl Jam :-), i have no problem that you like Pearl > Jam. I don't, and for _myself_ I would have to be off my wahootie to like > it, but i fully expect that some people might really like it. hell, i like > Beck. who am I to talk, right? :)

"I'm a loser baby, so why don't you kill me?" This song is the "Smells Like Teen Spirit" of 1994. Just you watch.

quoted 5 lines Again, this is my opinion: that the average person, meaning the person

> Again, this is my opinion: that the average person, meaning the person > who's musical experience consists of MTV, top-40 radio and Sam Goody record > stores, has not been exposed to a large enough variety of music to really > appreciate music. They simply don't have enough of a reference point from > which to make their decisions, so they're taking whatever they find.

I find it hard to believe that people buy what's there just because it's there. It's not like food. Entertainment is a luxury you can channel into whatever you like. If I didn't like very much music, I wouldn't go and buy music anyways just because it was there, I would buy books or see movies or go bowling or buy Sega cartridges or whatever. And most people I know are like this. They don't care as much about music as I do, but they care much more about movies than I do, for instance.

quoted 2 lines 1) Sire feels the practice of paying for playing is unethical (this is

> 1) Sire feels the practice of paying for playing is unethical (this is > always a possibility)?

Yeah right. Puh-leeze. Even I'm not *that* naive.

quoted 2 lines 2) richard james sucks and has no potential for commercial appeal (this

> 2) richard james sucks and has no potential for commercial appeal (this > does appear to be what you're insinuating)

No, if this was the case, they never would have signed him in the first place.

quoted 1 line 3) Sire is making a big mistake?

> 3) Sire is making a big mistake?

From a financial standpoint? Quite possibly. I don't know the numbers involved.

quoted 1 line 4) Sire is absolutely correct to think that it won't come back to them?

> 4) Sire is absolutely correct to think that it won't come back to them?

Sire is very likely correct that it won't come back to them. Record companies are very good at reading trends, and they're very good at going with them. Remember, one of the risks Metallica took by agreeing to make a video is that they might *lose* credibility with their hardcore fan base, to whom they had always preached that they would never make a video. But they made an extremely cool video (two actually) for "One" and the gambit worked. But it was by no means a sure thing.

quoted 6 lines but it makes sense that, over the long haul, you buy what you like.

>> but it makes sense that, over the long haul, you buy what you like. > > this makes sense for you and I, and it's true for us. but the average music > consumer sees Snoop Doggy Dog, Michael Bolton and James in the record store > commercials, displays, and advertisements, and assumes this is all that's > out there, so they satisfy themselves with it.

But very few consumers have all three of those artists in their collection. So you have to admit, there is *some* selection process going on here.

quoted 2 lines perhaps this means we who actually are getting what we really want are

> perhaps this means we who actually are getting what we really want are > spoiled?

Possibly.

quoted 14 lines is it so backwards? large companies sometimes buy their own product out of

> is it so backwards? large companies sometimes buy their own product out of > the stores to inflate sales of albums. the record industry exerts just as > much influence as we're saying it does, and probably more so. they control > almost all the channels of distribution, which is the entire key to what > becomes popular. > I hate to look like I'm trying to sound superior, but how do you know? Do > you have friends in the industry who are telling you what's going on? I do, > and this is where I'm getting my facts from. I can fully understand how you > can't possibly imagine these kinds of things because these people are > getting away with so much it's mind blowing. > Advertising's entire purpose is to _create demand_. A large part of that is > making people buy something they don't need or want. They do this by > _making you think you want it_. That's much of how the record companies go > about daily business.

Please believe me, I am not so naive to think that record companies are not master marketers. What you are talking about is what record companies *want* to do, and what they *try* to do, just like every other company in every other industry in America. But they are not 100% successful. They're not even 35% successful. Just look at all the garbage in the bargain bins that you and I both know will *never* get sold. It's mind-boggling how much crap there is out there that record companies tried (and *failed*) to sell the mass market. I will admit, I have no friends in the industry at all. However, I like to think I am a very acute (and cynical) viewer of the industry, and all the empirical evidence I have presented shows me that the record companies are no *better* at marketing than any other company in any other industry. So they're on a level playing field with the rest of them. And if they could enhance their bottom line by making Moby a star (and this is another tautology), you can bet they would, but they *can't* right now, so they're not trying to. Yet. But I think soon, they will attempt to market this stuff to a wider audience. Who knows if it'll work or not. And to finish with the most important point of all, from Jon:

quoted 1 line Good music stands on its own.

> Good music stands on its own.

'nuff said. - Adam J Weitzman INDIVIDUAL, Inc. weitzman@individual.com