Subject: Re: Solo ea and "tick"ing
From: Richard Wentk (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Tue Feb 22 2005 - 15:14:40 EST
At 01:41 20/02/2005, you wrote:
>thats called marketing - and in this day and age, that is how records are
Marketing fails as often as it works and A&R departments are littered with
heavily marketed failures.
It might look like you can potentially market anything, but clearly - that
word again - potential sales of Kontakte to the MTV demographic are never
going to match the potential sales of Bwitney or U2, no matter how big the
You can't market something if there's zero audience interest in it. Just as
you can't hope to make mass sales of a soft drink that people find unpleasant.
And that's not a trivial analogy. If you're looking for basic perceptual
commonalities between musics, there's a lot that can be learned by looking
at what people like and dislike, and the network of perceptual associations
that underpin those likes and dislikes.
>if one were to look at smaller, independent record companies, then you
>would find more interesting answers - /in correlation/ with personality
Perhaps, but then what? Does that mean those personality types don't also
listen to more popular music?
Or from a compositional point of view, that the 'merely popular' should be
excluded just because it's the music of the rabble?
Not entirely laterally to this thread - I'm bemused by the idea that some
EA composers apparently dismiss pop engineering techniques as 'aural MSG'
when there's potentially so much to investigate in those techniques - to
learn about how and why they create the effects they're famous (or possibly
If you're looking for loudspeaker music, music that most people listen to
everyday is likely to tell you as much about musical values as a PhD in Ye
Venerable Olde Classical Tradition would.
The ideal might well be to have both, and to cross-fertilise the two
extremes without prejudice.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b27 : Sat Dec 22 2007 - 01:46:06 EST