Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Music execs are very adverse in taking a risk in acoustic music. Why is that? Acoustic music sounds euphoric enough to capture the attention of a general audience.
Music execs in general don't know **** about music.
They think it is all formulaic, and that's all they know.
Like "This band has the right look, the right sound, goes to all the right venues, but they aren't catching on? We can't put our finger on it".
Well, dude, it is because they SUCK. They can't understand it because they don't really know good music anyway. Most popular music isn't very talent laden, so they can only go by what the matrix says.
Like when Nirvana gained traction. Most record execs were scratching their collective heads because Nirvana didn't fit the formula.
So they just went to Seattle and signed any and everybody that remotely looked and/or sounded like Nirvana.
Someone would have to break out and make an impact on their own to garner the attention of record company big wigs.
Oh, jeez, someone look up Bob Dylan and "Like A Rolling Stone" when Dylan went electric. Also research Johnny Cash when executives told him that acoustic was becoming less and less appealing by people, and they also referenced Dylan.
Believe it or not, music executives are in the business to make money and they have ways of knowing who their key demographic is -hence, who is it that is buying their records and concert tickets?
With the age of computers there are actually more and more self generated recordings and places where independent musicians can get their music out. Look up CD Baby, they help independent musicians and sell ONLY independent musician's music.
I had an email correspondence with one of the musicians and singer who I left favorable comments about on CD Baby and she used to be one of the people that selected music for movies and advertising. She left because of 'red tape' and said, "Hell, I could do this myself.' She started off hawking her music on street corners. She is still with CD Baby in spite of the fact her music is found in movies, television shows and advertisements.
You have to go by what sells. If you want to see someone's key demographic audience watch their concert videos. Look at a Michael Jackson concert video, despite people who argue his appeal was broad his key demographic was 13 to 15 year old girls who were spending the money for his music, concerts and brand items. You see them all in the front rows. It's the same kind of identification radio stations use to garner their advertising dollars - who is listening to your station?
There have been risk takers. Look at John Mayer for instance and the fact he did a lot of acoustic music.
Last edited by Thursday007; 03-31-2016 at 07:42 AM..
The best place to hear pop and other genres in music was when MTV did "Unplugged." I have a number of CDs from their shows and it appeals to me. But I've always had a draw to people like Dylan and other folk musicians who were strictly acoustic.
Two of my favorites from "Unplugged" is Nirvana and Alanis Morissette . I actually liked them better in acoustic. But I'm a small fraction of people who do. Therefore not considered a strong enough base to invest recording and concert money into.
There is acoustic music there. It doesn't sell as well as pop. Music executives draw the same inferences from that as you and I can.
Aside from that, everything is tested. You think test runs of all sorts of music doesn't happen? Focus groups? Limited trials? Of course it is. Labels want to make money. If they thought free-form bagpipe jazz would turn a buck, they'd be signing free-form bagpipe jazz bands.
Acoustic music has a market niche. But it's not with the key pop market demographic - which is the biggest money demographic out there. And the fact that you or I or someone else may like it doesn't change the fact that it's not nearly as popular as 'electric' music.
Before I was a fulltime professional musician, I was in marketing for over 20 years working with some of the nations largest companies like Benjamin Moore Paints, Carrier, Popeyes and many more. One thing every marketing exec knows is that the primary buying audience in the USA are women 30+. the music industry has built its entire marketing strategy focusing on selling music to an audience of people under 20 years old. Historically, this group has no money, no steady job or career and is not generally a loyal customer. So they seemed surprised when they narrowed the music genres to basically pop, country and rap and wondered why they could no longer convince people to buy a tangible album. It was obvious, its not because the digital media made it easy to rip off music, its not because the CD or any other media became obsolete, its because they were only targeting people in a younger demographic who had no money and lots of technical savvy. We no longer focused on good quality music with a meaning, instead we cranked out music that appealed to the hormones of a less than 20 crowd. We have trained our audiences to not care about the message, and not appreciate the art. Without appreciation, there is not value. If there is no value, people do not feel a need to pay for the product. I don't believe Auto manufacturers would allow people to get there cars for free if there was a way to do so on a mass scale.
There needs to be a monumental shift in music back to quality music with good meaning and a message and work toward moving the music business into an older demographic that has money and find great appreciation for the art. Original music needs to be marketed to an older audience and convinced to do that by offering a better message. Here's and example: the TV industry about 10 years ago was floundering. TV shows had become meaningless and shallow and plots were becoming repetitious. All of a sudden there was a huge influx of new creative writers and a larger investment in the quality of the TV shows and the TV industry rebounded and is now booming. We can not expect the music industry to grow, if we continue to offer poor quality music to a demographic that neither appreciates it for what it is or is willing to pay for it. Streaming is virtually stealing, just like downloading. If the return profit is less than 9 cents per track per CD like it should be, then its stealing. Music Execs and industry professionals need to hold streaming services accountable and find anew tangible media to sell music so artists can make a living from their music again. If artists were making 9 cents per play on streaming services, we could all make a living off that.
So go hug an artist today - and pay for the art you love.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Music Execs need to wake up
