Posts filed under 'Dance Music Industry'
Are you people deaf? (Revisited)
Clear back in October 2007, I wrote a blog entry with the title, Are you people deaf? It was basically a rant about how to ruin a perfectly good dance song.
I mentioned it only briefly in that entry, but not only are some producers deaf (apparently), but I’m also guessing most DJs are as well. Before I dig into what I’m talking about, let me rant a bit about hearing.
When I was a lot younger, I did spend more than one night in clubs where I left the place with my ears ringing to the point I couldn’t hear normally until well into the next day. While most clubbers experience this every time they leave a club, let’s be clear: This is not a good thing. If you’re ears are ringing, you have done damage that’s going to subtly add-up over time. Even after your hearing has “recovered,” the damage is done, and it will be additive each time you do more of it.
People like a thundering bass you can feel, and nice loud music to drown-out all the drunk babbling I guess, but I’d prefer to keep my hearing, which is why I use Etymotic’s high fidelity ear plugs at clubs and concerts. They reduce sound levels by about 20 db, and do so pretty much evenly across audible frequencies, meaning that using them is basically like turning the volume down without giving it a muffled quality.
As for DJs, based on the ones I’ve worked with, it’s apparent that most have been doing this so long without any regard for their own hearing that their hearing is already shot. I don’t use booth monitors—that’s why I have headphones—but those DJs I’ve worked with who do, usually turn them up well past my comfort zone, obviously because otherwise, they can’t hear the music. This is why I also end-up using the Etymotic ear plugs while DJ’ing in many cases; it’s just too loud otherwise.
Point #1: DJs and Clubbers—Protect your hearing now, or you will regret it later, and there is no way to fix it once you destroy it. (This goes for DJs, and for the people who listen to them.)
This past Saturday, at my benefit gig, I was paid a high compliment by Mika from Fastlane Productions, who provided the event’s electrical, lighting and audio. (These guys were fantastic to work with, and I hope to do so again in the future.) He told me I’m the first DJ he’s ever worked with who understood anything about signal levels and the need to not overdrive the audio. I was, in a word, nonplussed.
Unfortunately, this says way less about me than it does my fellow DJs. Every DJ mixer I’ve seen has VU meters that show you visually the signal levels. Most have them for the main mix, and many (including mine) have them on a channel-by-channel basis, too. And I would not have thought it was rocket science to understand that the target level for audio is always roughly 0 db on average. If you go past 0 db, the audio will overdrive and distort—on the peaks, if not on the entire signal.
But based on what I hear when I go to most clubs, Mika’s right; DJs just don’t get it. Most clubs I go to, the sound is overdriven into distortion. It starts out the night in good enough shape, but as the evening progresses, it’s pushed higher and higher (probably in proportion to the DJ’s increasing hearing loss) until it’s distorted and unenjoyable to listen to (with or without my Etymotic ear plugs).
Point #2: DJs—If you want it louder, turn-up the amps; don’t just ram the mixer sliders to the stop and crank the main mix level up all the way. VU meters are there for a reason. (And oh yeah, yellow and red? Those colors generally mean “danger.”)
I touched on this in my original post, but there are surprising number of dance tracks that are pushed into distortion, and actually released that way. Proper mastering by a professional audio engineer would never have allowed that to get through to a DJ in the first place; my guess is that these tracks are amateur jobs done by people who just have this idea that “louder = better.”
Yes, to a certain degree, louder = better, because most people expect modern electronic music to be driven pretty hard signal-wise. However, distorted ≠ better. Distorted = amateur. Distorted = crap. Distorted = I won’t play the track.
Point #3: DJs—As computer scientists say, “Garbage in, garbage out.” If you have a track that sounds like crap, don’t play it. In the end, it makes you sound like crap. (Oh, and crap? Crap isn’t good.)
The bottom line is that it really doesn’t take that much effort to sound good. But to be able to discern what “sounds good,” you need to have good hearing. So protect your hearing, for a start. But then use it to take pride in what you’re doing. Learn the very basics about audio, apply them, and the world will be a little better place.
Add comment July 1, 2009
Where are all the women?
Last week, as I was sort of assessing the Denver DJ scene online (long story for another blog post), I stumbled across Sonic Kiss. They’re a collective of female DJs here, and while I’ve not heard or seen them, I thought it was cool they… Existed.
It’s possible that I just don’t get out enough, but it did get me wondering… Where are all the women? Dance music seems to be dominated by men. Obviously they’re out there, as Sonic Kiss demonstrates. And I recently met a new friend, Jessica, who’s a DJ as well (although I’ve not heard her yet). But it’s clear that the DJ scene is way disproportionately dominated by the guys.
It happens on the production side, too. Denise Gurney, better known as Twisted Dee, is the only female dance producer / remixer that I’m personally aware of. There are tons of female vocalists in dance music, and there are probably more female producers that I’ve just not come across. But considering just how much music I listen to in a week’s time, the fact I can name only one is pretty telling.
There are a whole lot of areas where I think we could use more female influence, and one of them is dance music. This isn’t the time or the venue to get into a discussion about the genders, but I think it’s fair to say that men and women typically bring something a little different to any particular table, as do people of different cultures, lifestyles, and so forth. To me, that’s the most important part of diversity to start with… Fairness is important, yes, but whatever we’re talking about—a business, an industry, whatever—benefits from the differing perspectives perhaps more than the individuals involved benefit from the level playing field.
But I digress.
Hey ladies… Wanna be a DJ? Wanna produce dance music? Get your girly selves in here, because while I don’t have issues with the guys, we need you, too.
Add comment June 24, 2009
I’m wrong. Again.
As I’ve mentioned here before, I’m either blessed or cursed (depending on your point of view) with listening to a ton of new music each week to keep current on what’s happening, decide what to play myself, and decide what to play on iDanceRadio.fm. While my long daily commute gives me 10 to 12 hours each week to do this, the amount of time I spend actually listening to each track is admittedly quite short.
amberRose Marie - Wanna Be a DJ
I can remember the morning in the car I was listening to the most recent release from amberRose Marie, Wanna Be a DJ. I popped the CD in, and almost immediately, my reaction was, “What the hell is this?” I tried; I really tried. I sampled every mix on the CD, but could stand no more. I pressed “eject” and it went into the “I don’t think so” pile, and got mentioned in a rare negative blog entry.
I heard from amberRose Marie’s record label on that one, respecting my opinion, and encouraging me to try it one more time. And I heard from Harry Towers, the promoter of the track, who also wanted me to try it again. So, I did, and I had the same rather nose-wrinkling reaction. I thought that was the end of it.
It wasn’t.
A few weeks ago, I was asked again to listen to it, and rolling my eyes, I got the CD out, again, and plugged it in, again. Only this time, my reaction was, “Hmmm… Maybe this isn’t that bad.” Then I listened again. And again. And I started to like it. It’s sorta like what I went through all those years ago with Brussels sprouts and broccoli.
As is the case with almost every dance track, I still don’t like all the mixes. And while the track still strikes me as a bit of a novelty in terms of its lyric, not every song, let alone every dance song, has to have some deep emotional meaning. It’s perfectly legitimate to have a song that’s there just for the sake of having fun, not taking itself too seriously, and Wanna Be a DJ is just such a track.
This is hardly the first time I’ve been wrong about songs. The one example I keep citing to people is Tod Miner’s Luv N Music. I just could not even stand the song the first 10, or 20, or 30 times I heard it. Then magically, “OK, this is sorta cool!” And I still use that one in sets pretty regularly.
Anyway, some songs wow you the moment you hear them (like the lastest David Guetta track), and some just take some time (sometimes a lot of time) to sink-in. It’s unfortunate, but I just don’t have time to listen to songs 20 or 30 times a piece just to “make sure” my negative reaction is “real.” (And I’m not about to subject myself to that for the truly bad songs, of which there are many.) But I am glad that some people bang on me a little when they’re passionate about a track, vested interests aside.
Because, sometimes… I’m… Wrong. 
1 comment June 1, 2009
Can’t you people just release the *@&#^$%! song?
I posted the latest update to my dance chart the other day. For the second week in a row, Danny Saucedo is in the #1 position with All On You.
For those not following closely, Saucedo’s a former Swedish Idol contestant, signed to Sony, who is apparently enjoying a fair amount of success in his homeland and nearby Poland. In his early 20s, his voice belies his age, with a strength and emotion that works well with a song like All On You.
The problem? Go try and buy the song. If you’re in the U.S., you can’t. No doubt, you can get a Torrent, or use a P2P network and snag copies of it all day long. But you want to take a buck out of your wallet and get it the right way, good luck. I’ve been asked repeatedly by people who’ve heard this track in my mixshows, “Where can I get that track?” I don’t know; fly to Europe and use iTunes there?
I got my copy of the track through legitimate promotional channels. Sony, why are you asking me to play this song when your staff can’t seem to be bothered to take the 30 minutes or so required to make it available to consumers in the U.S. on iTunes?
And while I’ve certainly not read Saucedo’s recording contract, don’t give me some B.S. about territories and rights and what-not. Come on; new, young artist. Major worldwide label. Tell me they didn’t option the entire globe with this kid.
But whether we’re talking about this artist, or any other, this is one of the things that continues to blow my mind about the music industry, in dance and well beyond, and mostly with major labels, but minor ones too:
- Getting hooked-up with iTunes is hardly difficult or burdensome. It takes time, but most of that time is waiting for iTunes staff to process things—not the actual mechanics of posting content. So why so many indie artists don’t seem to think this is important is beyond me.
- To the major labels, if you own the rights, post the content. These days of timing releases to special moments? Making sure music goes out only on Tuesdays? Making sure releases coincide with some sort of press release or marketing effort? It’s history. Nobody gives a crap. There’s a lot of product, and not putting it out for some stupid reason that might have made sense 20 years ago is just insanity. Post it now, and figure out if and when you’re going to promote it later. You can always “re-release it” anyway… This happens all the time with indie dance music. Consumers do not care if it’s new to them now, or (again) six months from now. Release dates mean nothing.
This is really quite simple. The music business is hard. There’s lots of product. Consumers are fickle and have short attention spans. If you hope to make any money at all from your music, and you want to reduce piracy, how about actually offering said music for sale?
Such a novel concept for the 21st century.
So, Sony. Here’s a thought. Get around to having that intern in the digital department click a few web links and make Danny Saucedo’s track magically appear in iTunes, won’t you? I have a few fans who’d love to buy a copy. If they only could.
Add comment May 19, 2009
Supply and demand
I think about a lot of things music, and much of it comes out in blog entries in one from or another. What’s it take to get a song on the Billboard charts? How do I deal with the flood of music I receive around here each week? Why do I like and play (and chart) so many songs that I never see anyone else playing? Why do I get tired of some songs in about a day, when others last for months?
A classic bell curve plot.
This morning it hit me. I think all of it can be explained with a classic bell curve, coupled with simple supply and demand. (For those bell curve challenged, picture the worst songs on the left, and the very best on the right.)
To be sure, there’s a lot of good music out there. I hear it every day, I play it, I get more of it all the time.
There’s also a lot of crap. I hear that every day too, I don’t play it, and I get more of it all the time.
The really, really good stuff is not that common. I’m lucky if I get one new track that I consider “really, really good”—let’s call it the top 5% of the material—every couple of weeks (if it’s that often).
In any case, a good 65% or more of the music flow being pretty listenable; the left-most 35% of the music probably isn’t. Regardless, some is better than others. But as the bell curve tells us, the bulk of the music is pretty average… In the middle of the curve.
There is a huge amount of supply, judging from the amount of music I get each week, and the amount I see showing-up on the various digital music stores. Hundreds, perhaps thousands of new songs each and every week. Month after month. (I’m talking only dance music here, by the way.) It’s more music than any one DJ can possibly digest. More than any radio programmer can deal with. And certainly way more than any music consumer can even know about, let alone sift through, let alone buy much of. With the proliferation of decent software for making electronic music, the barrier to entry is very, very low, adding to the supply.
Of course, the stuff on the extreme right side of the bell curve tends to get noticed… Stands out from the noise level in the background (literally). Looking back on my annual top charts, it’s songs like Matt Darey’s Beautiful Day and Filo & Peri’s Anthem. A little farther to the left on the curve, popular choices like Lady GaGa’s Poker Face. The good stuff; the better-than-average to outstanding tracks.
As I enter more deeply the world of production, obviously this sort of thing concerns me if I hope to get anyone’s attention with my music. But whether for myself, or anyone else with similar aspirations, one thing is really clear: There’s a damned high bar, and you better put your game on, because the middle of the bell curve is a really crowded place.
Add comment May 11, 2009
Why so secret?
I was originally planning to write a blog entry today about a great track that I’ve had for awhile, but only recently started taking to. It’s from a producer out of the UK that goes by the name The One Hundred, and the track is Still & Fine. It’s a sweet track, especially the Bellatrax remix.
I was going to write about it—until I could find absolutely nothing about the producer, the song, or the vocalist who sings on it.
So instead, and not to pick on The One Hundred specifically by any means, this is now going to be a mini-rant about some issues I see in the dance music industry that are among many that prevent it from commercializing much of anywhere, especially in the U.S.
The Web (it’s about the brand)
You really can’t do much of anything these days that involves reaching consumers of any kind without having a web presence. When someone wants to find you, or learn about you, or buy your product, where do they go? The web. And usually Google on the web. It’s literally the first look many people have of “an entity” (company, artist, individual, product, service, etc.).
It seems a lot of artists and producers (heck, even “record labels”) are content with their only web presence being a garish page on MySpace, with a crappy looking template generated by one of the hundreds of “crappy looking MySpace template” sources that are a mere Google search away. (And yes, my own MySpace page uses one of those crappy templates because it’s such a pain to customize MySpace otherwise.)
The web is hard for a lot of people, so fair enough. But if you can register a domain name and point it at a MySpace page, you probably have enough sense and skill to do better than letting your “brand” be represented by the ugliest web site on the planet (MySpace, in case you’re not following along here).
But be that as it may, let’s accept for the moment that MySpace actually makes sense, and that it’s a good thing, etc. Then why would you set-up your MySpace page, and then do nothing with it other than drop your music into the player and start making and accepting friends? MySpace has space for a bio. Pictures. It even has a blog feature (the world’s crappiest blog, but it’s there). But these things are hard too, I guess, and allowing other MySpace users to spam your comments with their new release banners and YouTube videos is easy, so there you go. But I wouldn’t call it “putting your best foot forward.”
Hiding the Details (it’s still about the brand)
It is truly beyond me why so many producers and artists (and DJs too for that matter) go completely out of their way to hide their own identities and/or the identities of those they work with:
- Pictures taken with strong backlighting so all you see is a silhouette; oddly-cropped pictures where you see nothing clearly; pictures taken from the back; or no pictures at all.
- Missing or first-name-only vocalist credits. (What, you want to make sure nobody else records with him or her? Give me a break.)
- Missing or first-name-only producer credits.
- No information of any kind about where to purchase the music, or which label(s) a song or artist has been signed to. (If this isn’t an invitation to piracy, I don’t know what is.)
This is, frankly, nuts. Promoting music is little different than promoting anything else, and that’s why people like Coca-Cola and Nike spend so much time and money building and protecting their “brand.” I think it’s even more important with music than shoes and soda, because there’s so much music out there, when a fan finds something they like, they probably would like more from the people who made the track they liked.
When you hide the vocalist’s name, it becomes impossible to find more music he or she has sung. When you hide the producer’s name, likewise on production. When you hide pictures, there’s nothing for a fan to relate to other than the music.
Part of this, I believe, is because in many cases, popular producers work under multiple names for record deal purposes. One producer I’m thinking of in the UK who’s a favorite of mine works under around 12 different names, and the explanation he gave at one point was just that… Some track under some name gets signed for release, and he picks a new one. Sounds like a weird set of contract terms to me, but whatever. It’s not a great way to build a reputation in my view, at least not among consumers. (If people in the industry know who you are, I guess that’s all that matters to some.)
Missed Opportunities
I think the bottom line here is that this is all about missed opportunities. To pick on The One Hundred a little bit here, whoever they are, is that I would have loved to write a blog piece about the song. Talk about what I like, and why I like it. Who’s behind the song. What other work they’ve done. Essentially, help spread the word and promote the track. But I didn’t, because there’s nothing to say. And there’s nothing to say because the artist hasn’t chosen to say anything; at least not anywhere Google can seem to find it.
Music, to me, is more than the music itself. It’s interesting people, with interesting backgrounds, from interesting places, with personal stories. Not unlike the way we feed off of Britney’s dysfunction, but hopefully in a more positive way, many people (myself included) like hearing about all that when we bond with a song’s great production, or insightful lyric, or smooth vocal. It’s part of the experience, frankly. So why deprive an audience of that? It makes no sense.
But then, many things don’t make sense. But I still like Still & Fine from The One Hundred. Whoever they are.
2 comments May 8, 2009
Losing your originality (or over-extending it)
I was having a chat the other day with my buddy DJ Romeo in Kansas City. I always enjoy talking to him about dance music, because he has a different focus and a slightly different set of musical interests than I do, and as such, he’s often got a different point of view that forces me to think about things.
Which was precisely the case the other day. I’ll leave the names out of this because it’s not even relevant, but we were talking about a new song that had come out recently, and I mentioned I’d liked a particular mix by a particular remixer. I’m pretty sure Romeo threw-up in his mouth a little the moment I got the producer’s name out of mine.
He proceeded to explain that the producer I’d named had lost his originality; that all his mixes sounded the same. No sooner than Romeo got that out of his mouth than another new song came on my iPod (I was reviewing new music), from an entirely different remixer, and I was struck immediately that two of the elements were identical—not just similar, but identical—to another popular song the guy had remixed before, as if he had just dropped the vocal stems from the new song into the software project he’d used for the song I was remembering, and then called it done.
The effect is sort of like photographing someone against a particularly stunning backdrop, and then another person wants a really nice photo of themselves, so you just Photoshop them on top of the original photo. The person is different, and the background is perhaps only slightly less beautiful than it was the first time. But it’s disingenuous, in my view, and when I see that same backdrop start to show-up in a remixer’s body of work time and again, it starts to lose its beauty (not to mention sticking out like a sore thumb).
I’m not suggesting that big-name remixer/producers all do this, or that they lack passion. But I can agree with Romeo, as someone who listens to a lot of dance music, that there is both a lot of room for originality in this game, and there are a fair number of remixers out there who seem to have lost their edge and just crank-out mixes through some sort of template.
Of course, there are business realities at play here. Some of the biggest names in the business right now seem to crank-out remixes at a pace that must surely be in the neighborhood of once a week. At what point do you cease being an artist, and start being a music factory? (I don’t know the answer, but there probably is one.) And I also know what most of these guys make to create a remix, and let’s just say it’s not a great way to make a living. If you’re gonna do a lot of remixes, and you’re gonna try and make a living doing it, spending weeks on each one is just not gonna work.
There’s also a fine line in my view between having a style, and using a cookie cutter. I will name one name here: Scotty K. This LA-based DJ/producer stands out in my mind as someone who has managed to find a style, an identifiable sound of his own, without having every single remix sound the same. His projects stand out in my mind as nearly always having a swirling sound that I refer to as “the calliope.” The actual synth patch used for it changes a little song-to-song, but it’s nearly always there, and it’s trademark Scotty K. But at least the tracks I’ve heard from him don’t suffer from sounding like the came from the same formulaic template.
Add comment April 16, 2009
Idol isn’t the only way
Auditioning for American Idol (or one of its siblings worldwide) may be one way for people with singing talent to get discovered, as I blogged earlier this week. In fact, just tinkering with one’s video camera and posting the results on YouTube has proven to be another way some people get to the spotlight.
One of those people came to my attention on Monday while updating the music on iDanceRadio.fm, and that person is The Netherlands’ Esmée Denters. Just three years ago, Esmée was videotaping herself singing popular songs, Idol audition style, and posting them on YouTube. Apparently the results were impressive enough for someone in the industry to notice.
Denters was eventually introduced to Justin Timberlake, who in addition to signing her to his new Tennman Records label, had her open for his European concerts in 2007. She’s been hanging out with Timberlake since, as a sort of protégé. Fast-forward to today, and she’s preparing for the release of her first album. Not bad for a kid who just a couple of years ago was merely goofing around with Internet video.
Her debut single, which is what I added to the station on Monday, is titled Outta Here. It’s probably exactly what one might expect from someone associated with Timberlake: a nice, pleasant, radio-friendly, pop song infused with R&B, that sits nicely in an iPod playlist next to Beyoncé, Rihanna, or any number of otherwise largely soundalike female pop artists today. I’m not saying there’s anything wrong with that, only that it’s commercial pop music that follows the rules and sticks to the formula that’s proven to work as well as anything does these days in the music industry.
I’ve not seen or heard any extended remixes of the song yet; I hope they’re coming. But the album single works for me. Listen for it on the station and see if you agree.
It’ll be interesting to see where things go next for Denters.
Add comment April 9, 2009
AmazonMP3 and the line between convenience and annoyance
Last night, I was looking for a years-old dance track in a very specific mix that I’d heard on Sirius/XM’s BPM. I went to all the places I might usually go… Junodownload, AudioJelly, DJ Download… Nothing. Since I check iTunes only as a last resort, my next stop was Amazon.com, since I figured that their AmazonMP3 service is emerging as a viable digital download service. Lo and behold, they had the track.
So, I did the simple “buy” process, and that’s where the trouble started. Instead of an MP3 file, an “AMZ” file was coming across the wire. WTF?!
From what scant information that was on the download page, I rather quickly surmised that I was being forced through assumption to use Amazon’s MP3 download tool software. I didn’t have this stupid tool, so the AMZ file wouldn’t open. I had to reject the download, go download and install their tool, and thankfully when I back-navigated to the download page, the download started again, only this time, the AMZ file was recognized.
This was annoying enough, but once the download tool did its thing, iTunes started automatically and crap was added into that, too, without asking me. Here’s a list of my issues with this process:
I don’t want help
First and foremost, single track downloads from AmazonMP3 are not supposed to require the use of their stupid tool. I’m a pretty savvy guy. I don’t need, or want, Amazon’s “help” to make sure I don’t lose a downloaded file somewhere on my hard drive, or to stick it into iTunes (and hence my iPod) if that’s where I want it to go. Why was I required to use it?
I believe at this point that the issue was that I’d tried the tool shortly after Amazon.com opened their digital store in order to collect some free promotional downloads. My account was still marked as a download tool user, so it assumed I still had it. After uninstalling it this time, it directed me to a web page that indicated my account had been unflagged as a user of the tool. Fair enough I guess. But no less irritating.
What is the point?
I find it interesting that other digital download stores don’t have this requirement. Beatport, Masterbeat, Junodownload, AudioJelly, DJ Download, and a litany of others hoping to be the next iTunes don’t seem to have any issue allowing single MP3 downloads as… Shock… Single MP3 downloads.
AmazonMP3 indicates that the use of the download tool is required for albums. Why? Other download stores simply stick all the tracks into a download folder, and let you have at it at your own pace. Others still bundle them into a ZIP file and let you download that. Again, what is the big deal here?
OK, I’ll venture a guess at answering my own question.
First, as a web developer, I understand the technical challenge of confirming successful download using web technology. The bottom line is that it’s not really all that possible, reliably, without a ton of effort. As a result, most download stores allow a window a time in which you can download the track, multiple times if necessary, before further access is barred (as a thin piracy barrier presumably). By developing and offering a special tool for the purpose, AmazonMP3 can easily confirm successful receipt of a file… They could even checksum the download if they wanted to, to ensure data integrity, before marking it “downloaded” in their database. On that level (and that level only) it’s a pretty smart idea.
Second, AmazonMP3 is setting a low bar for customers. One reason iTunes has been successful is because it’s crammed down your throat (you can’t easily use an iPod without iTunes), and because the store is fully integrated with it. It just… Works. Most of the first iPod customers were geeks, but these days, it’s your mom, granddad, uncle Harry, and that sort of person who need all the help they can get. If it’s not easy, they’ll be calling customer service in a heartbeat. AmazonMP3 understands this too.
But I’m still baffled why people who actually know how to use a computer are treated like some idiot who just turned their PC on for the first time sometime last week. Besides… If they can handle downloading and installing the download tool, they can probably handle downloading and using MP3 files.
Ask first
Perhaps the most annoying part of all of this is that I was never asked ahead of time to download the tool. Its existence wasn’t verified before an AMZ file was crammed down my throat that wouldn’t open. And at no point during the tool installation was I asked if I wanted iTunes integration.
Amazon.com just assumed. Assumed I wanted the software. Assumed I had it. Assumed I wanted to integrate with iTunes. I don’t, I didn’t, and I didn’t, respectively.
I have quite enough “assuming” from Microsoft (dear user, we are God, we know what you want to do with your computer better than you do, so we’ll just do it), and I don’t need it from Amazon.com too.
In closing
I’m very pleased that AmazonMP3 is becoming a viable force in the digital distribution realm. I’m very pleased to see more labels, more independents, more artists, more content going there. I’d love to see Apple’s strangehold on the music distribution market loosened a bit, and even though Apple has removed DRM from the iTunes Store, I prefer the MP3 format to start with and will seek it out before alternatives until something better comes along.
But if what I experienced last night is the customer experience AmazonMP3 wants people like me to have, they’ve just ensured that they will be the last place I look for music, just before the iTunes Store.
Add comment April 8, 2009
The global Idol machine
I have to hand it to the folks at Fremantle Media (owned by the media giant Bertelsmann AG): coming-up with the Idol franchise was a stroke of brilliance. While American Idol might be getting a little tired at this point, it’s hardly in danger of cancellation with its millions-strong following, and Idol worldwide continues to chug along very nicely, thank you.
Say what you will about Idol, it brings to the spotlight talent we might not have heard otherwise, and while I’ve written plenty about the stars cranked out by the American version of the show, truth is, there are plenty of artists on the global stage that also have Idol roots, and as we’ve seen in the U.S., you don’t have to win the competition to get benefit of the “Idol effect.”
Take Danny Saucedo. Back in 2006, he appeared on Swedish Idol. While his Wikipedia entry suggests he wowed the judges, apparently his talent wasn’t quite sufficient to get him beyond the top 6 contestants on the show.
Apparently that was perfectly adequate, however, since Sony signed him in 2007, and he’s enjoyed a few #1 songs in Sweden since. Apparently he’s a bit of a sensation in Poland as well, but in any case, I just saw his name for the first time within the past few weeks when I got a promo of his track All on You.
It’s one of those tracks that was sort of, “yeah, this is good” on the first listen, and it’s been growing on me (thankfully not like a fungus in this case) since. As one might expect, it’s your basic polished remix of a basic polished pop song. Nothing wrong with that. And while I might feel a wee bit guilty for embracing another example of the vanilla ice cream of music (I normally prefer a little flavor and texture, figuratively speaking), good vanilla ice cream is still fun to eat, right?
It will be interesting to see if Sony are successful in getting Danny Saucedo to gain traction in North America. His “cute factor” should go a long way to help, but as I said, the music’s not bad either.
Check out his web site (if you read Swedish, anyway) at www.danny.nu.
2 comments April 7, 2009
