The result of that is what is played up and down the charts, learned from what sells 'records', and embedded into almost anything new to be more and more refined to the taste of the majority/masses. Also the stuff playing in supermarkets to make you buy more.
You say “music characteristics hadn’t much to do with it” but then you list a number of specific characteristics that make music more likely to work on radio. That suggests the opposite of “any music will do”. Only music with very specific qualities will do.
Or maybe you just meant to say you don’t like pop?
I guess it would depend (like the advertising) on what kind of demographics the population consists of. Pop music, because it is specifically designed to appeal to a broad spectrum of people, would have terribly nonspecific demographics. The weirder the genera, the more specific the audiance (usually), and thus higher "CPM".
Where's the sweet spot? Serving music has got to cost much more than serving a jpg ad, but maybe less than or equal to a flash ad (depending on the song and ad of course). I could very well be wrong about that though.
Tried and true: every once in a while I look at Billboard Hot 100 and other ratings. The top pop artists are not necessarily awesome but often further down the list is good stuff not in high rotation on the ‘trending’ lists.
Does the author mean mainstream "on the radio" pop, or the plethora of music we not explore and listen to on music services? I've venture to say the Top 100 lists occupy a smaller proportion of today's listeners thane ever before. We are unconstrained. And melody is out there.
reply