CONNELLS Archives

September 1995

CONNELLS@LISTSERV.MIAMIOH.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Tim Horrigan <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
The Connells <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 20 Sep 1995 18:33:29 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (27 lines)
Dana McCall <[log in to unmask]> said:
 
>I think that most of the radio stations see it this way; play what sells.
>However, I think the inverse is more true. People buy what they hear.
>Look at the Dave Matthews band.
 
Well, there's a feedback loop involved.  Being on the radio is a great boon
for sales (especially if listeners actually like your music.)  Radio stations
seem to look for an upward trend in sales.  If they see you hitting it big in
your little underground scene (e.g., Green Day in the pubk scene) they'll
kick you up to the next level of mass acceptance by putting you on the radio.
 
It is sort of mysterious why some stuff gets on the radio on some doesn't.
It's not at all clear why the Connells aren't on the radio when
similar-sounding entities such as Dave Matthews, Hootie & the Blowfish (much
inferior!), Gin Blossoms, etc. are all over the dial.
 
I don't think there's any conspiracy on the part of radio programmers to
suppress the Connells.  I just don't think the Connells have quite broken out
of their core audience yet, and when they do break out (which they probably
will eventually if they don't tire of their current situation), they will be
on the radio.
 
 
--Tim Horrigan
  [log in to unmask]

ATOM RSS1 RSS2