That's a bad analogy... if music sells a lot then it's cause a lot of people like it, McDonald's sells a lot cause it's a cheap and fast alternative. It's not like 2 million people bought the 20-20 Experience as an alternative to anything.
Well not quite. At least not imo. I think, there is actually quite a bit to that comparison.
cheap: cheap is in music a non-issue, only because this stupid business thinks that music needs to be sold at a fixed price per track instead of what the market allows. Instead it forces the music business to live within the budgetary consequences of the $1.29 track market model.
Let's just think for a moment, if Adam had the chance to sell his tracks at twice that price, would he have sold much less? Probably not, given his solid fan base. Maybe a few purchases of 10 albums at a time would not have happened, but for the most part, Adam's fanbase would gladly throw more money at him. And if he could do that, his albums, given exactly the same cost structure would have been both very profitable, because, the part that i-tunes gets would remain equal. That is, the label and ultimately the artist would benefit from that higher price. Instead the labels try to produce vinyl, and 'glam boxes' and special editions to at least allow for some recouping of those margins that normally would be out there for the picking. But how silly is it that this is how it needs to be done.
Now, there are other artists, who do not have such a price insensitive customer bases. Well then, they need to work with what their market allows. But, to regulate track price, is imo one of the many dumb things this business does.
Otherwise, music is cheap. And unfortunately, for many the price seems to be zero. So, price does not even figure into what is really popular. In comparison to other ways to entertain yourself, music is the cheapest you can find, and therefore very much the McDonald of choices.
Fast: Mc D. is available everywhere and it is fast. So, is listening to radio, and so is just going with the flow and listening to exactly what everybody else is listening to. It takes time to research music that is not readily accessible. It takes getting involved, or informing yourself and then going online and actively seeking out, what you want to buy, to buy something different. That takes time and effort, just like seeking out a special restaurant.
There are other reasons, the comparison above is a great one:
Music that is mass produced and mass marketed and it is easy, uniform, predictable, stays within the boundaries of a certain taste spectrum and is therefore comfort food. For the soul instead of for the stomach, but again, the comparison holds.
Pop music lives with the dichotomy of being a guilty pleasure, most people look down on it, but then consume it anyways. Kind of like the big Mac.
When a young crowd is in the car and needs some food, McD is the lowest common denominator of fast food, just like CHR or ACH is the lowest common denominator for the radio channel selection.
I think, Greg actually hits it on the head. Because, the big issue is, that the masses think that award shows and their radio program have something to do with what is good music, when obviously, nothing could be further from the truth. In food, the same people would totally know that a reward based on sales volume would be meaningless when it comes to quality of food. So, if his tweet reaches some folks who have not thought that through yet, they might wake up a bit. I thought his comparison was brilliant, actually.
i didnt want it to be that scary , and macabre , but when i was drawing it , the black pen fell from my hand and messed up the face with black ink . I didnt want to throw it away so i remembered the "black swan" dvd cover and voila !
