Spotify: https://spoti.fi/2S2UcLp

YouTube: https://bit.ly/2T3JTH6

1

This is a hit. Will the label make it one?

You’ve got to be in the mood to listen to new music. And today I was. And I heard a few very good tracks, but this was the best. And I wanted to write about it but I had a virtual doctor’s appointment coming up and I didn’t know if I wanted to waste my heat on it, especially in light of the blowback.

Yes, there are times you are ready, and times you are worn out. And usually, when you’re fresh it’s best. Which is why oftentimes the first take is the best, and the first cut is the deepest, but that was not a hit in its original Cat Stevens incarnation, but I must admit Rod Stewart did a better version, but at this point most people think it’s a Sheryl Crow song, but does the younger generation know ANY of these? I wouldn’t think so.

So let’s first define a hit. Especially in this era. It’s something you get instantaneously, that catches your ear, that changes your mood, that you want to hear again.

It’s just that simple. Yes, you may play the new work of your favorite act over and over until you get it, but don’t delude yourself into thinking non-fans will do this. The skip button is their friend. They don’t want to listen to anything they don’t like. As for the vaunted “playlist”…don’t get too excited. Yes, you’ll rack up some streams, maybe even make some dough, but playlists are for passive listeners, and the music business is built on active listeners, people who live for music, who grab on to something and spread the word to everybody, music is up front and center for these people, whereas the playlist people…it’s often background, in the office, during a cocktail party, while they’re paying bills.

Now not every hit becomes one, now more than ever. You see it needs a push. And a push isn’t as easy as it was before. And depending upon the format of your tune, the attack is different, and for some kinds of music there’s no attack plan at all, you just make it and play live and hope you gain traction, and most don’t.

So hip-hop records start online. Radio is last.

Rock records start on the radio. It’s a very small market relatively speaking, new rock, not classic rock, and most of its acts believe streaming is the devil so they’re leaving all the opportunities on the table. 

Country records start on the radio, but country fans will listen on streaming before rock fans will. 

As for pop…you need a push, which is why purveyors of these tracks employ the carpet bomb technique, all the old school stuff like TV, “Ellen,” “Kelly Clarkson” and late night, and print, and maybe even a version with a rapper to tie into that market.

So what is “Throw it Back”?

Well, it falls between the cracks, and therefore it may not be worth pushing, the label may choose to manage its bullets, because of opportunity cost. Keith Urban is anathema on hip-hop and pop radio, and Breland is Black, and let’s face it, a lot of country radio stations and country fans are racist. Then again, it’s almost an easier sell, because outlets may feel they have to play the track to avoid looking racist.

And “Throw it Back” is not your typical twangy track. That’s how you make something country today, through the “country” vocal, a stringed instrument like a banjo or violin (well, “Throw it Back” does have that banjo solo), it’s all about the toppings, not the essence, it’s as far away from Merle Haggard and Willie Nelson as it could be. In other words, it’s almost pop. Which means “Throw it Back” might fit. But I’m sure PDs can come up with all kinds of reasons not to play it.

Now there’s no doubt in my mind as soon as my audience receives this missive I’ll be inundated with the aforementioned blowback, this song SUCKS and they’ve got a better one!

First and foremost, you have to be dispassionate in picking emphasis tracks, hits. It’s not what YOU like, but what the AUDIENCE LIKES! This is a professional job, not everybody can be a program director, even though they think so. Talk to a musical act, it’s fascinating, they’ll tell you what songs work in concert and which ones don’t. And oftentimes it’s the ones they almost threw away, that they thought were substandard, that the audience embraces and become hits. Then again, artists are the absolute worst at picking singles. However, if you create an 11 you know. But you’re lucky if you create a couple of 11s in your career, if you have one at all, most acts never reach the pinnacle, despite deluding themselves that they have.

And the nature of the internet is either you’re sucking up or putting down. Play and you might consider suicide. It’s high school, even though you’ve graduated. But this time it’s the revenge of the nerds. Usually the most vocal are the ones who are the loners, without followers, they hide behind their handles, they want payback for all the ridicule they’ve endured. Yes, on the internet you can put it out there. But will anybody listen?

Music is a game of mass. It’s just that simple. If it only appeals to a few…don’t quit your day job. If you just want to follow your muse irrelevant of reaction, that’s fine, but please stop complaining that you’re not making money. Think of conventional business, if a company makes a stiff product, one unsuccessful in the marketplace, it doesn’t blame consumers, and it doesn’t double-down and market the product ad infinitum, it gives up, creates a new product or goes out of business and the proprietor(s) start all over. This is the so-called “badge of failure” that Silicon Valley adores, it’s all about EXPERIENCE! You learn by playing the game. Which of course has us asking why the record companies keep flogging the young and inexperienced. Then again, they’re social media giants. And artists and labels have realized social media is the absolute best way to get a record started. But don’t think it’s organic, I mean it occasionally works that way, but really it’s about the relationship between the major label and the social media site itself. Don’t feel squeezed out, this is a business lesson. The reason TikTok, et al, want to be involved with the major labels is they have a steady stream of product, there’s ongoing business, never mind money for support. You could be the best act in the world, but if you only put out a record every other year, you’re worthless to the social media giants, they need a constant flow.

So…

2

“If she get a shot of whiskey she know how to throw it back”

Breland has got a fantastic voice. Earthy and meaningful, with an edge. He doesn’t have the BEST voice, his voice has CHARACTER! The aforementioned Rod Stewart epitomizes this, they have a way of connecting with the audience.

“She’d turn up for Elvis Presley told the DJ ‘throw it back'”

Elvis Presley? Talk about a cheap shot, his audience is dying off, his memorabilia is dropping in value.

“She look better every Thursday she don’t have to throw it back

Shawty got me catching feelings

I just hope she throws it back”

THE LYRICS ARE STUPID!

But this is a world in which Justin Bieber’s lyrically inane “Peaches” was a monster number one. Like I said, this is a business, and you have to study it to be successful. Now you can sit it out completely, but you give up your right to complain, those who are deeply involved snub you when you reveal your ignorance. Go to the label and say that Spotify is screwing you, that it’s stealing money from you, and chances are they’ll close the door on you, knowing you’re insane, Spotify is how they make their money, THEY may screw you, but Spotify only takes around 30%.

So “Throw it Back” is not made for intellectual analysis, actually it’s best when you’re not even paying attention, when you hear it from afar, when you’re driving in your car, top down, sunroof open, arm on the windowsill, believing this is the best night of your life as you’ve got “Throw it Back” at the point of distortion on your car stereo. It’s about making you feel good, and getting your body moving, no more. It’s fine if you don’t buy that paradigm, you can choose not to play, but there’s a very good chance “Throw it Back” will not gain traction and then you have to realize why your track does not, you can learn.

So it’s not only Breland. It’s Keith Urban’s vocal too. He seems to be just shy of his limit, almost screaming, fighting to be heard over the music, like a singer in a bar, with ambient noise, clamor.

And there’s the instrumentation, the burbling bass under the rap. You may not even hear it if you’re not listening for it, but it helps makes the track. And the rap…short and sweet. Might as well give the audience what it is looking for.

And the track is short and sweet itself, barely over three minutes long. And except for the raps it’s essentially just one groove repeated over and over and over again, the traditional song structure is…OUT THE WINDOW!

And the magic is in the hook, which is enhanced by the country instrumentation, real instruments atop what otherwise could be seen as a hip-hop track.

And unlike most collaborations Breland and Urban are equal players, getting equal time, both necessary.

And then there’s that banjo solo…in other words this track has both hip-hop and country elements.

And only a hater could listen to “Throw it Back” without moving their body. This is the kind of track that gets self-doubting men standing at the bar energized, to ask a woman to dance. He’s been observing them all night on the dance floor, feeling separate, but now he finally has the mojo to play and when he’s out there moving his body and she throws it back…

I don’t know whether “Throw it Back” was an accident or planned like a military attack, but the end result is just…INFECTIOUS!

That’s another thing about a hit, change just one little thing and you ruin it and it’s not a hit. Come on, compare the “Help Me Ronda” from “Today!” to “Help Me Rhonda” on “Summer Days (and Summer Nights!!),” same song, the former dead in the water, the latter a chart-topper. Which is why sometimes the demo becomes the ultimate release, something is captured that can’t be replicated. It’s not science, it’s feel. It’s not ones and zeros, that’s the internet, but it’s music that drives the web and the apps, it’s the grease that makes it all work.

“Throw it Back” is not for January, sitting in your dorm room depressed, it’s about letting go. You remember letting go, don’t you? It’s fun, join the club and…

Throw it back!

(Note: There are some spoilers below.)

A typical HBO show. As in the cast supersedes the story. Guy Pearce in such a small role?

If you watch television, you know this is the most talked-about show on the flat screen. The second? “Startup.” I watched a few “Startups,” I plan to binge all thirty, it’s very watchable, not quite A level material, but the roles and the actors who play them are so good, and supposedly it gets better, I’m not checking my watch while I watch.

I really dug watching “Mare of Easttown.” We burned through all seven episodes in a couple of days. I don’t know how the people who watched week by week could handle it. Especially at the end of was it episode five or six, where it freezes on Mare’s face. I’ve got to wait a week to find out what happens? No way. Not that I expect HBO to change, I hope Apple TV+ does, bingeing is the only way to watch television, if you watch linear television, even worse on appointment, you’re a baby boomer, because the younger generation doesn’t do this, no way. And if you want to make bank, appeal to the younger generation, because they’re getting older every day, while the boomers are starting to die off. But to run an outfit like HBO you’ve had to work your way up the ladder, kissing ass all the way, so the concept of revolution is out the window. Oh wait! John Stankey came in and said they needed more product and then Jason Kilar came along and put all the content on the streaming service and Hollywood WENT NUTS!

The HBO staffers left. Or complained. It was a Tiffany operation, only the best and the brightest. But if you’ve got a streaming service, you need a hell of a lot more content. So people will subscribe and won’t log off. Stankey knew this, the established players did not.

As for Kilar… Word is he handled it poorly, he should have contacted all the players, those above the line, especially those who shared in profits. THEY NEVER EVER WOULD HAVE AGREED! Do you know how long it takes to do a deal in Hollywood? Sometimes the film is in the can before there is paper, and just getting to an agreement can take a year, no problem. So, just like in Silicon Valley, you’ve got to take action and then deal with the fallout. If it weren’t for Napster, we’d have no Spotify. Oh, we’d have something, but established operators only move forward when pushed.

So typically the development process at HBO was interminable. The opposite of Netflix. Netflix gives a go and you shoot. Well, historically anyway. But on HBO, they must insure that the end product is up to their standards. So they make you massage the product until it does. Is it the same since the purchase by AT&T, with more product in the pipeline? I don’t know, but the truth is the acting talent is so good in “Mare of Easttown” that it’s overwhelming, everybody has chops, you don’t see this level of participation on any other outlet.

But it’s superior to the story.

Kate Winslet is a local cop, investigating murders. Even worse, the girls are locked up?  This is B horror material. I was really wincing.

But then the show got much much better.

Except for one thing… Can someone please explain the pact between the three teenagers? Was it just a red herring, to make you think they were involved in the murder or did I miss something?

Having said all of the above, the ending was fantastic, the execution was as good as the surprise. So I give “Mare” a very high mark, I recommend it. But as much as the foreign shows? No way.

Watch “The Bureau.” Slow at first, but the tension will have you squirming in your seat. And everything rings true.

Not quite as much in “Borgen,” but close…it feels like you’re in the government.

And if you want genre, “Spiral” delivers completely, the best cop show on television.

And if you want gravitas, go with “A French Village,” amazing.

So what was the bigger point in “Mare of Easttown”? It was ultimately just about the plot. At first I thought they depicted the perils and prevalence of opioid addiction extremely well, shining a well-needed light, but then that faded away.

But there were excellent personal relationships. As far as the vaunted Jean Smart…I thought she was chewing the scenery at first, but then she got very good.

Speaking of good, Sosie Bacon was completely believable as the mother of Drew. I couldn’t stop wondering where I’d seen her, turns out she was in “Narcos: Mexico,” when is that coming back?

Julianne Nicholson rang true throughout, a fantastic job as Mare’s friend.

Even better was David Denman as Frank Sheehan…he nailed it! Just because you’re big and beefy with a beard, that does not mean you’re an intense bully. Frank is controlled, almost always soft-spoken, he’s a good guy, you’d be surprised how many are out there, despite all the clamor about #MeToo.

God, everybody was good, I haven’t seen an American show with this quality of acting…maybe ever. Everybody believable.

But Kate Winslet carried the show.

All the discussion is about the penumbra, ever since her starring role in “Titanic.” Is she beautiful enough, is she too heavy… That’s an American trope, DO THEY DESERVE TO BE A STAR!

But Winslet is so believable as Mare, you forget all her previous roles. Only at one point, when she was spruced up for dinner with Colin, did she even resemble the star Kate Winslet, here she was just a small town cop, who should have left town and had a better life, but just could not.

As for the psychological elements…

You’ve seen some of this before, but not recently, not in this depth. Winslet is haunted by the deaths of her father and son, she nearly sleepwalks through life. She never seems to lighten up and be in a good mood, the weight of her issues is always on her shoulders.

And Siobhan! She’s afraid to leave town for fear her family will fall apart, I’ve seen this in my own world.

And Siobhan dumping her contemporary for someone older and more sophisticated…this is how it works, especially when you’re young. You think you’re in love, bonded at the hip, and then your significant other jilts you unexpectedly.

And for far too many people it’s family first. They’ll say and do anything to protect their family. As for the duplicity…it’s rampant in America today, lying in court is de rigueur, it’s no longer anathema.

So on one hand you’ve got a typical police whodunit, with the false starts and blind alleys.

On another, you’ve got an incredible depiction of a world that gets almost no coverage in America. In America, you’re either a winner or a loser, a billionaire or homeless. But that leaves a lot of people out. Those who are working for a living, getting by, not always thinking about money, who live to eat microwave popcorn and watch TV and go to the local bar and drink.

And everybody knows everybody. This is what I love about the city, it’s anonymous. Living in a small burg is far too inhibiting, everybody knows your business, you’re labeled, it’s oppressive.

And then there’s Mare’s line about great being overrated. You think you want to do something great, but then people expect you to follow it up. And you’ve got internal pressure. But is being great what it’s all about, or just being enmeshed in the fabric, reaping the rewards of your relationships.

And then there’s the fact that Mare is always, well almost always, trying to do the right thing, and as a result it fractures her relationships. Turns out not everyone wants you to be honest and upfront, friends expect special dispensation. Mare is winning at her job, but she keeps losing in life.

Yes, life is depicted extremely well in “Mare of Easttown.” The opioids, the family dynamics. It’s great television. But is it lasting, meaningful television?

I think of “Happy Valley,” the English crime shows… The talent doesn’t supersede the story. David Tennant and Olivia Coleman are brilliant in “Broadchurch,” but they don’t eclipse the story, and the story is more believable than that in “Mare of Easttown.”

And if you want psychological, interpersonal/family drama, the first season of “Herrens Veje” exceeds “Mare of Easttown,” hands down.

I guess I just lament that everybody raving about “Mare of Easttown” has not partaken of these foreign shows, the English ones don’t even require subtitles! (Not that I don’t turn them on anyway.)

I watch to be entertained, but I also watch to be transfixed by art, to see people testing the limits. Try Bo Burnham’s new Netflix special “Inside” if you want to see someone doing so. I just don’t need another TV show, I need THE TV show! Watch “Ramy,” or “Master of None,” they’re dealing with issues of race and there’s plenty of humor. If everyone watched them we’d have less racism in this country.

So that’s my criticism of “Mare of Easttown,” it just didn’t shoot high enough. It will never top my list of recommendations. It’s another TV show, not art.

And I’m looking for art. Something that affects me, that I think about, that I will never forget. It’s hard to achieve, but first you have to shoot for it. “Mare of Easttown” did not, execution was primary, getting the story right. This was not “The Deer Hunter,” also set in Pennsylvania, that prevented sleep, but a really good ride. I like rides. But I’d rather read “Anna Karenina” than go to Disneyland. I’d rather listen to Frank Zappa than Olivia Newton-John. I’d rather watch “The Sopranos” than “Magnum, P.I.” I want to be transported, I want to be transfixed as you walk the line of experimentation with superiority, never falling off. Like sitting in the audience for “Hamilton.” Don’t make product, make art. I’d rather see you fail at art than make product. “Mare of Easttown” is ultimately just a genre show, I wish it were more.

Bloomberg’s Brad Stone is the expert on Amazon, he’s written today’s best selling book “Amazon Unbound” and 2013’s “The Everything Store.” Tune in to hear discussion of Jeff Bezos, the management processes of Amazon, the warehouses, third party sellers, AWS, Prime Video, hardware and more. This is the definitive statement!

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/brad-stone/id1316200737?i=1000524064845

https://www.stitcher.com/show/the-bob-lefsetz-podcast

https://music.amazon.com/podcasts/9ff4fb19-54d4-41ae-ae7a-8a6f8d3dafa8/The-Bob-Lefsetz-Podcast?returnFromLogin=1&

https://bit.ly/34E1hVp

That’s right, after its third day of its month-long run, Trump’s blog never exceeded 15,000 hits a day!

That’s right, the most famous man IN THE WORLD couldn’t go it alone. Proving, in case you wondered, that Mark Zuckerberg is more powerful than the President. Furthermore, just try hiding Zuck’s communications on Facebook, it can’t be done. Yes, in other words, Mark Zuckerberg has greater reach than anybody on the planet, think about that.

But even more, think about the inability of gaining an audience in today’s world. You can build it, but if you think people are going to come, you’re almost definitely wrong.

As for Trump himself?

His fame was built in the pre-internet world, and in the twenty first century by network television, which presently gets anemic ratings, everyone having gone to streaming outlets, or having buried themselves in TikTok or YouTube. Trying to make it today?

Be thankful you have an audience at all!

That’s one of the reasons the acts of yore can tour to such prodigious numbers. People know who they are, irrelevant of whether they like the music. A number one act today? Olivia Rodrigo…well, chances are unless you’re very young you didn’t even see her on the Disney Channel, but even more important, most of America HAS NEVER EVER HEARD HER MUSIC! Trump is in the news every damn day, what are the odds some musical act can gain equal mindshare?

As for the youth… Check the numbers on social media. That’s where today’s stars live. And they don’t live for long, providing content each and every day burns you out, but their numbers are stratospheric before they crash. Look at it this way…blogs are passé. The internet ball keeps rolling. Remember LiveJournal? Now it’s about Instagram and TikTok, outlets that didn’t even exist back then. Will the buck stop there? Probably not. Platforms have power in the twenty first century, but social media outlets are fads, no youngster wants to spend their time on the social media site of their parents, which is why you can’t find a youngster on Facebook, only oldsters. And even more interestingly, Amazon may compete with you and force you to sell or go out of business, but it doesn’t work that way in social media. The old site imitates the new site’s features…unsuccessfully. Instagram Reels? Furthermore, if you want to keep the players happy you’ve got to pay them. The relationship between TikTok and its stars is very close, TikTok is a manager as well as a distributor, it knows the platform relies less on tech than its talent, keep creators happy and users will continue to flock to the site. This is not YouTube, this is not Google, at arm’s length…if you’re not reaching out to the “acts” getting views on your site, helping them maintain their profile and make bank, you’re going to be superseded, the younger generation is all about ethical treatment, ignore the mores of youngsters at your peril. Another element in the desires/beliefs of Gen-Z? AUTHENTICITY! Fake it and they’re out. Credibility is key. And fascinatingly, you can be sponsored on social media and still be authentic, because you’re beating the man, you’re building your own business. But not in art itself, in art the system is supposed to reward you plenty, and if you’re going outside of it to drink at the trough, get more than you deserve, people resent you. Yes, music has more status, more gravitas than social media, not that the purveyors don’t do their best to undercut this.

Which brings us back to Olivia Rodrigo. Musically, her album is not a ten. But when it comes to lyrical content? Rodrigo is displaying all the angst of the greats of yore, putting her feelings, holding back nothing, right in the grooves/files, no platitudes whatsoever. Rodrigo is the opposite of the TV singing shows, she knows the essence is more important than the shiny exterior. It’s not that Rodrigo is so damn good, but how did we get so far from the garden?

Trump just can’t reach people. To get people to gain new habits is the most difficult thing to do. They’ll check their texts. Maybe their e-mail. And then they’ve got their regular sites, and that’s it. They’re already overwhelmed with data, they just can’t handle any more.

Like this fiction that we need a new musical site, that you can create a meaningful business selling/streaming on your own site. THE EX-PRESIDENT CAN’T EVEN DO IT, WHAT CHANCE DO YOU HAVE?

As for streaming sites…we already have too many. It would be better if everyone was on the same platform, it would be easier to gain attention and build stars. But the labels didn’t want this because they wanted to be able to play one against another economically. So what we end up with is fearful oldsters at Apple, paying but not listening too much, trusting the Cupertino giant, and stealth Amazon, playing to people who see music as secondary, pricing accordingly, and then the big kahuna, Spotify, which gets all the heat, to a great degree from people not even using it. Music was biggest when we had one site, i.e. MTV, but the labels couldn’t stop bitching that the television station was making all the money when they weren’t. Well look at things now, MTV is essentially out of the music business and almost no one is watching, yet the labels still own their catalogs, and Universal will go public at a giant number. You see ultimately it’s about the long game. But you’ve got to play the short game with your eyes open.

The hardest thing to do today is build a star. So, the majors just glom on to train-wreck, it’s easier, because to build block by block…hell, the executive in charge may not even be there when the act finally breaks through. Sales are so hard, that marketing has eclipsed content. There’s a fancy box, but air inside. Which is one of the reasons why a lot of today’s “stars” are more famous for the penumbra, their shenanigans, than the music itself.

Don’t keep your content from the platform…EMBRACE THE PLATFORM! It’s your only way to significantly build your audience. As for remuneration…there are more ways to make more money in the music business than there ever were in history. To bitch about streaming payments is to miss the point. Furthermore, instead of complaining you’re not making enough money, take a close look at your streaming numbers, how do you increase them is the question, not how do you get paid more for their anemic number.

It’s not like everybody forgot who Trump is. They just didn’t have time/want to go to a new site. Furthermore, Trump is the king of the bite-sized, and that’s not the blog paradigm, which is extended, no, that’s the essence of Twitter. Think about that… The world complains that Twitter is bits and bytes, when the truth is that’s a feature, because in a fast-paced world the content is digestible! The other criticism of Twitter? It’s a subset of the world, not everybody is on it. DUH! No platform, no media outlet has everybody, NONE! You should be embracing Twitter for its benefits, the core people in any field are participating, you can gain information which will help you in your outlook/career directly from the source!

As for Clubhouse??

Already passé. Have you heard anybody talk about it in the last month? A failed concept. No one wants to sit endlessly on the phone listening to wankers bloviate. They want it fast and furious unless it is worth going on a deep dive, and that’s not what Clubhouse provides.

And it’s too hard to build your own audience on Clubhouse. And when this is the case, the platform always dies, just like Trump’s blog.

At least give the Donald credit for realizing his blog wasn’t working. Instead of analyzing the flaws, most people today, especially oldsters, just double-down, believing if they just try harder they’ll break through… BUT THEY WON’T! Trump’s numbers weren’t going up, he saw the writing on the wall. Meanwhile, your numbers aren’t going up, on Spotify or YouTube, and you keep blaming the system…ever think it was you? Change or die in today’s world.

So if you’re starting from zero today don’t reinvent the distribution wheel. Go to the platform. BECAUSE DISTRIBUTION IS KING! Didn’t matter what Trump was saying on his blog, because NO ONE WAS READING IT!

And know that if your goal is to grow your footprint, your audience, in today’s world, it’s unbelievably hard. Sure, you can be a flash in the pan, but even that’s hard. Rather you’ve got to pay your dues endlessly, be a lifer. This is what happens when everybody can play, when the barrier to entry is so low, when it’s hard to separate the wheat from the chaff, the good from the bad. And never forget it was the OLDSTERS who kept saying no one would make music in the new world, and those who didn’t complain, i.e. rappers, went to the PLATFORM known as Soundcloud and gave it away for free to build an audience and then when Spotify broke through they dominated. That’s what happens when you adjust to reality.

And the reality is everyone can be known, but almost no one is, at least not by many. So if you want to be known, you must be really great and be where the most people can discover you. And while publicity/advertising can help, it doesn’t reach most people and the target audience dismisses it out of hand. As for becoming a brand… The bottom line is it’s easier to sell clothing and perfume and alcohol than music. Those are established lines. It’s not like anybody is selling topless bathing suits, which were even a failure when Rudi Gernreich tried half a century ago, or a scent that smells like dung…no, the merchandise is very traditional. But hit music usually is not. It’s a harder climb, often a Sisyphean task. But a great track lasts forever, great merchandise does not. Proving, once again, it’s hard to create and become a star. Unfortunately, even if the music is innovative and great, it’s even harder to reach people today. Sorry.