Re: Commercial???

[Richard Caley <rjc@cogsci.edinburgh.ac.uk>]

Philip Sainty:

> Accessible? yes; commercial? not really.

I'm not sure how it can be `not really' commercial, given the volume
of sales. That KaTe has any kind of reputation as an obscure or
`alternative' artist is mostly due to non-existant promotion of the
early albums in the US. 

> I agree that these are wonderful songs, but I don't consider them
> 'mainstream', as this implies that they are comparable with the songs
> you hear in the pop charts, which, IMHO, they are not. 

Well, the majority of straight songs in the charts tend to be either
rock anthems or ballads or (cheap imitation-)soul. The reason for that
has nothing to do with comerciality of other styles and lots to do
with the fact that chart are based on single sales which are dominated
by an age group that likes those styles. 

Besides which, She'll be in the singles chart very soon now. Even at
her most extreme KaTe isn't very far out. I remember (part of - argh!)
the video for The Sensual World playing on a TV chart show here, so I
presume it must have made a decent place in the charts, and that's one
of her less accessable singles.

Much as I hate to disagree with Vickie, it does matter to me if the
album and singles are a big hit. I want to stand maximal chance of
hearing something reasonable playing as background in shops and on the
radio. A chart price for the CD would be nice too, I buy too many that
are off the beaten track and so expensive.

--
rjc@cogsci.ed.ac.uk	Great Mysteries of the World #453:
			    Why does HMV shelve John Cage under `New Age'?