[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
.H I P H O P M AT T E R Sabout SoundScan.Most of the early complaints dealt with whichstores and regions of the country were su‰ciently represented in the SoundScan panel of national, multistate, and regional music chains.But others believed that the major labels’ real concern was that the new method brought to an end a thirty-year-old system that allowed them to influence the all-important Billboard charts.The two Mikes knew that their service represented a threat to the established order.“There was definitely some reservation,” Fine revealed years later.“They had a sense of control, and here we were trying to take that control away.”While the concerns expressed by the major labels may have beensuspect, the new POS system generated genuine alarm among inde-pendent labels and distributors.The indie music sector knew that the so-called “mom and pop” stores were more likely to carry their prod-uct and also give a break to new artists the majors historically ig-nored.Their biggest worry was that while SoundScan could providea more accurate account of music sales in the big chain stores itwould underreport the sales activity in the smaller stores.In addition to endangering their financial health, underreporting could imperil the indies’ ability to continue making music that cut against thegrain of the hardened formulas and conservative taste preferred by the majors.A few weeks before the introduction of SoundScan, the music in-dustry, both majors and indies, held a collective breath—uncertain what would happen but fully convinced that things would never bethe same again.Change was inevitable.Their concerns about Sound-Scan would prove to be both right and wrong.In its May 25, 1991 issue, the music industry’s most important trade publication announced, “This is a week of historic change for Billboard magazine,” adding, “it’s full-speed ahead into the future.” That week both the Billboard 200 and Country Music charts began using38 [ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
zanotowane.pl doc.pisz.pl pdf.pisz.pl trzylatki.xlx.pl
.H I P H O P M AT T E R Sabout SoundScan.Most of the early complaints dealt with whichstores and regions of the country were su‰ciently represented in the SoundScan panel of national, multistate, and regional music chains.But others believed that the major labels’ real concern was that the new method brought to an end a thirty-year-old system that allowed them to influence the all-important Billboard charts.The two Mikes knew that their service represented a threat to the established order.“There was definitely some reservation,” Fine revealed years later.“They had a sense of control, and here we were trying to take that control away.”While the concerns expressed by the major labels may have beensuspect, the new POS system generated genuine alarm among inde-pendent labels and distributors.The indie music sector knew that the so-called “mom and pop” stores were more likely to carry their prod-uct and also give a break to new artists the majors historically ig-nored.Their biggest worry was that while SoundScan could providea more accurate account of music sales in the big chain stores itwould underreport the sales activity in the smaller stores.In addition to endangering their financial health, underreporting could imperil the indies’ ability to continue making music that cut against thegrain of the hardened formulas and conservative taste preferred by the majors.A few weeks before the introduction of SoundScan, the music in-dustry, both majors and indies, held a collective breath—uncertain what would happen but fully convinced that things would never bethe same again.Change was inevitable.Their concerns about Sound-Scan would prove to be both right and wrong.In its May 25, 1991 issue, the music industry’s most important trade publication announced, “This is a week of historic change for Billboard magazine,” adding, “it’s full-speed ahead into the future.” That week both the Billboard 200 and Country Music charts began using38 [ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]