The art of music marketing begins and ends with the advertising of an advertisement; one part mass exposure and all remaining parts dependent on the effect of the song on the ears of the listener. An artist's song not only advertises itself, but additional songs for the artist, and the artist itself.

American Idol's marketing art is a masterpiece, wielding mass exposure, a repertoire of proven hits, and constant connection with its artists resulting in an inherent emotional investment for the fan. This is middle America marketing at its finest. And then there's the long tail.

According to a recent Pew Report, 83 percent of Americans discover music through terrestrial radio, movies, or television, and 51 percent suggested that the internet had no effect on purchases whatsoever. The report explains

The story for music is a bit different because it is an experience good--the kind of product whose quality is discernable [sic] only after it has been consumed. ...In fact, [consumers] are more likely to rely on mainstream media or recommendations from family and friends for inspiration for music purchases.

Reading this, creeping suspicion sets in for me. These are probably not the purchasers that dig deep, buy the first Arcade Fire or White Stripes CD, and help launch indie bands into popularity. I suspect that the majority of music purchasers don't have the hundreds, if not thousands of CDs, MP3's and old cassette tapes that I, my friends and colleagues house. I further suspect they have one Whitney Houston CD, one John Mayer release and a Radiohead album. And besides, Clotaire Rapaille, the famous Chairman of Archetype Discoveries and psychological marketing researcher of the reptilian mind suggests that you can't believe what people say.

It's not that people intentionally lie during surveys and focus groups; it's that they try too hard to please. When asked about their interests and preferences, they tend to give answers they believe the questioner wants to hear.

I'm wondering if there may not be some P2P exploration going on behind the scenes in addition to the Gray's Anatomy playlist and family recommendations (and when was the last time you rushed to iTunes based on a music suggestion from your mom?)

So while I'm wantonly waiting in vain for Dr. Rapaille to release a study on the psychology of music purchasing, Bob Lefsetz is busy writing about choices and the strategy of niche marketing. Lefsetz offers up Malcolm Gladwell's speech about Prego vs. Ragu's multiple offerings of spaghetti sauce and Bob's conclusion that

Maybe, if the public was exposed to something different, they'd like it! In enough quantity to make money! For everybody who likes Mariah Carey, there are tons who are turned off and hate her. This is the lesson of the twenty first century. Not that if everybody paid for music Mariah would sell more, but that many people don't want her music at any price, they want something different! He who will rule in the future is he who services all these niches, who gives people something different.

Here's where it gets sticky. Consumers (and that means you and me), like choices but not too many. I'm not going to wind my way through MyFaceFriend and listen to every musical offering. Most of America does prefer the passive music discovery of a pre-selected commercial radio playlist and the six or so selections broadcast on a one hour TV show. And long tail music lovers like to dig within their favorite genres--hence the sweetness of Last FM and Pandora, not unlike the alternatives of Rough Trade Records or Wax Trax back in the day.

Which brings us back to the art of marketing and exposure. I would wager that the music collectors--those who pay rapt and undying attention to what's new, what's hot and what they can discover first, use the internet--not radio and TV--for discovery. Those fans have the reptilian nature of connecting with an artist on their own, but the marketing need still be in place for the one song advertisement to make its mark and that will continue to solidify in the online world.