Talking to an internet start-up guy, it struck me: I need an intern.
There’s a new CD — Time Curve — coming out very soon on Arabesque (my playing of music by Glass and Duckworth). It’s not quite “classical,” not “new age” (although that may be how Amazon.com and other internet sellers will niche it). Some people use the term “alternative classical” or “alt classical”…
From the statistics I have, the people who download my recordings also listen to Radiohead, Death Cab for Cutie, 
Carl Craig, Aphex Twin, and yes, even to music by Mozart played by Radu Lupu. And that’s why my intern is needed — a flexible young musico-marketer-acrobat — a sherpa who might help maneuver through this brave new world. Figure out how to expose the new recording to ALL the right people…
Charming though it may be, the review we used to covet in The Gramophone is far from enough. Ah, to be on Stereogum.com or Pitchfork.
Potential applicants, I’m posting on Craigslist.
What do you mean with “right people”?
I was thinking of people who would find the music interesting. What I may have suggested (?) was people who will find the music interesting, but who are outside the old accesses to this kind of recording.
But, it’s that your goal? to find people that find the music interesting? I’m sure the equation doesn’t end there…
There is that old question: “Do artists find their audience, or create their audience?”
Finally, I can get to what I really wanted to comment. I think that the old question that you mentioned has a rather cosmetic coating of numbness that doesn’t help at all. The cryptic concept of audience, especially in America, conducts invariably to a stationary notion of its own reflection (it was quite pedantic to see how many times the term “audience” was mentioned at the Van Cliburn competition). Maybe the world, me included, has to go through the exercise of finally question what they really hear or for what they play/listen. Commercial music has done a pretty good job dispersing human neurosis in vicious circles. Contemporary/21th century music has gain a good spot at following the industrial compulsion of the postmodern man/audience. Masses will be always masses, but because of the same reason that we have Bach, Beethoven, Brahms, etc., it will be absolutely irresponsible to shape the notion of music in term of how the “audience” dictates it. That only freezes more and more its immaterial idea. Sure the quest for beauty or emotional/intellectual disturbance of the pseudo-present are at times “interesting” topics, but I’m pretty sure that never finishes the substance of music.
Thus, the link between music/performer/audience reckons on both on its congruence and evolvement. Evolvement not ingrained in a value judgment, but in a russian-doll game of consciousness. Finally, I hope there is a niche for “existentialist” music in this century (or in the next one), not as a catharsis of our cartesian trap, but as a re-new start in which interest would be a far fetched excuse to desires directly from the bigger doll, directly from the unconscious to the unconscious. Anything else is plain bureaucracy. (although we do have some Bach and everyone else later for the moment… maybe that’ll be it, maybe that’s enough). I remember a line from Celibidache… more or less… “I’ve given up the notion of beauty in music time ago, now, I look for truth”. That’s courage if you live in this world, a child game if you know who you’re. That’s the problem with the “right” people that you mentioned before and my previous question. Now, who wants to take the courtesy to know who we really are?