WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:03.359 Think about your own life for a second. How exactly 00:00:03.359 --> 00:00:05.940 do you measure success in your day to day? Right. 00:00:06.000 --> 00:00:07.960 Like, is it just the hard numbers? Yeah, exactly. 00:00:08.240 --> 00:00:10.599 I mean, is it about how many people buy into 00:00:10.599 --> 00:00:13.099 what you're selling or maybe how loudly your 00:00:13.099 --> 00:00:16.079 ideas are applauded in a crowded room? Or do 00:00:16.079 --> 00:00:18.199 you look at it from the flip side, like measuring 00:00:18.199 --> 00:00:20.859 it by the quiet respect of your peers? Yes. That 00:00:20.859 --> 00:00:23.399 critical acclaim from the very specific group 00:00:23.399 --> 00:00:27.160 of people who truly understand, you know, the 00:00:27.160 --> 00:00:29.559 nuts and bolts of what it takes to do what you 00:00:29.559 --> 00:00:32.640 do. It's a huge question. And welcome to the 00:00:32.640 --> 00:00:35.500 deep dive. Today, we are looking at a really 00:00:35.500 --> 00:00:37.520 fascinating stack of sources. Oh, absolutely. 00:00:37.780 --> 00:00:39.939 We've got the release history, the highly specific 00:00:39.939 --> 00:00:42.200 chart data, and the background details straight 00:00:42.200 --> 00:00:44.259 from the Wikipedia article for a song released 00:00:44.259 --> 00:00:47.259 back in the year 2000. A very specific era. Very. 00:00:47.340 --> 00:00:49.799 The track is called Pass You By. Yeah. And the 00:00:49.799 --> 00:00:53.399 artist is, well, the legendary American R &B 00:00:53.399 --> 00:00:56.600 group Boyz II Men. Right. So our mission for 00:00:56.600 --> 00:00:59.439 this deep dive, for you listening, is to explore 00:00:59.439 --> 00:01:02.039 the anatomy of what looks like a commercial flop. 00:01:02.570 --> 00:01:06.870 But one that somehow, against all odds, still 00:01:06.870 --> 00:01:10.030 achieved the absolute highest form of industry 00:01:10.030 --> 00:01:12.750 validation. It really serves as a perfect case 00:01:12.750 --> 00:01:15.810 study in the contradictions of the music industry. 00:01:16.230 --> 00:01:19.489 Because when we examine the raw data for this 00:01:19.489 --> 00:01:22.829 specific track. the numbers tell two completely 00:01:22.829 --> 00:01:25.969 different, almost irreconcilable stories. It's 00:01:25.969 --> 00:01:28.230 wild. It really is. You have this stark disconnect 00:01:28.230 --> 00:01:31.269 between the consumer reception, which, frankly, 00:01:31.370 --> 00:01:33.790 based on the metrics, was abysmal in their home 00:01:33.790 --> 00:01:35.989 country. Yeah. And the critical acclaim from 00:01:35.989 --> 00:01:37.769 the very highest levels of the music establishment. 00:01:38.260 --> 00:01:39.879 So we're going to look strictly at the release 00:01:39.879 --> 00:01:42.099 timeline, the specific chart metrics from around 00:01:42.099 --> 00:01:44.700 the globe, and the production credits. To understand 00:01:44.700 --> 00:01:46.939 how a piece of art can literally be rejected 00:01:46.939 --> 00:01:49.420 by the masses but celebrated by the experts at 00:01:49.420 --> 00:01:51.819 the exact same time. Exactly. And the trivia 00:01:51.819 --> 00:01:54.099 hidden in this track's history, it really makes 00:01:54.099 --> 00:01:56.480 you rethink the whole concept of what constitutes 00:01:56.480 --> 00:01:58.879 a hit. It changes the whole definition. It does. 00:01:58.980 --> 00:02:01.219 And for you listening, we really want you to 00:02:01.219 --> 00:02:03.159 keep this in the back of your mind as we go through 00:02:03.159 --> 00:02:06.290 the timeline. The pop culture narratives we tend 00:02:06.290 --> 00:02:08.710 to just accept without question. Right. The things 00:02:08.710 --> 00:02:11.569 we just assume are true. Exactly. They are usually 00:02:11.569 --> 00:02:14.210 so much more complicated behind the scenes. What 00:02:14.210 --> 00:02:16.849 looks like a massive failure on paper might actually 00:02:16.849 --> 00:02:19.189 be a triumph behind closed doors, depending on, 00:02:19.189 --> 00:02:21.069 you know, who is holding the pen. That's a great 00:02:21.069 --> 00:02:24.090 way to put it. So let's set the scene. The year 00:02:24.090 --> 00:02:28.430 is 2000. Boy's Two Second Men is a powerhouse. 00:02:29.070 --> 00:02:31.849 unstoppable truly if you look at the discography 00:02:31.849 --> 00:02:34.409 listed in our source material they have this 00:02:34.409 --> 00:02:37.689 massive catalog of defining singles leading up 00:02:37.689 --> 00:02:40.289 to this point songs like end of the road i'll 00:02:40.289 --> 00:02:42.590 make love to you on bended knee one sweet day 00:02:42.590 --> 00:02:45.020 it's hit after hit right They have been a dominant 00:02:45.020 --> 00:02:47.520 force. And in the year 2000, they are gearing 00:02:47.520 --> 00:02:50.120 up to release their fifth studio album. And the 00:02:50.120 --> 00:02:52.939 context of this specific era for the group is 00:02:52.939 --> 00:02:54.939 actually hidden right there in the album's title. 00:02:55.060 --> 00:02:57.740 Oh, yeah. The album is literally titled Nathan 00:02:57.740 --> 00:03:00.020 Michael Sean Wanya. Which is just their first 00:03:00.020 --> 00:03:02.300 names. It feels like a very deliberate choice 00:03:02.300 --> 00:03:06.280 to strip away the brand and just focus on the 00:03:06.280 --> 00:03:09.340 individuals. Taking that a step further, look 00:03:09.340 --> 00:03:12.009 at who is missing. from that title. Right. Because 00:03:12.009 --> 00:03:14.430 the source text provides the roster of group 00:03:14.430 --> 00:03:17.550 members. And the total list includes Nathan Morris, 00:03:17.770 --> 00:03:21.250 Sean Stockman, Wanya Morris, Mark Nelson, and 00:03:21.250 --> 00:03:23.729 Michael McCaffrey. Five guys. Five guys originally. 00:03:24.349 --> 00:03:27.349 But by titling their fifth studio album simply 00:03:27.900 --> 00:03:30.479 Nathan Michael Sean Wanya, they are making a 00:03:30.479 --> 00:03:33.699 very literal, specific declaration about the 00:03:33.699 --> 00:03:36.180 quartet lineup for this era. It's the fascinating 00:03:36.180 --> 00:03:38.800 absence of Mark Nelson from that title. Reflects 00:03:38.800 --> 00:03:41.060 the exact composition of the group at the time 00:03:41.060 --> 00:03:43.319 this music was being pushed to the public. It's 00:03:43.319 --> 00:03:45.219 a statement of identity right on the cover, telling 00:03:45.219 --> 00:03:47.400 the audience exactly who is in the room. It's 00:03:47.400 --> 00:03:49.139 like they are reintroducing themselves to the 00:03:49.139 --> 00:03:51.580 world, laying all their cards on the table. But 00:03:51.580 --> 00:03:54.460 focusing specifically on Pass You By, the single 00:03:54.460 --> 00:03:56.840 we were tracking from this album, there's a really 00:03:56.840 --> 00:03:59.159 interesting twist regarding who is actually in 00:03:59.159 --> 00:04:01.139 the room for this one. Oh, absolutely. Because 00:04:01.139 --> 00:04:03.520 even though it's released under this very unified, 00:04:03.740 --> 00:04:07.340 quartet -focused album title, the track itself 00:04:07.340 --> 00:04:09.840 was entirely driven by just one of those guys. 00:04:10.120 --> 00:04:13.060 Yep. Sean Stockman is listed as the sole songwriter. 00:04:13.710 --> 00:04:16.790 And he's also listed as the sole producer. He 00:04:16.790 --> 00:04:19.009 took on both of those massive duties entirely 00:04:19.009 --> 00:04:21.709 on his own. Which is incredibly impressive, especially 00:04:21.709 --> 00:04:24.610 within the context of a vocal harmony group, 00:04:24.769 --> 00:04:27.250 where collaboration is usually the core of the 00:04:27.250 --> 00:04:29.129 creative process. Right. You're usually bouncing 00:04:29.129 --> 00:04:31.230 ideas off each other. You usually have multiple 00:04:31.230 --> 00:04:33.709 writers, outside producers, a whole committee 00:04:33.709 --> 00:04:37.290 shaping the sound. But Stockman is stepping up 00:04:37.290 --> 00:04:39.769 and taking complete creative control of the architecture 00:04:39.769 --> 00:04:42.449 of this specific song. Wow. And when he delivers 00:04:42.449 --> 00:04:45.350 it to the label, which in this case is the corporate 00:04:45.350 --> 00:04:48.930 machine of Universal, we see the very first compromise 00:04:48.930 --> 00:04:52.490 between artistic vision and commercial reality. 00:04:52.810 --> 00:04:54.910 Yeah, let's talk about that. The source shows 00:04:54.910 --> 00:04:57.490 us two distinct lengths for the song. There's 00:04:57.490 --> 00:04:59.709 the main version, which clocks in at 4 minutes 00:04:59.709 --> 00:05:02.230 and 26 seconds. And then there's the radio edit, 00:05:02.370 --> 00:05:04.949 which is shaved down to 3 minutes and 59 seconds. 00:05:05.689 --> 00:05:08.790 Now, 27 seconds might not sound like a massive 00:05:08.790 --> 00:05:11.670 sacrifice to you or me, but... In the music business, 00:05:11.930 --> 00:05:14.029 why does that matter so much? Like, why does 00:05:14.029 --> 00:05:17.449 Universal need a tighter sub -four -minute version? 00:05:17.750 --> 00:05:20.329 It comes down to the strict mechanics of radio 00:05:20.329 --> 00:05:23.810 playability. Radio stations program their hours 00:05:23.810 --> 00:05:26.589 down to the exact second. Every single second 00:05:26.589 --> 00:05:28.949 counts. Exactly. They have to fit in advertisements, 00:05:29.370 --> 00:05:32.870 station identification, news breaks, and DJ banter. 00:05:33.269 --> 00:05:35.670 A song that runs over four minutes, and certainly 00:05:35.670 --> 00:05:38.189 one creeping up on four and a half minutes, is 00:05:38.189 --> 00:05:40.930 viewed as a liability for a programmer. Because 00:05:40.930 --> 00:05:42.610 it throws off the schedule. It throws off the 00:05:42.610 --> 00:05:45.290 math of the entire hour. By providing a version 00:05:45.290 --> 00:05:47.649 that is exactly three minutes and 59 seconds, 00:05:47.930 --> 00:05:51.250 Universal is removing a psychological and logistical 00:05:51.250 --> 00:05:53.470 barrier to entry for those programmers. Right. 00:05:53.629 --> 00:05:55.610 They are taking Stockman's four and a half minute 00:05:55.610 --> 00:05:58.430 vision and packaging it into a product that is 00:05:58.430 --> 00:06:00.870 perfectly optimized for the fast paced ecosystem 00:06:00.870 --> 00:06:03.990 of contemporary radio. Here's where it gets really 00:06:03.990 --> 00:06:06.589 interesting, though, because despite that optimization. 00:06:06.870 --> 00:06:10.139 Yep. Despite shaving it down to perfectly fit 00:06:10.139 --> 00:06:12.980 the radio format, despite the massive backing 00:06:12.980 --> 00:06:15.300 of Universal, and despite being from one of the 00:06:15.300 --> 00:06:18.420 biggest R &B groups on the planet, Pass You By 00:06:18.420 --> 00:06:21.360 was commercially unsuccessful. Completely. It 00:06:21.360 --> 00:06:24.420 completely failed to make the main US Billboard 00:06:24.420 --> 00:06:28.490 Hot 100 chart. To not even register on the primary 00:06:28.490 --> 00:06:31.649 metric of American musical success is a massive 00:06:31.649 --> 00:06:34.230 blow, especially considering their track record. 00:06:34.410 --> 00:06:37.009 But the data shows us exactly where it stalled 00:06:37.009 --> 00:06:39.529 out. Right on the edge. It peaked at number four 00:06:39.529 --> 00:06:42.170 on the Billboard Bubbling Under Hot 100. We have 00:06:42.170 --> 00:06:44.110 to explain the Bubbling Under chart because it 00:06:44.110 --> 00:06:46.790 is essentially the definition of purgatory in 00:06:46.790 --> 00:06:48.829 the music industry. It really is. It's literally 00:06:48.829 --> 00:06:51.170 the waiting room for the Hot 100. It means you 00:06:51.170 --> 00:06:53.029 are just sitting there right on the outside looking 00:06:53.029 --> 00:06:55.259 in. If you are number four on the bubbling under 00:06:55.259 --> 00:06:58.819 chart, you are essentially the 104th most popular 00:06:58.819 --> 00:07:00.660 song in the country. Which is heartbreaking. 00:07:00.899 --> 00:07:03.660 You get all the frustration of being close, but 00:07:03.660 --> 00:07:06.120 absolutely none of the glory of actually being 00:07:06.120 --> 00:07:08.899 on the main list. It's a brutal place for a major 00:07:08.899 --> 00:07:12.420 artist to land. However, if we dig deeper into 00:07:12.420 --> 00:07:14.959 the chart data, we see that the song didn't just 00:07:14.959 --> 00:07:18.180 disappear into the ether. It did find specific 00:07:18.180 --> 00:07:21.220 niche audiences within the United States. Okay, 00:07:21.279 --> 00:07:23.639 where did it land? It managed to hit number 27 00:07:23.639 --> 00:07:27.240 on the U .S. Hot R &B Hip Hop Songs chart. Not 00:07:27.240 --> 00:07:30.589 bad. And it reached number 39. on the u .s pop 00:07:30.589 --> 00:07:33.490 airplay chart so it is getting some play people 00:07:33.490 --> 00:07:35.470 in specific demographics are definitely hearing 00:07:35.470 --> 00:07:38.509 it but it just cannot achieve that critical mass 00:07:38.509 --> 00:07:41.050 to break into the mainstream consciousness in 00:07:41.050 --> 00:07:44.110 the u .s exactly so we had the u .s data did 00:07:44.110 --> 00:07:46.189 universal just cut their losses at that point 00:07:46.189 --> 00:07:48.629 or is there a global strategy at play here there 00:07:48.629 --> 00:07:51.569 was absolutely a global strategy And if we connect 00:07:51.569 --> 00:07:54.149 this to the bigger picture, the geographic data 00:07:54.149 --> 00:07:56.529 provides a really fascinating contrast. Because 00:07:56.529 --> 00:07:58.410 while the United States mainstream was largely 00:07:58.410 --> 00:08:01.110 rejecting the song, it was finding a significantly 00:08:01.110 --> 00:08:04.069 warmer reception internationally. Really? Yes. 00:08:04.209 --> 00:08:06.529 The song actually performed the best in Australia. 00:08:06.689 --> 00:08:09.970 It peaked at number 13 on the ARIA top 50 singles 00:08:09.970 --> 00:08:13.750 chart. And ARIA being the Australian Recording 00:08:13.750 --> 00:08:16.009 Industry Association, they were called on a billboard. 00:08:16.189 --> 00:08:21.670 Wow. Number 13 is a legitimate... And it wasn't 00:08:21.670 --> 00:08:24.509 just an anomaly in Australia either. The source 00:08:24.509 --> 00:08:27.550 shows it also charted in France, reaching number 00:08:27.550 --> 00:08:30.829 73 on the SNEP chart, which is the official French 00:08:30.829 --> 00:08:33.289 record industry syndicate. Right. And it made 00:08:33.289 --> 00:08:35.669 it to number 98 on the single top 100 in the 00:08:35.669 --> 00:08:38.610 Netherlands. Why do you think a quintessential, 00:08:38.669 --> 00:08:42.169 deeply American R &B group finds a much warmer 00:08:42.169 --> 00:08:44.590 reception for this specific track on the Australian 00:08:44.590 --> 00:08:47.649 charts than on the main? U .S. Hot 100? It's 00:08:47.649 --> 00:08:49.409 a great question. I mean, they are charting at 00:08:49.409 --> 00:08:52.110 number 13 halfway across the world, while back 00:08:52.110 --> 00:08:54.190 home they are stuck in the bubbling under waiting 00:08:54.190 --> 00:08:56.889 room. Is it just a matter of the American market 00:08:56.889 --> 00:08:59.129 moving on from their sound, or did the U .S. 00:08:59.129 --> 00:09:01.029 marketing team just drop the ball? It's likely 00:09:01.029 --> 00:09:03.409 a combination of both. The international markets 00:09:03.409 --> 00:09:06.370 were perhaps more receptive to Boy's Tulek Sekine, 00:09:06.470 --> 00:09:10.429 men's evolving sound at that exact moment, unburdened 00:09:10.429 --> 00:09:12.789 by the specific trends dominating American radio 00:09:12.789 --> 00:09:15.799 in the year 2000. That makes sense. Or... Perhaps 00:09:15.799 --> 00:09:18.639 Universal's marketing strategy in Australia was 00:09:18.639 --> 00:09:20.860 simply more effective at reaching the right ears. 00:09:21.139 --> 00:09:24.039 The Australian consumers clearly connected with 00:09:24.039 --> 00:09:26.679 Stockman's writing and production in a way that 00:09:26.679 --> 00:09:29.200 the broad American pop audience just did not. 00:09:29.580 --> 00:09:32.100 Right. It highlights how fragmented audiences 00:09:32.100 --> 00:09:35.919 can be and how a song's specific vibe might resonate 00:09:35.919 --> 00:09:37.960 with a completely different cultural landscape 00:09:37.960 --> 00:09:40.360 than the one it was born in. Okay, let's unpack 00:09:40.360 --> 00:09:42.139 this because everything we've talked about so 00:09:42.139 --> 00:09:44.200 far paints a picture of a song that genuinely 00:09:44.200 --> 00:09:46.620 struggled. Definitely. It's a commercial disappointment 00:09:46.620 --> 00:09:50.039 at home with nice, albeit confusing, silver lining 00:09:50.039 --> 00:09:53.559 overseas. But here is the biggest twist in the 00:09:53.559 --> 00:09:55.940 source material, and it completely upends the 00:09:55.940 --> 00:09:57.919 narrative we've been building. This is the best 00:09:57.919 --> 00:10:10.879 part. Despite... What's fascinating here is the 00:10:10.879 --> 00:10:13.419 massive juxtaposition between the industry establishment 00:10:13.419 --> 00:10:16.299 and the everyday consumers. It's night and day. 00:10:16.460 --> 00:10:18.539 Think about what this actually means in practice. 00:10:19.120 --> 00:10:22.320 The general public, the people buying CDs and 00:10:22.320 --> 00:10:24.740 calling into radio stations to request songs, 00:10:25.399 --> 00:10:27.580 largely ignore this track it couldn't crack the 00:10:27.580 --> 00:10:30.799 top 100 right but the voting members of the recording 00:10:30.799 --> 00:10:33.519 academy which is made up of professional musicians 00:10:33.519 --> 00:10:36.360 producers and audio engineers listened to this 00:10:36.360 --> 00:10:39.460 exact same song and singled it out as one of 00:10:39.460 --> 00:10:41.899 the very best vocal performances of the entire 00:10:41.899 --> 00:10:44.200 year i have to play devil's advocate for a second 00:10:44.200 --> 00:10:47.000 though go for it is this really a pure validation 00:10:47.000 --> 00:10:51.240 of the craft of the specific song? Or is it possible 00:10:51.240 --> 00:10:54.220 the Recording Academy just saw the name Boys 00:10:54.220 --> 00:10:57.279 to Second Men on a ballot and checked the box 00:10:57.279 --> 00:10:59.700 out of legacy habit? We see that happen a lot 00:10:59.700 --> 00:11:02.240 with award shows. It's a fair question, and legacy 00:11:02.240 --> 00:11:05.340 bias absolutely exists. But you have to consider 00:11:05.340 --> 00:11:08.519 the specific context of this track. Sean Stockman 00:11:08.519 --> 00:11:11.000 wrote and produced this entirely on his own. 00:11:11.120 --> 00:11:14.100 It wasn't a factory line hit, utilizing the trendy 00:11:14.100 --> 00:11:16.659 producers of the moment. That's true. The peers... 00:11:16.940 --> 00:11:20.100 in the academy. The people who actually know 00:11:20.100 --> 00:11:23.059 how difficult it is to engineer, arrange and 00:11:23.059 --> 00:11:26.120 produce a vocal harmony track were likely responding 00:11:26.120 --> 00:11:28.460 to the textual execution of the song itself. 00:11:29.580 --> 00:11:32.220 They are recognizing the architecture that Stockman 00:11:32.220 --> 00:11:34.259 built, even if the general public didn't want 00:11:34.259 --> 00:11:36.799 to buy the house. That distinction really highlights 00:11:36.799 --> 00:11:38.799 the difference between a song that is merely 00:11:38.799 --> 00:11:41.980 popular and a song that is technically or artistically 00:11:41.980 --> 00:11:45.580 excellent. Absolutely. It also reframes Universal's 00:11:45.580 --> 00:11:48.539 entire approach to the song. When you look at 00:11:48.539 --> 00:11:50.460 the release history, it's clear the label knew 00:11:50.460 --> 00:11:52.299 they had something of high quality on their hands, 00:11:52.379 --> 00:11:54.480 and they were relentless in trying to force the 00:11:54.480 --> 00:11:56.639 public to realize it. They really were. This 00:11:56.639 --> 00:11:58.779 was not a song they just dropped once and abandoned 00:11:58.779 --> 00:12:00.899 when it didn't immediately chart. The release 00:12:00.899 --> 00:12:03.100 history reads less like a standard marketing 00:12:03.100 --> 00:12:06.879 plan and more like a sustained siege over three 00:12:06.879 --> 00:12:09.100 months. Let's look at the timeline. Because it 00:12:09.100 --> 00:12:12.039 exposes the specific mechanics of how a major 00:12:12.039 --> 00:12:14.340 label tries to resuscitate a struggling track. 00:12:14.679 --> 00:12:18.100 It begins on July 11, 2000. That is the first 00:12:18.100 --> 00:12:20.820 impact date. And they specifically target rhythmic 00:12:20.820 --> 00:12:23.429 contemporary radio in the U .S. For those who 00:12:23.429 --> 00:12:25.830 might not know, Rhythmic Contemporary is essentially 00:12:25.830 --> 00:12:29.809 a format that blends upbeat R &B, hip -hop, and 00:12:29.809 --> 00:12:32.330 dance music. Exactly. It's aimed at a younger, 00:12:32.450 --> 00:12:35.330 club -going demographic. So they are starting 00:12:35.330 --> 00:12:38.210 with the core demographic. They are testing the 00:12:38.210 --> 00:12:41.169 waters where Boyz II Men has the strongest historical 00:12:41.169 --> 00:12:44.429 base. Precisely. They are hoping for a grassroots 00:12:44.429 --> 00:12:48.389 groundswell. Then, over a month later, on August 00:12:48.389 --> 00:12:52.490 23, 2000, they pivot to physical media. releasing 00:12:52.490 --> 00:12:54.990 the CD single over in Japan. Which speaks to 00:12:54.990 --> 00:12:56.970 the global strategy we were talking about earlier 00:12:56.970 --> 00:12:59.649 with Australia and Europe. They are activating 00:12:59.649 --> 00:13:01.870 international markets while still trying to build 00:13:01.870 --> 00:13:04.649 momentum at home. Right. And then we get to September. 00:13:04.789 --> 00:13:07.789 Now it is two full months after the initial push 00:13:07.789 --> 00:13:10.529 to rhythmic radio. The grassroots groundswell 00:13:10.529 --> 00:13:12.269 didn't happen. Right. The song isn't taking off. 00:13:12.429 --> 00:13:14.549 So what does Universal do? They pivot completely. 00:13:15.100 --> 00:13:18.340 On September 11, 2000, they send the track to 00:13:18.340 --> 00:13:20.679 adult contemporary and hot adult contemporary 00:13:20.679 --> 00:13:23.320 radio in the U .S. Adult contemporary is a completely 00:13:23.320 --> 00:13:25.419 different world than rhythmic radio. Totally 00:13:25.419 --> 00:13:27.620 different. We're talking about the easy listening 00:13:27.620 --> 00:13:30.899 stations, the music you hear playing softly in 00:13:30.899 --> 00:13:34.019 doctor's offices or grocery stores, targeting 00:13:34.019 --> 00:13:37.299 an older demographic that wants smooth, inoffensive 00:13:37.299 --> 00:13:40.600 sounds. That September 11 pivot is the sound 00:13:40.600 --> 00:13:43.279 of a label refusing to give up. but changing 00:13:43.279 --> 00:13:46.259 their tactics entirely. They didn't get the traction 00:13:46.259 --> 00:13:48.960 they wanted with the younger R &B -focused stations 00:13:48.960 --> 00:13:52.120 in July, so they regrouped and aimed at an older, 00:13:52.240 --> 00:13:54.600 more passive listening audience. It's a huge 00:13:54.600 --> 00:13:57.620 shift. And they didn't stop there. The very next 00:13:57.620 --> 00:14:00.419 day, September 12th, they pushed it to contemporary 00:14:00.419 --> 00:14:03.559 hit radio, which is basically mainstream top 00:14:03.559 --> 00:14:06.470 40 pop radio. Wow. You can almost picture the 00:14:06.470 --> 00:14:08.509 label executives sweating in a boardroom, just 00:14:08.509 --> 00:14:10.509 throwing darts at different radio formats, hoping 00:14:10.509 --> 00:14:12.669 one of them finally sticks. Just trying anything. 00:14:12.850 --> 00:14:15.870 They staggered this release across multiple distinctly 00:14:15.870 --> 00:14:18.309 different formats over a quarter of a year, trying 00:14:18.309 --> 00:14:20.509 to find any entry point into the American mainstream. 00:14:20.940 --> 00:14:23.080 And they were putting real tangible resources 00:14:23.080 --> 00:14:25.600 behind the packaging and the physical extras, 00:14:25.759 --> 00:14:27.580 too. They didn't just send out an audio file 00:14:27.580 --> 00:14:30.799 to radio DJs. There was a full music video directed 00:14:30.799 --> 00:14:34.039 by Darren Grant. And the physical media, specifically 00:14:34.039 --> 00:14:37.179 the European CD single, shows how labels used 00:14:37.179 --> 00:14:40.399 to manipulate sales and incentivize fans. The 00:14:40.399 --> 00:14:43.580 track list on this European release is wild. 00:14:43.799 --> 00:14:46.700 You have to remember the landscape of physical 00:14:46.700 --> 00:14:50.210 CD singles in the year 2000. Yeah. You are asking 00:14:50.210 --> 00:14:53.669 a consumer to go to a store and spend a few dollars 00:14:53.669 --> 00:14:55.870 on a piece of plastic that holds just one or 00:14:55.870 --> 00:14:57.929 two songs. You had to give them the compelling 00:14:57.929 --> 00:15:00.250 reason to buy the disc instead of just waiting 00:15:00.250 --> 00:15:02.620 to hear the song on the radio. So on this European 00:15:02.620 --> 00:15:06.639 release, track one is the 3 .59 radio edit we 00:15:06.639 --> 00:15:09.179 talked about. But then track two is a song called 00:15:09.179 --> 00:15:12.259 Darling. Track four is the instrumental version 00:15:12.259 --> 00:15:14.360 of Pass You By, which is actually great if you 00:15:14.360 --> 00:15:16.019 want to strip away the vocals and really hear 00:15:16.019 --> 00:15:18.100 the specific production work Sean Stockman did. 00:15:18.139 --> 00:15:20.220 Oh, for sure. But track three is this mysterious 00:15:20.220 --> 00:15:23.259 B -side called Rose in a Honeycomb. And what 00:15:23.259 --> 00:15:25.899 is so funny about our source material, the Wikipedia 00:15:25.899 --> 00:15:28.600 ecosystem, is that Rose in a Honeycomb doesn't 00:15:28.600 --> 00:15:30.980 even have its own page. It doesn't. It is actually. 00:15:31.120 --> 00:15:33.139 just an alternative search redirect that sends 00:15:33.139 --> 00:15:35.220 you right back to the Pass You By article. It 00:15:35.220 --> 00:15:38.919 acts as a digital ghost. It exists purely as 00:15:38.919 --> 00:15:41.980 a footnote on the track list of a European CD 00:15:41.980 --> 00:15:44.559 single for a song that didn't even chart in the 00:15:44.559 --> 00:15:47.940 US Hot 100. It's so strange. But for the hardcore 00:15:47.940 --> 00:15:51.360 fans who bought that physical disc, that B -side 00:15:51.360 --> 00:15:55.379 was a tangible exclusive piece of the Nathan 00:15:55.379 --> 00:15:58.519 Michael Shanwanya era. Right. By including unreleased 00:15:58.519 --> 00:16:00.960 tracks like Darlin' and Rose and a Honeycomb, 00:16:01.259 --> 00:16:03.600 Universal was trying to juice the sales numbers, 00:16:03.820 --> 00:16:06.019 hoping the diehard fans would buy the single 00:16:06.019 --> 00:16:08.659 just for the exclusive content, which would in 00:16:08.659 --> 00:16:11.000 turn push Pass You By higher up the charts. Which 00:16:11.000 --> 00:16:13.120 is pretty clever. It all adds to the complex 00:16:13.120 --> 00:16:16.000 texture of how this specific piece of music was 00:16:16.000 --> 00:16:18.200 packaged, marketed, and sold around the world. 00:16:18.610 --> 00:16:21.169 So what does this all mean? We have looked at 00:16:21.169 --> 00:16:23.809 the precise dates, the radio formats, the geographic 00:16:23.809 --> 00:16:26.210 chart positions, and the industry awards. It 00:16:26.210 --> 00:16:27.809 covered a lot of ground. When you put it all 00:16:27.809 --> 00:16:30.350 together, Pass You By is an absolute masterclass 00:16:30.350 --> 00:16:33.059 in the complexities of the music industry. You 00:16:33.059 --> 00:16:34.980 have a scenario where a song can be written and 00:16:34.980 --> 00:16:37.559 produced entirely by a single member of a legendary 00:16:37.559 --> 00:16:40.759 quartet. It can be aggressively pushed to four 00:16:40.759 --> 00:16:43.179 distinctly different types of radio stations 00:16:43.179 --> 00:16:46.120 over three months. It can completely flop on 00:16:46.120 --> 00:16:48.600 the main charts in its home country. It can then 00:16:48.600 --> 00:16:51.240 turn around and become a legitimate top 20 hit 00:16:51.240 --> 00:16:54.419 in Australia. And then the Grammy. Right. After 00:16:54.419 --> 00:16:56.840 all of that commercial confusion and boardroom 00:16:56.840 --> 00:16:59.559 panic, it can still secure a Grammy nomination 00:16:59.559 --> 00:17:02.259 from the most critical, discerning ears in the 00:17:02.259 --> 00:17:04.480 business. I think the most important takeaway 00:17:04.480 --> 00:17:07.339 for you. listening to this is to remember that 00:17:07.339 --> 00:17:10.980 success is rarely a single flat metric. No, it 00:17:10.980 --> 00:17:14.079 rarely is. We are so heavily conditioned to look 00:17:14.079 --> 00:17:16.460 at the top of a billboard chart or the highest 00:17:16.460 --> 00:17:19.059 sales numbers or the most likes on a post and 00:17:19.059 --> 00:17:21.180 equate that with the ultimate value of a piece 00:17:21.180 --> 00:17:23.480 of work. Exactly. But just like in your own career 00:17:23.480 --> 00:17:26.519 or your own personal projects, a lack of mainstream 00:17:26.519 --> 00:17:29.519 or immediate commercial success does not automatically 00:17:29.519 --> 00:17:32.619 invalidate the quality of what you produce. The 00:17:32.619 --> 00:17:35.829 peer recognition The respect of the people who 00:17:35.829 --> 00:17:38.109 actually know how hard the work is to execute 00:17:38.109 --> 00:17:41.670 often tells a truer, deeper story than the raw 00:17:41.670 --> 00:17:44.309 sales data. That's so true. Sean Stockman's production 00:17:44.309 --> 00:17:47.089 did not connect with the broad U .S. Hot 100 00:17:47.089 --> 00:17:50.390 audience, but the Recording Academy heard the 00:17:50.390 --> 00:17:53.170 excellence in the architecture he built. It really 00:17:53.170 --> 00:17:55.789 makes you appreciate the unyielding hustle behind 00:17:55.789 --> 00:17:58.700 the scenes, too. Knowing that Universal kept 00:17:58.700 --> 00:18:01.960 pushing it month after month, format after format, 00:18:02.160 --> 00:18:04.579 knowing the group kept filming videos and releasing 00:18:04.579 --> 00:18:07.140 international CD singles packed with B -sides. 00:18:07.240 --> 00:18:09.319 They really pushed it. They believed in the art, 00:18:09.380 --> 00:18:11.220 even when the initial numbers were screaming 00:18:11.220 --> 00:18:13.599 at them to give up and move on to the next track. 00:18:13.819 --> 00:18:15.839 And this raises an important question, one that 00:18:15.839 --> 00:18:18.319 I want you to mull over long after we wrap up 00:18:18.319 --> 00:18:20.759 this deep dive. Okay, let's hear it. If a piece 00:18:20.759 --> 00:18:22.980 of art is celebrated as one of the best of the 00:18:22.980 --> 00:18:26.700 entire year by industry experts, but it is completely 00:18:26.700 --> 00:18:29.220 rejected by the mainstream consumers it was so 00:18:29.220 --> 00:18:32.299 heavily marketed to, who is the true arbiter 00:18:32.299 --> 00:18:35.680 of its quality? Does commercial failure invalidate 00:18:35.680 --> 00:18:38.339 artistic success, or does it just mean the marketing 00:18:38.339 --> 00:18:40.720 team completely missed its target? That's a great 00:18:40.720 --> 00:18:42.900 thought to leave on. It is attention that exists 00:18:42.900 --> 00:18:46.420 in every single creative field. And pass you 00:18:46.420 --> 00:18:49.700 by remains the perfect, fascinating embodiment 00:18:49.700 --> 00:18:52.440 of that mystery. The numbers never tell the whole 00:18:52.440 --> 00:18:55.440 story. Thanks for joining us on this deep dive. 00:18:55.579 --> 00:18:57.279 Keep asking questions, and we'll see you next 00:18:57.279 --> 00:18:57.559 time.