Industrial Music forum

Electro, gothic, noise, darkwave from the Side-Line

Industrial Music forum » Music news discussion forum

1. 

   E101
   

   offline

   Member

   Now that it's been a few years since we turned into an iPod generation where we can cherry pick just the songs we like from any given band or album release, and as DJs see ALL the time, how people tend to only know, request & dance to the same songs over & over again, I have a question to throw out...

   What are your thoughts on some bands possibly just releasing 1-2 single tracks every couple of months vs. taking 2-3 years to release full length albums? Further to that, does it even make much sense for a band to put together 10-12 songs for an album anymore when typically speaking there are only 2-3 songs that the majority of most people care about or actively play & listen to? Obviously I'm not talking about "concept bands" here where their albums are meant to be "journeys" or whatever - I'm talking about bands who always make a point of trying to have those 1-2 club anthems per release... the same songs that overshadow every other album track by default.

   I have a feeling I know how most people HERE will respond vs. other places I've posed this question, but I'm nevertheless curious.

   Posted 3 months ago #
2. 

   Brapley
   

   offline

   Member

   If the band is releasing any of this stuff on vinyl or CD, singles are almost always more expensive per-track than albums are.

   Posted 3 months ago #
3. 

   Cult of the Bleeding Toe
   

   offline

   Always Confused

   5 track eps are the way of the future IMO.

   Posted 3 months ago #
4. 

   dissecting
   

   offline

   HI !

   I hate bands with muddled discographies, so hard to keep chronologically straight in my head. Releasing single tracks would make it so much worse. I think bands should release one album every year or two, plus a single or two with b-sides. Dumping all your scraps, bad demos, and failed experiments into the market really weakens even the strongest artists pedigree (lookin' at you "from the vault" series).

   Posted 3 months ago #
5. 

   bubba
   

   offline

   Member

   Albums. If you don't have the patience then you have no business listening to it.

   "Dumping all your scraps, bad demos, and failed experiments into the market really weakens even the strongest artists pedigree."

   I think you meant to look at FLA.

   Posted 3 months ago #
6. 

   Cretin Dilettante
   

   offline

   Member

   If a band can't release a good album, they're not a good band. The music doesn't have to have a big, grand, cheese laden concept to be coherent, it just has to flow well together.

   I have no problem with artists releasing single songs, but if you're the kind of music listener who ONLY listens to 2 or 3 songs out of an album then you need to reevaluate your taste. If the bands you liked were good, you'd have no problem sitting through a 10 track album because literally EVERY song would be interesting.

   Posted 3 months ago #
7. 

   dissecting
   

   offline

   HI !

   I understand what you're saying but respectfully disagree. Some authors only have one good book in them, some actors only one defining role. Call it a fluke or happy accident or just a muse that left too soon, but there's plenty of great artists who score one big hit then spend the rest of their career trying to recapture that magic. They create some raw masterwork in their youth then spend the rest of their lives becoming technically proficient at their craft, all the while their work becomes more and more bland. Just because you can fill up 50-70mins of music doesn't mean you should.

   the single has been in place since the beginning of recorded music. The format defined a framework and it was up to the artist to distil as much of their greatness into that 3 minutes of the first 7"s. Wikipedia says the LP wasn't even invented til 1948.

   I still wouldn't buy 1 song. And people buying singles of stuff that gets replayed every 10 minutes on the radio is pretty silly.

   Posted 3 months ago #
8. 

   Pool Waiter
   

   offline

   Member

   I think singles appeal to a certain crowd and albums to others. I am an album person and have found that I prefer other songs on an album more than the "single(s)" 90% of the time.

   What's funny about your statement, is that you are actually referring to the past but meaning the future. In the 50s/60s, bands/artists released singles. If they generated enough interest, those would get compiled into albums with a few more tracks added. Everything goes full circle.

   Posted 3 months ago #
9. 

   soillodge
   

   offline

   Tech Moderator

   Singles and EP's will be the mainstay soon. I'm cool with this.

   `michael

   Posted 3 months ago #
10. 

    xeno
    

    offline

    Member

    I definitely prefer albums - Not only those that are meant to be a journey, but also because a good artist will make a journey/concept album of it even if he's just packaging together singles...

    ...also, generally, I think even great single tracks benefits greatly from being played in a well defined consistent context...

    Posted 3 months ago #
11. 

    raedarius
    

    offline

    Member

    "Just because you can fill up 50-70mins of music doesn't mean you should."

    I agree with this. Trawling through an OK 80 minute album where a decent editor could have made an excellent 40 minute album doesn't do anyone any favours, unless you're into buying music by the pound.

    Twenty years ago, a band would release a 40-45 minute album on vinyl. Now they release an 80 minute album, pretty much in the same time-frame. Are bands these days twice as inspired as their predecessors, or less inclined to edit because the constraints of the format don't require it?

    On a purely practical level, you can listen to a shorter album more times in the same amount of time. You'll be more familiar with it quicker, and it will mean more to you in the long term.

    Posted 3 months ago #
12. 

    MetaSektion
    

    offline

    Member

    To return to the original question, "What are your thoughts on some bands possibly just releasing 1-2 single tracks every couple of months vs. taking 2-3 years to release full length albums?"....

    My view is that the distribution has changed. There is certainly more flexibility around delivery than previous.

    What hasn't changed is the need for an A&R function of some sort to regulate what the artist releases, to stop sub-standard product from dliuting the brand. This is obviously subjective territory, since a completist might consider a rough demo from their favourite artist to be just as collectable as something that was polished over a long period of time. To me, that's one area where the metamorphosis from the old distribution model to the new one(s) is still catching up. As to how to fill that gap... Maybe you can crowd-source quality assurance using serious fans and industry peers? Maybe being able to run an idea past a part-time A&R manager is a way of getting some objective input before deciding whether to release a track or collection of tracks (be it a single, EP, or album)? The next few years are going to be very interesting on that question, that's for sure.

    Posted 3 months ago #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply

You must log in to post.