Variety: Albums Don't Work Anymore

Intersting opinion piece in Variety magazine on albums being obsolete:

http://variety.com/2013/biz/news/katy-perrys-prism-a-good-example-of-how-albums-dont-work-anymore-1200824933/#

Well it seems that things have gotten back the way it was before the mid sixties(?). When singles were the way to go.

chewie wrote:

Well it seems that things have gotten back the way it was before the mid sixties(?). When singles were the way to go.

It seems that way. We are in interesting times.

Witchfinder wrote:

chewie wrote:

Well it seems that things have gotten back the way it was before the mid sixties(?). When singles were the way to go.

It seems that way.  We are in interesting times.

But it also doesn't help when you have to listen to a lot of filler on 80minute albums. Need to roll back those albums to 38-45minutes.

I don't know if the current crop of pop stars can come up with that much quality material anyway?

chewie wrote:

Witchfinder wrote:

chewie wrote:

Well it seems that things have gotten back the way it was before the mid sixties(?). When singles were the way to go.

It seems that way.  We are in interesting times.

But it also doesn't help when you have to listen to a lot of filler on 80minute albums. Need to roll back those albums to 38-45minutes.

I don't know if the current crop of pop stars can come up with that much quality material anyway?

Not a fan of epic albums unless the genre calls for it. My favorite albums tend to run less than 40 minutes.

corplhicks wrote:

chewie wrote:

Witchfinder wrote:

chewie wrote:

Well it seems that things have gotten back the way it was before the mid sixties(?). When singles were the way to go.

It seems that way.  We are in interesting times.

But it also doesn't help when you have to listen to a lot of filler on 80minute albums. Need to roll back those albums to 38-45minutes.

I don't know if the current crop of pop stars can come up with that much quality material anyway?

Not a fan of epic albums unless the genre calls for it. My favorite albums tend to run less than 40 minutes.

Same here. I find vinyl length (approx. 40 mins) to be ideal. I am also a big fan of Eps.

I'm fine with albums being longer if the quality of songwriting is there. But most pop 'artists' fail that test, so 40 minutes is more than enough. Ultimately, though, articles like these are more about the economics, not the art, of music. I believe that there will always be a market (admittedly much smaller than the industry has been used to) for albums of quality music.

Some times those longer albums can be a chore to get through. Give me the 40-45 minute albums anytime.

I've been saying this for years: bands/musicians need to learn that just because you CAN fit 75 or 80 minutes of material on a CD, doesn't necessarily mean that you SHOULD.

That said, I'm still an "album guy." When I listen to albums, I rarely ever skip tracks, I don't fast forward to the "hit" single on a CD, I start at track 1 and listen to it straight to the end, then I pop it out of the player, put in another CD, and repeat.

Fat Freddy wrote:

I've been saying this for years: bands/musicians need to learn that just because you CAN fit 75 or 80 minutes of material on a CD, doesn't necessarily mean that you SHOULD.

That said, I'm still an "album guy." When I listen to albums, I rarely ever skip tracks, I don't fast forward to the "hit" single on a CD, I start at track 1 and listen to it straight to the end, then I pop it out of the player, put in another CD, and repeat.

i agree. Put quality out instead of quantity.

The most important aspect (that the article doesn't mention) is the age group purchasing pop albums like Katy Perry. Teenagers. These kids have grown up in a post-album world, they grew up with iPods, they gravitate toward singles (as pop fans always have) and I'm sure a surprising number of them may never have owned a physical CD in their lives. The album really doesn't have a meaning to many of them, it's a concept from their parents generation and we all know how much teenagers want to emulate their parents. Right. It's just a different world now.

Many of us here are circling right on either side of 40, what we like is tied to what we grew up with. We bought albums, we traded them, discussed them, made compilation tapes from them, they became a part of who we are and hearing them now conjures up memories of the time we first experienced them. So we are naturally a little horrified by seeing this trend back toward singles and away from physical media, but at the same time we just have to accept that the marketplace is really not interested in people our age. Albums will continue to be made, physical media will still exist, it's just going to be niche going forward.

Sadly I agree with everything S.D. stated, excuse me I off to check out some nursing homes.    

Because I like being told what to do and how to consume media, by Variety Magazine.

[quote="chewie"][quote="Witchfinder"]

chewie wrote:

I don't know if the current crop of pop stars' songwriters can come up with that much quality material anyway?

Fixed it for you....

And I sadly agree with SD..... but who knows, maybe someday it will swing back in the other direction and the next generation will buy full digital albums. Hell, if there are enough of us parents playing full albums, who knows, maybe the next generation will pick it up

I've always preferred albums, but then again, I doubt my musical tastes coincide with the average teenager, haha.

I am an album guy all the way, but I don't mind ep's & splits at all.

Surely the perfect length for a Katy Perry record is about 8 seconds no?

I love the album, but accept that I'm not the target audience. I think that this kind of thing is cyclical rather than progressive and I'm sure that rags like Variety were writing similar things when punk was "wiping the rock dinosaurs of the cultural map" (which didn't happen but it made for good copy  )

There will always be people who wan't a bit more meat on the bone musically and there will always be musicians that want to stretch themselves beyond the limits of a catchy little ditty.

chewie wrote:

Witchfinder wrote:

chewie wrote:

Well it seems that things have gotten back the way it was before the mid sixties(?). When singles were the way to go.

It seems that way.  We are in interesting times.

But it also doesn't help when you have to listen to a lot of filler on 80minute albums. Need to roll back those albums to 38-45minutes.

I don't know if the current crop of pop stars can come up with that much quality material anyway?

thats why theyre claiming that albums dont work anymore.... I disagree with that completely

I would say maybe the evil record execs should be more choosy on who they invest in but we know that aint gonna happen

I agree with SD. Not sure if physical media is going to be around much longer. The niche of albums and releasing special packaging media isn't going to last if there isn't a large enough support to sustain it. The single has always been very important in music. We all remember the cassette singles and CD singles and how long they stayed around. The issue I have with LP's is that each time they are played they loose some quality, even with the best turntable. A needle is being dragged across plastic grooves. Tapes and CD's were acceptable alternatives, but at an ever decreasing quality that is greatly accelerated with use. Hence, the need to re-purchase. The sad truth today is that even if I own the media, I find it easier to play the digital copy I made. Right now, I think LP's are the best listening experience, but I usually don't have the luxury of sitting down in my easy chair and listening to one. For my most treasured music, I'm trying to grab up the best representation of the LP and sock it away without listening to it simply so I can preserve the music.

Album length has never really bothered me. If it has filler, then chances are it's not going to be a frequent listen. I have to listen to the album as a whole and kind of look at it as reading a book. Picking a chapter here and there doesn't give me the story. I feel the same way about music. An album is like a book and should be listened to as a whole.

I long for the days when bands released an album every year. Back in the day bands had an album out just about every year. Why things slowed down and albums where 2-5 years apart from each other became the norm is a mystery.

I agree with all who said the 40 minute length is pretty much the best for an album.

Long ass albums, even from excellent bands, just get boring (although with the power of shuffle now, those tail end songs get heard more from me now, since they can pop up in shuffle).

And there's no denying that most teenagers just buy singles on their iPhone. But it's not across the board. About 2 years ago I was in FYE, perusing the metal section. Their were two kids, who were 15 at the oldest, but probably 13 or 14, looking at the metal section. One kid was "the expert", compared to his friend, and was telling him what metal CDs he should get, and telling him which metal CDs he had at home.

Now, the kid was by no means really an expert. He would point to some cool bands, and as well to some crappy metalcore bands. But I was stoked he was into the CDs. He did, however, inform his friend that Kreator was crappy black metal and to avoid them. Can't win 'em all, I suppose. And as I said, he was young.

Also, having just read the article...well, I don't think most of the artists we, as a group here, dig on, are expecting to have chart topping singles.

I don't really think your average pop music consumer STOPPED caring only about the singles. It's just that in the 70s, 80s and 90s, they didn't have iTunes to where they could get only the single. So they often bought the full album, listened to only the singles/hits and proclaimed that they were the only good songs on the album.

Then those same people from those decades would later, when revisiting their youth or whatever, just buy the greatest hits album and proclaim that the hits are all you need.

Nothing has really changed aside from the easier access to the single they only wanted to begin with.

Albums all the way.

ZombieHavoc wrote:

I agree with all who said the 40 minute length is pretty much the best for an album.

Long ass albums, even from excellent bands, just get boring (although with the power of shuffle now, those tail end songs get heard more from me now, since they can pop up in shuffle).

Well, do you have to listen to the album in one go?

As a consumer I am very happy with 75 minute long albums. You can always skip tracks you don't like. Or is it better if 30 minutes of the music is tagged as "bonus tracks"? I like the fact I can come back to an album a couple of years later and re-discover those forgotten album tracks - "oh wow they had a song like this in here, too".

I always thought an album is a collection of songs, like a DVD box set is a collection of movies. You just can't have too many songs in there. Assuming the price isn't affected. I'm sure critics hate having to listen through long ass albums, but as a consumer it's all good.

Now, SONGS, on the other hand, they can definitely be too long. A lot of the repetition could be cut out in my opinion, in favour of more songs.

I'm perfectly fine with a 75 minute album as long as it's good - I feel like I am getting my money's worth of music. Hell, with bands putting out albums less often, you are STILL getting less material on a 75 minute album every 3 - 5 years than back in the day when you got a 40 minute album every year.

I don't agree that all albums are just a "collection of songs", some albums are much greater than the sum of their parts and work best when listened to all the way through.  I also have no problems with long songs, depending on the artist and what they do with it.  I would say if I looked through my collection the average song length is going to be around 6:30 per track.  

These days I get terribly bored when I hear a simple 3:30 verse/chorus/verse/chorus/bridge/chorus/chorus song.  I like tracks with long introductions, extended instrumental passages and many different time changes and variations of feel during the course of the track.

Obviously of course that means I don't care about singles and my opinion is obviously in the minority.