It's pretty funny that you use AC/DC in your argument as a band that doesn't put out good singles and then a bunch of filler.
I love AC/DC, but let's be realistic here: they put out the same CD every couple of years. If any band was a poster child for single song downloads it'd be AC/DC.
Yeah, I kinda got lost on the ACDC argument too. I love thier music, but they'd be sunk if people were only allowed to buy "You Shook Me All Night Long."
Note: That's probably my least favourite song in the history of music. I'm a Bon Scott era ACDC fan, personally.
I don't necessarily disagree with Kid Rock's statement (never thought I'd be writing that). There are many albums that I didn't like the tracks from, but over time developed a strong connection to. I see his point in that for many artists (hopefully all of them) the album is a complete story or unit that is meant to be heard from A-Z. It's a shame that many people will miss out on some great music because of the a la carte ways of itunes, but the fact is people will go elsewhere if it isn't available that way (imo).
This is why I'd like to see radio stations be allowed to play a wider variety of songs by bands. I think the labels are restricting themselves by only letting a song or two off an album be played over the air. Promote the album as a whole instead of promoting individual singles and you should, accordingly, see an increase in album sales over singles sales.
Just having fun DR - enjoy what you will - we all have different tastes.
I agree that the song is "terrible" but in an awesome summer way. Summer Girls by LFO and Steal My Sunshine by Len are two of my all time favorite "summer tracks". Every may I put them on the ipod and they are gone by labour day, they remind me of a simpler time when all I cared about was going to the bar and hanging out with my friends every night of the week.
This kid rock track is just this years "steal my sunshine"....except steal my sunshine is infinitely better
And I have a friend who swears 'New Miserable Experience' by the Gin Blossoms is the worst CD she has ever purchased.
(I have it too and am decidedly meh about it).
Well...
If we all had the exact same tastes, life would be pretty damn boring.
A lot about music is what time you experienced it in your life, what was happening, etc. For me, this CD is EXACTLY what I needed at the time of my life it arrived.
If I was trapped on a desert island and could only take one CD, New Miserable Experience would be it for sure.
If we all had the exact same tastes, life would be pretty damn boring.
A lot about music is what time you experienced it in your life, what was happening, etc. For me, this CD is EXACTLY what I needed at the time of my life it arrived.
If I was trapped on a desert island and could only take one CD, New Miserable Experience would be it for sure.
Absolutely! Cheers!
Edit: and for the record, I am currently listening to Les Miserables - 10th Anniversary Concert, but my desert island album would probably be STP - Purple. There are other albums I have liked more a various times, but it has been in my top 5 (figuratively speaking) since I bought it, and I can't say the same about any other album.
2nd Edit: And I wasn't deriding New Miserable Experience. Indeed, like you say, people have different tastes, some people hate it, some love it, some prefer a whole album, some prefer a few favourite tracks.
As crappy as cassette tapes were, it was generally a PITA to find a specific song, so I found I listened to whole albums much more in the cassette era
__________________
"The problem with any ideology is that it gives the answer before you look at the evidence."
—Bill Clinton
"The greatest obstacle to discovery is not ignorance--it is the illusion of knowledge."
—Daniel J. Boorstin, historian, former Librarian of Congress
"But the Senator, while insisting he was not intoxicated, could not explain his nudity"
—WKRP in Cincinatti
Last edited by Bobblehead; 08-29-2008 at 11:08 AM.
I would love it if we could keep talking about iTunes and the selling of singles rather than discussing whose musical tastes suck...
Russic: I agree, and it is a shame that people are missing out. I have never bought through iTunes, are full albums availible or do you have to download an album a song at a time??
You can buy full albums, and sometimes there are songs that are only available if you buy the full album. It could be just my perception here but I think that the artists concerned with this are the pop/top 40 artists. I guess people hear a song on the radio and then buy only that song...not shocking really.
Of course consumers are going to purchase only the songs they like. Why pay $20 for a full album that's 3/4 full of crap when you can pay $3 or $4 for the few songs that are actually worth listening to?
If artists gave a damn anymore, and produced albums that were largely worth listening to in their entirety, fans would buy albums instead of singles. How many people have ever thought, "I really like this song, but I'm not buying the whole CD just for the one track?"
And just how will an artist know which of those so called 2 or 3 tracks you are talking about are actually worth listening to? What appeals to one does not appeal to another. It is next to impossible to produce an album where every track appeals to every single person. Yeah, the very top of the pack can do it, but not most artists.
And just how will an artist know which of those so called 2 or 3 tracks you are talking about are actually worth listening to? What appeals to one does not appeal to another. It is next to impossible to produce an album where every track appeals to every single person. Yeah, the very top of the pack can do it, but not most artists.
They wont, before hand. After release they can look at what songs are selling most and, if their motive is strictly to make money, model future songs after those that're most popular. Or they can do what they want and make the music for themselves and to Hell with what appeals to the most listeners. I think that's what any band worth their salt does anyway.
Release your album, let people listen to samples from every song and decide if they want to buy the whole thing, or just the songs that appeal to them.
...I think that's what any band worth their salt does anyway.
i never understood this either ... why should musically inclined people be ashamed of using their talents (artistic or marketing talent) to make money and lots of it?
if i was in a band, i would make music that could make me filthy rich. then i would build a studio in my house and make whatever.
We were talking about music, and not giant steamy turds that barf out a single that gets played to death on the radio. If someone doesn't think that some music is better heard on an album I will loan, nay, GIVE you any of my Tool albums (other than Opiate, doesnt really apply to that).
Actually, the content of my post is exactly what we're talking about. If I want to own that band's only hit single my options are these:
1. Buy the album. I am NOT getting even value for my money here. I am paying for pure crap that has been bundled with what I want, for the plain and simple reason of getting more money out of me. Never again. So instead I'll maybe...
2. "Steal" the song by downloading it with a P2P app. Obviously the best choice for me, I get something for nothing. I feel limited guilt because the alternative is getting ripped off, as outlined above, by the record company. So your business model is broken by the advent of P2P, fix it or deal with the consequences. Enter...
3. iTunes Music Store and similar. Provides a way for the masses to get what they want (and no more) AND for money to be made. Still relies on people to choose to pay instead of download for free. Millions choose to pay and this is still not good enough? Go eff yourselves. I know it's been addressed already, but the problem is definitely on the Apple/record company side of the issue, and definitely not with people who choose to buy singles.
Radiohead set an awesome precendent with In Rainbows.
And I agree with your request to leave out the discussion of musical tastes, the point applies to all music.... including Chumbawamba.
__________________
Nobody snuggles with Max Power. You strap yourself in and feel the Gs!
And I agree with your request to leave out the discussion of musical tastes, the point applies to all music.... including Chumbawamba.
I suppose that it is almost impossible to leave musical tastes out of this because the type of music that lends itself more to this problem is top 40s and pop. I don't really listen to the radio, when I do it is AM talk radio. I have had Sirius for a year and I can't handle commercials any more. There also isn't really a station that has my favorite music on it in Calgary, I guess I am lucky that way.
For the music that I listen to I generally find that I love the rest of the album as well. If I listen to the rest of the album and I don't really like it I get turned off the artist. If they can't put together an album that I don't like they won't get any support from me. It is why I will listen to an album before I buy it, even if I just hear the first 30s of every song.
Radiohead set an awesome precendent with In Rainbows.
I think Radiohead get too much credit for that move (and I am a huge Radiohead fan). The reason it worked out well for them is because, well, they are Radiohead. They already have a huge following, are a top billing live act, have sold millions of albums, have amazing critical acclaim, and they could fart into a microphone and millions would still buy the record (andk knowing them, it would probably still be a damn good record). But their career success to this point has allowed them to distrubute an album for free because the downside was very small.
The ability to give away albums would never fly with the majority of people making music, unless they are on the opposite side, an unheard of indie band trying to gain exposure. I think everyone who falls between Radiohead and the unheard indie band would not benefit a great deal from giving their work away.
__________________
A few weeks after crashing head-first into the boards (denting his helmet and being unable to move for a little while) following a hit from behind by Bob Errey, the Calgary Flames player explains:
"I was like Christ, lying on my back, with my arms outstretched, crucified"
-- Frank Musil - Early January 1994
I think Radiohead get too much credit for that move (and I am a huge Radiohead fan). The reason it worked out well for them is because, well, they are Radiohead. They already have a huge following, are a top billing live act, have sold millions of albums, have amazing critical acclaim, and they could fart into a microphone and millions would still buy the record (andk knowing them, it would probably still be a damn good record). But their career success to this point has allowed them to distrubute an album for free because the downside was very small.
The ability to give away albums would never fly with the majority of people making music, unless they are on the opposite side, an unheard of indie band trying to gain exposure. I think everyone who falls between Radiohead and the unheard indie band would not benefit a great deal from giving their work away.
Agreed, I never said all bands should do this (but there's a LOT that could besides Radiohead.) What I was trying to get across was that they showed there is an alternative way of distributing music for profit (even if not for all musicians.)
__________________
Nobody snuggles with Max Power. You strap yourself in and feel the Gs!
Anyway, not so long ago Kid Rock was in the news saying that he wants his fans to steal his music, then come to his concerts and buy t-shirts (and feather boas, chewing tobacco and g-strings, presumably).
There are a number of bands from my earlier years that I only got into because I bought a whole album after hearing a single, Gin Blosssoms is a great example, although my epic album happens to be Epic, by Faith No More.
I got into Metallica after hearing One, and liking the rest of the album even more and then their back catalogue to that point. I got into Bad Religion based on the 21st Century Digital Boy single, and into tool based on the Sober single (and video, gross but cool).
Every single one of those bands except Metallica, i now own their whole catalogues because I like the feel of an album. There have only been three or four albums I truly regretted purchasing. (i.e. Evanescance)
The problem is that the new distribution system and radio play doesn't lend itself to using singles as an intro to a band, people can simply get THAT song and then move on....
__________________
onetwo and threefour... Together no more. The end of an era. Let's rebuild...
They wont, before hand. After release they can look at what songs are selling most and, if their motive is strictly to make money, model future songs after those that're most popular. Or they can do what they want and make the music for themselves and to Hell with what appeals to the most listeners. I think that's what any band worth their salt does anyway.
Release your album, let people listen to samples from every song and decide if they want to buy the whole thing, or just the songs that appeal to them.
Well, you won't stay popular for long if every song or album you release sounds like the one before. Artists of any kind evolve with time, so do each and every one of us. Same thing with a restaurant, think they are just gonna put out a menu of 2 or 3 items saying, these are the most popular, we don't want to cook the rest anymore. You end up like Big Mac if you do that.
And if you only model your songs after the popular ones, you are losing a percentage of listeners right off the top, the ones who like more than just the 2 or 3 most popular tracks. And as someone else mentioned, the radio stations only play the most popular ones anyhow. Who knows what might have happened with the other tracks if they had more exposure as well.
