Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format
GMC Forum _ CHILL OUT _ Single Vs Album
Posted by: Gabriel Leopardi Aug 31 2013, 03:06 PM
Hey guys! I just found a very cool post at Facebook by Nikki Sixx (Motley Crue's Bassist) where he talks about how cool the experiencee of hearing a whole album is, and that it's being missed now that people is used to buy singles.
This is what he wrote:
"When I was scrounging through record shops as a kid you usually (unless you just shopped for single's) bought the whole album.I always fell deeper in love with the band because "ALL" their songs spoke to me.Of course some jumped out at you right away while other's grew on you but you didn't skip any songs,you would listen from top to bottom over and over again.
When I started making albums I alway believed the WHOLE album was the adventure.Of course there is the lead single for radio but when did THAT become the whole experience?
I talk to more and more people everyday who tell me they only buy singles now.iTunes hasn't helped for that of course.We have asked them many times to bundle our album as one download so fans wouldn't cherry pick the hits and miss the hidden gems but its nots part of their business model.I love iTunes and buy music almost daily from it but it still frustrates me.I just wish more people clicked "BUY ALBUM".Maybe I am old fashioned in how I believe music should be listened to but I refuse to ever buy just a bands single.I always buy the WHOLE album.I encourage you to do the same.Tecnology may have changed but the fact that a band makes a WHOLE album for you hasn't.Dig deep and I promise you,you will fall deeper in love with the artist than you ever could only listening to one song.
Thoughts?" by Nikki Sixx
What do you think?
Posted by: PosterBoy Aug 31 2013, 03:14 PM
I definitely agree, I think it's part of the whole instant gratification culture we're in.
There have been albums which had songs I didn't like first time round but after a few listens became favourites. Also a lot of albums are great because of the sequence the songs are in.
I think because music is all around us now, in fact it's hard to get away from it, we've lost the art of truly listening to it, where we create a time and space just to sit still and take it all in.
Posted by: Gabriel Leopardi Aug 31 2013, 03:33 PM
Yeah, I agree with you... what would be of Pink Floyd's "The Wall" album in this Itunes Era??
Posted by: Ben Higgins Sep 1 2013, 07:20 PM
I absolutely agree with Nikki.
An album, or 'record' as it was originally known, is indeed a 'record' of a particular time and place in a band's life. A whole vibe or atmosphere can be encapsulated in an album. Not only that, but we all have memories of certain albums at certain times of our lives. And the songs evoke mental pictures. The artist (and often record company or producer) chose the song order so everything was supposed to be received and experienced a certain way by the listener. It's like framing a picture or directing a movie.
I think it's a bit of a shame that it's too easy not to experience the overall effect that an artist wanted to give.
It would be like movies coming out but the viewers can pick and choose what scenes they want to watch.. so the director never gets his/her chance to give their vision to the listener unmolested in its intended form.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not against the way music consumption is going.. it's the future and we have to accept and work with it.. but I do totally agree with Nikki and I do think we, as musicians, need to take other measures to help present and frame our art so that it can be received in the manner we intended it to be. It's our spirit after all.. and I want someone to get all of it 
Posted by: bleez Sep 1 2013, 08:12 PM
there's a few albums which I almost always listen to as a whole and rarely stick a couple of songs from them into a playlist just because they dont seem 'right' unless you have the whole album. 'Wish you were here' by the floyd would be the first that spring to mind for me.
Posted by: Gabriel Leopardi Sep 1 2013, 08:42 PM
An album, or 'record' as it was originally known, is indeed a 'record' of a particular time and place in a band's life. A whole vibe or atmosphere can be encapsulated in an album. Not only that, but we all have memories of certain albums at certain times of our lives. And the songs evoke mental pictures. The artist (and often record company or producer) chose the song order so everything was supposed to be received and experienced a certain way by the listener. It's like framing a picture or directing a movie.
I think it's a bit of a shame that it's too easy not to experience the overall effect that an artist wanted to give.
It would be like movies coming out but the viewers can pick and choose what scenes they want to watch.. so the director never gets his/her chance to give their vision to the listener unmolested in its intended form.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not against the way music consumption is going.. it's the future and we have to accept and work with it.. but I do totally agree with Nikki and I do think we, as musicians, need to take other measures to help present and frame our art so that it can be received in the manner we intended it to be. It's our spirit after all.. and I want someone to get all of it
Comparing an album with a movie is a very good way to understand this concept. It's true that not every album is created like with a concept that connects all the songs. But as you said, there is some magic happening when an album is composed and recorded and the only way to feel it is listening to the whole thing.
Posted by: klasaine Sep 1 2013, 10:10 PM
I just like that atavistic thinking has become retro hip.
Posted by: Headbanger Sep 1 2013, 11:14 PM
When I listen to an album that I have just bought, I would probably favour one or two of the tracks...the tracks that made me buy the album...but as time moves on..I often find the tracks that I favour change to others. An album is part of a story that should fit together...if it isn't I don't usually want to listen to it and I would just play the track I prefer...If bands want to sell an album...maybe they should think about the 'storyline' that is being listened to....If there is no track cohesion, then maybe they shouldn't make an album. There are few experiences in life that can 'carry' you for the same time as a good album. 
Posted by: Taka Perry Sep 2 2013, 08:56 AM
I think the album and the single are different things, with pros and cons. As Nikki Sixx said, an album is an experience, which is completely understandable and I agree. However, if you're an independent artist and you make an album, I find that a lot of the time a big portion of the attention will go to one or two tracks. I think this is because people see an album as a group a tracks, not as a collection on track 1, track 2 etc.
On the other hand, if you are an independent musician and you release a single, you can focus your attention onto the one track, and get more people interested in you. I think also, people have limited time and are much more likely to listen to a single song than a whole album. Especially if they don't know the artist. That is just my opinion
Posted by: Cosmin Lupu Sep 2 2013, 01:00 PM
Well, this is a very interesting topic for me at least at this particular moment in time Why? Because Days of Confusion - my band, that is - is ready to release a single this autumn, which is meant to announce the arrival of our full album in March - April next year. We did it as a means to make some noise around the album beforehand and we plan to release it in a digital form, so that people may buy it. Do you guys find this a good idea, in this particular context, or not? It will also have a music video
Posted by: klasaine Sep 2 2013, 05:04 PM
If you release the single in autumn but don't plan on releasing the album until spring I think you're waiting too long. People will forget about you.
Put the releases closer together (december for the single).
Release 'the first' single around xmas and another one 3 weeks before the record. You need to keep their interest.
*Yeah, people are busy these days. No, make that distracted - generally the same amount of actual 'work' gets done as it always has. If a band puts all their energy into one or two singles and not producing an entire work (i.e., record) - and lets face it, the gold standard is still about 45 minutes to an hour of music - then folks are going to get bored and move on to something else. That's nothing new in the music (entertainment) business. It's always been that way. Only one or two songs - even if they're modest 'hits' ... you're forgotten in a year. You gotta have product. Whether you release it bit by bit or all at once it still has to be compelling enough to keep their interest. Don't let them forget you.
Posted by: zicco Sep 2 2013, 05:48 PM
Absolutely albums
I still go to the store and buy albums!
I love the feeling of holding it in my hands, reading and looking at the pictures on the cover and so on, and then finally sit down and listen and enjoy the music.
There is nothing that can beat it. 
Posted by: Gabriel Leopardi Sep 2 2013, 06:27 PM
Why? Because Days of Confusion - my band, that is - is ready to release a single this autumn, which is meant to announce the arrival of our full album in March - April next year. We did it as a means to make some noise around the album beforehand and we plan to release it in a digital form, so that people may buy it. Do you guys find this a good idea, in this particular context, or not? It will also have a music video Put the releases closer together (december for the single).
Release 'the first' single around xmas and another one 3 weeks before the record. You need to keep their interest.
*Yeah, people are busy these days. No, make that distracted - generally the same amount of actual 'work' gets done as it always has. If a band puts all their energy into one or two singles and not producing an entire work (i.e., record) - and lets face it, the gold standard is still about 45 minutes to an hour of music - then folks are going to get bored and move on to something else. That's nothing new in the music (entertainment) business. It's always been that way. Only one or two songs - even if they're modest 'hits' ... you're forgotten in a year. You gotta have product. Whether you release it bit by bit or all at once it still has to be compelling enough to keep their interest. Don't let them forget you.
This is something that we did with Cirse, and it worked so good! We wasn't able to record a whole album the last year so we recorded 2 songs, and release them in August 2012. We did 2 videoclips and we could do many things thanks to that in the following year that took record the full cd. If the songs are strong enough and you already have music edited this will really help.
It's true that it's not the best to have a long period of time between the single and the cd but this could be solved releasing 2 or 3 singles in this period. Even worse is not releasing music at all.
Posted by: Cosmin Lupu Sep 3 2013, 09:01 AM
It's true that it's not the best to have a long period of time between the single and the cd but this could be solved releasing 2 or 3 singles in this period. Even worse is not releasing music at all.
Hey Ken and Gabe - the distance is not so big, due to the fact that in the following months we are having more events planned alongside with the single release:
- An MTV Unplugged session which will become a DVD and it will be aired on MTV Romania during the Alternative Nation show
- A minitour consisting of 5 cities alongside our buddies from Goodbye to Gravity meant to promote the single release
- Releasing a series of live studio recordings of the whole 'Seeds' EP which we shot last month
I guess these things will keep people entertained and with their eyes and ears on us until March/ April when the full album is released.
Posted by: klasaine Sep 3 2013, 03:45 PM
- An MTV Unplugged session which will become a DVD and it will be aired on MTV Romania during the Alternative Nation show
- A minitour consisting of 5 cities alongside our buddies from Goodbye to Gravity meant to promote the single release
- Releasing a series of live studio recordings of the whole 'Seeds' EP which we shot last month
I guess these things will keep people entertained and with their eyes and ears on us until March/ April when the full album is released.
That's really cool that you're doing all that but I personally would still pick a second single to release somewhere in there. Maybe one of the 'session' live cuts - ?
Posted by: Gabriel Leopardi Sep 3 2013, 05:05 PM
- An MTV Unplugged session which will become a DVD and it will be aired on MTV Romania during the Alternative Nation show
- A minitour consisting of 5 cities alongside our buddies from Goodbye to Gravity meant to promote the single release
- Releasing a series of live studio recordings of the whole 'Seeds' EP which we shot last month
I guess these things will keep people entertained and with their eyes and ears on us until March/ April when the full album is released.
Great plan mate! If it's possible I'm with Klasaine on this, a second single would be great... new music is always very refreshing for fans.
Posted by: Cosmin Lupu Sep 4 2013, 07:49 AM
Might be we could release one of the acoustic songs as an acoustic single to promote the Acoustic DVD a little
I think this could be an idea!
Posted by: Todd Simpson Sep 4 2013, 10:22 AM
I"M WITH YOU GUYS 100 PERCENT!!!
It's sadly one of the things that has simply gone the way of the Dodo bird and nearly died out here to some degree with the collapse of physical media as a sales format and the rise of the "digital single". 
HOWEVER!!!!! Good music never really dies. Fans are find real music via the web and even through buying used CDs/Albums etc. and experiencing the full monty for themselves. There are still great magazines like DECIBEL that focus on bands that actually play their own instruments and write their own music.
So just as it has done in the past, "good" ( by that I mean well written and played with some degree of virtuosity and care) Music has gone underground in the states and has taken root across the pond in Europe. Not to mention CHINA which has a very young Rock/Metal scene full of kids just winging it and playing Slayer covers and trading CDs and MP3s the way kids used to trade tapes way back in the day.
Real music just can't be killed. As long as there are people that really love music, the long form album/cd will never really go away. Just mutate in to something new shared in new ways. 
Here is a blog post about a small slice of the music scene in Shanghai
http://shamussillar.com/2013/03/china-flashback-metalheads-and-mohawks/
Todd
An album, or 'record' as it was originally known, is indeed a 'record' of a particular time and place in a band's life. A whole vibe or atmosphere can be encapsulated in an album. Not only that, but we all have memories of certain albums at certain times of our lives. And the songs evoke mental pictures. The artist (and often record company or producer) chose the song order so everything was supposed to be received and experienced a certain way by the listener. It's like framing a picture or directing a movie.
I think it's a bit of a shame that it's too easy not to experience the overall effect that an artist wanted to give.
It would be like movies coming out but the viewers can pick and choose what scenes they want to watch.. so the director never gets his/her chance to give their vision to the listener unmolested in its intended form.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not against the way music consumption is going.. it's the future and we have to accept and work with it.. but I do totally agree with Nikki and I do think we, as musicians, need to take other measures to help present and frame our art so that it can be received in the manner we intended it to be. It's our spirit after all.. and I want someone to get all of it
Posted by: Gabriel Leopardi Sep 4 2013, 08:17 PM
I think this could be an idea!This sounds like a good idea! All the best mate.
Posted by: Slavenko Erazer Sep 5 2013, 09:18 AM
I still go to the store and buy albums!
I love the feeling of holding it in my hands, reading and looking at the pictures on the cover and so on, and then finally sit down and listen and enjoy the music.
There is nothing that can beat it.
NO|thING!
END OF DISCUSSION!!
Posted by: Caelumamittendum Sep 5 2013, 01:54 PM
Is there a new "single" culture at the moment? If so I haven't really noticed as such. I still buy full albums, but I can see the lure in buying singles and releasing singles as a teaser for your album, plus potentially having one or two "special" songs on there. A b-side.
Posted by: Gabriel Leopardi Sep 5 2013, 02:30 PM
yeah, singles worked in this way even in the 60's and 70's, as a teaser.
Posted by: klasaine Sep 5 2013, 04:15 PM
Not just as a 'teaser'. Singles sold HUGE up until about the mid 80s (CDs enter the market). Remember, 'singles' were the pop music record culture for the 50s and up through the mid 60s.
Rec cos would also release a 'new single' when they saw a hit record's sales slightly dip.
Possibly the best example is Michael Jackson's 'Thriller'.
Seven (7) singles were released. Oddly, the first single released was the duet w/Paul McCartney, 'the girl is mine'. It did Ok but not great. Epic records decided to immediately pick another - Beat It, then Billie Jean, etc. ... and the rest is history. *I believe it's the best selling record in history.
Is there a culture now of 'singles'? I'm not sure if kids under 24 even know there's such thing as an album, unless they're musos.
It's kinda come full circle. Maybe that foretells that some type of long play format will again re-emerge dominant - ?
Posted by: Gabriel Leopardi Sep 6 2013, 02:32 PM
Rec cos would also release a 'new single' when they saw a hit record's sales slightly dip.
Possibly the best example is Michael Jackson's 'Thriller'.
Seven (7) singles were released. Oddly, the first single released was the duet w/Paul McCartney, 'the girl is mine'. It did Ok but not great. Epic records decided to immediately pick another - Beat It, then Billie Jean, etc. ... and the rest is history. *I believe it's the best selling record in history.
Is there a culture now of 'singles'? I'm not sure if kids under 24 even know there's such thing as an album, unless they're musos.
It's kinda come full circle. Maybe that foretells that some type of long play format will again re-emerge dominant - ?
I didn't know that Jackson's story. So he edited 7 singles and then compiled all of them in an album. It really worked commercially and it didn't quit impact to the album which finally sold lots of copies.
Posted by: klasaine Sep 6 2013, 03:55 PM
Not exactly.
The album was all recorded at the same time prior to the singles' release dates. That is generally how they did it starting probably mid 60s when the 'long playing' format (and FM radio) came into vogue.
Prior to that, in the 50s and early 60s (Elvis, Beatles, etc.) they would record singles and then compile them later as an LP.
*Singles also had a 'B' side that was generally not on the LP ... which, if you really dug the 'B' sides you had to buy both the LP and the singles.
Famous 'B' sides: Revolution, You Can't Always Get What You Want, Strawberry Fields Forever, Suffragette City, Maggie May ...
When that happened, many times the rec cos would then scramble to put out a 'special edition' EP or 'Fan Club' only release or new LP release 6 months later re-packaged with the added 'B' sides (new photos, maybe a poster or other swag) etc.
If the band was a UK based group, then here in states, because we didn't release at the same time (until the later 60s) we would re-package the LP with the popular 'B' side or sides on the LP (usually with different art work too). Stones and Beatle records are famous for that - UK release or Yank release?
Posted by: Gabriel Leopardi Sep 6 2013, 06:18 PM
The album was all recorded at the same time prior to the singles' release dates. That is generally how they did it starting probably mid 60s when the 'long playing' format (and FM radio) came into vogue.
Prior to that, in the 50s and early 60s (Elvis, Beatles, etc.) they would record singles and then compile them later as an LP.
*Singles also had a 'B' side that was generally not on the LP ... which, if you really dug the 'B' sides you had to buy both the LP and the singles.
Famous 'B' sides: Revolution, You Can't Always Get What You Want, Strawberry Fields Forever, Suffragette City, Maggie May ...
When that happened, many times the rec cos would then scramble to put out a 'special edition' EP or 'Fan Club' only release or new LP release 6 months later re-packaged with the added 'B' sides (new photos, maybe a poster or other swag) etc.
If the band was a UK based group, then here in states, because we didn't release at the same time (until the later 60s) we would re-package the LP with the popular 'B' side or sides on the LP (usually with different art work too). Stones and Beatle records are famous for that - UK release or Yank release?
This made the "b sides" albums very popular in those years. I remember many Rolling Stones B sides that were really good. That's a good trick for making the fans buy both the album and the singles.
Posted by: Cosmin Lupu Sep 7 2013, 09:51 AM
So many things to learn from the big guys - I think it's far easier to sing/play than to sell and get out there with success, ain't it?
Posted by: klasaine Sep 7 2013, 03:28 PM
Sometimes the 'B' side was an instrumental version of the same song.
Sometimes it was a different artist on the same label. This is actually becoming popular again - the shared single and shared EP. Pressed on vinyl of all things.
Posted by: Darius Wave Sep 7 2013, 04:31 PM
Once again we hit the wall with two different points of view. I was always used to know singles as a demo song of next albums. As far as I remember when I was a kind (90's) most of singles where just a shorten, radio versions of particular album track. Now...now my private opinion is that it could be a remix, unplugged or rearranged version...but then comes a problem...when people hear the single and buy the album which sounds completely different...then they might be dissappointed...
Powered by Invision Power Board (http://www.invisionboard.com)
© Invision Power Services (http://www.invisionpower.com)