Have surprise releases gone too far?

[Ryan Reid 173]

Beyonce's surprise release has yet to be topped. She capitalized on several things: 

- The inclusion of music vidoes for EVERY TRACK cannot be overlooked. Not only did it build upon the story arc of her prior releases (B'Day eventually had a video for nearly every track as well), but it also became a huge value proposition. For the price of the album, you also got visuals, essentially for free.

- By dropping all of it together, no one could digest everything in one sitting. Which fed into the trend of "FOMO" ... everyone had to drop $17.99 for that release because they didn't want to be left out of the Twitter conversation. And they did it all sight unseen.

- Because Beyonce is arguably the highest-profile artist in pop music today, the fact that she pulled this off in complete secrecy was a monumental feat in itself.

 

The secret releases that have come after are nothing even remotely comparable to Beyonce's achievement. The one that comes closest is Miley's 'Dead Petz' release, though not because it was a surprise (I predicted it's release on VMA night among my friends, simply based on the volume of high profile interviews she was giving leading up to VMA night... no way that volume of promo was strictly VMA driven). Miley's was enthralling for reasons altogether different from Beyonce: 

- Miley's free album released via online NON-SUBSCRIPTION streaming was a direct challenge to streaming-haters like Taylor Swift and elitist subscription devotees of TIDAL and the like. Miley was making a statement about the true "value" of recorded music. 

- Miley released an album that was so off-putting and left-of-center for her entire catalog, that this seemed to be the ONLY way to release it. 

- Miley used the MTV VMA's hosting gig (arguably, the definitive venue for delivering "shocking surprises" in popular culture) as her "release party" for the new album. 

 

While there have been several other "surprise" releases (which is to be expected in this era where music piracy pre-release is the norm; it's essentially the only way to secure actual sales), no one in the game has come close to attaching true artistic and business RELEVANCE to their secret releases in the way that Beyonce and Miley have. 

[StrawberryBlond 14,775]

"Everyone" "I can name 6" ... Seems like a pretty tiny minority to me. Especially if they aren't A-listers. Even Drake/Future wasn't a total surprise as it had already been talked about and they announced it the day before. Still last minute, but not exactly a surprise release in the vein of Beyonce.

Yeah I was mad that they took her number one, but then I realised it wasn't that big of a deal and I continued on in my life. I love that you're pointing out the cynicism of others when you are being incredibly cynical right now How do you know that's not just how they want the albums out? Sure, for the labels it's probably a good gimmick. But neither you or I know exactly why they do it. It's just that you're choosing to be bias and cynical about it, that's all.

Tell me, did you feel this way before Lana's #1 got snatched? Have you expressed these feelings before that?

It's an expression. And a lot of those people are from different genres. That's kinda what I mean by "everyone<" - i.e. not just popstars. And like I said, there were many more who did a loose definition of a surprise release. I think any release that wasn't announced 3 months in advance is pretty much considered a surprise now, especially if it didn't have any singles preceding it.

I normally don't mind about chart positions but this one really hurt as someone like Lana needs the exposure so she doesn't get laughed at for flopping and so critics will continue to be fair to her. Why can't we be cynical together, eh? Takes one to know one and all that? Ok, I suppose we shouldn't be speculating about what their intentions are but...they've both got big egos. I think that tells you all you need to know. Everyone who's done a surprise release is known for having a big ego and for being attention w****s, I've noticed that. Only someone like that would do such a "look at me" action like this. And I may be cynical about it but I'm not being biased. I'm basing it on what i've seen from this artists and how they put themselves forward.

Yes, I've been feeling this way before Lana. I knew this question would come up. I found my post in this thread on 22 August: http://gagadaily.com/topic/160454-should-gaga-surprise-release-lg5/?page=2#comment-6952371

I actually planned this rant in advance as soon as Ryan's album got announced (didn't know how big it was going to be and feared he'd take the #1), so I planned to unleash my anger if he achieved it, but then Drake/Future destroyed all fairness by charting with a mixtape, so bang goes that theory. I had been planning a rant about surprise releases for a while and now seemed the perfect time because 2 surprises had finally been released at once (something I saw as a major flaw that was eventually going to happen), making it the perfect opportunity for people to understand exactly what I was talking about by "going too far." But I won't deny that stealing it off Lana was what really pushed me over the edge. It's not so much my fave got robbed, it was that the album of the year got robbed and I'm a big believer in the best body of work getting the biggest success.

I think you're more frustrated about success then because Ryan charted at #7.  If Drake and Future debuted lower and Lana got #1, would you have even made this topic?  I think some people only dislike surprise releases only when they actually do well.  

It's obviously Drake and Future who I'm maddest at. If you read what I said above, I'd been planning this rant for a while but this situation gave me the perfect opportunity to put my thoughts out and have people truly understand what I meant by "going too far." And no, actually, I dislike a lot of surprise releases because they're simply not that good. It's no wonder a lot of them use this method because no one would have bothered buying it if they had singles to judge it by. Like I said, it's a cheap way to get sales and trick people into buying, even more so than the traditional "good singles/crap album" concept. Maybe you'll feel different when it's your fave that gets robbed of their rightful position.

Beyonce's surprise release has yet to be topped. She capitalized on several things: 

- The inclusion of music vidoes for EVERY TRACK cannot be overlooked. Not only did it build upon the story arc of her prior releases (B'Day eventually had a video for nearly every track as well), but it also became a huge value proposition. For the price of the album, you also got visuals, essentially for free.

- By dropping all of it together, no one could digest everything in one sitting. Which fed into the trend of "FOMO" ... everyone had to drop $17.99 for that release because they didn't want to be left out of the Twitter conversation. And they did it all sight unseen.

- Because Beyonce is arguably the highest-profile artist in pop music today, the fact that she pulled this off in complete secrecy was a monumental feat in itself.

 

The secret releases that have come after are nothing even remotely comparable to Beyonce's achievement. The one that comes closest is Miley's 'Dead Petz' release, though not because it was a surprise (I predicted it's release on VMA night among my friends, simply based on the volume of high profile interviews she was giving leading up to VMA night... no way that volume of promo was strictly VMA driven). Miley's was enthralling for reasons altogether different from Beyonce: 

- Miley's free album released via online NON-SUBSCRIPTION streaming was a direct challenge to streaming-haters like Taylor Swift and elitist subscription devotees of TIDAL and the like. Miley was making a statement about the true "value" of recorded music. 

- Miley released an album that was so off-putting and left-of-center for her entire catalog, that this seemed to be the ONLY way to release it. 

- Miley used the MTV VMA's hosting gig (arguably, the definitive venue for delivering "shocking surprises" in popular culture) as her "release party" for the new album. 

 

While there have been several other "surprise" releases (which is to be expected in this era where music piracy pre-release is the norm; it's essentially the only way to secure actual sales), no one in the game has come close to attaching true artistic and business RELEVANCE to their secret releases in the way that Beyonce and Miley have. 

You make very good points. Indeed, no one's touched the sales of Beyonce's release because she had other factors going for her, in the form of a 100% visual album and having a very high profile at the time. In contrast, it's unbelievable how U2's surprise free release had no impact even though it was put automatically into every Apple user's albums list, a move that was so much more worldwide and all-encompassing...but the story was dead within about a month and now it's like it never happened.

I don't agree that Miley's album had impact, though. Seriously, no one's talking about it anymore apart from the people who liked it. That Dooo it video has barely any views (Til It Happens To You has amassed more views and likes in a shorter space of time despite no fanfare or live performances) and no one was even talking about her VMA performance for more than a day. The whole thing had nowhere near the level of imapact that her VBangerz era did and that album wasn't free. So, it goes to show that putting something out for free doesn't guarantee exposure and people talking about you.

You made an extremely good point about Beyonce's release having that element of "if you don't buy it now, you won't be able to see the videos and you'll be left out of the loop when everyone's talking about it all week." I'm sure a lot of people downloaded it out of sheer curiosity and the thrill of trying something new. Which isn't the way that we normally buy our albums. We listen to them in full before buying because most of the time, they're sub par. If she put the entire album's tracks on YouTube along with all the videos, she wouldn't have sold as much because then we would have judged for free and plenty would have seen something they didn't like and decided against it. But no, it was an iTunes exlcusive and any free public distribution of the tracks/videos were hastily removed. So, of course she got amazing sales, because people were buying it blind, like in the old days.

[DeleteMyAccount 11,881]

It's an expression. And a lot of those people are from different genres. That's kinda what I mean by "everyone<" - i.e. not just popstars. And like I said, there were many more who did a loose definition of a surprise release. I think any release that wasn't announced 3 months in advance is pretty much considered a surprise now, especially if it didn't have any singles preceding it.

I normally don't mind about chart positions but this one really hurt as someone like Lana needs the exposure so she doesn't get laughed at for flopping and so critics will continue to be fair to her. Why can't we be cynical together, eh? Takes one to know one and all that? Ok, I suppose we shouldn't be speculating about what their intentions are but...they've both got big egos. I think that tells you all you need to know. Everyone who's done a surprise release is known for having a big ego and for being attention w****s, I've noticed that. Only someone like that would do such a "look at me" action like this. And I may be cynical about it but I'm not being biased. I'm basing it on what i've seen from this artists and how they put themselves forward.

Yes, I've been feeling this way before Lana. I knew this question would come up. I found my post in this thread on 22 August: http://gagadaily.com/topic/160454-should-gaga-surprise-release-lg5/?page=2#comment-6952371

I actually planned this rant in advance as soon as Ryan's album got announced (didn't know how big it was going to be and feared he'd take the #1), so I planned to unleash my anger if he achieved it, but then Drake/Future destroyed all fairness by charting with a mixtape, so bang goes that theory. I had been planning a rant about surprise releases for a while and now seemed the perfect time because 2 surprises had finally been released at once (something I saw as a major flaw that was eventually going to happen), making it the perfect opportunity for people to understand exactly what I was talking about by "going too far." But I won't deny that stealing it off Lana was what really pushed me over the edge. It's not so much my fave got robbed, it was that the album of the year got robbed and I'm a big believer in the best body of work getting the biggest success.

It's obviously Drake and Future who I'm maddest at. If you read what I said above, I'd been planning this rant for a while but this situation gave me the perfect opportunity to put my thoughts out and have people truly understand what I meant by "going too far." And no, actually, I dislike a lot of surprise releases because they're simply not that good. It's no wonder a lot of them use this method because no one would have bothered buying it if they had singles to judge it by. Like I said, it's a cheap way to get sales and trick people into buying, even more so than the traditional "good singles/crap album" concept. Maybe you'll feel different when it's your fave that gets robbed of their rightful position.

You make very good points. Indeed, no one's touched the sales of Beyonce's release because she had other factors going for her, in the form of a 100% visual album and having a very high profile at the time. In contrast, it's unbelievable how U2's surprise free release had no impact even though it was put automatically into every Apple user's albums list, a move that was so much more worldwide and all-encompassing...but the story was dead within about a month and now it's like it never happened.

I don't agree that Miley's album had impact, though. Seriously, no one's talking about it anymore apart from the people who liked it. That Dooo it video has barely any views (Til It Happens To You has amassed more views and likes in a shorter space of time despite no fanfare or live performances) and no one was even talking about her VMA performance for more than a day. The whole thing had nowhere near the level of imapact that her VBangerz era did and that album wasn't free. So, it goes to show that putting something out for free doesn't guarantee exposure and people talking about you.

You made an extremely good point about Beyonce's release having that element of "if you don't buy it now, you won't be able to see the videos and you'll be left out of the loop when everyone's talking about it all week." I'm sure a lot of people downloaded it out of sheer curiosity and the thrill of trying something new. Which isn't the way that we normally buy our albums. We listen to them in full before buying because most of the time, they're sub par. If she put the entire album's tracks on YouTube along with all the videos, she wouldn't have sold as much because then we would have judged for free and plenty would have seen something they didn't like and decided against it. But no, it was an iTunes exlcusive and any free public distribution of the tracks/videos were hastily removed. So, of course she got amazing sales, because people were buying it blind, like in the old days.

I just don't think it's something to get that mad about.

[blahblahblahhhh 15]

It's the best way to release music for what I'm concerned. Feels kind of organic. I personally don't mind it at all. I like the idea of living in the NOW.

[Whispering 18,865]

I define surprise releases more than "dropped completely out the blue without warning." It can also be defined as "notified the world just a week before release" or even "was mysterious about new album's release ... As I understand it, 1989 was announced very last minute and only Ryan's and Taylor's fanbases knew about it. I review albums, meaning I have a schedule laid out ahead of me every month (and I check up on it every few days) and I didn't know about this album until the day he dropped it.

Plenty more have used this model, especially this year. I don't care if they're A-listers or not, everyone's getting in on this act. I can name 6 who have done it as well as others that are in that grey area of "was it a surprise, is it not?" In general, a lot of albums have been announced last minute this year and it's annoying me as it's f***ing up my album review schedule. 

 

A couple of months ago you said you were an amateur music reviewer. When did you get a job reviewing music? How exciting! Can you give us a link to your professional reviews? I would love to read them! 

Oh, by the way, the Ryan 1989 album had been reported on for a couple of months...not just a week. That seems like plenty of time to know that an indie covers album is coming. Lol 

[StrawberryBlond 14,775]

A couple of months ago you said you were an amateur music reviewer. When did you get a job reviewing music? How exciting! Can you give us a link to your professional reviews? I would love to read them! 

Oh, by the way, the Ryan 1989 album had been reported on for a couple of months...not just a week. That seems like plenty of time to know that an indie covers album is coming. Lol 

Don't know if you're being sarcastic or not. But no, I'm still an amateur reviewer. Found out that you need a degree in some form of musical theory and might have to go on to a masters (which I don't have and I need a job far more than I need further study) and that a lot of critics have other jobs on the side as it really doesn't pay all that well. Add in all my previous moaning about it being a corrupt business of paid for reviews and so on and I lost faith in the idea. I'd probably get fired from the average publication for not being positive enough too. I can hear it now: "Rachel, you can't keep ranking all these high profile acts with just 2 stars and saying that they're bland - it's disrespectful to these music legends and makes us look like a publication that can never be pleased. 3 stars minimum 90% of the time or you can kiss this post goodbye."

I was just talking about how, professional or not, there's a lot of albums to review, especially late in the year, so when spontaneous stuff comes up, that's even more time to be taken up. I know I do it as a hobby, so I obviously choose to do it and enjoy it but I still like to have a plan. I'm not big on things being sprung on me at the last minute, in life in general. I actually want to know what professional critics do with these releases - do they have to work "overtime" as it were? Do they get paid to do unscheduled releases? Even if you are getting paid, it must suck to get extra on top of what you expected. We've yet to hear what critics make of these surprise releases but this amateur one has had it up to here. I'm hoping it's just like a lot of other pop culture movements - a fad that'll die out and be looked back on as cringey in years to come.

Honestly, I had to idea. I get most of my album schedule from Wikipedia (just search "list of albums released in" followed by the year) because it really is a good source of not just the biggest names but a lot of indie ones and foreign ones too. I've rarely missed a release using Wikipedia apart from the occasional obscure record that was a runaway critical hit and/or gained unexpected attention (got 2 of them this year, both of which I'm super pleased to have discovered). I don't believe Wikipedia listed anything about 1989 until the last minute. As you know, I keep up to date on all Taylor news, so why didn't I hear about this? Ok, so it wasn't a surprise release in the traditional sense, then. But there were still a lot more throughout the year that have driven me crazy.

By the way, I hoped that we would have started to get along better after privately chatting, yet I still see you liking posts that are negative towards me. I was a bit...put out by that, to say the least, considering that most people who get to know me are nicer to me afterwards. Just remember that everyone sees what posts you're liking.

[Whispering 18,865]

Don't know if you're being sarcastic or not. But no, I'm still an amateur reviewer. 

...Wikipedia listed anything about 1989 until the last minute. As you know, I keep up to date on all Taylor news, so why didn't I hear about this? Ok, so it wasn't a surprise release in the traditional sense, then. But there were still a lot more throughout the year that have driven me crazy.

By the way, I hoped that we would have started to get along better after privately chatting, yet I still see you liking posts that are negative towards me. I was a bit...put out by that, to say the least, considering that most people who get to know me are nicer to me afterwards. Just remember that everyone sees what posts you're liking.

I wasnt being sarcastic. You had said you were an amateur reviewer in the past and in the posts in this thread you were talking like you were on some kind of set schedule, which made me think that someone was giving you that schedule, which implied to me that you had some sort of job in that field. 

I saw articles about the album back around the first of August. That seems like sufficient time to know that an indie album, full of covers is coming out. 

I agreed with the comment that I liked. I dont care if you saw that or not. That doesn't mean I hate you as a person...I don't know you. What it does mean is that I agree with what that person said in that particular situation. I do find it a bit odd that you are tracking likes on posts, but to each their own. 

[StrawberryBlond 14,775]

I wasnt being sarcastic. You had said you were an amateur reviewer in the past and in the posts in this thread you were talking like you were on some kind of set schedule, which made me think that someone was giving you that schedule, which implied to me that you had some sort of job in that field. 

I saw articles about the album back around the first of August. That seems like sufficient time to know that an indie album, full of covers is coming out. 

I agreed with the comment that I liked. I dont care if you saw that or not. That doesn't mean I hate you as a person...I don't know you. What it does mean is that I agree with what that person said in that particular situation. I do find it a bit odd that you are tracking likes on posts, but to each their own. 

Really, this was completely new to me. I'm sure if I'd seen an album with the same name as Taylor's cropping up, I would have noticed. Remember that I live in the UK and I didn't even know who Ryan Adams was until the day he dropped that album. Naturally, such an American-based act wasn't exactly reported on British media and I didn't even see anything about it on GGD. Just like how most Americans are just learning of the existance of a British act's album despite it being released months ago here.

I wasn't tracking likes, but I was tracking who had quoted me, so your like stood out (and it wasn't the first time, either). Personally, I try to avoid liking posts that are negative towards other members unless said member is acting like a complete idiot (which I most certainly was not). Particularly when we have conversed privately and struck up some kind of acquaintance. Even if I 100% agree with what a member has said, if they go on to say something mean about another member that I am somewhat neutral to, I don't favourite it. I like to reinforce civility among members and don't like to revel in the takedown of another member because it's like you're siding with a bully. I'm sure you've seen the turnaround that KatyCat and I had. Because they held out the olive branch and were nice to me, I've paid it back by being nice to them and I would never favourite anything negative that anyone writes about them, even if I think they might have a point. Needless to say, I'm very miffed when others don't pay me the same courtesy. I held out the olive branch a long time ago to a member who was always rude to me by asking if they could make me a signature on their specialised thread, complimented their work and everything. They refused because they didn't like me, laughed at me and some other people mocked me afterwards, I was embarrassed in front of everyone and I've never forgotten it. I'm too nice for my own good sometimes. I may be harsh to celebrities, but you'll find that my manner with everyone else is very different.

[Whispering 18,865]

Well, there you have your own answer. The news wasn't in UK publications and those are the ones you pay attention to. The news was out there for two months, though, for those professional reviewers to know an indie album of covers was coming out sometime soon...for those who don't limit their music news. 

Yeah...it's not that deep...but go ahead and over a--lyze the likes people give on some random pop girl fanforum. Lol 

[StrawberryBlond 14,775]

Well, there you have your own answer. The news wasn't in UK publications and those are the ones you pay attention to. The news was out there for two months, though, for those professional reviewers to know an indie album of covers was coming out sometime soon...for those who don't limit their music news. 

Yeah...it's not that deep...but go ahead and over a--lyze the likes people give on some random pop girl fanforum. Lol 

Not every critic reviewed it. I can't get Wiki to work right now but I don't see any UK publications talking about it, it was all mostly American-based. The US was the only place it charted decently, after all. Not every critic reviews every album either. Some of the biggest critics weirdly miss out big releases, so many could bypass a covers album. I only review albums by people I've heard of or have become relevant recently. It's not so much limitation as being able to track down albums I can listen to for free easily (indie artists and foreigners are harder to find complete albums to stream) and allowing myself enough time to live life (I'd never be able to sleep if I reviewed literally every album that got released every month). Plus, I don't review cover albums, just original work. I was only using 1989 as a reference point for two "surprise" releases debuting at the same time.

Well, just know that some people view it deeper than you do. Maybe I put too much importance on people liking me but I always take it to heart when someone dislikes me when I've seemingly done nothing wrong especially if I was never mean to them. I've tried to be one of those "I don't care what nobody thinks" kinda people but I'm just too desperate to please for that.

[Whispering 18,865]

Not every critic reviewed it. I can't get Wiki to work right now but I don't see any UK publications talking about it, it was all mostly American-based. The US was the only place it charted decently, after all. Not every critic reviews every album either. Some of the biggest critics weirdly miss out big releases, so many could bypass a covers album. I only review albums by people I've heard of or have become relevant recently. It's not so much limitation as being able to track down albums I can listen to for free easily (indie artists and foreigners are harder to find complete albums to stream) and allowing myself enough time to live life (I'd never be able to sleep if I reviewed literally every album that got released every month). Plus, I don't review cover albums, just original work. I was only using 1989 as a reference point for two "surprise" releases debuting at the same time.

Well, just know that some people view it deeper than you do. Maybe I put too much importance on people liking me but I always take it to heart when someone dislikes me when I've seemingly done nothing wrong especially if I was never mean to them. I've tried to be one of those "I don't care what nobody thinks" kinda people but I'm just too desperate to please for that.

Okay, so an American based album of cover songs was reviewed by a few critics that pay attention to that sort of thing. You don't, so you didn't know that music sites were talking about it for a couple of months. It was a pretty minor release, two months heads up was enough time for those interested in such an album.

Yes, I believe that you take likes on a fanforum too seriously...but that is your choice, after all. Once again, I never said "I didn't like you", just that I agree with the comments that I like. Nothing personal, it's just the way that it is. 

[StrawberryBlond 14,775]

Okay, so an American based album of cover songs was reviewed by a few critics that pay attention to that sort of thing. You don't, so you didn't know that music sites were talking about it for a couple of months. It was a pretty minor release, two months heads up was enough time for those interested in such an album.

Yes, I believe that you take likes on a fanforum too seriously...but that is your choice, after all. Once again, I never said "I didn't like you", just that I agree with the comments that I like. Nothing personal, it's just the way that it is. 

Well, yes, some critics have different purposes and just review one genre and so on. It only tends t be independent reviewers like Robert Christgau who review everything - most newspapers and magazines will have a genre specific critic (or even two) for their albums meaning the overall publication doesn't have the same viewpoint. Best way of seeing it.

When a forum is one of the very few places you have friends, it matters a lot. Seriously, I don't even really see my real life friends anymore and I'm living a very lonely life with little direction along with the added pressure of anxiety and minor depression. I hope it all will start to change one day but until then, I'm desperate for any sort of friendliness and praise I can get.