Do Albums Matter Anymore?

[Sechito 490]

1 minute ago, HookerOnAChurch said:

 

Because releasing random singles in order to please the fans and the charts literally means killing the music and the creativity of the artist who would return to have nothing to say in the matter. A whole record tells a story a  random song no.

i feel like certain artists (not gonna say who) prob would release singles with ease but im not saying albums as an industry would die out 

[Edonis 28,623]

18 minutes ago, Sechito said:

also how likely even is it that billboard would change

I mean, the UK charts changed their formula for streaming. It's not impossible. 

[Sechito 490]

1 minute ago, Edonis said:

I mean, the UK charts changed their formula for streaming. It's not impossible. 

wait really?

[Edonis 28,623]

1 minute ago, Sechito said:

wait really?

Yes 

https://www.theguardian.com/music/2018/jun/25/uk-top-40-singles-chart-to-include-video-streaming-figures

"Tally will take in Apple Music, Spotify, YouTube and Tidal, while streams from free and paid-for services will no longer be weighted equally" (TG, 2018). 

[Sechito 490]

1 minute ago, Edonis said:

Yes 

https://www.theguardian.com/music/2018/jun/25/uk-top-40-singles-chart-to-include-video-streaming-figures

"Tally will take in Apple Music, Spotify, YouTube and Tidal, while streams from free and paid-for services will no longer be weighted equally" (TG, 2018). 

oh damn i never realised

[Guest]

I think that charts changing their formulas to include streaming is only natural because they are supposed to represent accurately what people are listening to and as streaming becomes more and more dominant, it wouldn't be fair to not count it as the main source of music listening nowadays.

In a commercial sense, streaming encourages the release of singles with a shorter length because, for example, with Spotify you get paid per listen but the time that constitutes it as "one listen" isn't flexible nor based on a percentage, which means that if a song's length is 10:30 or 2:30 but they have the same number of streams the artist will get paid the same amount. It's simply cheaper and requires less effort for a money-hungry label to put out scattered and shorter songs rather than an entire cohesive and resource-intensive album.

That means that industry plants and/or artists that don't have control over their own music and are pushed around by their labels will usually appease to those tactics because in that instance it's about making the most money, not having an artistic vision or integrity.

That said, today it's easier than ever for independent as well as established artists to put out their music into the world and more importantly have it reach a large audience, which was not the case pre-streaming era, which leads me to believe that even if there's a handful of people who will gravitate towards the practice of not releasing albums there's still many, many more who see the importance and value of it and have the freedom to still put them out.

[Sechito 490]

36 minutes ago, nenhures said:

I think that charts changing their formulas to include streaming is only natural because they are supposed to represent accurately what people are listening to and as streaming becomes more and more dominant, it wouldn't be fair to not count it as the main source of music listening nowadays.

In a commercial sense, streaming encourages the release of singles with a shorter length because, for example, with Spotify you get paid per listen but the time that constitutes it as "one listen" isn't flexible nor based on a percentage, which means that if a song's length is 10:30 or 2:30 but they have the same number of streams the artist will get paid the same amount. It's simply cheaper and requires less effort for a money-hungry label to put out scattered and shorter songs rather than an entire cohesive and resource-intensive album.

That means that industry plants and/or artists that don't have control over their own music and are pushed around by their labels will usually appease to those tactics because in that instance it's about making the most money, not having an artistic vision or integrity.

That said, today it's easier than ever for independent as well as established artists to put out their music into the world and more importantly have it reach a large audience, which was not the case pre-streaming era, which leads me to believe that even if there's a handful of people who will gravitate towards the practice of not releasing albums there's still many, many more who see the importance and value of it and have the freedom to still put them out.

you put it perfectly i--

[Taylucifer 5,061]

of course albums still matter, they allow for an artist to express themselves in a way they generally aren't able to with singles (as they have to have some form of mass appeal)

[Sechito 490]

Just now, Taylucifer said:

of course albums still matter, they allow for an artist to express themselves in a way they generally aren't able to with singles (as they have to have some form of mass appeal)

true

[Battle 4 Ur Life 6,337]

OF COURSE THEY DO.

for those who can make them.

[Sechito 490]

2 minutes ago, D0P3 said:

OF COURSE THEY DO.

for those who can make them.

we know who cant 

[Economy 47,027]

3 hours ago, Glamourpuss said:

Releasing random singles didn't work for Katy Perry and it isn't really working for Ava Max. Their fans keep asking where the album is.  

I love a solid body of work and a cohesive album. It just wouldn't feel right to be given random songs with no proper album release. 

Yeah it may be early still to stop them all together... Ppl still like the idea of one single piece of work...

 

But I think Katy has the right idea for the future she's just a bit early

 

With instant access to any track tbh I don't see why we need albums...

 

Singles released gradually and consistently and more frequently I think make more sense now tbh than getting 10 or 12 tracks at once and then nothing for 1-2 years

 

It made sense in the era of physical music to be able to buy a collection... But in the digital era I think the idea of albums are becoming outdated

[Sechito 490]

1 minute ago, Economy said:

Yeah it may be early still to stop them all together... Ppl still like the idea of one single piece of work...

 

But I think Katy has the right idea for the future she's just a bit early

 

With instant access to any track tbh I don't see why we need albums...

 

Singles released gradually and consistently and more frequently I think make more sense now tbh than getting 10 or 12 tracks at once and then nothing for 1-2 years

 

It made sense in the era of physical music to be able to buy a collection... But in the digital era I think the idea of albums are becoming outdated

if we got singles at a rate like maybe born this way era (5 singles in a year one after another without much breaks between each) id be fine with it, maybe they could later put them together?? idk i just dont like the idea of singles without a single concept.

[Sechito 490]

2 minutes ago, Sechito said:

if we got singles at a rate like maybe born this way era (5 singles in a year one after another without much breaks between each) id be fine with it, maybe they could later put them together?? idk i just dont like the idea of singles without a single concept.

also i agree, the way katys been releasing i like

[Economy 47,027]

6 minutes ago, Sechito said:

if we got singles at a rate like maybe born this way era (5 singles in a year one after another without much breaks between each) id be fine with it, maybe they could later put them together?? idk i just dont like the idea of singles without a single concept.

Honestly depends... Albums have that advantage of a theme... But every album tends to also rave random bops that don't even necessarily fit the theme

 

I think it's fine to put out entire collections sometimes if an artist has a theme but I think we're also entering an era where stand alone singles should become more accepted and an artist should be able to do that if they wish

 

If an artist has a good bop they wanna put out they should be able to surprise their fans and not have to be restricted by the fact that they don't have an album ready like Lady Gaga has done with The Cure

 

A lot of ppl aren't used to the idea of stand alone singles... Albums and eras are still a thing so I'm not surprised stand alone singles still have a tendency to under perform... There isn't that era hype that fans still expect

 

But overtime as ppl become more accustomed to it and they become more common and frequent... I think we will start to see more hits from stand alone singles tbh

 

The Digital era totally changes how we access music and what's possible. We should not be surprised that releasing methods start to change with it