Licorice Pizza… b(u)y the slice?

Thursday August 18, 2005 at 12:23 am | Filed under Entertainment

Okay, I think I’m trying to be way too cute with the title there. But it’s actually a pretty serious post. At least as serious as my blog gets. Recently, my buddy Tim and I had a discussion about albums vs. singles, and the way music is shared and flung around the internet, on to iPods and through iTunes and all of the other iThings that are out there that iPeople are doing. It seems that buying/downloading singles (or certain songs off of albums) is more popular than ever with the emergence of online music stores.

Where’s all this online sharing/purchasing of music taking us? Will albums go away completely because artists will no longer feel the need to release 8-12 songs at a time? Are singles going to take over and be the only way to get music?

When you think of this topic, think of how you listen to music, and how it’s changed since the days of the mix tape. Are you the type that listens to albums all at once, or do you set you MP3 player on shuffle and let it surprise you?

« Lemme Splain What I’ve been doing… »

No Responses to “Licorice Pizza… b(u)y the slice?”

  1. Jon Says:
    August 19th, 2005 at 8:54 am

    Certain albums were made to be “albums” – every song was good, there was a theme of some sort (musical and/or lyrical). When I think about listening to music, there are albums that I consider to be one “work” – something worth listening to in one sitting. Also, when I’m hearing a new artist or a new album from a favorite artist, I like to (try to) listen to the whole album as a “first listen”.

    But for the most part, I like to mix up all my genres and shuffle. It’s like having your own commercial free radio station where every song is going to be good.

    As for where things are going… it’s been years since anyone mainstream has made an “album”. I think it’s mostly been some hit singles with filler. The emerging market could potentially end the filler. That wouldn’t be a bad thing. But which is easier – Checking in on a band every couple of years for a new album or trying to keep up with a band that’s putting out a new song every couple of months? Also, this would have quite an impact on touring (which can be a major source of revenue). The traditional model of releasing an album and touring to support it every few years might not work out very well if an artist is releasing 10 great songs (one every couple of months) over the span of three years.

  2. Rich Says:
    August 21st, 2005 at 10:13 pm

    I’m an album guy all the way. Always have been, always will be.

    As far as Jon’s comment about nobody mainstream making an “album” in years, I couldn’t disagree more. I can unleash a monster list of acts who have put out what should be considered albums, but in order to truncate pomposity, I’ll just recite a partial group. Mainstream artists like Green Day, Beck, The White Stripes, Weezer, and System of a Down (as well as veteran stalwarts like Bruce Springsteen) are still out there, putting out collections of songs that fit well together-some, like Green Day’s, even fitting the “concept” label. So the album format has not reverted to the days of pre-Rubber Soul and Pet Sounds, and as long as artists who are in the know about the cathartic experience an album can provide, albums as we know it will still be around.

  3. Joe Says:
    August 22nd, 2005 at 10:58 am

    Good stuff. The behavior of the “album listener” vs. the “singles listener” is an interesting thing. A singles person might have their car hooked up with an MP3 player on shuffle, of a bunch of CDRs with a variety of tunes on them. Them the album oriented person may have a bunch of store bought CDs, or an MP3 player, not on shuffle, and with whole albums ripped on it.

  4. Dianne Says:
    August 22nd, 2005 at 8:00 pm

    When I read your title I was reminded that I’m old, I remember the store Licorice Pizza, 8 track tapes and when Music Plus use to sell roach clips and bongs.

    Sigh!

  5. gordon Says:
    August 23rd, 2005 at 9:13 am

    I don’t really think of it as “album vs. single” listener becasue there are different times where I like to do both. My thinking is that the people buying just one song of iTunes are the same people that call into radio stations and request a song that the station has probably played 8 times during the day. I’m not really into the way music is sold on the internet right now anyways because paying a dollar for a song is way to much considering the cost that goes into making music. A CD cost about 2 dollars for a record company to make and the final price is due to mark up by the record companies as well as resellers. In most cases thats a 700% markup and they are trying to do the same thing with Internet music. If artist are really wanting to sell their music on the internet they should break away from the record companies and produce and market it themselves. Then the price will most likely be more reasonable.

  6. Joe Says:
    August 23rd, 2005 at 11:21 am

    I’ve never called into a radio station to request a song, but I have spent $17 on iTunes. $7 on singles, and $10 on an album (plus 7 free singles download that didn’t cost anything.) I would consider myself more of a singles listener vs. an album listener, but there are, of course, those staples albums that deserve the whole listen.

    I certainly like the freedom of being able to hear 30 second clips of an antire album, then deciding if it’s worth the $10 for the album, or if I should just buy a song or two off of it. That’s the big win for me and online music buying.

  7. Jon Says:
    August 25th, 2005 at 8:44 am

    In related knews, finally somebody in the music business is starting to “get it” and is going to try a new business model.

    Warner Music Group is creating a new music-distribution mechanism that will rely on digital downloads instead of compact discs.

    Edgar Bronfman Jr., Warner Music’s chairman and CEO, said Monday that the new mechanism will be called an “e-label,” in which artists will release music in clusters of three songs every few months rather than a CD every few years.

  8. Joe Says:
    August 25th, 2005 at 10:54 pm

    Wow.. what timing! That’s kinda creepy.

  9. Rich Says:
    August 31st, 2005 at 10:14 pm

    I know it’s late, but I just thought of something:

    Remember back in the ’60s and ’70s when acts used to release just singles apart from albums? Some of the time, like in the case of The Beatles, these singles were used as a precursor to what their next album was going to sound like. Could we be getting back to that format?

    Man, I hope the album doesn’t go extinct. How else am I supposed to enjoy The Flaming Lips?