Very interesting read on the demise of the album format.

Nothing will ever beat those experiences in the 60s and 70s of buying an album, taking it home (sometimes trying to decide if you wanted to open it leaving the plastic covering still on it, or saying the heck with it and ripping it off), putting it on the turntable, opening up the double folder (and, if you were lucky, maybe a poster or some other kind of freebie), reading the liner notes, looking at the lyrics word for word during that first play, and on and on.

There was no internet to look up more info on the artist. 100% of what you now knew about the band was right in front of you in print.

Remember just going ahead and buying an album because the cover art was so cool?

Dang, I sound old, but this is interesting reading.

[www.musicthinktank.com]

Quote
Mongoose

There was no internet to look up more info on the artist. 100% of what you now knew about the band was right in front of you in print.


[www.musicthinktank.com]

The first time I heard a Stones song from their 60's albums was on a AM radio station, and it was so difficult for me to get the vinyls at the time. It was a long time until I realized what was the song I heard. This was when I bought the Stones first album, back in 1993, I think.

I was reading John Perry's book on the making of the Exile album. Perry made a point of discussing how much work was involved in choosing the songs to open & close each side of an album. Also, how the songs were arranged on each side. When you have a CD which is just a long string of songs, you don't really think much about it. At least I didn't.

I love LPs not only for the higher sound quality, but also for other factors, such the larger-side album artwork and the liner notes. And I have nostalgic reasons for preferring vinyl as well.

EDITED FOR SPELLING ERRORS





Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-09-17 16:42 by MILKYWAY.

Don't forget when people started putting one good song on an album, and refused to put that song on a single, so you felt ripped off. This was the late 80s and through the mid-90s. Napster forced artists/record companies to realize people were fed up spending so much on an album if it was mostly filler.

Gee, I guess it is safe to say the album is dead. Although Jack White's Blunderbuss was in that tradition of old albums and it was the last CD I bought. The entire concept of a related piece is gone now. Nobody cares. It's make you wonder if music will ever be as big in people's lives as it was for almost a hundred years.

<<I guess it is safe to say the album is dead>>

They were saying that about vinyl years ago, but against all expectations it has made a year-by-year resurgence, as illustrated in another thread.

So long as this trend continues, the "album" mentality will likewise make an eventual comeback as a result of ever-increasing vinyl sales, whose buyers are realizing the benefits of a complementary collection of songs as well as what "side 1" and "side 2" mean.

It won't be 2010 forever. It's not like ersatz pop singers and lame, insipid talent(less) shows will be the last word in the history of popular entertainment.

The wheel keeps turning.... round.

Vinyl album sales are at their highest for years in the UK.

This comes in waves. In the first half of the 60s, the single mattered the most.

In recent years, the album hasn't really been that important, but now - with the rise of the vinyl - it probably will be more important than ever in a few years...

Vinyl comes back. In fact, it IS already back.

An excellent article. All the points he made were spot on. I have cursed quite a lot here especially the impact of CD in killing the album format. Even though the good old vinyl have made a nostalgic come back, it is obvious that one cannot turn the time. The artistic impulse, together with its commercial aspect, has dried out. The concept of album has degenarated too much. It goes to both directions: the people - the listeners - who once saw an album in its vinyl golden age, as an artistic statement of its own (including the visual part, and the music offered as well-thought compact units, etc.), and the people - the artists - who once made those artistic statements, and saw them as the main point in making their career. Both don't think alike any longer. Now there are basically individual songs to be downloaded, or way too long "albums" consisting of endless run of songs with no much dynamics or thought. The "album age" starts to be history soon, but that's the way life goes on.

When ROLLING STONE once again, lists "100 best albums of all-time", say in 2020, it will be the same list as it was, say, in 1997...( most of them consisting of 60's and 70's albums). In 2040 when they will list it again, they need to add an explanation what "album" means...

- Doxa

Quote
Glammy
Vinyl comes back. In fact, it IS already back.

How are LPs selling? That is a matter of dispute. David Bakula, Nielsen SoundScan’s senior vice president of client development and insights, said that his company tracked 4.6 million domestic LP sales last year, an 18 percent increase over 2011, but still only 1.4 percent of the total market, made up mostly of digital downloads (which are increasing) and CDs (for which sales are declining).

Quote
Doxa
An excellent article. All the points he made were spot on. I have cursed quite a lot here especially the impact of CD in killing the album format. Even though the good old vinyl have made a nostalgic come back, it is obvious that one cannot turn the time. The artistic impulse, together with its commercial aspect, has dried out. The concept of album has degenarated too much. It goes to both directions: the people - the listeners - who once saw an album in its vinyl golden age, as an artistic statement of its own (including the visual part, and the music offered as well-thought compact units, etc.), and the people - the artists - who once made those artistic statements, and saw them as the main point in making their career. Both don't think alike any longer. Now there are basically individual songs to be downloaded, or way too long "albums" consisting of endless run of songs with no much dynamics or thought. The "album age" starts to be history soon, but that's the way life goes on.

When ROLLING STONE once again, lists "100 best albums of all-time", say in 2020, it will be the same list as it was, say, in 1997...( most of them consisting of 60's and 70's albums). In 2040 when they will list it again, they need to add an explanation what "album" means...

- Doxa

I'd love to echo the more optimistic thoughts of other posters...but I think Doxa's pretty much nailed it.

That said, I'm sure that both he and I would love to be wrong



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-09-16 15:18 by Spud.

Quite frankly, I never cared for the "visual experience" of old LPs. Save for a minority of artists who actually released some truly great artwork, most of the covers were plain crap.

Never cared for inner notes either. They were a treat only on jazz and classic music releases. I can't remember of one single rock LP I have bought that had something interesting or informative to read (besides the credits, that appear also on CDs).

Record shops here in Italy hardly ever had anything truly interesting to buy that was not mainstream.

My "LP buyer" career started in the early eighties. The price of music was the only thing that prevented me from buying records in a compulsive way.

Things actually got worse with the CD era. For many years CDs were so expensive that despite I had at home one of the very first CD players, I started buying CDs on a regular basis only ten years later, around 95.

Cost of music aside, I think that the only solid argument that explains the bad state of LP sales, is the possibility of downloading single songs instead of buying the whole album.

If this had been possible in the 70s too, I think that history of LP's sales would have been completely different.


C

Every band I went to lately had vinyl in stock as merchandising!
Vinyl for ever.

Quote
Spud

Quote
Doxa
An excellent article. All the points he made were spot on. I have cursed quite a lot here especially the impact of CD in killing the album format. Even though the good old vinyl have made a nostalgic come back, it is obvious that one cannot turn the time. The artistic impulse, together with its commercial aspect, has dried out. The concept of album has degenarated too much. It goes to both directions: the people - the listeners - who once saw an album in its vinyl golden age, as an artistic statement of its own (including the visual part, and the music offered as well-thought compact units, etc.), and the people - the artists - who once made those artistic statements, and saw them as the main point in making their career. Both don't think alike any longer. Now there are basically individual songs to be downloaded, or way too long "albums" consisting of endless run of songs with no much dynamics or thought. The "album age" starts to be history soon, but that's the way life goes on.

When ROLLING STONE once again, lists "100 best albums of all-time", say in 2020, it will be the same list as it was, say, in 1997...( most of them consisting of 60's and 70's albums). In 2040 when they will list it again, they need to add an explanation what "album" means...

- Doxa

I'd love to echo the more optimistic thoughts of other posters...but I think Doxa's pretty much nailed it.

That said, I'm sure that both he and I would love to be wrong

Yeah, in a way I'd like everything remain the same, like in the good old days, but that's not the way world is, and I have in my sweet short life learned to accept the change... What we can see in our own very eyes is just so obvious, even though I understand that the generations who have born and grown up with the idea that the basic unit of music is an album format one can touch and look at, might not accept the latest turn of events.

But in a bigger history of music, the story of album is not that long. Since the whole format is very made to a certain technological innovation, it is rather natural that the album is a rather contingent format of presenting music (and in hindsight, its destiny is very much sealed with its technological premises). It was a lucky co-incidence that the best creative souls of the 60's - surely some before them, but it was them who make it big both artistically and commercially - took this format as the object of their creativity impulses, and made it an artistic statement of its own, and not just a random collection of songs. In a way, an album is really music format of rock culture and rock 'generations', the late 60's and the 70's, and probably to some extent, the 80's, being its peak years (at least artistically). My prediction is that when the 'album age' is to be studied from a historical point of view some day, it is very much associated to rock music culture (when rock was mainstream music in pop, or the 'language' of the youth, or still had a cultural relevance). The single has a longer and wider history, but album is really a 'rock' thing. I guess the horrible fear of 'death of album' is the most shocking to the people lived in this culture (like we all here in this site), wheras for many others that particular format is not that important.

The point is that when album is gone - and to a certain extent, it has already gone - that does not mean that no more music is done. No, the medium will change, and who knows what will happen. But like the golden album years show, also the medium and its techonological possibilities will affect to the content of the music. And to our way of 'seeing' the music.

- Doxa



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2013-09-16 18:13 by Doxa.

In any case, I don't think that the LP format (meaning a collection of songs released as a unity) will die.

It is not at all easy and on the long run is quite wearing to produce only "singles". "Fillers" are a resource that I doubt artists will abandon.

Probably LPs in the future will be presented more in the form of EPs with bonus tracks.

With this regard, I've noticed something interesting over the years.

If, for example, an LP is released with 10 songs and 5 bonus tracks, people tend to see this release as something positive, no matter how shitty the "bonus tracks" are.

On the other hand, if the same 15 songs were released as a proper LP, people would complain for it being littered by "filler".

C

Quote
tatters

Quote
Glammy
Vinyl comes back. In fact, it IS already back.

How are LPs selling? That is a matter of dispute. David Bakula, Nielsen SoundScan’s senior vice president of client development and insights, said that his company tracked 4.6 million domestic LP sales last year, an 18 percent increase over 2011, but still only 1.4 percent of the total market, made up mostly of digital downloads (which are increasing) and CDs (for which sales are declining).

No kidding. Vinyl is the new hipster elitist toy. Albums I bought for $5.98 in the 70s sell $25.98 as 80 gram vinyl. You'd have to have really good, expensive equipment for vinyl to sound better than a good CD or download. Vacuum tube amps and crap are okay for true audiophiles, but most people can't really tell the difference. I always thought albums were a pain in the ass. They sounded fantastic the first couple spins and then dust, static, whatever, degraded the product rather quickly nobody how many brushes and liquids you applied.

Quote
MILKYWAY
I was ready John Perry's book on the making of the Exile album. Perry made a point of discussing how much work was involved in choosing the songs to open & close each side of an album. Also, how the songs were arranged on each side. When you have a CD which is just a long string of songs, you don't really think much about it. At least I didn't.

Ahh...the art of sequencing. Very interesting debate

Quote
Cristiano Radtke

The first time I heard a Stones song from their 60's albums was on a AM radio station, and it was so difficult for me to get the vinyls at the time. It was a long time until I realized what was the song I heard.

But what track was it, man?? Don´t leave us hanging!

Quote
RobberBride

Quote
Cristiano Radtke

The first time I heard a Stones song from their 60's albums was on a AM radio station, and it was so difficult for me to get the vinyls at the time. It was a long time until I realized what was the song I heard.

But what track was it, man?? Don´t leave us hanging!

Hahaha, it was just Walking the Dog, and I had never heard until that moment. I just knew what song it was after a year or so, when I finally bought the record.

i completely agree with doxa even though i am still buying vinyls these days because well maybe because i am just a feticist..
yet format is not the point the point is music, any format will influence the way music is done, but the good is that music will always be done and good music also

Adele's 21 album has shifted something like 20 million copies worldwide and has currently, in the U.K., sold more copies than both Thriller and Dark Side Of The Moon. 21 is ranked at No.4 on the all-time U.K. best-seller's list, fitting snugly in between Sgt. Pepper and Oasis' Morning Glory.

I only bring this up because it shows that, if an artist is genuinely talented and truly captures the record-buying public's imagination, then the album, as a format, can still have a place. Plenty of those '20 million' include downloads, I am sure. Which is good, as it shows that iTunes can cater for the album format and not just for those who like to pick random songs.

Quote
RobberBride

Ahh...the art of sequencing. Very interesting debate

Remember the story of Mick and Keith pushing notes under each others' hotel room doors, trying to get the sequencing of Exile just right?


These days, the beauty is that NOTHING has to become obsolete and you can have your music in whatever medium you prefer. You can listen to vinyl and/or you can just download one track from an album, you can make your own CD "albums" by sequencing the songs any way you want, you can stream music, you can have portable music or stationary music--in other words, I don't think anything has been lost and for the music fan a whole bunch has been gained. OK, artists don't tend to think in terms of "concept albums" these days, but THANK GOD.

you can't turn back the clock- its just not gonna happen for all the reasons doxa stated and more.

having said that,i was at a party a couple of years ago and talk turned to music.the host says "yeah, i just listen to vinyl records,you guys should have a listen."

[now for one,i dont want to be the guy pining away for the past,i bought a huge cd collection years ago and loaded it onto my ipod awhile back,i haven't heard an actual album in years.
when people say they want vinyl to come back my first thought is "yeah,i'd like a couple of 18 yr old girls to stop by my house and smoke a thai stick and drink a bottle of wine once in awhile too," but time has moved on.]

so anyway we go in this huge room decked out with gigantic speakers and a very modern looking turntable.

i'm telling you -the sound was un-fcking-believable,its sad what we are missing.everyone had the same look,like"what the hell"
the vinyl addicts arent just being nostalgic,it does sound better.

Quote
liddas
With this regard, I've noticed something interesting over the years.

If, for example, an LP is released with 10 songs and 5 bonus tracks, people tend to see this release as something positive, no matter how shitty the "bonus tracks" are.

On the other hand, if the same 15 songs were released as a proper LP, people would complain for it being littered by "filler".

C

This is an interesting observation, or insight, thanks for providing it here!

The way I read its 'moral' is that it still shows that people still have a rather high expectations what an album is all about. That the songs need to be strong enough and somehow fit to the flow of the whole. Less 'fillers' the better. So when the lesser or weaker 'filler' material is cut off clearly from the whole, it doesn't ruin the artistic impression. That is to say that people still have a sort of 'traditional' concept of album still in their mind.

But my observation is that this traditional high demand conception has gradually started to fade away, much due to the CD format, which made the longer albums technically possible, and thereby, the maxim of 'quantity over quality' rather prevailing these days. (I would say A BIGGER BANG is a clear example of this maxim in practise, if we use a familiar example). The result is that albums are not any longer to be treated as whole listening experiences, where each cut has its place in it, and which tells a 'story', but just a collection of many random songs, from which listeners just picks ups the ones he or she prefers. 'Picking up' is just so easy these days. The wholeness does not really matter any longer. The CD provided a decisive step to the downloading culture, by degenarating - little by little - the whole idea of album as an over-all listening experience.

Let me make two other observations of the theme.

In a way the (high-priced) Super Deluxe, multi-disc box phenemenon of the last decade or so, is also a kind of sign of the good old album concept saying long goodbyes. Now the days when albums actually really mattered, are milked out with all kinds of fancy packages for hot-going nostalgia market. The more the better is a prevailing maxim also there: who cares any longer about the artistic statements the artists once made - we just want to hear anything somehow related to those once important statements. We want a 'bigger' picture, and more discs or whatever there is, the better. (This is not a bad thing per se, but it says something of the nature of music business these days, and of us consumers, and how 'poor' item an individual one-disc album starts to be).

And look what has happened to 'live album' concept? I think that is a concept nobody actually misses any longer, because capturing live music - concerts - is done much better by other formats. Now the whole concerts can be offered instead of these edited high-light reconstructions of them as like in vinyl days - which used to be a kind of artistic statements of their own. (That at least seems to be the prevailing consensus here at IORR.) I claim that thanks to the (much wanted) decision to offer more complete live shows from the past, the old live albums are starting to be nothing but historical curiosities. Who needs a torso like STILL LIFE any longer when we have a complete official 1981/82 shows? What will happen soon even to YA-YA'S when some - sooner or later - 1969 show will be released in full? Those albums had a function once, but not any longer. Further, the (multi-disk) DVD releases have nowadays made the recent live albums rather marginal releases in offering tour souveniers.

Okay, I just offered some - perhaps rather far-reaching and parorchial - examples of the change we are all wittnessing now. But the decline of the concept of album is a fact, and it comes in multiple ways, some of which we might even notice happening. And like lem motlow said, you can't turn the clock back.

- Doxa



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-09-16 22:57 by Doxa.

Excellent article. The whole experience of purchasing music has become sterile and characterless. I miss the record shop visit where I'd allocate a few hours to browse through the racks and read the covers etc. YOu'd even get talking to people next to you. Now it's soulless and to a certain extent so is the sound.

They used to have booths where you could listen to the records on enormous headphones before you bought them. *sniff*

When I was 8 years old I daringly took the bus to Hollywood to Wallach's Music City on the corner of Sunset and Vine. They "allowed" me to go into one of a series of private listening booths with a 45 single of "Shop Around" I was SO thrilled that they'd let a "little girl" do that and I saved my money to return and buy that single (which I still have).

Music City seemed like a veritable palace of music to me, and I never regretted the lies I told my parents along the line of "I have to go to the library...it might take me awhile."

Those were the days, eh, stonesrule. I remember I had a jar with a hole in the top where I'd save my pocket-money to buy records--a single cost six shillings and eightpence, and an album was thirty-two shillings and sixpence. I think the first one I bought with my own money was by the Shadows.

I too as a kid used to love to go buy the latest 45, just to not have to call the damned radio DJ and beg him to play my favorite song, and I miss the double gatefold albums, good for many things, like playing the music and looking at the pictures, reading the liner notes etc etc... It is too bad that album is kind of a lost art form, although I have many albums framed in those 33 1/3 picture frames they sell.

For me it was all about the music. I did enjoy great covers but never bought an album just because of the cover, it was for the music.