I got an advance of Jay-Z’s The Blueprint 3 album recently. It’s actually pretty solid throughout, but that’s not what this is about. The album has fifteen tracks on it, and like I said, it’s pretty solid but it seems to me that fifteen tracks on any album is too long these days. Jay-Z can get away with it because well, he’s Jay-Z after all, and people will listen through the entire thing at least a couple of times until eventually boiling it down to their favorite tracks which will then make their way onto their iPod. Or, if it’s mind-blowing from start to finish, which some albums definitely are, and some may consider The Blueprint 3 to be, the whole thing makes it to the player. The point is that in the year 2009 with media so readily available to anyone at any time, new bands/artists should release their music in smaller quantities putting out only the best of what they have, no filler. This obviously isn’t a new idea, people have been doing it for years, but it seems especially important now in an era where competition isn’t only with other bands, but with other forms of media entirely, it’s a lot to expect a new listener to sit through 12 or 15 songs at a time when they haven’t previously even heard of you. This isn’t to say people won’t listen to an entire album, I do it regularly, it’s just that it’s harder and harder, given the state of music availability, to get people to spend that much time with the unknown.
What’s wrong with new, unsigned bands releasing a song or two at a time every few months, giving people a taste of what they can do? Do this for an extended period of time, and then compile all of the songs plus a few new ones on an album to be released as a whole. I do, after all totally believe in the body of work that is the album. I’m all for hearing songs in context, in fact, depending on the band, I think it’s imperative to hear the flow of the album in order to really get the artist’s vision, plus I love album artwork, so by all means let’s keep them coming. I just think that as a new artist in the year 2009, it’s easier to get the attention of new listeners, new fans by putting out quality over quantity. Plus, releasing songs little by little helps build anticipation for what will eventually be the entire work.
Established artists are clearly different, especially when they are album-based artists like Radiohead or My Morning Jacket. bands like these have a massive fan bases who will always give an album the benefit of the doubt, but even then it’s hard to get people to extend their attention span past what they are used to.
I’m curious to know what the general consensus is when it comes to you the music fan taking on a new artist. Are you a fan of entire albums versus a few songs at a time? Do you like a few songs before diving into the whole album? What’s your preference? (Comment on bottom of page).
In my humble opinion, singles and EPs are the way to go for brand new artists, and for some established acts, who want to gain new fans. Let’s save the over-wrought, debut concept album for the bands that have earned the ears and time of the listeners, and before long maybe you’ll be one of them. Then, I’m more than happy to listen (at least once) to your 25-song epic take on the history of ancient Rome as told through the eyes of an alien visitor who discovered a guitar in a cave during a time when music was outlawed… or not.
Jay Harren
Follow me on Twitter
My favorite album of last year was Benji Hughes’ A Love Extreme, a 25 track double disc debut album. There are love songs, there are songs of loneliness, there’s a song about doing ecstasy at a Flaming Lips concert, a song about his neighbors complaining about his stereo being too loud, a song about a prom committee having to choose between dracula & a mummy as the prom band, an epic song about rescuing a Spanish chamber maid in distress from an evil king, & a few short instrumental tracks thrown in for good measure. And they’re all great. According to my last.fm page, the only artists I’ve listened to more in the last year are Bob Dylan & Fleetwood Mac.
There’s two ways to control the quality… release less music or write more good music. Benji chose to write more good music & it paid off. If I just had five or six Benji Hughes songs, I wouldn’t be half the fan I am. In fact, I might enjoy it for a while but move on to another artist who has a more substantial collection of good songs.
I don’t want to have to periodically check up on a band to see if they have a couple of new tunes. I think that’s the worst idea ever. The only update I want from a band is when they have a show near me coming up. I don’t want your video podcasts & I don’t care about your political thoughts. Just make a record that I can buy I listen to & tell my friends about. And then make another one. And if you’re good enough Scorsese will do the rest.
Benji spent 3 years on this record. I say wait… don’t rush it. Be patient. Build a body of great songs. Buck the formula, develop some diversity in your songwriting. Everything doesn’t have to be epic, if you can write a good song about something simple, then you’re onto something.
I love making mixes & I love doing podcasts & so on, but I rarely have the time anymore. And I devote as much of my life to music as anyone I know. It takes too much effort to listen to singles, I’d rather just throw on a Beatles record & let it play through. If you have a good song, I might listen to it six or eight times. But after a while I’ll get over it. But I always come back to great albums.
I’m inclined to agree with Jon. I understand the idea of quality over quantity, but why spend time on music that doesn’t have both? I think if I got turned on to a band who released a couple songs every month for a year and said that’s what they were doing from the start I might be interested. I’d check back on that. But releasing singles and EPs whenever you have material isn’t something I could see myself getting behind. For example, I love the Smashing Pumpkins. They released a single (for FREE even!) around the time of the Super Bowl. Not great, but pretty solid and from a band I already have a listening relationship with. But as of today I have probably listened to that song three times. It just isn’t worth my time to play ONE song.
I can really only call myself a “fan” of a band after they’ve released a minimum of two albums. One album just isn’t enough for me to really GET the band, let alone one or two tracks. Now if you’re trying to get label interest this might be the way to go. It’s definitely a valid method, just not one I would be willing to implement just yet.
Great thoughts Jay. I’ve given the “less if more” advice to lots of bands, but few take it. It seems like new artists are often so emotionally connected to their songs that they can’t make good decisions on what to cut. They would benefit from taking the advice of a manager, a&r or even streaming them all online and polling the fans. Dashboard built a massive and very dedicated following through the EP strategy you’ve suggested above, with some of those songs making it on future records. Although that plan probably works better with some genres than others.
Regarding established artists, yes they have a massive fanbase who will buy whatever they put out, but even a lifelong fan can be put off by a crummy record that they hype as, “another Achtung Baby”. REALLY? Out of 50-60 songs this is the best they’ve got? Years ago Bono said, “If this band ever starts putting out crap records, we’ll all quit.” Well, Bono lied.
Every artist needs a Simon Cowell in their life, and they should listen. Even Tiger Woods has a swing coach on his payroll. Yet, when artists reach major success, it seems that they either don’t listen to people speaking into their creative process, or no one has the guts to be honest with them. Either way, it’s a recipe for No Line on the Horizon… errr… I mean mediocrity. However, I will say thank you for not making it 15 tracks.
What I’ve noticed personally and with my friends both on- & offline is a clear trend away from singles. When digital music hit, it allowed for and almost demanded a singles mentality. When Napster & AudioGalaxy were in vogue & dial-up connections were standard, you could be listening to the track you just heard on the radio in just 5 or 6 short minutes & that was revolutionary. And you could store hundreds of 96kbps or 128kbps singles on your 1gb 1st generation iPod. But now with broadband internet connections, huge portable storage capacities, & album-by-album torrenting replacing song-by-song file sharing, we’re back where we started. I think there was a singles era, & with rap & electronic music that continues, but with everything else we’re moving back towards albums because it’s more convenient & it’s more fulfilling. Singles were never more fulfilling, it was just something dictated by technology.
Also, just because you have a song doesn’t mean it needs to be released asap. Sure, everyone wants to go on tour right now. Everyone wants to be a rock star, no one wants to sit in their bedroom for a year & write a hundred songs. But in this day of age where all it takes is a stereogum post, I don’t see the point in going out with 4 or 5 decent songs & trying to slug it out against everyone else who has 4 or 5 decent songs. Why not take the time to write 12 to 15 or even 25 really great songs & then let it all take care of itself?