Music on the Internet
So I read this article today, which suggests that the album may soon be on the way out. Frankly, I truly doubt this is so. I have a feeling that people have been predicting the death of the album since about 1964. But the author makes an interesting point, which is that the music business, and musicians more specifically, have not adjusted well to the Internet Age. And that's kind of counterintuitive at first, because one think that we associate strongly with the internet is mp3's and song-swapping on Napster or whatever. But think about it - those things are a product of the fan base and bootleggers, not of the industry and the artists themselves. The music industry, instead, revolves around making an album, promoting it, touring to support it, and then returning to the studio. This means the a given artist is in the spotlight only for a short time before falling off the face of the earth, sometimes for years.
So this author says that maybe the solution for music on the internet is to make it more similar to news or television sites - provide constant material, and music on the internet will thrive. This, in turn, would kill the album, because someone who's putting out 50 internet singles a year simply won't have the time, or the motivation, to produce albums. But, as I stated above, I really don't see this happening. I could be wrong, but I think most musicians are perfectionists, at least to a degree, and they simply wouldn't have the temperment to just dash off songs and stick them online for anyone to hear. Sure, some would be gems, and some would have a lot of work put into them. But others would be junk. And I think the average artist wouldn't be happy with that.
On the other hand, I think for certain artists, this could work. Take someone like Ryan Adams. This year, he has three albums scheduled for release, two of which (I believe) are double albums. So we're probably talking about somewhere in the 50 song range, total. Now, imagine that, instead, he made one really good album (even a one double-album) and then released the remainder of the songs on a biweekly basis. Yes, he'd probably sell less albums in the short term, but he'd make up for it in constant exposure. Every couple weeks, you'd likely see a short review somewhere of the latest internet single. And that could help his career in the long-term.
Anyway, an interesting article.
2 comments:
I'm pretty sure that only the first Ryan Adams cd is a double.
Anyway, I really really hope we never reach the point where people just don't release cds anymore (at the very least, release cd collections of these 50 songs a year).
I might be strange, but while I'd totally pay $5 or $10 for a single that just has a song or two I need, but at the same time I'd never considering paying even $1 for a fucking mp3 of the same song. If it does go into the direction of "mp3 only", I'm going to spend a lot less, not more.
I totally agree. I never have paid for an mp3, and probably never will. I mean, the quality is mediocre and I can only listen to it on my computer. Why would I pay $1 per song for that? I much prefer my CDs, thankyouverymuch.
What I would like would be something where the artist would just release stuff on their website for free, more or less as a form of advertising. People could just listen to a few tracks and then maybe decide whether they like the artist or not. The music press, meanwhile, would just eat it up - all of the hottest bands constantly releasing new tracks. And then the hardcore completists could purchase the songs in an annual or semi-annual CD form, like you suggested.
Post a Comment