Is It Really Dead?
Every once in a while I like to ramble on about this or that. Actually, come to think about it, that’s really about all I do here. Today I’d like to ramble about the formats in which we consume our music. Nearly every week I read at least one piece about the “death of the album.” Understand, most of these writers are not talking about the move away from vinyl, but about what they perceive to be a move away from the album format.
It’s argued that because of the rise of the “digital music revolution,” accompanied by iTunes and iPods, that the album as an artform is no longer relevant. What’s important now is for artists to make a string of perfect singles without concern for how these songs might fit together. Besides, people are only going to download one or two songs and then put you on “Party Shuffle” anyways, right, so why pursue the laborious process of conceptualizing and coordinating anywhere from 8 to 20 songs that are somehow supposed to work together?
What I read less often are clear defenses of the album as a viable and indeed valuable commodity from a listener’s perspective. But most of the music that I listen to comes in the form of a full album. Though we have certainly witnessed the rise of the single, most artists still intend for that single to be heard and understood as part of an entire album.
Albums typically sinsist of 8-12 songs and generally last anywhere from 35 minutes to over an hour. More often than not, there is a relation to the tracks, whether it be thematically or musically. Though the sale of single songs has skyrocketed due in part to iTunes, most artist still release albums and intend for thier songs to be understood in this context.
There is something to be said for making an intentional effort to interact with music, to set aside a significant chunk of time to be transported into the artist’s vision. While singles often help us find immediate gratification, albums require some invenstment in listening. Albums often tell a complete story while singles only present a single scene of that story. Sometimes the story may be more thematic than explicit. It may be based more on impression than an explicit story, but there is something special about an artist being able to make an hour’s worth of coherent music that not only works together but belongs together.
Many have lost the attention span to deal with an album’s worth of material but when I think of some of my favorite music, I think in terms of albums before I think in terms of individual songs. Many artists can create a great song. Very few can create a great album. A musician’s talen must be understood over the course more than one song.
As long as there’s music and as long as there are people who truly love music, I’m convinced that album will be a viable format. What do you think? Do you listen to entire albums anymore? What are some of your favorite albums and why?
- Read This Is Your Brain on Music: The Science of a Human Obsession by Daniel Levitin
I agree that the album will always be a viable format for people who truly love the “art” side of the music and the stories that it tells over the course of a collection of “x” number of songs.
One the other hand, i like the challenge of pursuing the listeners who are single-oriented and download one or two songs on iTunes. I’m interested in connecting with them and communicating with them…and i feel like the “consumer/pop/single” type of song represents a chance to try something new and figure out the most artful, true and beautiful way to grab their attention.
That being said, honesty trumps gimmicks in my book. I wouldn’t try to sucker people by manipulating them with cotton candy.
But cotton candy that is TRUE? well that sounds good to me.
i’m rambling.
My wife gave me a record player recently as a birthday present. I’ve been enjoying the wonderful (better) sound of vinyl records(even the warm white noise of small scratches, like a crackling warm fireplace), and the fact that the most convenient way to enjoy a vinyl album is to listen to one whole side at a time (not as easy to switch tracks with records as with other technologies). One is reminded that the flow of song after song was sometimes an important artistic decision.
Brent,
Good post. I never think of music (my favorite) in terms of one song. It’s always a compilation of work. In fact, I think that’s why I have a hard time of creating playlists, because it’s hard to find synthesis between songs. So most of my playlists are either albums or multiple albums from artists.
I’ve purchased two albums of Sigur Ros‘ after reading your posts. Takk and () I like them both.
So when I go out for a run, my playlists are just artists…..Coldplay, Snow Patrol, Jimmy Eat World….etc, etc.
rhett
My 20GB mp3 player definitely changed the way I listen to music. Before that, I would make a few CD copies from my collection of 300 and put them in a wallet. (I didn’t want to risk my out-of-print favorites being swiped or melted in my car). It wasn’t practical and I got only about a tenth of the enjoyment I do with a hard drive player.
Now I have 3000 songs in my pocket and the (much-maligned) instant shuffle play has been in heavy use (…as well as the next button). I’m re-experiencing treasures that I had forgotten about. As for “album listening”, I usually only do that when I’m listening to recent acquisitions, or when my shuffle has helped me find an old treasure.
This week’s companion for my 90 minutes of driving has been the Derek Trucks Band. Highly recommended!
I think the download single trend is actually a good thing. Most listeners are casual and that won’t change. In my opinion, it’s a bit pretentious for artists or record companies to define how the customer should use their product. Most of the time it’s pride and profit that is driving that argument rather than art. I have to chuckle when I hear the Red Hot Chili Peppers or the Dixie Chicks talking about their latest album like it’s some kind of watershed moment in human history.
You cannot listen to a symphony or concerto or Handel’s Messiah piecemeal, shuffled on your iPod.
The “album” will live on.
Good point. It’s funny you say that because when I was thinking of truly remarkable album-worthy art, Messiah was at the top of my list.
I was totally blown away when I read that Handel took a mere 24 days to compose it. The beauty and cohesiveness of that piece are enough to singularly refute atheism and deism.
Today’s pop artists have delusions of grandeur.
I feel the same way. One of my favorite albums is David Crowder and the UBC Band (yes, their first album)’s All I Can Say. From beginning to end, it’s got a heart to it that cries out to be played sequentially. I still listen to it when I get down. Now I’m thinking about it again- so I’ll go listen to it. Thanks!
I miss records and tapes but at least CD’s don’t have to be rewound. I can’t get into the iPod thing, Brent, for the reason you mentioned. You have to listen to the whole thing–at least once (Which can be a real challenge with some of the music THEY put out these days.)
Is there a list of ‘albums’ somewhere that you CAN listen to all the way through?
Josh
“…the word of God is not bound.”
–2 Timothy 2:9
[...] Brent Thomas talks about the viability of the album format. Great take on how music should be understood. “Albums typically sinsist of 8-12 songs and generally last anywhere from 35 minutes to over an hour. More often than not, there is a relation to the tracks, whether it be thematically or musically. Though the sale of single songs has skyrocketed due in part to iTunes, most artist still release albums and intend for their songs to be understood in this context.” [...]