Downloads mean fans ignore albums

For nearly 40 years, the album has been the main currency of pop music and its No. 1 source of debate.

Is Abbey Road better than Rubber Soul? Is Nevermind really the greatest rock album of the '90s? Is Britney's new album lame or what?

With the recent boom in 99-cent-per-song downloading sites, music fans are cherry-picking their favourite tunes and ignoring full-length albums - much to the dismay of musicians who spend months crafting them.

The album's glory days could be history, with three-minute singles ruling the music world as they did in the 1950s. That shake-up would not only affect the record labels' bottom line but might also transform the way pop music is created and heard.

"I see the demise as inevitable," says singer David Bowie. "In the future, it'll all be in the hands of the fans, who'll cut and paste whatever songs they want. The artist will have no control over it."

Yet not everyone is ready to bury the album. Some high-profile musicians insist that the album - not the song - is the be-all of pop music, and they argue that fans shouldn't be able to carve random pieces off an album any more than readers should be able to buy one chapter of a book.

"We have to be the ones who decide what happens to our music," says Lars Ulrich of Metallica. "We conceive entire albums, and I'm not gonna give it to you in any other form than the one I conceive. ... You can dissect it after that if you want, but at least you have to respect our choice."

Metallica is among a handful of acts that refuse to sell their songs a la carte over the Web. John Mayer, Linkin Park and the Beastie Boys are also bucking the 99-cent song trend by only allowing their complete albums to be downloaded for $9.99. But they might be fighting a lost cause. Album sales have dropped 20 per cent since 2000, according to Nielsen SoundScan, and all eyes are fixed on new digital music shops such as Musicmatch, BuyMusic and Apple's iTunes, which has sold more than 25 million songs since it started in April. Unlike brick-and-mortar record stores that deal mostly in full-length CDs, the internet stores focus on songs. At iTunes, single downloads are outselling albums roughly 15-to-1.

"It's a song economy now," says iTunes spokesman Chris Bell. "Consumers have come to expect it through illegal file sharing and CD burning, and we're making sure every song is available for individual downloading."

The company's slogan - "iTunes is designed for instant gratification" - points to the biggest reason why albums may be withering. With attention spans shrinking and music outlets multiplying (on TV, satellite radio and in cyberspace), people aren't as willing to sit through an entire album as they were in the past.

Super-size albums are making the problem worse. The 35-minute album of yesteryear has been replaced by 60- and 70-minute epics, in part because compact discs fit more music than LPs and tapes did. But the marathon albums are also a result of musicians trying to justify the $18 or $19 cost of a CD.

"It's like, 'How much music can I cram on there?' and the albums just get weaker and weaker," says Joe Levy, a Rolling Stone senior editor who helped compile the magazine's recent "500 Greatest Albums of All Time" issue.

"It's not just the download services that are chipping away at people's interest in albums; it's the bloat that's been created ever since CDs were introduced."

In the '50s, rock 'n' roll revolved around the 45-rpm single. Albums - if record labels even bothered to put them out - were just ragtag compilations of unrelated singles. But the psychedelic '60s turned that upside down. With the Beatles and Bob Dylan knocking out songs at a rapid-fire clip, the 33-rpm album became the best way to get them to the marketplace.

Spurred on by free-form FM radio, musicians started writing longer songs and weaving whole albums around a musical or lyrical theme: The Beatles' Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band (1967), The Who's rock opera Tommy (1969), Marvin Gaye's socially conscious What's Going On (1971).

Suddenly, rock 'n' roll was no longer just a random parade of ditties blaring from an AM car radio. Thanks to the album, rock was an official art form, worthy of being analysed on hi-fi stereos and dissected in The New York Times - just like jazz or classical music.

By the mid-'70s, concept albums were standard fare in pop music, from Willie Nelson's Western fable Red Headed Stranger to Pink Floyd's stoner-rock song cycle, Dark Side of the Moon.

Even if albums didn't have a theme, bands treated them as indivisible works of art, which helped boost their egos as well as their bank accounts: When Stairway to Heaven became the rage of FM radio in the early '70s, Led Zeppelin refused to put it out as a single, a ploy that catapulted sales of the group's fourth, untitled album.

Record labels took a similar approach in the '80s and began phasing out singles to force music fans to buy full-length CDs. But not everyone was convinced the album was infallible.

"I've never found an album - even a Beatles album - where every song on it was great," says B.B. King, who now listens to his favourite tunes on an MP3 player.

R.E.M. guitarist Peter Buck agrees. "I can't tell you how many albums I bought back in the vinyl days and only listened to one side."

Post-punk bands such as R.E.M. formed as a reaction to the bloated "art-rock" albums of bands like Yes and Emerson, Lake & Palmer. Even as singles began vanishing from record stores in the '80s, people began clamouring for their return.

"Singles are the essence of rock 'n' roll ... Nobody goes around humming albums," rock historian Dave Marsh wrote in his 1989 book The Heart of Rock & Soul: The 1,001 Greatest Singles Ever Made.

Today's post-Napster generation goes by the same philosophy. Armed with hand-held MP3 players, music listeners have turned into free-range DJs, playing their favourite singles whenever and wherever they want.

But don't hit "eject" on full-length CDs just yet. Though the album may be faltering, the pay-to-download sites account for a small percentage of all music sold, and most musicians still plot their careers in terms of albums, not songs.

This year, concept albums have been coming back in vogue (Neil Young's Greendale, Mars Volta's De-loused in the Comatorium), as have heady, experimental works such as Erykah Badu's Worldwide Underground.

"I'm an analog girl in a digital world. ... I don't even have the internet," says Badu.

"I have faith that real music lovers will always want to hear every little bit of an album," says singer Edie Brickell. "Artists will have to get more creative with websites to encourage people to listen to the whole thing ... but the album is still such a great concept."

And if musicians keep sticking to the concept, the iTunes nation could eventually get over its album phobia.

"Ultimately, the fate of the album is in the hands of the artist," says Rolling Stone's Levy. "If they keep making great albums, the album will survive."

I've heard some of the demos, but have heard the live treatment of all of them, because, God Bless Them, they are still taper-friendly.

Have you seen the Wilco movie, I think it's called "I am trying to break your heart"

For my money, I can still go out and by Tom Petty's latest CD, plug it in and let it go until the end. I don't even know the names of the songs because I just let it play through when the artist is talented.

If you recall, Petty was the first muscian that the record companies wanted to use to jack up the price of an album to $13.00. TP didn't like this and went through a very long court trial to stop them from raising the price. This is like going to court with your boss.

He is presently being banned from the radio PRECISELY because his last CD absolutely slams the music industry. Tom even said as much in a Rolling Stone interview.

This is no joke either. I've called our local radio stations and they will not play anything on his new CD because it slams the radio industry.
Definately worth checking out Tom's latest called "The Last DJ."

The same music industry that pays shills to tell us that Manenema and Justin Timberlake are "relivant" also sold America Pat Boone and Fabian. They also are the ones who believe that Carly Simon deserved to be inducted in the Rock and Roll Hall Of Fame.

Kids are fools. Some learn musical independence by the time they finish high school (they rebel against their parents, why not against their peers and the dominant media?). Others stay in the top 40 world until they go to college and then broaden their tastes. Still others never take a chance and always look at the top 10 picks (these people also seem to be the ones who vote on election day based on who's leading in the polls).

Oh, yeah. I own it. But, in fairness, I am an obsessive collector of music.

The demos, as a whole, are a far superior album to YHF to my ears, mainly because it is much more of a rock album. The version of "Not for the Season" is a great "Being There"-esque rock song, as is "Never Let You Down". To my ears, the whole thing just sounds much more organic than YHF - which, I should repeat, I did like.

I've called our local radio stations and they will not play anything on his new CD because it slams the radio industry. Definately worth checking out Tom's latest called "The Last DJ."

Chicago's WXRT mostly sucks (tepid music for ageing Boomers) but they did play the title track when the CD came out.

Exactly. I hate Timberlake, he is such a fairy. I am a metalhead and will tell you straight out that many bands are so terrible live, when compared to the cd, that is shows how bad they really are and how it is all hype. Take Slayer or Iron Maiden - Great Albums Great Performances. They never sold out. The kids today are so sheepish and follow whatever crap is thrown at them. Korn is ok, Linkin Park is ok, but they are so commercial. Old Metallica, Slayer, Megadeth, Ice T, Public Enemy, although controversial, never really sold out to the commercial interests and put out hardcore stuff. Metallica today are phonies. I am so embarrassed by them. Its like a family member betraying you over money.

I've heard that David Bowie's newest album, Reality, is supposed to be his strongest in years but I've only given it a brief listen in a store (I didn't buy it but might have if I had started DJing rock and roll at a club last fall).

An album that came out a couple of years ago but may be ready for reappraisal is The Maker's Strangest Parade. It's a concept album with some elements of David Bowie's Rise & Fall Of Ziggy Stardust sound. The band's older fans felt betrayed by the change. I dig it but it may not be for everyone.

The Dirtbombs' Dangerous Magical Noise is my current ROCK pick (it has some elements of soul):

I am not kidding, Slayer is almost like an out of body experience. Reign in Blood is considered the best heavy metal album of all time, even by Metallica. I started out as an Ozzy fan, then Metallica. I tripped over a slayer cd back in 1989 and then from that day, I have been a Slayer fanatic.

Better than that, I saw a book of Rolling Stones reviews published in the 1970s. AC/DC, the Police, and other bands all got 1 star. Rave revues for sensitive fern bar music.

The critics rarely get it right the first time. Movie critics all hated Blade Runner when it came out. Now big budget SF is "respectable" (Tom Cruise even stars in Phillip K. Dick stories).

Wow. The people on this thread sound like a bunch of geezers.

"When I was a kid, they played good music, not this crap they play today. That Brittney Spears is a little tramp. Metallica, now that was music. Whenever you want to get a girl into bed, play side 2 of Led Zeppelin 4. It's really good if she takes her teeth out."

Geez guys. Young people might want to listen to something other than the fifteen records you thought defined western culture when you were cruising the strip in your eight year old Chevette, listening to Pink Floyd on your eight track.

I'm not questioning B.B. King's musical ability (all though the live performances I've seen personally have some strengths and some parts that aren't so high).

Without a standard for comparison his comment has no meaning. The Gil Evans/Miles Davis albums have some clunkers?

He brought up the Beatles. I think that Rubber Soul and Revolver are both solid albums (their 2 best). Since he brought up the Beatles that means he's talking "all time" not just current releases.

B.B. King needs to listen to more albums.

You should check out a Swedish band called Opeth. They're like a perfect cross between Pink Floydian atmosphere and brutal, unrelenting death metal (cookie monster vocals and all). Their last two albums, "Deliverance" and "Damnation" are the two most accessible albums, but all their stuff is worth checking out.
They're touring in February, and from what I understand they're absolutely amazing live.

BUMP.

Those are the same kinds of bands that I've been seeing for around 20 years. Great bands out there on the road. No "reserved seating". No hired goons in yellow shirts working security. Ticket prices cheaper than the price of an album (let alone cheaper than the price of a plane ticket or good meal).

I heard they are great. The death metal voice though is not really to my liking because I can't understand any of it. At least old Metallica and Slayer and Maiden you can understand somewhat what is going on.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.