# This Too Shall Suck...

- Site: Analog Industries
- Author: Chris Randall
- Date: 2011-07-19
- URL: https://analogindustries.com/2011/07/this-too-shall-suck/

Matt Davidson (Stretta) put up an interesting comment on Google+ the other day that sparked a rather long and involved discussion. Since he put it on G+ instead of his blog, and limited it to his Circle Of Compadres or whatever, I assume he doesn't want me quoting it in entirety here. However, I'll paraphrase him (badly, and take specific points out of context even) here, and provide my own color commentary that I touched upon in the comments of his missive.

His general premise was that when one puts up an album on Bandcamp for "pay what you want," one is somewhat disappointed at the prevalence of the $1 that many people kick in for a full album, especially in the context of one's altruistic nature. Matt, like me, puts up a ton of secondary and tertiary content in the form of samples, entire songs, and software for free, in addition to the meta-project that is the album itself.

Looking at my Bandcamp stats, I feel I can break consumers of my (recent) music in to three groups: Benefactors, Listeners, and The Curious. The Benefactors kick in ten bucks every time, pretty much no matter what the content. Listeners tend to make a quantitative assessment of the value ("This album has 10 songs, therefor it is $10. This one has 5 songs, so here's your fin.") The Curious are the ones that pay a buck. I generally put up my EP-sized material for Pay-What-You-Want-Minimum-$1, so this number gets colored.

Benefactors are who really drive the commercial side of the process. After so long in this business, when I release an EP or LP, I know for certain fact that there is a group of people that will give me $10. I can count on them. I don't know how they perceive me in general, or why they do this, as I'm not one of these sorts. But this amount of money that I _know_ is coming is essentially my budget. I use it for the TuneCore shit, and to buy anything else specific to the release. It is an immutable fact.

The Listeners are a source of extra income, but they're more fickle. These are the people I actually have to please, because the Benefactors, as long as I don't go all Metal Machine Music on them, will support virtually any endeavor. They aren't a terribly good sounding board. The Listeners, on the other hand, don't buy something they don't like.

The Curious are the people that find my material on YouTube or via a retweet, or hear it in Real World vs. Road Rules #23: Des Moines, or some shit like that, and are like "fuck it. It's here, I don't have to hunt up a Torrent. It's a buck. Fuck it." I look at this as value-added to me. I don't attempt to please these people. It's nice if they turn in to a Listener or a Benefactor, but they don't figure in to the equation except tangentially.

A commercial success for me is a release I didn't have to spend any of my own money to make. That's the 2011 version of the music industry. Even if I did, it's not that big a deal, because I make music I like, and am beholden to anybody only inasmuch as the more Listeners I alienate with any given release, the less income I'll see from that release.

Mark Beeson, who most of you don't know, but you're currently reading and commenting via a big chunk of code he wrote a long time ago, brought up an interesting point that is tertiary to my mission statement, but should be touched upon anyhow: iPod don't care. iPod don't give a shit. An album is no different than a song as far as your playlist is concerned. To put that in the context of what I'm talking about, from a crass commercial standpoint, to maximize the benefit of your Benefactors and Listeners, you should release a lot of single songs and two-song packages, rather than saving everything up for a single monumental release. Those of us that are older have an incredibly difficult time getting rid of the notion of the Long Playing Album Of 45 Minutes as a unit of music, but in this amazing modern world we live in, that is a relic of the 70s, for better or worse.

Thoughts?

## Comments (46)

**Mr. B** (2011-07-19):

I really think it depends on your goals. I've pretty much divorced myself from the idea that I'm ever going to be a "rock star", whatever that means. I'm just trying to make music that I would want to hear.

Along those lines, I don't listen to singles. I'm not generally interested in them. I like albums. Every time I hear the argument that the album is dead, you get a Radiohead or an Arcade Fire releasing what is essentially a concept album, and it blows everyone's fucking minds. (I'm not commenting on the quality of either band, just using as an example).

So, while it *might* be a better monetization strategy to release a single/maxi-single kind of thing, I'm not likely to do it because it's not what I'm interested in. I'd rather work to find the few people who are interested in what I'm trying to do, if any.

I've resigned myself to the fact that I'm never going to really "cover my costs", & I try to be thankful that at the moment I've got a job that provides me enough discretionary income to have the toys that let me pursue it. Talent (or lack thereof) is another issue altogether.

**chaircrusher** (2011-07-19):

People who buy one song from an album for their iPod are casual consumers of music. They have an iPod because commercial radio doesn't play what they like, and either they have no acccess to college radio or they have access and think it's too wacky. That's the experience they're after -- the pop radio experience, only without the commercials or the uncertainties of radio reception.

Unless you have a handle on how to make chart-topping pop, r&b or hip hop, you're not going to be a significant player in the one-song-at-a-time world.

The album isn't dead, but its audience is smaller than it was before iPod. Anyone who buys and listens to music seriously will still put on an album, or select an album on the device of their choice. I want to know what Chris Randall or Reinhardt Voigt or Will Whitmore can do with 40 minutes to develop their ideas.

**noisetheorem** (2011-07-19):

I saw the post and comments, but did'nt have time to post. Ill put my thoughts here.

Its not pretty, but it is the reality. Its harder, I think, for older musicians who grew up dreaming about fat record contracts and driving to gigs in limos than it is for the new generation.

Honestly, though, I think the music biz will ultimately be better for it. It gets a big ugly factor out of the equation (the record companies) and puts artists in much more control of their own destiny.

The world has changed. No one wants *just* music anymore. They want an end to end experience. The music is the extra thing you package along with the special software or gadget you created to add value, not the other way around. I am getting ready to do my first solo release and the big hang up I have is how to add that value. If I can make enough to pay for lunch or some more plugins Ill be thrilled. Making my money back will never ever happen.

This is the reality of it. You can cry about it and accomplish nothing, or you can accept it and move on.

**krylenko** (2011-07-19):

With all due respect CC, I take major issue with "People who buy one song from an album for their iPod are casual consumers of music" and "Anyone who buys and listens to music seriously will still put on an album."

I too want to know what artist X can do with Y minutes to develop their ideas. But you know what? When Y > 10 minutes, too often the answer is "not enough". Not enough to be interesting, and not enough to be worth the money.

To cite one specific example of a musician I love: I'd far rather wear out the three Burial singles that blow my mind than listen to all of Untrue over and over, just because I'm supposed to as a "serious" music lover.

**Mike Nickel** (2011-07-19):

First off, what was the Die Krupps reference regarding?

As for the primary topic here... I really appreciate the BandCamp offerings as I like to know that the artist is getting paid more and I love the choice of formats. I'm pretty sure that I paid a different amount for each Micronaut release on there and that was all circumstantial. It depended on how much I liked it and how strapped for cash I was at the time. Like for Resistor, that was when I just learned that the guy from SMG(you) was making instrumentals and I was curious. For the Experiment EP, I was counting the days until you published it.

Was this of any help?

**shamann** (2011-07-19):

I get irritated when people release a lot of short pieces of music as separate commercial releases, especially on a system like Bandcamp that has no order bundling/shopping cart functionality.

I generally listen to albums only, or more accurately whole works and not just pieces taken from one (which could be a single song, but often isn't), so I can't really speak to Mr. Beeson's point. It is a foreign concept to me as a listener. But I agree that the rock CD ideal of 10 songs, 45 minutes no longer makes any sense.

I will say that I have no idea what most listeners want. People seem to dig Spotify, I hated it when I tried it. Other people seem to enjoy listening to Chillwave, but extended lofi variations on the Cars' Drive appeal very little to me. There is so much music around to listen to, and habits and tastes have become so varied, I find it hard to imagine that any general theory on listenership is even possible to formulate.

**Mike Nickel** (2011-07-19):

Regarding the number of songs in a release, it doesn't really concern me. Yes, I do just shuffle albums or artists in my iPhone. I do however appreciate singles such as Study One in that you wanted to put a song... so you did. Yes, it goes in the playlist so the fact that it was a single was irrelevant. I currently have a playlist on my phone called Electronics+ that has all of the Micronaut BandCamp releases except for the live album and I listen to it quite often.

**shamann** (2011-07-19):

Well now, how's this for timing:

http://blog.bandcamp.com/2011/07/19/u-s-patent-application-12973070-inter-net-shopping-%E2%80%9Ccart%E2%80%9D/

**Chris Randall** (2011-07-19):

Well, now. That's a horse of another color.

That aside, we're all fairly aware of the habits of listeners, so chiming in with "well, I do things this way but I realize I'm in the minority" isn't terribly helpful information. Consumers will _always_ take the path that is the least amount of resistance as a function of the least amount of affect on the pocketbook. My Listeners and Benefactors will put up with a bit more bullshit than the average Joe, but since we're all technologically savvy, and not only listen to music but create it and engage in the commerce aspect for the most part, we, as a whole, make a really fucking shitty control group.

So 40 posts of "well, that's cute, but _I_ only listen to songs on the radio, then transcribe and transpose them for a quartet of two cellos, a viola, and an English horn, and carry around four blokes in my SUV to play them for me" and derivations thereof isn't useful. We're taking a more meta-view here, a look at the overall picture of the level of devaluation you're willing to accept as a creator.

-CR

**stepwriterun** (2011-07-19):

Maybe I'm old fashioned but I like albums, CD's and vinyl. MP3's are convenient, but for one reason or another I like having the CD because I can essentially choose the quality of the MP3 that I eventually make to put onto my ipod. I also like the fact that I have a backup (with an actual book or something about the recording ) that won't flake out on me in the same way that a hard drive will. But since I'm a dinosaur in how I prefer to have my music don't listen to me.

For this brave new world of releasing songs I like the idea of releasing them in chunks of 2 to 5 per virtual EP. There is no reason to hold out for 10+ songs to make an album unless the songs have a unifying theme or you're only going to release the album fully mixed into a single large MP3 file. I don't think many people listen to full albums anyway.

**boobs** (2011-07-19):

shit.

so, my little label and it's handful of releases are all on bandcamp for mostly pay what you want with a minimum of $1. i have to admit i'm kind of entertained by the results. average payment is probably $4. no one pays over $10 ever. though all the releases are also on itunes, emusic, junodownload, addictech etc and many people shop there because that's their favorite store or whatever so some releases do sell for $14+ depending on the format the person wants.

i think the album concept is doing fine and that people are still into it.. i'd say that albums are getting shorter though. and people are fine with that. 6 songs from one artist is a nice concise listen where the idea gets across. i love a 10 song album and that's still what i find myself shooting for in my own creations but there's something nice about a 6 or 7 song creative spree that can be wrapped up and released while it's still fresh.

what i found funny about bandcamp is that people will still pirate it even if it's $1. they'll take an hour and play through the tracks and record them with wiretap or whatever and then edit them/import them to their mp3 player and that's that. $1 is still too much for some people or they don't value their time as much as that $1.. but they'll go spend $4.50 on a latte.. anyway. i'll not get off on that rant.

regarding added value: i'm calling bullshit on that. unless you are linked up with rolling stone magazine and offer free subscriptions or something like that .. that most people don't care. they don't want a software widget or whatever. they just want the music. sure, a small percent of people will be stoked on a free iphone app or win/mac software thingy but they are in the minority. the bottom line is the music. if it's good then people will want it and not care about anything else. but perhaps a free widget will be a good marketing thing if no one has heard of the artist.. i like to let the music speak for itself.. sometimes that works pretty well and some times it's "how's that working for ya?".

i think having a popular blog/twitter feed is more helpful than value added content. raising your voice above the noise is tough to do.

and regarding the paraphrased stretta comments.. that's just life. if you put it up there for $1 then a lot of people will pay that. as interesting as stretta's music is and as well known as he is in certain circles his name isn't going to 'ring out' like a 90's warp artist etc. and lets face it... anything that is in the IDM orbit of styles isn't selling like it did 10 years ago. but perhaps he's only acknowledging the ratio of $1 to $5 payments in which case.. i refer to my early comment.. if you put it up there for that then people will pay it. but would you rather have 1 listener who pays $50 or 50 listeners who pay $1 each?

my thought process on putting releases up for $1 pay what you want is to make the music as accessible as possible and also i was curious to see if someone would take the time to pirate something that is so inexpensive and represents an (i think) awesome value for the money.

i don't know if i made any useful point but that's my bandcamp blurb.

**Trackdriver** (2011-07-19):

I don't think you have to do complete tracks either in the future. I'm a dinosaur too and prefer listening to albums no matter if it's vinyl, cd or mp3 and I rarely buy singles. My colleagues at work however that are only half as old as I am only listens to playlists and hardly that because they constantly switch songs in the middle of another. I can tell you that it's highly annoying when they are playing on speakers.

**boobs** (2011-07-19):

@trackdriver - lols. some people shouldn't be let near the ipod.

i know what you mean. one of the things about albums is you have to commit to it.

i love playlists and make a lot of them. i group tracks by mood etc.. i know i can listen to a certain playlist when i'm in the mood for something or maybe i take 15 of my favorite tracks from an artist and put them in one playlist.

**Chris Randall** (2011-07-19):

My thoughts are pretty much about boobs. Or the same as boobs. Or something.

In any event, I am, in this case, with boobs.

-CR

**Fixate** (2011-07-19):

I somewhat agree that the album is quickly becoming a relic. The problem is, every time I hear "Single/Maxi-single" or "EP" I also expect all I'm going to find are one or two new songs and a handful of bad remixes of said new songs. Obviously that's not the case for a lot of us electronic musicians lately(i.e. your Micronaut EPs). Maybe keeping to EPs is the way to go?

**boobs** (2011-07-19):

i'll add that for the bandcamp stuff i release the price is $1 but you can't download individual tracks.. you have to download the entire album. that's sort of my way of keeping the album format alive in some way... plus.. for $1 why make individual songs available? it's more mouse clicks when setting up... and any time i can shave off of setting up a release is a good thing. ;)

**ungeheier** (2011-07-19):

I have to put my hand up for liking albums. Not sure if it's because I feel there's more of a connection between those 6-12 songs vs a 1-3 song release.

Also I sometimes forget that people release stuff. I mostly see blogs/twitter and such while at work. There's been a few times where you've released smaller works and I completely forget about them until someone mentions it again, or you release another EP while I'm at home.

Hell, I forgot Stretta told me about 2 of his other releases over a G+ hangout, and only remembered to look for them after said discussion in your original post.

Albums to me are more of a complete thought, whereas EP's tend to come off like a half-thought.

I'd rather have 2 full albums than 4-5 EPs. For whatever reason I devalue EPs.

**ungeheier** (2011-07-19):

...to add to my comment.

Its much easier for me yo select 1 or two albums than figure out what the last 3-4 EPs were that I bought when adding music to my phone or ipod.

**Chris Randall** (2011-07-19):

@Mike Nickel: I'm referring to this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metal_Machine_Music

(Which is generally accepted to be one of the most unpleasant albums of all time, unless you ask Thurston Moore by way of Suit & Tie Guy, in which case it is a towering achievement of unparalleled beauty, and you see what I did there?)

Not the Die Krupps song of the same name.

-CR

**Mark** (2011-07-19):

We're rapidly approaching the 10-year anniversary of the original iPod. A few years before that you had other mp3 players (remember the Nomad? I still remember the funny looks we got from airport security -- "what is this device again?" "it plays what? where do you put the music?").

That is to say, kids who are in college now likely have no recollection of a world without mp3 files and random access to their music.

Ignore, for a moment, the general usability of how you buy music. You're discussing silverware at that point. When you have an entire generation, who are just now starting to be the number one consumers of music, and have grown up only ever knowing a shuffle button and smart playlists, and a purchase of 40 minutes of music is no different than a purchase of 5 minutes of music save for the price, then -- from a purely selfish point of "keep providing your audience with great music" -- you should take the software developer route of "release early, release often."

Taking nine months, or a year between releases, especially in the 21st century, is a pretty hosed concept, I think, since it will tend to bias towards an overall blandness in order to maximize the week 1 sales. I know for indies that isn't such a big deal, but imagine putting a track out every month, and keeping that level of back-and-forth engagement with your fanbase constantly fresh.

**inteliko** (2011-07-19):

I'm a fence walker on the subject.

Nothing like cracking in your favorite CD from 92 and feeling it like you did than. Someone mentioned early in this thread Arcade Fire. They are an exception. My wife got me turned on to them. Catchy as fuck. I love crankin the CD in my car.

But than there is that shitty band who you like 2 of there songs... or those pop tunes you love but didnt love enough to buy the album cause the rest of the album sucked... this is where you learn to appreciate your iPod.

**DBM** (2011-07-19):

Yes and no . I'm all about my iPod , digital , quick , cheap , and sometimes free , however I love ep's and lp's .... A whole album ....though looking at my collection I waould have to say 80% of the albums I love front to back are " concept albums " coincidence ? Though at a fresh 30 maybe I'm starting to tarnish too ?

**afreshcupofjoe** (2011-07-19):

I think your assessment is spot on. I'll be the first to admit that I pirate a shit ton of music. I've been doing it since I was 15 and Napster first came out. I'd say the majority (but not all) of my music loving friends are the same way. It really comes down to convenience. I'd like to support the artists that I really listen to regularly, but it's just so much easier to pirate. I also wish I had a better filter so I didn't have to download 20 albums worth of mediocrity before I found something I truly could get into. So, when someone puts up a pay-what-you-want album and I decide to download it, I give them a dollar. I give them a dollar becasue it's more convenient for me to pay the dollar than to pirate the album, and I also give them a dollar becasue I really do want to support artists even if it's only by a small amount.

The reason I don't give them more than a dollar is, first and foremost, becasue I probably won't ever listen to their album more than once anyway. Sorry, but that's the truth. Most of the people who are paying you a dollar are just being nice, and don't really give a shit about your music. Like I said, I download a shit ton of music, and my filter is terrible. If I paid $10 for every shitty album I downloaded, I'd be worse than broke. Most of this music doesn't really matter to me, so why would I pay more than a dollar for it? If I didn't have the option to buy it for a dollar, or pirate it for free, I just wouldn't ever listen to their music, and that's the sad reality.

So most of the time I'm just one of "the curious" and I do think that most artists should be happy to have my dollar and shouldn't bitch about it, becasue that's all they are ever going to get out of me. On the other hand, I have been a "benefactor" many times. When Radiohead did the pay-what-you-want thing with In Rainbows, I gave them 8 bucks, and I've paid similar to other artists when given the option. Why do I give them more money? I do it becasue I know I love their music, and I'm going to get my money's worth out of it. I know beforehand it's going to get played regularly, so I give them what I think they deserve.

Now, occasionally an album I downloaded out of curiosity will end up being something that goes into regular rotation, and if I could go back I would give them more money, I would, but these albums are few and far between. I usually have no idea what music will eventually get under my skin, so I give them all a dollar, or nothing at all, and that's just how it is. Though, if I do end up liking their music, next time they release and album I will be a "benefactor" rather than a curious listener, and I will be willing to pay.

As far as the singles vs. albums thing goes, I'm album kind of guy. Singles usually get lost in my collection. But I know I'm in the minority there, so I agree with Chris on that point too. It seems to be the way things are going.

**mad ep** (2011-07-19):

So many points here - I don't even know where to start.. I guess maybe the division between myself as a musician versus me as a listener/consumer...

As an artist I don't have a general preference between LP vs EP or single. Certain concepts are longer in format (one of my albums was a triple CD) - others are shorter (single with remixes, 4 track EP, etc). I certainly don't put in less effort into the shorter concepts - it is just that sometimes a few tracks say what I am trying to say. Additionally - it's been about 4 years since I have properly released an album... and part of the reason is that it used to bother me to put in so much effort to not only compose 10-12 tracks that told the story I was trying to tell, but also put in all the effort with track order and artwork etc etc etc - only to have it get jumbled in people's iPods and/or torrented (often times leaked by distros just before it is even released).... Recently it has been more rewarding to me to just focus on shorter projects. 12"s, digital EPs, etc.

As a listener - I haven't bought that much music recently. One of the last remaining benefits of releasing on labels (seeing that there isn't much money to be made from releasing) is getting lots of promos. Sure I don't get phat royalty checks much, but I guess at least I don't have to spend much money either. Equally, many of my favorite musicians are friends of mine so we trade our own music quite a bit. I still remain a fan of the album - but equally like singles - particularly because as a DJ, I like to re-contextualize them into a whole new platform in the mix.

As a consumer - I tend to buy physical copies for albums - but don't mind buying digital singles (usually for DJing). I have only bought from Bandcamp a handful of times - and I admit that I have used the $1 option a few times when it was available.. Sometimes, I have paid more as well - and I can't quite remember the context in which I only paid $1... but thinking about it now (and to use a cliche)... if I had $1 for every time one of my releases was downloaded via piracy, I'd be pretty happy.

**blinkman** (2011-07-20):

A favorite topic of mine. There's enough evidence around to make a pretty convincing argument that the album is dying, but there's plenty more to argue that it isn't. I prefer to think that the album format is too important to artists to fall by the wayside (and that industry commentators are usually full of shit), and I wrote an article to that effect just a few months ago: http://www.chadblinman.com/blog/stop-telling-me-the-album-is-dead/ (I hope this doesn't come off like spam. It's just a simple personal site, free and adless.)

c.

**seancostello** (2011-07-20):

I don't get putting up anything up for sale for a buck, other than a single song, or an iPhone app that you were tempted to give away for free. I also agree with whoever said that if you offer it for sale for $1, you don't have a lot of room to be offended if people buy it for $1. But I am pretty fascist with my prices for my work.

And, @CR, I really like Metal Machine Music. Or did at one point in my life. I also liked to listen to "Ventolin" over and over, as it really did some neat things to my brain chemistry under the right brain chemistry conditions. Now that particular sine wave frequency causes excruciating pain for me.

**boobs** (2011-07-20):

the theory is that enough people will pay more than $1 that it'll work out to a better average. sometimes it works out pretty well and sometimes not.. it's an interesting experiment.

**Chris Randall** (2011-07-20):

If there was one person that regularly posts here that would like Metal Machine Music (besides S&TG, who I have banned long since) and I had only one guess to name that person or else I would die a painful death, I would guess "Sean Costello," and I wouldn't even have to think about it.

That said, only someone who's never been signed to a major or mini-major would think a dollar wasn't a lot to get for a record. You know how much I've received in artist royalties for the four SMG albums I recorded for TVT? The ones that sold a sum total of 400,000 copies? Yeah, that'd be none dollars. And none cents.

(Of course, being the principle songwriter, and not being a complete fucking retard, I did get mechanicals for all those albums. About a dime per.)

Even after Paypal and Bandcamp take their blood money, the 50 cents you're left with is five times what you'd get from Warner Brothers, and more like 10 times once your manager, publisher, and lawyer take their cut.

-CR

**puffer** (2011-07-20):

Every time I hear an old like myself talk about the death of the album as an release medium and how the MP3 generation is all YouTube singles and playlists I think of any number of teen and preteen boys I've met that are more interested in their Dad's album collection than with whatever it is that kids are supposed to be listening to. I constantly see my friends' kids latching onto to early Kinks, Black Flag, Nirvana albums. These kids may be a minority relatively but anecdotal evidence shows me they are not rare.

It's easy to lose sight of, out here trainspotting on the fringes of independent electronic, dance and hip hop that while we're not the outliers we once were, that Nickleback and U2 and JayZ still sell a shit ton more albums than Deadmaus sells singles. I don't think it's all that much different than it ever has been: serious, (mostly) pale (mostly) boys will care way too much about music, while the rest of the population is happy listening to radio. The only significant difference is they now have the illusion that they are 'choosing' their playlist selections. And, moreover, most of those classic and touchstone LPs had a lot of, uh, filler that was only of interest to the diehards. Again, the majority have always been interested in singles but industry, artists and true fans, even youngsters, are going to keep albums around for the foreseeable future.

**Taxist** (2011-07-20):

The only time I ever listen to an album is when I am going on road trips, or testing out new music. Otherwise, its playlists. Having an hour worth of music is nice in theory, but generally most albums consist of about 10 minutes worth of awesome music, 20 minutes of passable music, and 15-30 minutes of filler. Probably listen to more albums if they weren't mostly filler.

Don't consider myself a part of the ipod generation or any of those other contrived terms. I am just tired of paying for filler.

**Trackdriver** (2011-07-20):

I'm sorry for beeing unclear. When I said my collegues are listening to playlists only I didn't mean that playlist is a bad thing. What I ment is that they don't buy albums - only picking single songs from albums. I don't say that is bad either. I made mixed cassette tapes back then with my favourites and often with a theme though I prefer to listen to albums. Now, my point with the post was that they don't even listen to complete songs anymore so maybe you only have to release half finished tracks in the future

**klemen** (2011-07-20):

If it's of any help, I still buy albums (downloads and CDs) but refuse to pay more than 10$ per download/album. If some were cheaper I'd buy more, there's simply nochance I'd pay 21 eur (EMI shop) for an album.

That said, I still download some music illegaly, can't bother to go to the shop (and iTunes don't work here, except for apps and eMusic is pretty limited, I do have a subscription there though).

Never singles though. Albums or nothing. Old school.

btw, Beatles released almost two LPs per year, bands nowadays take 1.5 to 2.5 years between albums, which is simply too much.

k

**krell** (2011-07-20):

If a band can be bothered to release music on vinyl I'll more than likely buy it. Format is important. What possible value does a crappy mp3 have, really? If the music is good enough to produce then it's good enough to release properly.

**msouthard** (2011-07-20):

About 90% of the music I listen to is off of Bandcamp these days. If an artist has an album for free or for $1, I'll pick it up, and if I end up enjoying it, I'll pick up their entire catalog and make sure they get a fair amount of cash in return (C418, Ilkae, Kaneel, etc.)

Having said that, and also being an artist on Bandcamp, I didn't notice much of a difference at all in sales between having an album up for $5 vs one for pay what you want minimum $0. I'm sure I can choc it up to being relatively unknown. I like the idea of releasing smaller projects more often, and I think it might put a few more dollars in my pocket, but I also love albums and I feel more accomplished after finishing a complete work over 45 minutes.

**Jason Duerr** (2011-07-20):

Agree, the way to go is EP and singles with remixes. Albums will become more rare.

**cymatics** (2011-07-20):

I'm with Mr. Bitterness on this. At least, that completely echoes my thoughts on releasing my own music. I would love for word of mouth to be such that I'll upload my album and wake up the following morning and discover an overnight fanbase, a zamtillion pounds in my PayPal account and sex on tap, but...it's 2011, and I'm nobody. I enjoy writing music and am privileged to be able to afford the tools. This is an end of itself. Some hobby artist quietly putting up an album on bandcamp will likely achieve a level of sales equal to their fame, asking price regardless.

I'd rather fix an arbitrary but low price tag to my album. I'm currently favouring £3.50 - I'm a big believer in the importance of pricing, in terms of psychology. I think of 'free' in my mind as free = worthless. If it's worth having, it's worth some money. But £9.99? No, too much, I believe in it being cheap enough that people shouldn't have an excuse to pirate it. But, essentially, not so cheap that it doesn't look worth having.

I would say something against the Mark Beeson advice (of many small releases), is that from the perspective of some random person finding your music-purchase page, I think the benefit of the album is that people aren't faced with fifty releases and then having to try and wade through it all to perhaps find the one track they like. And when they have no reason to give anything less than a shit about you, who's going to bother doing that? You'll probably just no bother to listen to anything at all. The album gives a convenient package - "This is a whittled selection of my best music. This is it. Take it or leave it."

The problem is perceived value (lack thereof). Radiohead are worth $8 bucks to that guy because he knows he likes them. Random internet man? You're worth shit all.

But I think there are ways to increase perceived value. Unfortunately, seeing someone tweet "Dude! My album "The Zorgon Factor" is finally out! Please check it out and RT!" is the social media equivalent of the sound of a car driving past. It's background noise I don't pay attention to.

**shamann** (2011-07-20):

I'm happy if people mention they have something new out on Twitter, I'm less happy about people who retweet every single nice thing said about them on Twitter.

I was thinking more about small, frequent sales and the Benefactor group. I'd worry in that scenario that I might wear them out (which in my case is at most 20 people). Even with free material, I sometimes wonder if too much of it exhausts my audience, I know I've given up on trying to listen to everything put out by the most prolific of my favourite musicians.

**cymatics** (2011-07-20):

@shamann Yeah that's fair. A good example of when that goes wrong is Calvin Harris - I unfollowed him because he insists on RT'ing swathes of "ZOMG your single is teh breastest piece of music since Batehovan". Happy for him, but it's just noise after a certain point. And I have STILL not listened to the record in question, almost making a point of avoiding it now.

There is an excellent post at Music 3.0 on this exact subject (well, the pricing your music thing) - I may have to re-assess my £3.50 and just start selling some shirts: http://music3point0.blogspot.com/2011/07/when-your-music-should-be-free.html

...as well as another appropriately put up today: http://music3point0.blogspot.com/2011/07/why-free-is-so-misunderstood.html

**xmodz** (2011-07-20):

My thoughts are simple.

If your music makes sense as an album and you want to make it an album, then put out an album. Just make sure that it's good and you've thought it through by choosing an appropriate medium, etc.

If your music makes sense as a single, then do it that way.

If your music makes sense as an EP, then do that.

As long as you put some serious thought into how and why you release your music a certain way, then it's all good. Examine your audience and what they want/expect from you and plan accordingly for maximum returns both financially and in "artistic" satisfaction.

I also feel that getting paid a dollar for something is better than receiving nothing. If someone won't pay more than a dollar for something, chances are they would have never bought it at a higher price anyways so it's not a loss.

**meeglosh** (2011-07-21):

I prefer to take the macro perspective on the historical context of recorded music. Before recorded music was invented people gathered in salons or concert halls or caves and listened to extended performances. Then, once recorded music came into play, the limits of the format dictated that everyone was listening to the single or maxi-single format for about the first 50 years until the 10" and 12", 33rpm LP was introduced in 1949, and more widely adopted in 1950. The iPod and associated short attention span listening habits didn't come along until 2001, another 50 years later. What am I getting at? The album format is coming back according to these 50 year cycles; just another 39 years to go! Also, assuming Ray Kurzweil's singularity comes to pass, even all those crotchety classic rock loving "kids these days" types will still be around to appreciate the album format's triumphant return.

**boobs** (2011-07-21):

@afreshcupofjoe - i understand that for some people the most important thing in life is total convenience and they can't be arsed to spend a little time searching for things they like...

however, i don't really understand how it's somehow more convenient to download 20 albums and then weed through them to find the stuff you like than just to go to an artist's website/bandcamp etc and previewing tracks before you actually download them? the convenience argument is losing its steam with me because you can find music everywhere on the net.

my experience with music is that i generally have a hard time finding things i like. the last thing i want to do is download 20 albums from some torrent and listen to things i'll probably not like at all and then i'll just be bummed.

i'm so stoked when i find something that i like that i just can't wait to pay for it. it's a gift when i find something i'm into. i feel fortunate that something i like exists and if i have to shell out a whole $1, $5, $10, $15 for it then i consider that an amazing deal for me.

**BlueSpark** (2011-07-21):

I'm with boobs.

**BlueSpark** (2011-07-21):

If you like a song or album, you should pay its creator, or the stuff you like might disappear.

**neB** (2011-07-22):

I'm with boobs.

**meeglosh** (2011-07-22):

Next AI t-shirt run: "I'm with boobs"

**Downpressor** (2011-08-14):

>A commercial success for me is a release I didn't have to spend any of my own money to make. That's the 2011 version of the music industry.

is the money shot for me.

In my ~37 years of consciously consuming music, most of the "albums" I've come across were not coherent things but rather boxes of different songs. Most musicians making those dont seem to have an album in them throughout their careers. Thats OK. Some of the filler tracks stick with me.

That said, as far as singles vs albums, in my mind much of it has to do with they type of music. For some genres the box of music format works, for others not so much. Every genre I've ever worked in has been more about individual tracks and because of that I've never released any package of music with more than 5 tracks. I've never built up a reputation under one name to have different kinds of buyers but I think the classifications here probably made equal sense in the days before the iPod.