This post has got me thinking about the whole question of the continued role of the album. Received wisdom was that with the advent of streaming music we would go full circle; popular music started with just single songs, transitioned to the concept of the album but would now return to single song output and albums would become what they first were, in effect 'playlists' of singles. I'm not sure what the numbers say but I assume the number of albums bought continues to decline? Nonetheless it seems to be enduring as a form which in some ways is surprising and makes me wonder all sorts of things...
Do labels still demand albums of artists?
Why do bands go through the emotional labour of writing an album when recording and distribution economics suggest it's not necessary?
Are they still needed to market/promote a tour?
Are you not a proper artist/lightweight if you can't hack creating a 'proper' album?
Given most listeners cherry pick from albums, what's the point of creating 'filler' these days?
Should albums be created in an 'agile' fashion, put out a song or two get some feedback and then do some more ? Obviously there will always be a place for the concept album, but even there why not release in episodes a bit like Dickens did with his novels?
It strikes me that artistically there will always be a place for the album, and not just concept albums. Crawler by Idles that Coatigan alluded to earlier is ultimately just a collection songs could you not just collect them individually and stick them in an individual playlist (just like the first 'albums' which were interconnected blank sleeves to put a collection of songs in - the musical equivalent of a photo album) ? I think the answer is no, even though it's not a concept album there is merit in the songs being released together, there is a coherency to them that transcends the individual songs and you have to spend time with it to appreciate it. It demands more from the listener but I don't think that's a bad thing.
It is a very interesting discussion, and something I have been twerking with myself since more or less covid.
It is probably a two fold issue, what an album vs song or songs is to us as listeners, and what it is to artists. Taking the second one first. How much money can they make out of individual songs, how sustainable is it, how and when do they tour, what is their cycle, can they try different things etc. I imagine just writing songs and releasing them as they are done is both demanding and somewhat 'employment-like'. As opposed to having a set period of creative focus, releasing it, touring with it, getting the money off it, and then who knows. Maybe a break till the next one, maybe trying something else with others, maybe start working on the next one. Also has that conveying going through whatever they happen to be going through as a phase and an album sometimes documenting that. Individual songs I don't think have that, if you have to put them together yourself.
From a listening point of view, there has definitely been a shift towards more frequent songs (maybe to stay relevant), and even when there is an album coming out, feels like half of it has been released as songs by the time it is out. I struggle with that, myself. I have been avoiding it, sonthat by the time the album is out, I can listen to it all, and not feel like I'm skipping through what I've heard and not really fussed about what is left. I personally think that is pushed by the streaming platforms more than the artists, to ensure subscribers remain interested. It imo dilutes the interaction with music, which is already arguably suffering from the ease of skipping and the more at a glance culture we have slowly turned to.
I don't often listen to entire albums in a sitting. But I prefer them tere in that format, to collections of songs. I get why bands breaking through would do it, but must also come with a risk of having to rush songs to stay relevant, as opposed to taking the time till an album is ready.
What say the lables and contracts have in that, I have no idea.
