IMO, now that singles are over their mid-noughties slump, record companies are sacrificing the album market.

 

They know that their only chance of #1 singles is to release them *before* the parent album, due to cherry-picking - however, this results in lost sales to piracy due to fans being unwilling to wait for delayed releases. Also, if you release your best singles before the album, there is then very little incentive to buy the whole album, so people are even more likely to cherry-pick the remainder!

 

If not for the lucrative Xmas market, I get the feeling that some record companies, especially those with lots of urban artists, would prefer not to have to release albums at all...

 

 

This is a bit tricky because it's impossible to be a successful and most of all INTERESTING artist without album. Taio Cruz for example will never sell out arena tours because nobody cares about him as a personality.

 

Now it seems that acts have to choose whether have successful singles or a successful album and tend to choose singles. Not all can choose though. Also, seems that media has become more singles driven.

 

Just my thoughts

I've always thought the UK albums market has suffered purely because of cherry picking becoming the norm for purchasing music online. Back in 2004/2005 there was no such thing as cherry picking because the ditigtal market was relatively new. As it's grown over the last 3 years (particularly from 2007 onwards) we've seen pretty much the demise of the album.

 

These days it's all about individual tracks making the official "singles" chart - it's now the public who virtually decide the singles. Ie; 'Love The Way You Lie' wasn't confirmed as a single but enough people bought it after 'Recovery' was released to send it top 10 and stay there for 14 weeks. This is also a far better example than say 'I Gotta Feeling' or 'Poker Face' as people would've already heard of those two tracks as they had already become successful in other countries. 'LTWYL' pretty much exploded at the same time all over the world including America.

iTunes should stop cherry-picking from happening by making album tracks ALBUM ONLY.

 

Then again they shouldn't as we would of had to wait forever for Love The Way You Lie to be released and it wouldn't of sold as much.

 

Not all albums are suffering - look at Eminem and Lady GaGa, both singles artists with high album sales!

The album has been decline for number of years it's just been more foreseen in 2008 to present. Only established acts will gain sales as they have a standard fanbase. Like someone said, Taio Cruz hasn't had a top 10 album despite two huge #1 singles. Taio Cruz doesn't seem to have a personality which can sell albums or arenas. He has a stale stature.

 

On another note, people are saving money and hardly anyone wants to buy an album which seven pounds or so especially for an artist they are not a fan or they do not who that person is.

On another note, people are saving money and hardly anyone wants to buy an album which seven pounds or so especially for an artist they are not a fan or they do not who that person is.

 

I think this is the point. Debut albums tend to start slow and sell when people get to know the artist a bit better. Then for X Factor acts for example it's totally different - their careers have peaked before they even release their debut albums or soon after.

 

Also people have learned that singles driven pop acts don't really focus on albums any more. If you have heard the single, you've heard the best part (Sugababes).

 

True stars will always focus on their albums and people will buy them (Eminem, Gaga, Madonna, Robbie Williams, rock acts like Metallica, AC/DC, Bon Jovi etc). Rihanna could do that too if she didn't release a new album every 6 months. Take a break girl!

Now it's also easier to buy only the single..Just a couple of clicks

 

You don't have to go to the shop where the album is next to the single and is a more tempting physical product.

It's partly a question of visibility. A few years ago your average HMV would devote a whole wall and some other space to promote albums as well as the general shelves with the older stock. Now a large part of that wall is occupied by computer games and DVDs. Once part of the remaining space is taken up by albums already in the chart there is not much room left to promote new albums. Therefore, unless you are a member of a site like this - and most music buyers are not - t's easy to miss an album.

 

Take a specific example. One Night Only released an album recently. I couldn't find it in either of my local HMVs - either in the promotions area or on the main shelves. It still made the chart but even the following week - when it should have taken its proper place according to its chart position - there was no sign of it. Therefore, many people who might have bought the album could even now not be aware that it exists.

It's still albums that build careers. It's not as fickle as the singles market, which seems to live off one or two hit wonders and shuns acts once they approach "veteran" status - especially if they're from the more alternative spectrum. So the likes of Taio Cruz should be worried that he can't sell an album to save his life, though it gives me a great source of amusement :lol: If he carries on relying on singles then the fact is he isn't going to last much longer IMHO. I mean, god, even the Vengaboys had one album going double platinum!

 

As for the declining album sales, I would agree that cherry-picking has caused big problems for the more "poppier" acts. I think the lessening impact of the more alternative kind of acts getting any leeway on the singles chart is also a factor - and that leads to the albums market becoming more "fan-based built" with artists debuting high and then dropping quickly because they've had little to no exposure for their singles. Of course the really big acts don't even need hit singles to sell albums.

Considering the sales figures, I wouldn't say such.

Rihanna could do that too if she didn't release a new album every 6 months. Take a break girl!

 

...but by doing so, she's still keeping herself in the public domain and therefore is still successful - one of the best examples of recent (by this I mean in the last 5 years) acts who have grown in status and the fanbase has increased by constantly releasing singles/yearly albums.

 

Anyways, The Beatles worked hard throughout the 60s and they also released new albums roughly a year (give or take a couple of months) apart. Didn't do them any harm, it surely did the opposite and boosted their popularity.

 

These days an artist only needs go be out of the music scene for 12 months and they're forgotton about and upon returning nobody is interested.

Agree, I don't like it when they take 3 years on a damn album. How hard can it be to write 12 songs and publish it, surely doesn't take 3 years.

Agree, I don't like it when they take 3 years on a damn album. How hard can it be to write 12 songs and publish it, surely doesn't take 3 years.

Because for a large part of that time they are touring to promote the current album. That doesn't leave too much time to write new material. And don't think it's just a case of writing 12 songs. They'll write more than that before discarding some as not good enough.

Agree, I don't like it when they take 3 years on a damn album. How hard can it be to write 12 songs and publish it, surely doesn't take 3 years.

 

Even worse is when they take 2/3 years to write/record a new album and their comeback single is average/crap. Never a good sign (although that can be at the fault of the record company).

Because for a large part of that time they are touring to promote the current album. That doesn't leave too much time to write new material. And don't think it's just a case of writing 12 songs. They'll write more than that before discarding some as not good enough.

I know it takes a lot of effort, Ke$ha's took over 100 songs to be filtered, but surely an album grows old after a while. I already have problems WITH a year sometimes, I guess I'm impatient :P

 

Even worse is when they take 2/3 years to write/record a new album and their comeback single is average/crap. Never a good sign.

Exactly :P I mean for instance where is Winehouse? It's taken 4 years now and we're yet a damn track.

Edited October 27, 201014 yr by Mason

Rihanna could do that too if she didn't release a new album every 6 months. Take a break girl!

 

 

Well she releases 6 singles per album why bother buy her album, most tracks are also found on spotify, as you can listen to an album before you buy it, think this where the albums are getting killed off, you listen to an album, and than you think, nah not going to buy that now, I've heard it.

Exactly :P I mean for instance where is Winehouse? It's taken 4 years now and we're yet a damn track.

 

They tried to make her go to rehab and she said "yeah, alright then". :P

 

Is Amy even recording tracks for her new album? I read an article about Mark Ronson on the BBC News website a few months back saying he'd love to get back with Amy and record new tracks together.

I'm glad that the download market has brought cherrypicking. But what I'm curious about: why do record companies continue to allow this, instead of insisting on bundling the songs together as an album, as they used to do? (In the US, before the download era, they had virtually stopped making singles at all.)

 

Somewhere I read that Kid Rock's "All Summer Long" was *not* available for single download in the US, in order to force people to buy the album. So apparently it's possible to withhold singles from (legal) download. I wonder why this is not done more often (and fear that it will be).

 

They know that their only chance of #1 singles is to release them *before* the parent album, due to cherry-picking - however, this results in lost sales to piracy due to fans being unwilling to wait for delayed releases.

For a simultaneous solution to both these problems: see my long post from two months or so ago.

Somewhere I read that Kid Rock's "All Summer Long" was *not* available for single download in the US, in order to force people to buy the album. So apparently it's possible to withhold singles from (legal) download. I wonder why this is not done more often (and fear that it will be).

 

Because people will simply download the song illegally.

 

I personally don't think that album sales have fallen because of cherrypicking - I think its more to do with people being able to hear albums in full (via Spotify, or some other medium online) before buying and deciding whether on the basis of what they hear whether it would be better to buy the whole album, or just the tracks that they like..

 

This is surely a good thing - people are simply being more selective rather than buying it 'just in case it's good'.

iTunes should stop cherry-picking from happening by making album tracks ALBUM ONLY.

 

It's not something they could do unilaterally though, as they'd lose tons of custom to other sites that still permitted it. Also, there's a far more significant issue that'd arise - that of piracy. If people can't get tracks legally when they want them, a good proportion will not be prepared to wait.

 

Then again they shouldn't as we would of had to wait forever for Love The Way You Lie to be released and it wouldn't of sold as much.

 

Not all albums are suffering - look at Eminem and Lady GaGa, both singles artists with high album sales!

 

I don't think late reease would have too negative an effect on *really* popular tracks, but might well affect less prominent ones far more badly.