Jump to content

Deluxe/Special Edition Albums 54 members have voted

  1. 1. Should they be as 'new' - separate from the originals?

    • Yes
      9
    • No
      37
    • Don't know/care
      4

Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Featured Replies

Posted

Should they be considered as 'new' albums?

 

I only ask because in the Lady Gaga forum a thread describes Artpop as her *4th* album? :wacko:

 

IMO, if sales are combined for chart purposes, then they are effectively all one album!

  • Replies 19
  • Views 2.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

It's different when it comes to The Fame Monster as that was a new album/EP in most countries. In the UK, however, it was released as a special edition only with The Fame rather than a stand alone piece.

 

The vast majority of the time, I'd combine deluxe/special editions but occasionally circumstances like above arise and then my opinion would change.

Definitely depends on how it was released in the places/countries.

 

Personally, I'm more confused about sets (double disc/box/etc.) not combined (for example the latest JT albums) (I understand many of them though) than deluxe and special editions being combined with standard editions.

Edited by FM11

Deluxe or special editions are NOT new albums as such. They shouldn't be counted as new albums neither. They are purely reissues with additional material to the earlier issue.
They're not new albums and shouldn't be counted as such. In the UK, The Fame Monster is not a separate album so I hate it when it is discussed as such. People bang on about her 4th album which to us is her 3rd and yet go on about how amazingly her debut sold in the UK-but that was 2 albums to the same people. I consider Artpop to be her third album.
I agree that ArtPop will be GaGa's third album. I think that The Fame was the foundation for the Fame Monster so in the same way I don't class two story buildings as two separate buildings I don't class deluxe editions as separate albums, one leads on and is essential to the other in MOST cases.
We shouldn't consider them as that - labels may do if they want to cut an underperforming contract quickly. Five album deal? Nah, changed our mind, one album in five editions for you lot...
If it's only 4 or so new tracks then yes, it should be combined with the original, but as Liam said, The Fame Monster wasn't released with The Fame in every single country so it's kind of like a separate album anyway, and therefore I'd count it that way. Although, Justin Bieber's My World 2.0 was released with My World (1.0) here yet I'd count them both as one album...

Yes, they should be counted as a new album - though with a rider. If it's just one or two new tracks then that's fair enough on the grounds it hardly amounts to a "new" album. However if the extra material is a whole new set of tracks (for example, 5+ new tracks) and is enough to expand the re-release to an extra CD then it's a total rip-off to package it as a "deluxe" album. It's basically a new album with the old one attached to it.

 

The OCC only changed the rules on how Deluxe albums are treated regarding amalgamating sales with the original when album sales began to decline and this was seen as a way of artists expanding the life of a project. It's a basic rip-off for fans. It probably contributes to falling sales as most casual buyers who are aware of Deluxe versions being released some months down the line will hold back and will wait for the re-release (which is basically what a deluxe version is).

 

Years ago, the extra tracks would probably have been the B side of the CD singles of tracks released as singles from the original album.

It probably contributes to falling sales as most casual buyers who are aware of Deluxe versions being released some months down the line will hold back and will wait for the re-release (which is basically what a deluxe version is).

Good point, and it obviously doesn't help that the re-releases are more often than not released in the Christmas period.

Good point, and it obviously doesn't help that the re-releases are more often than not released in the Christmas period.
Indeed! There's nothing wrong with timing re-issues / deluxe versions in time for the Christmas period but it's the cynical nature of how fans are now routinely ripped-off due to the same album being reworked to attract twice the sale. It's what puts off most purchasers of albums in the first place. At the very least, it sends out a mixed message along the line of "buy the album now" when the album is first released and then a few months later "buy it again because there's a few extra tracks"...

 

The worst kind of these re-releases is when some of the new tracks are made 'album-only' on download sites so you're literally forced to buy the entire album again if you want all the new stuff. Looking at Ellie Goulding here.
The worst kind of these re-releases is when some of the new tracks are made 'album-only' on download sites so you're literally forced to buy the entire album again if you want all the new stuff. Looking at Ellie Goulding here.

And that's probably going to encourage illegal downloading which is something record companies and artists are stressing about recently.

We shouldn't consider them as that - labels may do if they want to cut an underperforming contract quickly. Five album deal? Nah, changed our mind, one album in five editions for you lot...

That's not how a five-album deal works though - it means the act are committed to the label for five albums and can't go elsewhere. Labels can - and do - drop acts at any stage.

Agreed. As soon as I started feeling like I'm being ripped off or taken advantage of I say to myself "f*ck it I'm downloading this illegally, instead".
  • Author
Agreed. As soon as I started feeling like I'm being ripped off or taken advantage of I say to myself "f*ck it I'm downloading this illegally, instead".

 

In other words, two wrongs make a right? :P

In other words, two wrongs make a right? :P

Don't tell me most of releases like that aren't just means to trick people into buying material they already own in order to be able to purchase new songs. I don't mind deluxe editions if they are available to buy from the start, separately from the original, but those special editions are sometimes just a plain rip-off.

 

WAIT FOR A FEW MORE MONTHS AND RELEASE A COMPLETELY NEW ALBUM BITCH

Agreed, Queenderella.
  • Author
Don't tell me most of releases like that aren't just means to trick people into buying material they already own in order to be able to purchase new songs. I don't mind deluxe editions if they are available to buy from the start, separately from the original, but those special editions are sometimes just a plain rip-off.

 

WAIT FOR A FEW MORE MONTHS AND RELEASE A COMPLETELY NEW ALBUM BITCH

 

As long as they allow cherry-picking of the new tracks, that's OK - but if the new tracks say 'album only', then they might as well say 'please pirate me'... :mellow:

Create an account or sign in to comment

Recently Browsing 0

  • No registered users viewing this page.