Why don't they make them album only so their sales can be concentrated in 1 week to get a higher peak?like they did before downloads..didn't Ellie goulding do something like this with HLWILY?

The Saturdays are (apparently) doing this with Not Giving Up.

 

It means a higher peak I guess but surely it would get more sales by climbing up the charts, peaking and then falling back down as opposed to just debuting high and falling?

I think will.i.am may be doing this with 'Feelin' Myself' as that appears on the re-release apparently and I'm sure the re-release was late last year.

Let's not give the record labels ideas.

Wiley did it with Lights On too I think and that got Top 10. It seems a good idea if they want a high peak I guess.

I guess it depends whether they want sales/longevity or a high peak (I guess most record labels would prefer the former). But then Ellie Goulding has had both with How Long Will I Love You being held back and made album only.

more pointless manipulation, i'd rather this didn't become a common thing eventually

 

holding back 'How Long Will I Love You' was kinda pointless tbh, it was always gonna do well anyway

 

It's counter-productive imo! It may mean a lower peak, however a lot of sales would be cut out. Similar to when OA/OS songs are released.

It's sadly probably going to catch on after how well Ellie did from it - though the first major example of this was Wiley's 'Lights On'. I'd like to think it's not currently commonplace because record labels realise it's ridiculous manipulation but it's more likely that it's because they haven't figured out yet that it's ridiculous manipulation.

I'm assuming Ellie's was done because it was CIN. The Saturdays are just pretty desperate to get a (non) top 10 hit that is there for 1 week then is gone and their fans can celebrate.

It is manipulative and a bit of a ridiculous way of securing a hit but I feel that it might be something that has to be done. Post-album singles rarely take off now meaning that artists basically only have one or two hits each era. In many circumstances, the release of the post-album single flops and so album sales are affected as without a successful single, it drops awareness of the album. If radio or TV sees a single that is high on iTunes, they're more likely to support it and keep playing it, which in turn makes it more successful. Nowadays, the post-album singles are slowly rising but, most of the time, aren't given enough support to rise enough and it stops getting played as it only has a Top 40 or Top 30 peak. It's why there are so many re-releases now because artists can secure another hit but don't have to think about writing a full length album and it keeps their name out there. Also, it might mean less of radio playing the same old songs over and over again.

 

So yeah it's not an ideal situation but I think it might have to be used.

I guess they are more about sales than chart positions (chart positions mean little if sales are low or something).

I'm assuming Ellie's was done because it was CIN. The Saturdays are just pretty desperate to get a (non) top 10 hit that is there for 1 week then is gone and their fans can celebrate.

Yeah, I'm thinking the same way too. It was released in the same way as previous CIN singles.

If someone wants to own a particular song and only that song without buying an album, he will do it anyway, legally or not.

Record labels know that well and prefer getting money from that song instead of losing it. They are aware they wouldn't force anybody to buy the whole album...

Yeah when 'Lights On' was made album only there was no way in hell I was buying the full album, and there was no way I was waiting two months just to buy a song. :lol:

 

Tough shit Wiley. You lost a sale from me!

I think it makes the singles charts a bit more interesting. Before the download charts, post album singles use to be much bigger contenders than they are these days.

I think it makes the singles charts a bit more interesting. Before the download charts, post album singles use to be much bigger contenders than they are these days.

 

 

To me, that makes the chart less interesting

'How Long Will I Love You' is STILL unavailable to buy as an individual track from the 'Halcyon Days' album on iTunes, you can only buy it through the specific single version. That suggests to me that the reason they released it how they did was because there would've been a problem getting the royalties to Children in Need if it wasn't set up as a separate download, rather than it being a ploy to maximize the song's peak.

 

**

 

I'm not entirely sure I see the problem people in this thread are talking about, about post-album singles apparently being unable to become hits. Haven't we in the last few years seen two albums produce a record amount of top 10 hits ('18 Months' and 'Teenage Dream')? Pre-album singles have ALWAYS been more likely to become hits than post-album singles, not just because album sales drag them down but also because of the hype and pent-up anticipation that usually comes with the lead single for a project, but there has been about the same amount of post-album singles managing to become huge in the last few years as there was in the 90s/00s afaik.

more pointless manipulation, i'd rather this didn't become a common thing eventually

 

holding back 'How Long Will I Love You' was kinda pointless tbh, it was always gonna do well anyway

 

Totally agree - if anything it is going to encourage more people to stream/illegally rip songs rather than pay for them. One thing it won't do is increase sales, and it'll make the chart even more meaningless and less representative than it already is.

'How Long Will I Love You' is STILL unavailable to buy as an individual track from the 'Halcyon Days' album on iTunes, you can only buy it through the specific single version. That suggests to me that the reason they released it how they did was because there would've been a problem getting the royalties to Children in Need if it wasn't set up as a separate download, rather than it being a ploy to maximize the song's peak.

 

**

 

I'm not entirely sure I see the problem people in this thread are talking about, about post-album singles apparently being unable to become hits. Haven't we in the last few years seen two albums produce a record amount of top 10 hits ('18 Months' and 'Teenage Dream')? Pre-album singles have ALWAYS been more likely to become hits than post-album singles, not just because album sales drag them down but also because of the hype and pent-up anticipation that usually comes with the lead single for a project, but there has been about the same amount of post-album singles managing to become huge in the last few years as there was in the 90s/00s afaik.

 

I agree with the first paragraph, that actually does make a lot of sense.

 

But I completely disagree with the second point - it's MUCH harder for post-album singles to be hits these days compared to the 90s/early 00s.

I'm not entirely sure I see the problem people in this thread are talking about, about post-album singles apparently being unable to become hits. Haven't we in the last few years seen two albums produce a record amount of top 10 hits ('18 Months' and 'Teenage Dream')? Pre-album singles have ALWAYS been more likely to become hits than post-album singles, not just because album sales drag them down but also because of the hype and pent-up anticipation that usually comes with the lead single for a project, but there has been about the same amount of post-album singles managing to become huge in the last few years as there was in the 90s/00s afaik.

I'm thinking they are not referring to highly established acts, but to less popular ones. Some like the idea of making them available to purchase in a later date, a different but old-fashioned(ish) way to approach success sales-wise. Dunno, maybe they forgot there have been a good amount of post-album singles that did well.

 

But TBH, some tracks probably don't get the exposure/success they could have, that's when I kind of favour the idea of making them available to buy later. But the songs have to be good enough to do well anyways.

 

Or make the tracks 59p!