I've read some debate about Ellie Goulding's Halcyon Days being a rip off because of how expensive it as and how the 10 extra tracks could have been a separate album.

 

This practice is nothing new but are you more likely to wait for a re-release of an album by someone who is not perhaps your favourite, who is also likely to be re-releasing the album in Q4 because of how frequently it happens nowadays? - I understand wanting to have material by your favourite artist as soon as possible.

 

I have to say - I probably am.

Edited February 1, 201411 yr by AnthonyT

I am leaning more and more towards waiting now; even if there is no "deluxe" ripoff, albums can be found for a considerable discount not that long after release.

For me it depends on the material. For example, I love the cohesiveness of 'Halcyon' and 'Bad Blood' in their original forms and was happy buying them in the knowledge that there may well be re-releases later on, because both sounded great as whole albums as they were. As it happened I was never really interested in getting their extended versions due to the material (also, I find more than 12/13 songs hard to listen to). With albums I like less as whole bodies of work, I might hold off for Q4 re-releases, but then I'll probably end up skipping loads of tracks and not treating them as 'albums'. I guess I'm a traditionalist in liking albums as their own entities and not collections of singles/random songs, and therefore re-releases just confuse things for me :P

I wouldn't say Halcyon Days is expensive at all, it's 12.99 for the deluxe in HMV, same as any other deluxe album is. :P

 

I never wait for re-released albums, not gonna let that prevent me from enjoying the original album at all. If it gets re-released with a couple of extra tracks, I'll just wait for that version to be reduced. Was happy enough buying the re-release of Halcyon though, it's 10 new tracks which make it more worth it IMO.

I wouldn't say Halcyon Days is expensive at all, it's 12.99 for the deluxe in HMV, same as any other deluxe album is. :P

 

I never wait for re-released albums, not gonna let that prevent me from enjoying the original album at all. If it gets re-released with a couple of extra tracks, I'll just wait for that version to be reduced. Was happy enough buying the re-release of Halcyon though, it's 10 new tracks which make it more worth it IMO.

£13 is expensive if you have already bought the original version.

Funnily enough I did wait until the re-released deluxe version until I bought Ellie's first album - I would say for me it depends on how much I like the artist. Usually I will buy the album soon after it is released if I love the artist, however if I just merely like them or the singles then I am happy to wait over a year to get the album and a deluxe edition with bonus/extra tracks for a bargain price is usually all the incentive I need..

It really depends. If I can really tell that an artist will release a deluxe version, I will wait. If I am really excited for an album, I will get it almost immediately. Normally, I don't buy albums immediately and get them when they're around £7 but if I hear any hint of a deluxe version, I will normally wait.

If I buy the original, I tend to cherry-pick the tracks from a subsequent deluxe version.

I always wait as I wouldn't spend even 10 pounds on an album unless I am seriously crazy about it which doesn't happen too often.

I only really buy albums these days if I'm like a diehard fan of the artist or I just want it that much, which equates to probably only a few times a year.

 

If I don't already own the album, a re-release with more tracks will probably make me more inclined to buy it. In the case of what Gaga did with The Fame Monster and Ke$ha with Cannibal, I just 'obtained' the new songs. I would have bought them if they were released as a seperate album/EP or something but to buy it again just seemed a ludicrous idea to me...

£13 is expensive if you have already bought the original version.

You are paying like £2 more than you would have if Halcyon Days had been sold on its own. What horror.

 

Stuff like HD, Fame Monster and Cannibal are the sort of re-releases that should be acclaimed. At least they don't add 3 live versions of old singles and ask you to pay full price again.

One of the problems I have with them is that they are often (but not always) full of out-takes and rejects from the main album anyway.

You are paying like £2 more than you would have if Halcyon Days had been sold on its own. What horror.

 

Stuff like HD, Fame Monster and Cannibal are the sort of re-releases that should be acclaimed. At least they don't add 3 live versions of old singles and ask you to pay full price again.

But why not just release the new material as a separate album at the standard price?

But why not just release the new material as a separate album at the standard price?

Because that defeats the purpose of a re-release.

Because that defeats the purpose of a re-release.

Which is to make money.

Which is to make money.

 

Isn't that the purpose of a normal album anyway though? :unsure: Obviously the artist might not be in it for that reason but the record company most certainly is.

Which is to make money.

Not just that.

The main purpose of a re-release is to make money from boosting album sales, making the album look more successful and therefore helping the artist to get more support. The re-release will contain tracks that, normally, aren't strong enough to justify an album by itself. Also, in many cases, the more albums an artist releases, the less support they get and so re-releases help to counteract this problem by looking like they've produced less and therefore making them look 'fresher'.

 

Another purpose is also to keep the artists name out there.

The main purpose of a re-release is to make money from boosting album sales, making the album look more successful and therefore helping the artist to get more support. The re-release will contain tracks that, normally, aren't strong enough to justify an album by itself. Also, in many cases, the more albums an artist releases, the less support they get and so re-releases help to counteract this problem by looking like they've produced less and therefore making them look 'fresher'.

 

Another purpose is also to keep the artists name out there.

 

hear hear. In the olden days, these bonus tracks used to be called "B Sides" and they were the main reason you bought the single if you were a fan and already had the album track. No reason they can't be bundled 2 together (like the Pet Shop Boys do) and sold along with a remixed or edited version of an album track for £2. Proper value for money, proper loving your fanbase, and the singles get higher chart positions so push the album anyway.

 

8 tracks for a tenner (or more) is more than they cost to download individually, it's just being greedy. If they were of a high enough standard they would form an album of their own.....

 

My rule is: once an artist releases a bonus version I stop buying the albums because I've lost trust they won't do it again. Want a bonus version? Release it the same day as the regular version. Consumer has a choice and it's not a rip-off.... B-)

In general i have started to wait for the re-releases as i feel i get better value but with artists that i am a big fan of like Kylie for example i buy the album straight away. Another trend i have found myself doing in the last 2 years is not buying releases straight away as for a while i was getting tired of paying full price for only a few months later see the album selling for half price. With money being so tight and i do buy a lot of music i feel i get better value for money by holding out for a while. Gary Barlow was the only new album i have purchased recently and paid full price for.