As many of you know, I'm a big fan of the Lefsetz letter. In a recent post of his, he condemned albums and endorsed the idea of just releasing singles (you can read the post here). However, if you know me well, you know that I hate singles. I need a whole album to listen to, in the order that it is in. So I wrote him back. This is my message with a few extra pieces thrown in after the fact. Let's get some discussion going on this one, okay?
------
Most of what you say I can jump on board with. Not this.
Yes, an album will lose traction faster than a string of singles. Yes, an album will cost more. And yes, artists like Katy Perry have proven the value of the single.
But music is more than just the numbers. Music is art.
The photographer, when featured in a gallery, will be showing a series of photographs that convey an idea or message; not a single photograph that "says it all." They wouldn't think of showing one piece at a time, because the art is the entire project. It is within that project that you are able to see the subtleties between images. In order to keep you coming back, you would need a series of images that all punched you in the face, getting your attention.
Releasing singles is the business of releasing hits. Sure, we all want to write hits. But the idea of a hit is that it's its own idea - stand alone. Seldom are hits dealing with developing thoughts that stand alone.
You can't have much of a well developed thought in music in 3 minutes just as 3 minutes often isn't sufficient time to develop your side of an argument. A good hook and catchy melody are really all you need for a single. If you want to be thought-provoking, to develop dynamic, and to tell more of a story than a headline, you need an album.
You've also seen to overlook the fact that you can release a single off of an album. An album can be full of singles, but the entire entity is so much deeper than the individual songs that it is comprised of.
Singles are great. They are a great way to reach out to new fans. YES! But a single wants to be part of something bigger artistically.
Look at other art. The wall in your house could be a really pretty shade of blue. However, strokes of different paints are what make paintings. It takes a lot more to create a museum quality painting than to come up with the color of paint that will be used to paint the museum's walls.
I realize that this is a dying way of thinking, but I still feel that there is a lot more merit to releasing an album. A lot of the problem is that proportionally fewer and fewer good albums are being released. There is an excess of really crappy music being released - singles and albums alike. It floods the market, overwhelms the senses, and makes it difficult to make time for an entire album.
Rather than discouraging people from writing albums, I'd much quicker just tell people to give up if they can't make good music. Whether their way of conveying their art is in using singles or writing albums, there is a time and a place for each.
-Alex
alexbrubakerguitar.com
------
Most of what you say I can jump on board with. Not this.
Yes, an album will lose traction faster than a string of singles. Yes, an album will cost more. And yes, artists like Katy Perry have proven the value of the single.
But music is more than just the numbers. Music is art.
The photographer, when featured in a gallery, will be showing a series of photographs that convey an idea or message; not a single photograph that "says it all." They wouldn't think of showing one piece at a time, because the art is the entire project. It is within that project that you are able to see the subtleties between images. In order to keep you coming back, you would need a series of images that all punched you in the face, getting your attention.
Releasing singles is the business of releasing hits. Sure, we all want to write hits. But the idea of a hit is that it's its own idea - stand alone. Seldom are hits dealing with developing thoughts that stand alone.
You can't have much of a well developed thought in music in 3 minutes just as 3 minutes often isn't sufficient time to develop your side of an argument. A good hook and catchy melody are really all you need for a single. If you want to be thought-provoking, to develop dynamic, and to tell more of a story than a headline, you need an album.
You've also seen to overlook the fact that you can release a single off of an album. An album can be full of singles, but the entire entity is so much deeper than the individual songs that it is comprised of.
Singles are great. They are a great way to reach out to new fans. YES! But a single wants to be part of something bigger artistically.
Look at other art. The wall in your house could be a really pretty shade of blue. However, strokes of different paints are what make paintings. It takes a lot more to create a museum quality painting than to come up with the color of paint that will be used to paint the museum's walls.
I realize that this is a dying way of thinking, but I still feel that there is a lot more merit to releasing an album. A lot of the problem is that proportionally fewer and fewer good albums are being released. There is an excess of really crappy music being released - singles and albums alike. It floods the market, overwhelms the senses, and makes it difficult to make time for an entire album.
Rather than discouraging people from writing albums, I'd much quicker just tell people to give up if they can't make good music. Whether their way of conveying their art is in using singles or writing albums, there is a time and a place for each.
-Alex
alexbrubakerguitar.com