Considering judgements of value are completely subjective any arguments relating to the quality of particular songs or albums are essentially a wast of time. I have my opinions and you have yours.GiantRaven said:Then your claims go unsubstantiated and what you say can be disregarded entirely because you can't back up what you're saying.Ken Sapp said:No I don't as I am not here to change your opinion.
There is value to what you're saying and I agree, bands should be allowed to complete an album at their leisure to get everything sounding perfect but once you start labelling this applicable to all albums that are released (which you did, stating that 'Most of an album has been crap filler with 1-3 maybe even five good tracks for at least twenty years') then you begin to make large claims that you really need to substantiate. This, of course, is completely impossible so it begs the question as to why you needed to make such a huge blanket statement in the first place.Ken Sapp said:Considering judgements of value are completely subjective any arguments relating to the quality of particular songs or albums are essentially a wast of time. I have my opinions and you have yours.
On the point I made of bands being expected to push out albums at an unrealistic rate, artistic endeavors can not be forced to conform to a timetable however when a new artist signs on with a record label the contract has a time table saying they will produce X number of albums in X amount of time. New artists do not generally have the clout to be able to change much in contract negotiation. Since they are bound by contract to get that next album out or lose their contract they will often have to include material which is either not finished to their satisfaction or use songs written by label songwriters they may have never met which will result in music which doesn't feel the same because it wasn't written by the same people.
Considering the lack of digital distribution, that is no surprise. However, nowadays we are not forced to buy an entire album just to get one or two songs that we are looking for.tigermilk said:Nope, back in the late 90's and early 00's my 1200 or so albums were all on CD. I have often wondered though about how a whole generation of people will consume music in the fragmented fashion the OP mentions.
Because it is generally true. If you walk up to random person in a record store(do they still have those? I haven't been to a mall in a while) and ask them why they are purchasing an album most will name the 1-5 songs off the album that they want.GiantRaven said:Ken Sapp said:Considering judgements of value are completely subjective any arguments relating to the quality of particular songs or albums are essentially a wast of time. I have my opinions and you have yours.
On the point I made of bands being expected to push out albums at an unrealistic rate, artistic endeavors can not be forced to conform to a timetable however when a new artist signs on with a record label the contract has a time table saying they will produce X number of albums in X amount of time. New artists do not generally have the clout to be able to change much in contract negotiation. Since they are bound by contract to get that next album out or lose their contract they will often have to include material which is either not finished to their satisfaction or use songs written by label songwriters they may have never met which will result in music which doesn't feel the same because it wasn't written by the same people.
There is value to what you're saying and I agree, bands should be allowed to complete an album at their leisure to get everything sounding perfect but once you start labelling this applicable to all albums that are released (which you did, stating that 'Most of an album has been crap filler with 1-3 maybe even five good tracks for at least twenty years') then you begin to make large claims that you really need to substantiate. This, of course, is completely impossible so it begs the question as to why you needed to make such a huge blanket statement in the first place.
I suppose I'm just part of a dying breed of music consumer. That makes me sad.Ken Sapp said:Because it is generally true. If you walk up to random person in a record store(do they still have those? I haven't been to a mall in a while) and ask them why they are purchasing an album most will name the 1-5 songs off the album that they want.
I make blanket statements because I am speaking in generalities which are mostly true. There are exceptions to every generality but the exceptions do not make the generality untrue.
Huzzah! I do love me a good concept album.macfluffers said:I don't think that we should be called a "dying breed". There's just fewer of us. But there will always be a section of consumers who like a full product, and appreciate an album as a full work of art that is greater than the sum of its parts.
Also, people selling disks at concerts and whatnot don't sell them by the song, so there's that. Aaaaaand artists will be making concept albums until the end of time, and even people who usually only pick their favorites from an album should be able to appreciate those.