The life and death of the album

The life and death of the album

A reoccurring discussion is the life and the death of the album. It seems ever present - and generally the idea is that the album is dying a slow and pain full, and an expensive death - an example of this is Bob Lefsetz @ http://lefsetz.com/wordpress/index.php/page/4/ - more albums. And I must admit that I to a certain extent have to admit that the man is right. But only at a certain level. I think the concept of an album is dying, when the understanding of an album is one static size, be it a CD or a download from iTunes. We, the consumers, are interested in two tings, the easy consumable content aka the single or an insight in the artist life and doing, the process of creation, or the possibility to interact and be updated continually on the doings of the artists. We have two examples of this, and a bit of history. 

Two years ago, The Radiohead example where all the rave, everyone where extremely interested in they business model, and how it were going to go - it wasn't really that big a deal, looking back at it. Because today we have two examples of bands that have taken the idea, and putting depth on the concept. First of the most recent, Depeche Mode and their subscription based information - http://blog.wired.com/business/2009/02/apple-republic.html  this is brilliant - this will be the way people who are interesting in a artist will want their information from now on, when I were in my late teens, my approach to an artist where that, if i liked the artist, i Loved the artist, and wanted everything that the artist ever made, eg. i have some really rare marilyn manson and foo fighters singles today - but that were prior to the digital age, where everyone can get everything anytime free (and illegal) - the way to fight that is to make everything available to does who are ready to pay a small fee, in return you will get high bit rated and mastered content exclusively, when it is conceived. The other example i have is the (big surprise here) Nine inch nails case, Trent Reznor et al have really taken the digital possibilities seriously and are approaching mass digital marketing on a almost googlish fashion. Everything from different products (from free download to the mother of all boxes), incorporation Gerd Leonards Music Like Water Theory into their business model, with so big success that NIN were the most legally downloaded artist in 2008 @ amazon http://www.amazon.com/b/ref=amb_link_7866952_18?ie=UTF8&node=1240544011

The point here is that if your a band that's interested in making conceptual albumish experiences, don't fret, the albums may be dying, but the album experience will certainly live on. 

And I have to say that these two models will without any doubt be the models a lot of artist will incorporate in their strife for success in the years to come, the thing is, there are a big difference between the two models, and this is were you really have to listen up if your corporate music, Depeche Mode is signed to EMI and it is EMI that's is making the micro-subscription available, but NIN releases their own material and are not signed to any major label (http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/burn/nine-inch-nails-dumps-record-labels-going-direct-to-fans-308409.php), they release their content under the creative commons licencing and is doing all this with enormous success. So what is it that I am saying? I am saying - change to the better Majors, or be left behind, the movement has started and there is nothing to stop it. http://www.featuredartistscoalition.com/

Ps. I could talk about Madonna stopping @ majors, or how coldplay (another EMI band btw)  also have learned to harvest user interaction - but i have to go to work @ my corporate  job