Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Heron TSG]

I have heard a lot of bands, and I have heard a lot of good songs. It's only rarely that I find an entire album that I like. Do all the tracks have to be related to each other? Any of them? Do all the songs have to be good, or does it only take a few to carry the album? Do a couple terrible songs make the album bad?

For an example, The Best of Rockers 'N' Ballads is an album by Scorpions, and it contains a song you've almost certainly heard before, Rock You Like a Hurricane. That there is a great song. There are a couple other good ones on the album, but I wouldn't just sit down and listen to the whole thing straight through. King Kobra put out an album called Ready to Strike that has a whole bunch of songs that are neither bad nor exceptional (Shake Up, Tough Guys, etc), plus a few memorable ones. (Ready to Strike, Hunger)

On a different note, you have albums that are meant to be listened to together. Concept albums can all be about one theme. I can't name any off the top of my head, but I've heard of such a thing. Rhapsody of Fire has two story arcs across 11 albums. Each song is required (or at least recommended) to get a full understanding of the story, but there are ups and downs in quality. During Rain of a Thousand Flames, you have a vast gap between the excellent Queen of the Dark Horizons and the somewhat forgettable Elnor's Magic Valley.

As I see it, there are two reasons songs are still sold by the album, instead of by the song.

1. It's easier to sell the mediocre songs alongside the great ones and still profit off of them.
2. As in the latter example, the songs are related in some way and it makes it convenient to put them together.

Thoughts?

[Zrk2]

That sounds accurate. Where exactly do you want to go with this thread?

[Heron TSG]

Forward, of course. It would be impossible to go backwards. I would like to hear the opinions of others on the value of album sales as an institution as compared to selling songs as singles. I would like to hear about albums that are good based on something other than their individual parts. I would like to hear whatever you have to say in this topic. Even your concurrence is news to me, which makes the thread worthwhile. A lack of discussion is almost as informative as a discussion in some cases.

[penguinofhonor]

I was just thinking about this listening to the Who the other day. I feel like if there's one thing they're great at, it's album structure. Tommy, The Who Sell Out, and so on. That kind of unity and album pacing just isn't something you see anymore.

I think it's because we've stopped using records, which are a lot more difficult to skip around with or randomize. People don't want to be forced to listen to the same band for 40 minutes, which I think is reasonable, but the trade-off of that is songs being optimized for being played alone.

[Zrk2]

Especially with pop music it seems that (and my bias is showing here) that they are designed to be catchy, and draw sales, but not actually quality music. It seems to me that music is no longer about being music, or appreciating the art, and is instead intended as a background for socialization. Maybe music was always like that, I don't know, but that's what seems to be going on as far as I can tell.

[Svarte Troner]

When I rarely buy music, I buy it as a collector; I want to read through the little booklets and look at the album art art and marvel at all the other little goodies they sometimes put in there depending on what you buy. ^{_{And of course listen to the music...}} I mean come on, who buys a single song except for the musically oblivious 8th grader? And who releases singles anyway besides shitty pop musicians.

Pretentiousness aside, I wouldn't buy an album if it had more than a few downright bad songs on it. So far I've only bought albums I can enjoy all the way through.

[Bdthemag]

I usually prefer albums that are meant to all be listened together, and usually have an over-arcing story or feeling you could only understand if you listen to the entire album. Good examples of this are albums like The Wall (Pink Floyd.), 2112 (Rush), or anything from Godspeed You! Black Emperor. I get more interested in an album if I actually have to pay attention to the lyrics and tone of the songs to understand what's going on.

[lordcooper]

I pretty much treat listening to music as two separate activities.

There is passive listening, which takes place alongside other activities such as walking, cleaning, gaming etc.  I'll just stick my ipod on shuffle for this.  Then there is active listening, which is when I turn off the light, light up a joint, crack out the vinyl and immerse.  That is the point when I appreciate a proper album or symphony.  Pink Floyd and Hawkwind are probably the best example of bands that put out consistently great albums IMO.

[Heron TSG]

It seems to me that music is no longer about being music, or appreciating the art, and is instead intended as a background for socialization. Maybe music was always like that, I don't know, but that's what seems to be going on as far as I can tell.

I'm picking up what you're putting down. I have three main playlists. #1 is for playing while I'm talking with friends or something, and it tends to be less in-your-face stuff. Herb Alpert and the Tijuana Brass, Kansas, etc. #2 is for when I'm actually paying attention to the music, generally when I'm hanging out by myself. There's a bit of multitasking, maybe reading or gaming. That's where most of my favorite music comes in, mainly because I don't like splitting my attention between listening to lyrics and other people. #3 is for when I'm actively listening to the music. This being my running playlist, there's a lot of montage music, plus some songs that keep my attention. (There isn't much else to do while running but listen and run faster.)

NINJA EDIT:

I pretty much treat listening to music as two separate activities.

There is passive listening, which takes place alongside other activities such as walking, cleaning, gaming etc.  I'll just stick my ipod on shuffle for this. Then there is active listening

This is exactly what I'm getting at. I'm more of a fan of 'album' music when I'm really paying attention to it, but when I'm just listening to music in the background to stave off the silence of my dorm, anything goes.

[Svarte Troner]

I pretty much treat listening to music as two separate activities.

There is passive listening, which takes place alongside other activities such as walking, cleaning, gaming etc.  I'll just stick my ipod on shuffle for this.  Then there is active listening, which is when I turn off the light, light up a joint, crack out the vinyl and immerse.  That is the point when I appreciate a proper album or symphony.  Pink Floyd and Hawkwind are probably the best example of bands that put out consistently great albums IMO.

2nded, minus the joint (although If I had any friends who smoked I'd probably be in the same boat). I find that this is how I discover if an album's good or not. I might download and listen to something while playing a game or something and pass it off. Then some time later I'll listen to it again while in the car or doing mindless chores at work and think it's fantastic. Come to think of it, I do the majority of my "serious" listening while in the car.

[fqllve]

Unless I'm just messing around on youtube the way I normally listen to music is to sit down with an album and listen to it all the way through. Mostly because it's kind of a hassle to sit there and pick which song you want to listen to next, I guess you can do shuffle, but a good album, even if it's not a concept album, is going to have a cohesive feeling that you just aren't going to get like that. I'm not sure that it's that whole albums aren't given attention anymore, because I can name a few good modern albums (anything by Andrew Bird, Elliott Smith, or Aesop Rock is gonna be really solid, if not excellent), or if it's just that I don't listen to modern music much. But musicians like The Beatles, Hendrix, Bob Dylan, Bert Jansch, and especially King Crimson all put out consistently solid albums, with few, if any, weak tracks.

I think my ideal album is varied, yet still working towards and over-arching theme. The best way to describe it is hearing the musician approach a musical idea from several different styles. King Crimon's first album (what I would rank as possibly the best concept album of all time) is a great example of this. It goes through a few folk-inspired styles, from Ian MacDonald basically just on his flute to the proto-metal of 21st Century Schizoid Man, but not only do the all retain the English folk influences, but they all, not just lyrically, build to a culmination of despair and resignation at society. It makes listening to the same band for a whole album interesting without being repetitive while still making you feel like the album accomplished something. I think, probably as a consequence of the way I listen to music, that repetitive song-writing is the worst thing a band can do, nothing will make me stop listening faster.

There are exceptions though. Dylan's Blood on the Tracks is played in two keys, Open D and Open E, and yet the album's songwriting greatly surpasses those limitations so that every song feels distinct while not really actually being so. But not everyone can write like that, and in anyone else's hands it would have turned out one of the most boring albums ever.

[Zrk2]

I must say, I really enjoyed Dead Silence, by Billy Talent, even if it is REALLY preachy at times. Rocks like all hell, though.

[DarkWolfXV]

A lot of albums have only really 3 great songs, and rest are meh, but they are solid, decent, nothing great or special about them, but they keep the flow and fit there, that is what makes album good. However, a great album is made mostly of great songs, it becomes great. And to me, there are few factors outside of the songs here. Track placement, album artwork, lyric booklet. I only buy albums that are great all the way, or almost all the way.

[anzki4]

I mainly listen to music actively - ie. listening the music is the main thing - mainly during walks or nights just before going to sleep. Sometimes when listening to music as background noise, I just have to stop it, because I feel I don't appreciate it enough that way. If I don't focus on the music, I just miss most of it so why bother?

The album has to work as a whole. Of course I have from few bands just a few songs I like and I listen them from time to time, but most often, when I listen to music, I listen the whole album on one sitting/walk. I've never really cared for physical album, booklet and whatnot.

[Jimmy]

I'm a fan of Radiohead and they're notorious for this. Especially for their earlier albums, the songs are best when listening to the entire work from start to finish, not just individual songs. I'm even a fan of some of their live performances for this same reason, which is unusual for me since I'm not usually a live music fan.