[ Olive Juice Music ]

The Olive Juice Music Store is always open!

what about what ben said? Posted by pablo das on 11/10/2009, 4:35 pm Message modified by user pablo das 11/10/2009, 4:35 pm Ben wrote: "Also, I don't think pop music is necessarily meant to be taken in the context of an album anymore. More than ever, in pop, single songs are advertised and sold, not albums." What about that? What is the significance of an 'album'? why do we still make them? why do ( I'll speak for myself) i still feel compelled to get 9 to 13 songs together and call it an album before putting it out? You can put up any number of files...from "ep" sized to singles to albums...and charge any amount of money for them. What about that? is it time to leave that old conditioning/ convention behind?  Post a Response

Re: what about what ben said? Posted by Bliss on 11/10/2009, 4:45 pm, in reply to "what about what ben said?" well--i don't know how to download songs and I have no ipod--so I need an album or cd and if I have to put in a different cd every two songs it's a lot of work. One thing we could do is only perform live and only listen to music live--you know-like it's been done for 99% of our history. PS Far out. It's 4:47pm and it's getting dark. No form of government is sustainable.--B.N.Bliss  Post a Response

Clarification Posted by Bee K on 11/10/2009, 4:54 pm, in reply to "Re: what about what ben said?" Message modified by user Bee K 11/10/2009, 4:55 pm Anders wrote that, I put it in italics and responded. I think the album is still incredibly significant. Even if the CD is going out of style, collections of songs are still created and released with artwork that ties them together, and often a unifying concept, mood and sequence. People who upload to illegally share with others on their blogs still write about the music in terms of the whole release, often including the artwork as part of the post. If anything, the single has returned, but it won't supplant the record. It's just back as a valid artistic and commercial strategy. If you're a one-hit wonder or just have one song you want to release, there is a market again. Those are some of my initial thoughts. I have more. But not now. "Power doesn't corrupt people, people corrupt power." - William Gaddis  Post a Response

Re: Clarification Posted by soce on 11/10/2009, 5:16 pm, in reply to "Clarification" The single/ep can work as a valid sales model. If you had enough fans clamouring for your music, you could certainly release it one new song at a time. I personally feel that the album works best for me. Each of my own albums has been a considerable amount of work and growth, and I wouldn't feel right just releasing an endless stream of singles without tying some together at some point with some sort of overriding theme. I'm blown away that there are some artists can release multiple new albums per year, all of very high quality.. I'm very slow at it myself. Certainly releasing full-blown albums with the artwork and such can be very expensive, and it's not easy to recoup those expenses, let alone turn a profit without lots of work-- It would be much cheaper to just sell mp3s online.. It just depends on how you plan to market yourself and how you feel about it all, why you are doing this in the first place etc etc behold...  Post a Response

Re: Clarification Posted by Anders on 11/10/2009, 5:41 pm, in reply to "Re: Clarification" Message modified by user Anders 11/10/2009, 6:07 pm I pretty much agree with Ben 100%. Though I stand by my original statement as well, but this in no way questions the validity of an album. Personally I prefer an album. "Pop" is the qualifier in my initial statement: "Also, I don't think pop music is necessarily meant to be taken in the context of an album anymore. More than ever, in pop, single songs are advertised and sold, not albums." The "mega star," or whatever, that used to sell millions upon millions of albums is being marketed in new ways. Now the principle stakeholders are trying to get quick money by selling millions of .mp3s (among other strategies). License this song to that television commercial and make it ubiquitous. Rise to the top on iTunes. One might make an argument that the album represents the independent artist more than ever. I'm not quite ready to take that stance, but I do think it makes sense for us to make albums. In any case, both approaches are viable. I've never messed with the music store on MySpace or anything, but I suppose more independent artists are experiencing selling single songs even if those songs were conceived for an album. In this culture, Barry represents the minority as far as downloading and listening to portable .mp3 players. There has been a lot of talk (maybe it's already "had been") about a rise in live performance as the principle way musicians would make money while a new paradigm would slowly emerge to replace record sales in the "Internet age." So far it appears that licensing has seen more action than live performance, but performing live is certainly my favorite. I especially appreciate Soce's point: "Each of my own albums has been a considerable amount of work and growth, and I wouldn't feel right just releasing an endless stream of singles without tying some together at some point with some sort of overriding theme." P r o c e s s . . . . . and g r o w t h ! what else ?  Post a Response

Re: Clarification Posted by isaacgillespie on 11/12/2009, 5:45 pm, in reply to "Re: Clarification" I'll play devil's advocate! The Album is a holdover from a time when the only way you could sell/present/create things was in a physical form. The internet allows for new and exciting (albeit so far non-commercial) ways of presenting music to the masses. Does this mean that albums are a bad thing? Hell no, I love albums! But they are big and expensive beasts and you can't always afford to make one. Moreover, sorry folks but the era of making a living by selling albums is over and done with (or at the very least, on it's last legs). But I do think the new frontier is alive and exciting. And I'm not talking about iTunes or mp3 downloads. As far as I can tell, all that stuff is just still steeped in the old (Album-y) way of doing things and suffers from __ the worst of both worlds. The future of music (and all content, really) will be streaming online in the "cloud". Soon enough you won't download anything, you'll just stream it. I mean, really, we're already there. If I want to hear a pop hit, I don't even bother illegally download it, I just look it up on youtube where somebody has most likely already illegally uploaded it for free streaming. As that becomes more prevalent, the Album will become less important. And the thing that goes out the window will be canonicity. The thing that an album does really well is to encapsulate the way a group of people are feeling in a certain place at a certain time. Because an album is a discrete statement, but in a big way. It tries to tell the story of an era by presenting the definitive versions of the definitive songs. It's big and it's expensive. The future is about songs being made quickly and cheaply. You write something in the morning, record it on GarageBand in the afternoon and it's streaming on your blog in the evening. So it's smaller and more immediate. Also more malleable because you can put a different version of the same song up in a week that reflects a new point of view. Which dovetails nicely with what Barry said: "One thing we could do is only perform live and only listen to music live--you know-like it's been done for 99% of our history." The Album is really the anomaly, historically. Web-streaming music that's constantly evolving and interacting with different musicians reflects the way music actually lives in the real world  Post a Response

Re: Clarification Posted by pablo das on 11/12/2009, 6:26 pm, in reply to "Re: Clarification" Message modified by user pablo das 11/12/2009, 6:27 pm quoted from earlier "The future is about songs being made quickly and cheaply. You write something in the morning, record it on GarageBand in the afternoon and it's streaming on your blog in the evening. So it's smaller and more immediate. Also more malleable because you can put a different version of the same song up in a week that reflects a new point of view." I actually quite love this idea. Feels so liberating. What are we liberated from? The tyranny of the album concept which i find sometimes to be a false and limiting concept. Very few people write the songs with any intention of them living together on an album but rather look outside the songs for some sort of justification for the fact that we as dynamic beings are trying to force a through line. Often perfectly good songs are left of a record because of these weird mental formations that are ultimately empty. I appreciate them being tied together in many ways :an era" a 'concept" but they dont have to. I like the idea of songs living by themselves...valid in and of their own right. I didnt know this until i wrote this. these to are empty mental formations. P  Post a Response

Ummm....not quite. Posted by Bee K on 11/12/2009, 11:57 pm, in reply to "Re: Clarification" Message modified by user Bee K 11/13/2009, 12:00 am Sorry, I disagree with you, Isaac. And I think the Boss, Roger Waters, Scott Miller, Joni Mitchell, John Coltrane, Wagner, De La Soul and many others are (or would be) with me on this. You're confusing the album as a sellable product with the album as an artistic statement. No one is arguing that the physical form will be here forever. But for hundreds of years, long before there was ever a reason to sell a product, there were operas, symphonies, masses, song-cycles (Schubert, anyone?). The album, conceptual albums in particular, were the first time that pop music began to take on a form that resembled a well-established approach to making musical statements on a grand scale. The product didn't make the art form. Pablo: What are we liberated from? The tyranny of the album concept which i find sometimes to be a false and limiting concept. If you're including me in the "we," I don't feel weighed down my the album concept at all. I actually find the album to be the liberating idea. Very few people write the songs with any intention of them living together on an album but rather look outside the songs for some sort of justification for the fact that we as dynamic beings are trying to force a through line. Consider me one of the "very few people." Even though I write a song one, at a time, I can often step back and see how material ties together in ways that I never realized. Piecing together certain selections, I can produce something that stabs at a larger theme. The final whole is often greater than the sum of the parts. Often perfectly good songs are left of a record because of these weird mental formations that are ultimately empty. You're free to just release singles, which is the great part of this new era of online downloading and streaming. But if you're suggesting that the idea of an album is an empty mental formation, then I assume that you feel the idea of isolated songs is a full mental formation? If so, explain. I appreciate them being tied together in many ways :an era" a 'concept" but they dont have to. I like the idea of songs living by themselves...valid in and of their own right. I can list thousands of songs that are valid in their own right but also valid as part of a collection. The idea of a collecting of individual pieces of art to form a larger statement dates back way before the record and transcends mediums: photographers, painters, songwriters, poets, dancers...this idea isn't going anywhere. It will manifest itself in the new mediums as well, and in ways that we can't predict. "Power doesn't corrupt people, people corrupt power." - William Gaddis  Post a Response

Re: Ummm....not quite. Posted by soce on 11/13/2009, 1:29 am, in reply to "Ummm....not quite." In general, the only time I've written songs and then not included them on albums are pretty much when I don't feel that they are my very best songs, or that they don't get across the message I hope to showcase. Often I'm pleased with a song, but I don't feel it really fits on an album.. Maybe it's too much of a downer, or it just never got a great response at my live shows (and I didn't trust in it enough on my own to feel that it would do well when listened to in private).. Some songs are just way too personal, and difficult to enjoy upon repeated listens. I think my own albums work best when they are collection of fun and entertaining songs that are easy to listen to. Now some may be sad or scary, but nothing that's super out there. I realize that some people prefer making wild songs that make little sense.. Basically you have to format it the way that you feel most comfortable. behold...  Post a Response

Re: Ummm....not quite. Posted by pablo das on 11/13/2009, 1:18 pm, in reply to "Ummm....not quite." Interesting how do you find the album liberating? when you say 'Consider me one of the "very few people." Even though I write a song one, at a time, I can often step back and see how material ties together in ways that I never realized. Piecing together certain selections, I can produce something that stabs at a larger theme. The final whole is often greater than the sum of the parts." You're kinda agreeing with me. To see how material ties together after you write it is not the same as writing it with the intention that it fit together. Also I guess what i'm saying is why does it have to "fit together" the only reason it would need to fit together is because of the desire ( a convention we're conditioned with) to create an album. I think it's a beautiful and valid thing to see the through line. Totally worth doing. I'm doing it now. bUt I also see the through line from Testosterone kIlls to what i'm doing now. So then all of the sudden we're considering a "catalog' and not an album and not a song. this is what I mean by "empty' mental constructs. They're conventions. not any more substantial than any other concept one could develop ( including the concept of "song" or "single") except that more people through conditioning and reinforcement of the convention recognize it. I'm curious about what it would be like to challenge these conventions is all i'm saying. To be aware of them and play with them. Free myself from them. Could be I discover that they are there for good reason. maybe/maybe not. Your last argument reminds me of the anti gay marriage argument...'it's always been this way" so we justify not moving forward or critical analysis because of tradition. this is really an uncompelling argument. We're fuc king americans! And new yorkers at that! We blaze trails and set standards! wE're always on the forefront! i love you too, hunny! ( i do!)  Post a Response

Re: Ummm....not quite. Posted by isaacgillespie on 11/13/2009, 3:06 pm, in reply to "Re: Ummm....not quite." Yeah! That's right! ####ing Americans! Land of the Free, Home of the Brave Mother####er! But seriously, I agree. I'm not downing on the album, it's an awesome form. But there's no reason to stop there! Ben: "But for hundreds of years, long before there was ever a reason to sell a product, there were operas, symphonies, masses, song-cycles" You don't think operas, symphonies, masses & song cycles evolved in response to the conditions around them? To be a successful artist, you need to create something in a way that people are going to respond to. I think the album is a really awesome way of bringing musical and artistic ideas together, but it's not the ultimate. I just think there's a lot of exciting formal possibilities that are opening up because of the new ways people use media and it's a shame to miss out on that. Brian Speaker's song-a-day, for example, could never have been achieved if he needed to press a cd every week. I mean, he could have written it, but he wouldn't have gotten to share it but for this digital world we're living in. Soon and very soon we're gonna see more exciting and cool shit like that project, methinks. And those sorts of things will capture our attention more immediately than a "CD Release Party" and rightly so.  Post a Response

     «Back to thread