Apple's "Cocktail" may spur whole album sales in iTunes

12346»

Comments

  • Reply 101 of 118
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,231member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by m2002brian View Post


    In fact when your playing music (in the ipod app) you either get the album artwork (cover only) or a generic music symbol. IF you swipe left2right you go back into the library. Why not be able to swipe up and down for album artwork (lyrics also) and if none at least a spectrum analyzer or something besides a stupid music symbol. They could add interactive content right into the artwork.



    I agree with most people here. I'm not going to pay for the songs I don't listen to. It seems the record labels are trying hard to stay in the past. Maybe because the future won't need them.



    Some time ago, I bought an app from the App Store from The Presidents of the United States. It has art work, the music can be streamed. New work comes into the program from time to time. Music and writing that never made it into their albums is available etc.



    Pretty nice. If "Cocktail" is similar to what this is, it will be very good indeed. I don't know if it will be though.



    The company that did this has done a lot of others. If you don't like streaming, then you won't like it, but otherwise, the $2.99 is a real bargain:



    http://www.nutsie.com/iphone
  • Reply 102 of 118
    asciiascii Posts: 5,941member
    Who the heck has time to sit around and listen to an entire album? It is not a few extras that will bring that back, but a climate of intellectual snobbery. And that kind of climate, if it ever does come back, will be in rich times not lean.
  • Reply 103 of 118
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,231member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ascii View Post


    Who the heck has time to sit around and listen to an entire album? It is not a few extras that will bring that back, but a climate of intellectual snobbery. And that kind of climate, if it ever does come back, will be in rich times not lean.



    I prefer to listen to an entire album. I don't always do it, but I usually do. I listen to classical and jazz as well. You pretty much are required to listen to an album all the way through with much of that. Operas as well. At least one Act at a time.



    I don't understand the not having the time these days.



    We still have 24 hours in the day as I recall. I doubt that people are any busier these days then they were in the past. Some will never have time for entertainment, but that's their problem, and doesn't affect most people.



    The problem is with attention span. People aren't willing to organize their time to allow this.
  • Reply 104 of 118
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by melgross View Post


    I would be very curious as to what exactly is meant by "album" there. When I was involved with the industry, as recently as 5 years ago, there was no more than a very small fraction of that number of albums released.



    I wonder if they're talking about self released albums as well. That would account for why so few actually sold over 1,000 copies in the first year (or ever).



    Also, a very large of albums released are not "new", but re-releases.



    When I consider the numbers, I'm thinking about new releases (new material, or old material that was re-recorded), and albums that were released by real commercial, or public financed entities, not someone who made a vanity recording because they couldn't get a contract.



    Well as MissionGrey realised in post 95 when he checked Amazon US http://www.amazon.com/s/qid=12487270...0090727&page=1 8870 commercial albums were released in the last 30 days, which if it is a representative 30 days works out at 106,440 over a year which is remarkably similar to the figure I quoted earlier.



    Yes, some will be re-releases, but so what? Many of them will not have been previously available on CD and will be 'new' to many people. I recently bought The Flying Lizards 'Fourth Wall' album from iTunes. It was originally released in 1981 and hasn't been available for over 25 years. Apart from the 7" single 'Hands2Take' which I have all but worn out, the album is completely new to me and will be to many who buy it.



    As I said earlier that Wiki list is laughable, a quick comparison with Amazon shows numerous mainstream albums missing from it. The source I quoted appear to know what they are talking about and this would in fact tally with the much smaller number of releases you experienced 5 years ago when only around 25% of the current number were released.



    Quote:

    According to Nielsen Soundscan, a total of 105,000, new full-length albums were released in 2008, a fourfold gain from the earlier 2000s.



    Quote:

    Nielsen SoundScan is an information system that tracks sales of music and music video products throughout the United States and Canada. Sales data from point-of-sale cash registers is collected weekly from over 14,000 retail, mass merchant and non-traditional (on-line stores, venues, etc.) outlets. Weekly data is compiled and made available every Wednesday. Nielsen SoundScan is the sales source for the Billboard music charts.



    I too prefer to listen to an entire album, and you are right in saying that almost everyone has the time, if they choose, to do so. I no longer read as many novels as I used to, not because my time has got shorter but because I now spend more of my free time on my iMac or watching TV or DVDs; none of which I had when I was an avid reader.



    Speaking of novels, a thought has occurred to me. I wonder if those who believe they have a right to buy individual tracks, and to hell with the artists intention, also believe that we should be able to buy individual chapters from novels or specific scenes from movies?
  • Reply 105 of 118
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,231member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Stephenbw View Post


    Well as MissionGrey realised in post 95 when he checked Amazon US http://www.amazon.com/s/qid=12487270...0090727&page=1 8870 commercial albums were released in the last 30 days, which if it is a representative 30 days works out at 106,440 over a year which is remarkably similar to the figure I quoted earlier.



    Yes, some will be re-releases, but so what? Many of them will not have been previously available on CD and will be 'new' to many people. I recently bought The Flying Lizards 'Fourth Wall' album from iTunes. It was originally released in 1981 and hasn't been available for over 25 years. Apart from the 7" single 'Hands2Take' which I have all but worn out, the album is completely new to me and will be to many who buy it.



    As I said earlier that Wiki list is laughable, a quick comparison with Amazon shows numerous mainstream albums missing from it. The source I quoted appear to know what they are talking about and this would in fact tally with the much smaller number of releases you experienced 5 years ago when only around 25% of the current number were released.











    I too prefer to listen to an entire album, and you are right in saying that almost everyone has the time, if they choose, to do so. I no longer read as many novels as I used to, not because my time has got shorter but because I now spend more of my free time on my iMac or watching TV or DVDs; none of which I had when I was an avid reader.



    Speaking of novels, a thought has occurred to me. I wonder if those who believe they have a right to buy individual tracks, and to hell with the artists intention, also believe that we should be able to buy individual chapters from novels or specific scenes from movies?



    If these are all commercial releases, then it's amazing. I would guess that a large percentage are re-releases though.



    Even so, it's difficult to imagine that many releases in one year. The number has certainly shot up recently.



    To what end I wonder? You don't make money on albums that sell less than 1,000, even if they are old, out of copyright works with old artwork, as I suspect much of this is.
  • Reply 106 of 118
    trajectorytrajectory Posts: 647member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Stephenbw View Post


    Speaking of novels, a thought has occurred to me. I wonder if those who believe they have a right to buy individual tracks, and to hell with the artists intention, also believe that we should be able to buy individual chapters from novels or specific scenes from movies?



    When was the last time you bought a single song from an album and, upon listening to it, the song made no sense at all because you couldn't hear it in context with the other tracks?



    I always buy entire albums from my favorite artists, because I trust their talent and ability to produce more than just one or two catchy hits. But that is an exception. Most of the time I will get 2-3 songs from an album because I just don't like the rest. It all comes down to personal taste.



    Besides, artists who want to force everyone to buy their entire album do have that option in the iTunes Store with "Album Only" songs.
  • Reply 107 of 118
    mazzymazzy Posts: 53member
    Does Tubular Bells Part One cost .99 on iTunes? And it's only half of a song!
  • Reply 108 of 118
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Trajectory View Post


    When was the last time you bought a single song from an album and, upon listening to it, the song made no sense at all because you couldn't hear it in context with the other tracks?



    I always buy entire albums from my favorite artists, because I trust their talent and ability to produce more than just one or two catchy hits. But that is an exception. Most of the time I will get 2-3 songs from an album because I just don't like the rest. It all comes down to personal taste.



    Besides, artists who want to force everyone to buy their entire album do have that option in the iTunes Store with "Album Only" songs.



    Never, because I only buy single songs that are or were released as 'singles'.



    However I can think of many albums that whilst individual tracks may appear to 'make sense' alone, together with the other tracks on the album the effect of the whole is far greater than the sum of its parts. Lou Reed's Berlin, Iggy Pop's Avenue B, Kate Bush's Aerial, The Art of Noise's Seduction of Claude Debussy spring to mind as albums that only work satisfactorily as complete albums as do many albums by Brian Eno, Davids Bowie & Sylvian, Yello, Holger Czukay, Janet Jackson, Sparks, Michael Nyman, Paul Simon, Donna Summer, The Pet Shop Boys, Johnny Cash, Leonard Cohen, Joni Mitchell and Prince; to name a few.



    Nobody has ever been 'forced' to buy an entire album, you always have a choice. It is my understanding that the 'Album Only' tracks on iTunes are primarily down to the length of the track
  • Reply 109 of 118
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mazzy View Post


    Does Tubular Bells Part One cost .99 on iTunes? And it's only half of a song!



    it is 26 minutes long so is an 'Album Only' track.



    And on that note I'm off to bed
  • Reply 110 of 118
    mazzymazzy Posts: 53member
    I think it should be up to the artist & label whether they wish to sell their "product" on a per song or per album basis. Yes there are some releases that should be a full album intact in my opinion however why don't they then encourage you to buy it by charge 5 or 6 bucks total for the full album. If fact keep single songs at .99 or 1.29 and charge $6. for the album. That would give you more incentive to upgrade.



    I am old enough to remember paying 88 or 99 cents for 45 singles. Albums at that time were 2.99 or 3.99 and NOT ten times the cost of a single. Granted there were two sides but the B sides in many cases were throw away tracks UNTIL Penny Lane and Strawberry Fields forever. Probably one of the first double A side singles. Although they did have many others: We Can work it Out/Day Tripper, Rain/Paperback Rider and so on.
  • Reply 111 of 118
    Plz, Apple, dont make me buy the entire iPod product line just to get a Nano.





    There are very few that should come in album form, like Pink Floyd The Wall, Cibo Matto Viva La Woman, Aimee Mann The Forgotten Arm or musicals and operas.
  • Reply 112 of 118
    virgil-tb2virgil-tb2 Posts: 1,416member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Trajectory View Post


    ... Finding an album where nearly every single song is good is an exception, not the norm. ...



    I keep hearing this sentiment but it makes no sense to me.



    Almost no musician or group puts out more than one album a year, usually less than one a year. If said artist is so lame that they cannot even put together ten good songs in a whole YEAR, then they just aren't that good.



    So, if an album *doesn't* have at least ten good songs on it (i.e.- it's all good or the majority is good), then why should I listen to it at all? The group is obviously shite if they can't even do that. I think the whole idea that a group or a musician is "so good" that they have a song worth buying, but are somehow not good enough to write a whole album in a year or mores' time is just bull.



    Most of my town's local bands can put out an entire album and it's all "good" in the context of their work if you happen to like their work. How can even a bar band ever get a gig if they can't play at least ten good songs? Even if they are covers they have to be good or they'd never get hired.



    I think this is true of almost any band that has any real talent. The only bands I can think of or ever heard of that can't are popular "acts" like Britney or Madonna and some of the more trashy rap stuff and that ain't "art" at all, that's just commercialism.



    If someone doesn't like a band enough to listen to more than one of their songs, how can they say that they even like or appreciate their music? How can anyone can like only one song from a band but not like the rest of their stuff, unless you either have no appreciation for music at all or unless the band is actually shite and your "like" equates to "it makes me tap my foot."
  • Reply 113 of 118
    gregalexandergregalexander Posts: 1,399member
    Well, I'm glad they're looking at different ways of packaging music.



    We don't need to be restricted to the new way (singles) or old way - 10-15 songs in a specific order with some cover art and perhaps other add-ins like Lyrics. The idea of opening a mosaic of information, lyrics, web links, & songs is interesting.



    I personally used to buy an album if I liked 3 songs on it - now I'd just buy the 3 songs. I was surprised when songs came out at $1 each, I'd expected songs to be $3.50 each or $9 for the album (as an example).



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Abster2core View Post


    The way I took it immediately after reading the article was that "Cocktail" as the name implied was not the typical hard copy of a current album with a few digital ad-ons.



    What I assumed was that is was a custom digital remaster that one could personally create, e.g., song selection(s), cover art, lyrics, artists' bios, recording history, etc., but not necessarily having to buy all the songs in the 'original' album at once. But, of course, the option to 'complete' it at will anytime in the future.



    Interesting thought!



    I wonder if we could "package" a cocktail ourselves and send it to others, for them to then fill in the blanks buy paying for applicable songs.



    The other areas I can see some scope in is Music Videos. Why not giveaway the music video to anyone who buys an album? Or when someone loads a CD into iTunes offer a very small upgrade fee to get the music videos? Within the "cocktail idea"
  • Reply 114 of 118
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mazzy View Post


    I think it should be up to the artist & label whether they wish to sell their "product" on a per song or per album basis. Yes there are some releases that should be a full album intact in my opinion however why don't they then encourage you to buy it by charge 5 or 6 bucks total for the full album. If fact keep single songs at .99 or 1.29 and charge $6. for the album. That would give you more incentive to upgrade.



    I am old enough to remember paying 88 or 99 cents for 45 singles. Albums at that time were 2.99 or 3.99 and NOT ten times the cost of a single. Granted there were two sides but the B sides in many cases were throw away tracks UNTIL Penny Lane and Strawberry Fields forever. Probably one of the first double A side singles. Although they did have many others: We Can work it Out/Day Tripper, Rain/Paperback Rider and so on.



    I agree that it should be up to the artist as to how their art is packaged and sold, and then it is up to us whether or not we choose to buy it.



    But if you were paying 3.99 for an album in 1967 why do you think you should only be charged 5.99 now? Have wages and prices in the US only increased by 50% in the intervening 42 years?



    Here in the UK, £3.99 was 25% of my weekly income back in 1974, today £7.99; the cost of an iTunes album, is less than 2%, and I often find it even cheaper to buy the CD from Amazon.
  • Reply 115 of 118
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,231member
    The inflation calculator is a very useful web page. It goes through 2008 now, but shortly after 2009 is finished, it will be updated to include it:



    http://www.westegg.com/inflation/
  • Reply 116 of 118
    Thanks for the inflation calculator, it is very interesting to see that $3.99 in 1967 = $25.46 in 2008.



    Even more interesting is that in the UK £3.99 in 1967 is a staggering £54.76 today. So paying £8.98 for a new cd is even more of a bargain than I thought



    http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/histori...ion-calculator
  • Reply 117 of 118
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,231member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Stephenbw View Post


    Thanks for the inflation calculator, it is very interesting to see that $3.99 in 1967 = $25.46 in 2008.



    Even more interesting is that in the UK £3.99 in 1967 is a staggering £54.76 today. So paying £8.98 for a new cd is even more of a bargain than I thought



    http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/histori...ion-calculator



    People don't realize how much of an effect inflation really has. They also don't realize how much of a bargain many thing are today, especially music.
  • Reply 118 of 118
    Quote:

    Wizard69 said: Sadly I think this is BS. It may have had some significance when albums actually had more than one good song on them but that day has long past. Frankly I don't think musicians & song writers have the intelligences and social connectedness to produce good works to fill an album. Certainly not what would be considered mainstream artist.



    Part of this is that the cult of the band has really died. Groups don't stay together long enough to develop a strong following for one. More so though is that I believe society no longer idealizes band members knowing that they really don't desreve to be put on a pedstal anymore than the next guy. I mean really how many people would want their kids to be the next Rap singer, Brittany Spears or any of the other countless fabrications. At this point all you really see in the modern day bands is greed and disfunction. People like their music but the are also aware that the industry has become a money game and has lost it's soul.



    Wow. Thanks for the most ignorant comment I've ever seen. Do you see how one single example (your bitter experience) does NOT imply the same for the whole population? You must have failed math over and over in school, not to mention this shows how little common sense you have.



    Did someone in the music industry ruin your life? Are you a failed musician?



    And what does "living in the past" have anything to do with the topic? Just felt like you should add that in there to show that guy how his experience is BS? If anyone is living in the past it is you, who fails to find new music. You should be a politician, they are good at arguing without the use of logic.
Sign In or Register to comment.