7:25 a.m. PT: The digital music player has enhanced the listening experience for consumers. We can download our favorite tunes for free in some cases, legally or illegally, and we can carry them everywhere in small, compact gadgets. We no longer have to trek to brick-and-mortar stores to buy music on compact disks. We don’t have to wait several days or weeks for CDs we ordered to arrive at our doorsteps.
The music: We want it how we want it, and we want it now. Instantaneous. And no shipping fees.
We’re modern-day hunters and gatherers, foraging through an abundant mass of products set loose by the Internet and rapidly changing technology. The abundance is almost decadent. As long as you have Internet access, you can find almost anything anywhere. And if you know where to look, you don’t even have to pay for it.
But how does this abundance look from the artist’s point of view? Every time someone downloads a copyright-protected song without permission, an artist’s and/or record label’s rights are violated. Every time someone opts to buy a single song instead of an entire album, the artist’s intended message may be lost in the process. That’s what rapper and producer Jermaine Dupri thinks.
An Album: A story with a beginning, middle, and end
I don’t know anything about Jermaine Dupri or his music. I probably wouldn’t like it if I listened to it. But he has a point.
Dupri, blogging for the Huffington Post, is complaining about the digital music store model, where users have the option of downloading individual songs instead of buying the complete album. He writes:
A good album is more than just a collection of singles…Every album is created for you to hear the next song, especially on rap albums. Rappers make intros on their records for a reason- they want you to listen it to set the mood and get ready for that second song.
I’m not saying that music can’t ever be sold as singles. Not every album is equal and consumers are always going to try to cherry pick the songs they like. But that doesn’t mean the people who[re] investing their time, money and sweat into a record shouldn’t have the right to decide how it’s gonna be sold, whether that’s in single units or as a whole.
Dupri claims that artists lose sales when fans download only singles. He wants artists to stick together against online music stores, which he says take “what we give them and [do] what they want with it.” If artists, producers, and record label execs rebelled against the iTunes model, then “those guys at Apple can either cooperate, or have nothing for people to buy and download on their iPods.”
I’ve heard artists talk about creating a “concept album,” where every song is bound together under an overarching theme. Dupri says the album American Gangster, on which he contributed, is a story with a beginning, middle, and end. I certainly understand their desire to sell a complete album, not just for the sake of money, but also for artistic integrity. I’d be upset, too, if I wrote a book and Amazon decided to sell individual chapters. That sounds ridiculous, right? But I guess music folks like Dupri feel the same about their albums.
Dupri is also right about sticking together. Perhaps online music stores would change the buy-the-single model if the music industry pushed for a change. But the horse is out of the barn. What’s the point in locking the door now? And how would online music store users react if the option to buy singles was gone?
Single Tracks: I understand, but…
If they feel they’re being used, artists like Jermaine Dupri should do something about it. His colleague Jay-Z refused to let iTunes sell only singles on American Gangster. Good for him. I dig the artistic integrity/money thing.
But I want the option to buy individual tracks.
For instance, when I hear a song on TV or in a movie that I like, I know I can hunt down the title and artist and download that song. I don’t want to buy the album that contains the song. Another example: I’m starting to expand my musical inventory. I listen to 30-second samples of songs by people I’ve never heard of. More often than not, I’ll download only one or two songs that appeal to me. Until I get to know the artist’s work, I choose not to download entire albums. Unless I can download them for free.
That’s just the nature of consuming. Why pay for the mediocre whole when we can get the excellent parts? The Internet has amplified this tendency. That’s why CD sales are down.
Is the behavior of an artist’s fans, hardcore or otherwise, any different from new music samplers? Most likely. Looking at my own behavior, I tend to buy an entire album if I’m familiar with the band. I do this to sort of help them out and because I know I’ll end up liking the majority of songs.
For example, I watched Hanson’s docu-series titled “Taking the Walk” (available as a free download on iTunes) about how the brothers made their latest album, The Walk. I didn’t consider myself a fan at the time, but I became one as I saw them labor over every song. They worked when they were tired, sick, frustrated…They changed lyrics, keys, rhythm – whatever they had to do to find the perfect lyrical hook or sound. They decided not to add certain songs to the album because those songs didn’t fit the message they were trying to convey.
I liked some songs more than others, but when I was ready to pull out the wallet, I didn’t think twice about buying the complete package. Seeing the process of making The Walk, as well as hearing most of the album’s songs, sold me on the whole.
Perhaps artists like Dupri and others who complain about the buy-the-single model can give consumers an incentive to buy albums. They can create a docu-series similar to Hanson’s or offer an exclusive sneak peak before the album goes on sale.
Then again, they already have the choice to not offer their music to online stores that sell individual tracks. It’s all about choices. Artist’s have theirs, and we have ours.
Do you agree with artists like Jermaine Dupri? (My answer is “Yes, but…”) Do you prefer having the option to buy individual tracks?
Critiques:
Related post:
{ 15 comments }
La Shawn,
On one hand I can understand Dupri’s point. But I can’t tell you how many times I’ve bought a CD and only liked 2 or 3 out of the 13 or 14 songs on the CD. If I preview an cd and I hear more songs that I dislike than like, then I’ll pass on buying the entire cd. On the flip side, if I hear only 2 songs that I like and have the option of buying just those songs, then I’ll buy them.
I think artists, especially rappers of all people, should be accomodating to what consumers want if we’re the ones that’re paying for their gi-normous cribs they live in and ridiculously priced cars they drive and empowering them to live the lifestyles they live.
Sure artists have their choices but we (consumers) have ours too. The “buying a book by the chapter” argument is an apples and oranges argument. In my opinion, consumers care less about an artist’s concepts and themes than they do about simply hearing music that’s appealing to their tastes.
Just my $0.02 worth.
Oh, I fully support the right of artists to offer their music for sale in whatever form or combination they want. I also fully support the right of people to shoot themselves in the foot if they so choose–and, if the artists persist in not offering what the consumer clearly wants, that’s exactly what they’ll be doing.
Consumers want what they want…and, as we’ve seen, in the case of music, if they can’t buy it legally, they’ll download it illegally. The entreaties of the record labels to not do so have largely fallen on deaf ears; what makes the artists think they’ll be any more successful in convincing the consumer that they really don’t want to have it “their way”?
Which is not to say that the artists don’t have a point. Some albums really do have to be appreciated as a whole, particularly “concept albums.” (Examples: The Who’s Tommy, Genesis’ The Lamb Lies Down On Broadway, Marillion’s Brave.) I’m just saying they’ll have an uphill battle trying to convince the modern consumer to see things their way…and stridently digging in their heels, as Dupri seems to want to do, is likely to backfire on them.
“Yes, but…”
I spend a lot of time and tons of sweat crafting the audio I do. When I’ve arranged something to have significance when heard in proper order, it’s very frustrating (to put it mildly) when someone listens to the middle and stops.
I do however, understand and support the right of people to have their favorite songs. Here’s where I fall: artists should release enough items suitable for individual listening to keep the fans happy. They should also have the right to release special recordings which can only be consumed as a whole unit.
Artists periodically release “event” level recordings in which they’ve done something that means a lot to them. These recordings should be sold that way.
NOW… if artists were releasing better quality music, collections in which it’s difficult to decide which single is better than the next, this would be much less of a problem.
I dug out Stanley Clarke’s “If This Bass Could Only Talk” CD a few days ago, and if a person doesn’t hear the whole thing, in order, you just can NOT appreciate what a fantastic collection of music it is.
Artists make a good point about downloads: many times musicians, writers, producers, get work down the line because someone read the “liner notes” on albums and noted a name. Within the music circle, a buzz happens and the musician, writer, producer, singer gets work down the line.
Dupree is right about losing money on single sales: the record deals are based upon full CDs/albums vs. singles. The Behind the Music show on T.L.C. broke the record deal costs down the best I’ve ever heard or read.
“Left Eye” said most new artists get deals where they “make” $0.04 – $0.06 (what happened to the cent sign and who remembers the symbol?) per CD they sell. The record companies “give” the artists money which is really a loan to make a CD/album. It’s with interest, then the record producers, musicians, and studios have to be paid from that. Musicians do late night studio sessions because that’s when the cheapest rates apply. So, when the record sales come in, the money goes to the record company FIRST, who takes their cut, with interest. The artists may NEVER see any money. So, the artists have to go on tour to make money, but then Uncle Sam takes about 40% off the top, then the state they reside, then they have to pay off everyone else before they see anything.
“Left Eye” said the year they sold millions of CDs, they only made $60,000.
The best explanations of what the artists are up against, in order, have been from T.L.C., New Edition just because their story is ALL of the errors people make, and Issac Hayes.
They should also have the right to release special recordings which can only be consumed as a whole unit.
They should (and those who have a good contract lawyer already do) have the right to release special recordings which can only be *sold* as a whole unit.
But you really can’t control how people enjoy your product. If they only want to hear the middle bit, they’ll only listen to the middle bit, even if you made them pay for the whole thing. As practical matter they’ll treat it like a real expensive single.
There’s nothing you can do about that, no matter how fancy your DRM schemes … the guy who only wants to listen halfway through is always gonna have the choice of turning off the stereo.
Just be thankful anyone’s listening at all.
Re: “real expensive singles”:
On iTunes “American Pie” is only available as part of an album. Is that due to issues of artistic integrity? Or is it just a way of applying premium pricing to the one grand-slam hit of an otherwise only moderately successful artist?
You know, I’ve seen songs on iTunes that are available only if you buy the whole album. It seems to me that iTunes and other online music stores do offer artists the option of keeping albums intact. More research required…
I appreciate the album as an entity, but a song is an entity too. And, as a consumer, I just can’t go along appreciating everyone’s album or I would be broke and have no time. I love being able to purchase a single 3 minute section of an album that I happen to like. True fans have the option of buying and appreciating the whole thing.
Before I buy an album/CD, I have to have heard at least 4 songs that I like. There are exceptions. Some exceptions are Teena Marie, Earth, Wind, & Fire, and Chuck Brown. Kirk Franklin is close to approaching exception status.
Ditto #3. Having both, promoting both, is fine. There’s no reason to ditch singles for “album only” format just as there’s no reason to entirely ditch albums for singles. The two have always co-existed, haven’t they?
Technology has changed the music business just as it has changed so many other businesses. It has given the consumer the ability to choose how he wants to purchase his entertainment. It is freedom from the corporate model. Those who do not adapt will be left behind. Rather then moan about how no money is made from single sales, rewrite your contract to reflect the new realities. If the artist wants to sell a work as a whole, hey thats the choice they make, but they need to realize that people will only take what they want from the album, and the technology exists to make it simple now. Get with it or get used to selling a whole lot less.
The book analogy is apples and oranges, unless it is a book of “related” short stories. So ask yourself, if people were buying only the stories they liked, and ignoring the book as whole would that bother you or anger you that they were ignoring your message? Or would you be happy people were at least listening to some of what you wanted to say and were willing to pay for it?
Me,I’d be happy.
I agree with DarkStar about there having to be a certain number of singles that I like on an entire CD before I will fork over the lettuce to buy it. DarkStar, we’re both Earth, Wind & Fire and Kirk Franklin fans. My husband bought a DVD of a Chicago/Earth, Wind & Fire concert that’s still SMOKIN’ HOT!! We never tire of watching it. Some music just transcends time no matter how many decades ago it was originally recorded.
I do buy singles through iTunes at .99 per song. I’m not sure what the breakdown is between the artist, the writer, and the recording company. I love this freedom inasmuch as I most likely will not love every single on an album even of someone that I’m most fond of. You have the option of downloading the entire album of that person for usually about $9.95 or so. I know it’s disheartening to the artists and all those involved on that end, but they’re going to have to realize that CDs are going the way of 8-track and cassette tapes. They’re simply becoming dated.
This is crazy talk. I read about this on http://WWW.GLOBALGRIND.COM and had to come check out more. Of course Jay-Z can sell a whole album, he’s the man and got one sick song after the next. But a lot of these new artists have only one song that you really want to hear, so why buy the cd for that one song. Dupri says people like him made mtv and bet and itunes. Actually, the fans made all of this. Without the fans, artists wouldn’t be selling anything. You’re still making money, way more money than you even know what to do with, as a result of your fans, so why go against what your fans want? It makes no sense!
I rarely buy the album and only listen on the radio. Hence, the radio stations and I are messing up the artists desire by picking and choosing certain songs anyway.
The theme or story of an album is always lost on me, even those that I buy. (Trans-Siberian Orchestra does have stories to their albums so they are an exception.)
For the poster that asked about the ¢ (cent symbol) you can make it a few different ways. If you are in Word you can select it from the “symbols” menu. Or you could memorize the keystrokes that will work when posting on blogs (as I did above) or in Word.
Hold the alt key and then pres the numbers (no spaces) 0162 in that order and you get ¢! Voila there are other symbols you can get as well the only other one I know is the one for degree (as in bake at 375º) and it is alt 0186
Comments on this entry are closed.