• On The Insider: Robert Downey Jr Injured on the Set
January 18, 2008 4:23 AM PST

The Album is Dead...

Posted by Mark Cuban
  • Font size
  • Print

There once was a time when the release date of an album was exciting. For our favorite artists we knew when the last album came out and when the next album was due. If you loved the artist you bought it. If you didn't you either bought the single or you listened to the album with your friends and then decided.

As the price of records and then CDs increased year by year, spending 20 bucks for a CD became a purchase you needed to be sure of rather than a no brainer or impulse buy.

Then free became an option.

Then aggregating almost unlimited free music on a PC and then an IPOD became easy.

So here we are in 2008 and the only given in the music industry is that CD sales have and will fall. And fall. And fall.

Reading last weeks billboard, something interesting popped out at me. The song Low Rider by Flo Rida sold 467,000 units in a single week. There were 27 digital singles that sold more than 100k units in that week. The obvious trend continues that people are ready, willing and able to buy singles of songs they like.

So the question arises, why don't artists serialize the release of songs ? Why not create a "season" of release of songs, much like the fall TV season and promise fans that Flo Rida is going to release a new single every week or 2 weeks for the next 10 weeks ?

Sure, its not easy to come up with a great song every 2 weeks. But isn't that exactly the same problem you have with an album ? Maybe thats not the "creative process" for certain artists. That's a problem for them.

What we do know is that music fans will spend 99c and that its easier to ask them for 99c a week than it is to get 9.99 at one time from them for 10 songs.

Serializing the release of music also allows for the marketing arms to be in constant touch with sales and radio outlets. Rather than having to initiate marketing plans and hope to reinvigorate the interest in an artist, it becomes a digital tour that never ends.

If an artist commits to release music on a weekly or bi weekly basis, then consumers can make a commitment knowing they are going to get something new and hopefully exciting for their 99c. If the commitment is strong enough its feasible that artists could sell subscriptions to their serialized releases. My guess is that consumers will feel better about subscribing to an artist and getting a song a week or every 2 than dropping 10 dollars at a time for an album.

In reality thats exactly how I buy my music right now. I dont do it by artist. I go to iTunes and I go through the top 10 lists and listen to samples and thats how I determine what music I'm going to buy.

If there was an option when I bought a single to subscribe to an RSS feed that would send me a sample of that artists song when they released a single, I would add that RSS feed to my browser. Add a 1 click to buy, and chances are I'm going to buy a lot more music.

Is this idea so great I'm going to start a music label ? No chance. I wouldn't get in the music industry if you paid me. However, as a customer and a buyer of music, if I knew that my favorite artists were releasing music weekly, I would certainly check by every week or listen to what was in my RSS aggregator to see what new stuff they had for me.

Consumser are buying music 1 track at a time. I think people will pay 99c to get a single rather than steal it. I think people would rather steal a full album rather than pay 10 dollars or more for it.

Labels need to make the effort to get artists to deliver in a manner that realizes these perspectives.

The album is dead.

Mark Cuban co-founded Broadcast.com in 1992 and is currently the owner of the Dallas Mavericks.
Recent posts from Mark Cuban's blog
A couple of my rules for startups
Will you watch what I watch ?
Music and movies - give away the soundtrack
I can't believe I'm becoming an Apple Fanboy
The Album is Dead...
My new Facebook strategy and the FB power level
P2P Part 3
Do Blog Comments Have Value ?
Add a Comment (Log in or register) 16 comments
by Shig2k1 January 18, 2008 5:18 AM PST
Nice idea, but it still doesn't remove the "free" option... ultimately, there will always be people who pirate music.
Reply to this comment
by pdskep January 18, 2008 5:32 AM PST
The article should be titled 'music is dead'. Music has become a commodity that's bought and sold with little interest in its artistic value. This has almost always been true to an extent, but never has the quality of the music suffered so. I partially blame the mp3 and download revolution for this development. What's easy, plentiful and cheap to get no longer has value so why put forth any effort. We'll end up with 'artists' releasing 30 second ring tones and any sense of meaning will be stripped for a funky beat we can answer our phone to. If your artist can only manage one or two worthwhile songs, maybe he/she isn't worth listening to.

The album concept allows the artist to follow a theme and its songs being recorded at approximately the same time will have a cohesive feeling. Maybe we've become so overstimulated that we can't sit and concentrate to our music for more that 3 minutes at a time. It's just background noise now.

Being an internet pioneer I'm sure you'd love to see your vision come true Mark, and sadly it probably will.

Patrick
Reply to this comment
by john55440 January 18, 2008 8:57 AM PST
"spending 20 bucks for a CD"

The last two CDs I (just) bought on Amazon.com were $12.97 and $9.99.

CDs offer superior sound quality , compared to compressed digital music.

Currently, those who only purchase individual songs, rather than entire albums, are missing many lesser known gems, and are missing the cohesive experience of an entire album.
Reply to this comment
by KCL January 22, 2008 8:47 AM PST
"CDs offer superior sound quality , compared to compressed digital music."

Um. What?

You need to check your facts, or at least your science. CDs ARE compressed digital music and you can buy CD-quality music from iTunes. Digital is digital, dude. It's all about the sampling. You could get higher quality than CD by buying vinyl, assuming of course you have a pristine copy and the right equipment (including your own hearing) to hear the difference.

And while there are certainly albums the provided a "cohesive experience" out there, most are simply filled with one or two good songs couched by a bunch of crap.
by OStrolphant January 22, 2008 1:43 PM PST
I disagree with KCL. a song at over 1000kbps is not all THAT compressed, especially when purchased music is in the 128-192kbps range. Digital is not digital. I can listen to digital XM radio at 96kbps or DVD audio at far superior rates. both being digital and both living in different planes of existence. I think KCL needs to check his facts because them are not right. John is right.
by KenanFarrell January 18, 2008 1:10 PM PST
Interesting idea, Mr. Cuban. This could work for new music but there's a world of music out there already recorded waiting to be discovered by new listeners. Since taking History of Rock at IU, I've learned about hundreds of classic rock, blues and country artists. I want to hear the great past albums, not just "greatest hits" compilations put together by some record label exec. Maybe it's not albums or music that is dying, but rather the music listener.
Reply to this comment
by January 18, 2008 3:51 PM PST
In 2003 I discovered a songwriting/performance club in Edinburgh called Out of the Bedroom - over the course of seven months I performed regular three song spots at the club and released ten limited edition 3 track CD singles. Eight of the lead tracks were then collected for an album released in the eighth month - I sold loads of CD singles and then people bough the album too - just to make up the set...
Reply to this comment
by Mr Twain January 22, 2008 7:17 AM PST
This blog fails to recognise that not all recorded output is meant to be "product".

The audience for recorded music is fragmented, just as the output of the industry is. While there will always be a market for singles - and now a market for single tracks - that is the lowest common denominator; the Big Mac market. It's music for people who don't really listen to music. People who "go to iTunes and (...) go through the top 10 lists and listen to samples and (to) determine what music (they're) going to buy. People like you. Fortunately, you're not the entire audience. Some people still love music.

The concept of a "season" of releases might work for those who view music as ephemeral brain filler - but for many artists it simply would not work. Not every song is a single. This isn't TV, where each episode has to fit the same template, do the same job and leave you wanting more.

A collection of songs can have its own texture - its own peaks and troughs. Moments of quiet reflection followed by an anthemic pay off. The classic albums are complete works, not mere song compilations.
Reply to this comment
by cnetabdul January 22, 2008 10:51 AM PST
This also assumes that the current formats and business models are as good as it gets. Theoretically an album can be released as one song and carry a higher price, or maybe 99cents is too high, maybe a band can make money on just 50 cents (they don't get a lot through old media..ie.. the physical album) A band only need a devoted following and some creativity.
Reply to this comment
by Peter Hilgendorf January 23, 2008 9:06 AM PST
No it isn't.
Reply to this comment
by James98765 January 23, 2008 10:29 AM PST
From an entertainment point-of-view I agree with you. Overall however, serializing new releases has serious pitfalls. True music is about art (as in, a form of creation/expression) and to "serialize" it like this would make it into a (purely) commercial venture. Mind you, I'm not addressing the already highly glamorized and marketed entertainers that are pushed by MTV and radio; I'm talking about true songwriters/singers (artists, not performers).

While I believe this system could prove profitable to the music industry and flavor-of-the month entertainers who simply perform songs written by a professional, I think it would further limit the possible exposure of real artists. Imagine if this serialization system was applied to other forms of art, such as painting: I'm sure it would lessen the impact and (intangible) value it offers; in fact, I'd go as far as saying it would cheapen it.

Even if you take the art out of the music and consider songs a product; I'm not sure this system would work. Consumers with so many (instant gratification) options are unlikely to tie themselves into a subscription service for a product they have not yet received, nor would they be sure of the quality of the product (e.g., I have quite a few "fav" artists on my list that have released HORRIBLE songs).

Furthermore, I can see the serializing of music being akin to the issues game publishers currently create when they rush the developers to finish a product. Instead of a completed product, you receive a hurried one and unlike games, you can't really patch a song. In addition to this, you have (great and potential) projects that will never see the light of day, simply because they do not fit into the publisher's bottom line.

No, I would definitely be against this idea - not because it can't be profitable, the system is already in place to serve the bottom line. Rather, I'm against the idea because it encourages the further cheapening of the art aspect of music into something relatively empty and meaningless.
Reply to this comment
by notgonnatellya January 23, 2008 10:48 AM PST
Mark, the album may be dead, but the cause is not due to increased prices. There's a fallacy that CD's are much more expensive than it was when albums ruled, but that's only true if you don't account for inflation. If you do that, you quickly discover than CD's cost LESS than a record did at any point in the last 40 years.

The other silly statement you make is that CD's cost $20.00. Where are these people who pay $20.00 for a CD shopping? Does the CD come with a joint or some other drug?

Even when they're not on sale, most CD's are available for $15.00 or less. Many are on sale the first week for 10-13 dollars (which is less than I paid for a CD in 1987, even if you don't adjust for inflation).

No, the problem is that radio long ago gave up on albums. MTV long ago gave up on music, and kids today have other things they care about.

You also claim that people are willing to plop down a buck for a single, as opposed to buying a CD. What you gloss over is that more money is made on CDs (much more) than on downloads and that most people that pay for music get it on CD. Personally, I think anyone who settles for a crappy lossy audio file isn't really that interested in music to begin with (or at the very least only listens to music on a DAP with bad earbud headphones)

Finally, your idea of subscribing to an artist won't work. Most willing to subscribe to an artist are the same people who will run out and buy that artists CD. I like U2. I may not love every album, but I buy the album no matter what. I'm the target for subscribing to an artist, and I'm already buying the CD.

My brother is ok with U2, but he's not going to subscribe to some U2 channel for a song 2x a month. He might do that for Pink Floyd, but he'd buy the album, so we're back to square one.

I occasionally like a Madonna song. There's no way I'd subscribe to her....she's too hit and miss.
Reply to this comment
by jgraebner January 23, 2008 11:22 AM PST
Another important point to note here is that the album is certainly still the best approach to selling certain genres of music. Selling pop music as individual tracks makes sense. Selling classical music, Broadway cast recordings, film scores, many types of jazz recordings, etc. that way would be way less effective.

Of course, as others have pointed out, even with pop/rock/country music there have been a lot of talented performers/songwriters that have very artistically crafted a collection of connected/related music. While I can see the argument that digital distribution greatly expedites the ability to purchase songs more selectively, I'd really hate to see the artistry involved with the creation of albums be lost.
Reply to this comment
by outlandosmusic January 28, 2008 12:08 PM PST
Hi Marc,

Releasing music as "seasons" is brilliant. Very HBO.

However, I disagree, respectfully, with your assessment of the state of the album and, frankly, I'm hell-bent on its emphatic rebirth :-): www.outlandosmusic.com/blog
Reply to this comment
by jaggerbush April 2, 2008 8:21 AM PDT
Hi Mark, We are busy with an animation film about The magnificent 7 elephants in Africa. Do you want to contact us? tusker@absamail.co.za
Reply to this comment
by LoserPoet May 1, 2008 2:08 PM PDT
I would have to agree that the album is dead. I remember when I used to wait eagerly for each release from my favorite bands, making a point to purchase said album on the day it came out. This year I've watched several albums come out and haven't felt any interest in purchasing any of them. I still listen to albums, as lately hard bop jazz has become my obsession. Albums of old seem to be more cohesive statements whereas today's music seems to be mainly a collection of songs with no inherent theme thrown onto a CD. A lot of artists seem to feel that they must fill every minute of space on said CD as well, leading to much more throwaway junk than in any other period of music.

On an unrelated note, this is my first visit to your blog, sir. As such, I must take this opportunity to implore you to purchase the Chicago Cubs. I know the final decision isn't up to you, but of all the candidates, you have the most passion for the sport. I really hope you get a fair chance to purchase the team. If you end up the chosen suitor, you'll make a ton of Cub fans happy.

LoserPoet
http://shooterslounge.blogspot.com/
Reply to this comment
advertisement
Click Here

In the news now

Slowing expectations at a green-tech start-up

Six months ago, biofuels start-up Mascoma had the wind in its sails, as did the rest of the clean-tech sector. Now, the company is treading carefully and scaling back.


With JavaFX, Sun seeks new coders, new revenue

With the launch of JavaFX 1.0, Sun is trying to reclaim Java's strength as a foundation for rich Internet applications. But it's no longer the incumbent.


Tim Lincecum, motion capture star

San Francisco Giants pitcher, who won the Cy Young award last month, dons a motion capture suit for 2K Sports' Major League Baseball 2K9 video game.


About Mark Cuban's blog

Mark Cuban co-founded Broadcast.com, a provider of online multimedia and streaming services, which was sold to Yahoo! in July of 1999. Prior to that, he co-founded systems integrator MicroSolutions, in 1983, and later sold it to CompuServe. He is the currently the owner of the Dallas Mavericks, and writes a blog at www.blogmaverick.com, which is reprinted here with permission.

Add this feed to your online news reader

Mark Cuban's blog topics

advertisement

Inside CNET News

Scroll Left Scroll Right