A Singular Sensation

If the dozens of commercials I saw this week are to be believed, the American Music Awards took place last night (I certainly wasn't about to flip over and check). That means this afternoon I heard about a ton of musical acts taking home awards, none of whom I could pick out of a police line-up or hum the song they are most famous for. Also, I'm pretty sure that I will never hear from them again, because by this time next year they will have been replaced by another cluster of interchangeable acts. I don't blame the American Music Awards, though. (Still, we really should cut the number of entertainment award shows down to 4 - Tonys, Emmys, Grammys, Oscars. I feel that pretty much covers everyone.) The problem is that the music industry has such short memories that within two weeks of an artist releasing an album people want to start filming the "Where Are They Now?" segment for their biography. It is with that phenomenon in mind I began to wonder why musicians are in such a hurry to release full albums anymore. If you think about it, every thing else about the music industry has changed, so why are we still insisting musicians put out new songs in blocks of 10-12? Since most songs are purchased individually anyway, wouldn't it make more sense to release them individually?

The way I see it, anticipation is often the key element in any promotional campaign. This is why movies typically make the most money their opening weekend and season premieres get the highest ratings on the television calendar. It goes back to that most basic of human instincts: wanting is always more fun than having. So, why not try and string that anticipation out as long as you can by releasing a new song a week? I mean, it is not like you couldn't still tour with the new music once it was all out. Not to mention, it would just be more data for musicians to work with. For example, with these single-specific sales numbers you could really pinpoint which songs are hits and which one only the loyalist of fans are going to learn the words for. Believe me, nothing brings a concert to a halt faster then a musician destroying the vibe by bringing up a song only 30% of the audience is familiar with. (Seriously, it is not like we need the bathroom break.) It would help artists figure out what songs are going to get the best reaction and help them mold a playlist, enhancing the entire concert experience. Also, if you are one of these soulless, engineered pop stars (also known as most of the popular musical acts today) you could figure out what sounds people are most drawn to and create more music that sounds just like it. Trust me, some artists have been able to carve out very lengthy careers using no more than 10 chords.

I know some people are going to argue that making fans buy the entire album is the only way to get them to listen songs which aren't getting a lot of radio airplay, but considering the state of the radio industry I'm not sure that principle even applies anymore. Pop radio essentially plays the same 15 songs on a 4-hour rotation, which means if you want to hear new music you have to go hunting for it anyway. Also, that argument feels like something you would have argued a couple years ago, back when people still had to buy CDs. It is the same flawed starting point that leads to record companies setting it up that if you want to buy the hit single on iTunes you have to buy the entire album. Well, that may work for the people who like the artist and were planning to check out the rest of their songs anyway, but the remainder of us are going to do one of two things: 1. decided we don't like the song that much or 2. find a way to illegally download it. I'm no math major, but I'm pretty sure $1 is more than $0. Don't believe what family comedies about people getting unwanted dogs have been telling us for years - forcing someone to own something is not the way to make them eventually love it. So, congratulations, you've annoyed someone who was a casual fan and could have grown into a full-fledged one into most likely hating that artist and made no money.

The fact that record companies still produce albums the same way as they did 10 years ago is rather scary, because any industry which doesn't know enough to adapt is doomed to fail. Considering how fast it felt like the way we listen to music changed I can't say I blame the music industry for being unprepared, but the continued lack of a plan is disturbing. I can only assume they keep up these practices either because they have always done it this way and don't want to change or they simply don't have a better idea to replace it with. Honestly, I'm not sure which is scarier for the future of the music business. Considering the overnight ratings show the AMAs got the lowest ratings in the shows history, it is clear they have a problem. You can crow all you want about that being a product of too many award shows, going up against a good football game or people having too many other entertainment options, but the simple fact is that if there was a big enough draw more people would have tuned in. Even if they didn't tune in for the whole show they would keep clicking over to catch a performance. A bleaker truth is that there simply aren't any act in music right now which are talented enough to get people to make a long-term invested in them - no one expects this current group of pop acts to be making quality music two years from now, never mind ten. That's why releasing one song at a time may be the way to go - let's aim for making 10 weeks worth of good music and see who is still standing.