PunBB

screw_ball Wrote:You listen to the wrong music, then.

Worst post EVER!!! How can music be wrong???

skippy the wonder dog Wrote:

screw_ball Wrote:You listen to the wrong music, then.

Really? What do I listen to?

And how do my listening habits affect what "most bands" produce?

I'm just saying that you don't listen to the same "most bands" as I do. Maybe most of the bands you listen to release crap albums these days but I'm listening to a pretty amazing album right now that came out yesterday.

screw_ball Wrote:

skippy the wonder dog Wrote:

screw_ball Wrote:You listen to the wrong music, then.

Really? What do I listen to?

And how do my listening habits affect what "most bands" produce?

I'm just saying that you don't listen to the same "most bands" as I do. Maybe most of the bands you listen to release crap albums these days but I'm listening to a pretty amazing album right now that came out yesterday.

When I say "most bands," I mean "most bands," not "most bands that I listen to."

I'd say if you're making general comments about why bonus tracks are offered, you should be thinking about "most bands," not your personal tastes.

Most bands put out crap, and the idea of the album as a cohesive musical statement is pretty much dead.

skippy the wonder dog Wrote:

screw_ball Wrote:

skippy the wonder dog Wrote:

screw_ball Wrote:You listen to the wrong music, then.

Really? What do I listen to?

And how do my listening habits affect what "most bands" produce?

I'm just saying that you don't listen to the same "most bands" as I do. Maybe most of the bands you listen to release crap albums these days but I'm listening to a pretty amazing album right now that came out yesterday.

When I say "most bands," I mean "most bands," not "most bands that I listen to."

I'd say if you're making general comments about why bonus tracks are offered, you should be thinking about "most bands," not your personal tastes.

Most bands put out crap, and the idea of the album as a cohesive musical statement is pretty much dead.

The thing is, though, you've never heard most bands. I haven't either. I'm sure you know a shitload of bands that I've never heard of and I'm sure the same can be said about me. Still, I don't have any pretense of knowing about most or even a sizable portion of currently recording bands. Now, I will say that I do know a bit about music and I have heard music from thousands of bands, as I'm sure you also have. If you're talking about the mainstream, then I agree with you completely. But the majority of music is not in the mainstream and a lot of it is really, really good. Sure, a lot is shit but you're making an extremely broad generalization.

I think this argument can safely be moved to its own thread somewhere else.

screw_ball Wrote:... you're making an extremely broad generalization.

You've now argued yourself into a circle.

Let me know when you get that mental knot untied.

Of course I'm talking about the mainstream. That's where "most bands" are. That's why it's the mainstream.

Not that albums of filler wrapped around one good track stop at the boundaries of the mainstream.

this is what it sounds like when doves cry

daylight Wrote:

Graham Wrote:I am absolutely NOT in favour of this "extended" or "limited edition" album package with extra songs.

The ABSOLUTE worst are iTunes pre-order-only bonus tracks. I don't want to buy an entire album in their shitty format, but in order to get that ONE song you have to take the whole thing. If they were simply bonus tracks you could buy individually I'd have no problem with it. Also, yeah, multiple special editions can blow me. QOTSA and Bloc Party had whole albums worth of b-sides with their latest releases. Instead of feeling like you're buying a special edition it just seems like each version is incomplete. It makes me LESS likely to buy the album, as I'd rather burn my own copy with all the bonus tracks on it.

Exactly my point. The "Pre order bonuses" also piss me off for the same reasons.

As far as "oh well this isnt 1963 anymore, most bands create their albums to be extensive works of art," goes, um, well, hate to burst the bubble, but this has always been the case with real bands. I'm PREEEEEEETTY sure that Led Zepplin IV had some "bonus tracks" (read: b-sides that were cut) too.

The thing is, "bonus tracks" is a fancy marketing term to sell you the tracks that were cut. To make you feel like you're getting something special. In all reality, "bonus tracks" are nothing but B-sides. If there were a Fully re-release with "bonus tracks" tomorrow the "bonus track" would be Blonde Solid. It's not a bonus track. It was a B-side and it was cut. For some reason or another, maybe the label executive was being a dick, or maybe the band cut it because it didn't fit with their extensive work of art.

Maybe Blonde Solid is not the best example though as here, we are obviously all biased towards our un-released favourites.

Case in point: REM actually wrote "I'm Gonna DJ" for Around the Sun. But it (painfully obviously) did not fit with the mellow, more acoustic approach ATS had. Later it was re-worked into Accelerate. I don't want these kinds of tracks to end up as "bonus tracks" as some sort of sob story on how they were cut from their "extensive work of art" and they are somehow giving back to their fans. Which, if you're going by this argument, then this hypothetical bonus track was cut purposefully, to accentuate the work of art and entice more people to spend more money and buy a full album.

Is that what this has been degraded to? The full album can't stand on it's own anymore as a work of art? We have to have bonus tracks and special editions?

What happened to the "work of art?" This isn't 1963 when the art masterpiece album was like the holy grail of music. You're right, it's not 1963. It's 2008 when "works of art" don't exist anymore, because you can't have two different versions of a masterpiece. Whoring of B-sides to make more money and get people to buy the full album sure doesn't count as "integrity." Hey, there aren't two versions of the Mona Lisa; the original and the special edition that comes with all the scrap canvas shit Leonardo discarded while making it.

Special editions and bonus tracks suck.

/rant[/b]

You make your point very well and I find it had to argue. What I am trying to express is my concern for what I see as a missed opportunity for the band and the fans.

In the new Spin Magazine Bono said U2 and r.E.m. are the biggest/best bands in the world. I will add The Tragically Hip and Pearl Jam. Take a look at the material these bands have made available on the retail market in the past five years. The only band that does not provide the additional new release material I mentioned are The Hip. Yes, I know about Hipponomus, but that was a greatest hits package.

I am not talking about substandard material intended to milk the audience. The multi-media format of the companion disk is an art form that provides an opportunity for the artists to further express their vision.

NegPhil Wrote:In the new Spin Magazine Bono said U2 and r.E.m. are the biggest/best bands in the world.

Wow, talk about an ego :roll:

The Hip may be one of the best bands... but certainly not one of the biggest (I don't know if that's what you were implying).

Was World Container even a #1 in Canada?

skippy the wonder dog Wrote:

screw_ball Wrote:... you're making an extremely broad generalization.

You've now argued yourself into a circle.

Let me know when you get that mental knot untied.

Of course I'm talking about the mainstream. That's where "most bands" are. That's why it's the mainstream.

Not that albums of filler wrapped around one good track stop at the boundaries of the mainstream.

Most bands are in the mainstream? Hahaha, what? Can you clue me in to which music industry you're talking about?

@ NegPhil

Ah, now you raise a good comparison here.

U2 did it with their Greatest Hits packages. I don't support that. I, like a sucker, bought those, and their B-sides were B-sides for a reason. REM's were also released in such a manner. I can't say I follow Pearl Jam, I'm not sure what they did.

I applaud the Hip from keeping their Greatest Hits collection free of B-sides.

Why don't bands release B-sides collections? EXLCUSIVELY B-sides? That way, it's for the fans, and intended for the fans only. The casual looking for their latest singles will pick it up, and realize it's not for them. Instead of trying to pawn off your B-sides as "bonus tracks" on unsuspecting casual fans. Those tracks aren't for everybody, but the fans will sure enjoy them. Why spoil an album release with multiple versions?

I know for sure, that everybody here including me, would orgasm over the idea of a B-sides collection, with all our unreleased favourites such as Montreal, Blonde Solid and Ultra Mundane to name a few.

But until the day I die I scoff at the idea of "bonus tracks" and multiple versions of albums.

Haircut-Rabbit Wrote:The Hip may be one of the best bands... but certainly not one of the biggest (I don't know if that's what you were implying).

Was World Container even a #1 in Canada?

I'm sure it was...

Here in the 'Peg I heard on the radio this morning, that REM's Accelerate DEBUT at #1 in Canada.

The DJ Jim Jones said: "...and how many albums did REM have to sell in Canada to debut at #1? ....[long pause]...8000. That's pretty sad. In a country of 35 million, I'd expect a city like Brandon to sell 8000 new REM albums."

If I'm not mistaken, WC sold over 100k eventually? A large, very dedicated fanbase is definitely more likely to still purchase a physical album.

Graham Wrote:I can't say I follow Pearl Jam, I'm not sure what they did.

Pearl Jam released an exclusive b-sides album a few years ago called 'Lost Dogs'

Graham Wrote:I know for sure, that everybody here including me, would orgasm over the idea of a B-sides collection, with all our unreleased favourites such as Montreal, Blonde Solid and Ultra Mundane to name a few.

But until the day I die I scoff at the idea of "bonus tracks" and multiple versions of albums.

My thoughts exactly