Last album you "bought" that was solid, all the way through

Linderbee

Let's GO, CARDINALS!
Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2005
Posts
29,189
Reaction score
2,811
Location
Longmont, CO
Okay, it was being discussed the other day how music today is basically garbage, and entire albums are being put out that are basically trash except for a couple of singles.

Led me to wonder what was the last album you purchased (or, obtained) that you felt was solid in its entirety. Maybe you didn't like EVERY song, but still felt the album as a whole was a good piece of work.

I'd have to say John Mayer's debut, "Room for Squares". Loved the entire album. Great story-telling, very personal...I could listen to it end to end over & over.

So what's yours? I'm interested in the new Foo, too. :)
 

Dr. Jones

Has No Time For Love
Joined
Nov 2, 2004
Posts
33,752
Reaction score
22,040
Hootie and the blowfish.... Cracked rear view.

Coldplay.... X and Y.

John mayer..... Continuum.

That's about it. Lol
 
OP
OP
Linderbee

Linderbee

Let's GO, CARDINALS!
Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2005
Posts
29,189
Reaction score
2,811
Location
Longmont, CO
Hootie and the blowfish.... Cracked rear view.

Coldplay.... X and Y.

John mayer..... Continuum.

That's about it. Lol
Cracked Rear View was good.

I'll have to check out Continuum. I didn't care for Heavier Things very much, so I just didn't buy any more after that, but now I may have to :)
 

desertdawg

ASFN Icon
BANNED BY MODERATORS
Joined
Sep 1, 2010
Posts
21,831
Reaction score
1
Location
@Desertdawg777
Great question, last complete album that I remember purchasing...might be Rage Against the Machine.
 

Jersey Girl

Stand down
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
Sep 17, 2002
Posts
33,027
Reaction score
7,885
Location
Super Scottsdale
Wow. I can't even really remember the last time I bought an album. I'll have to think about this one.
 

DWKB

ASFN Icon
Joined
May 15, 2002
Posts
18,224
Reaction score
7,491
Location
Annapolis, MD
Today's music isn't garbage. Example A is the last album I listened to beginning to end was Mumford and Sons "Sigh No More".

If music today sucks to you then you're either not looking hard enough or you're getting a bit old IMO.
 

RugbyMuffin

ASFN IDOL
Joined
Apr 30, 2003
Posts
30,487
Reaction score
4,901
Today's music isn't garbage. Example A is the last album I listened to beginning to end was Mumford and Sons "Sigh No More".

If music today sucks to you then you're either not looking hard enough or you're getting a bit old IMO.

Agreed to a point.

But, it is harder to find more "out of the mainstream" music these days that is for sure. Cause, not all, but a lot of the over processed garbage is exactly that. Garbage.

Although, you can always browse youtube, etc., etc.

As for the question: Clutch - Strange Cousins from the West.

I always buy the CD of bands I really enjoy. Kind of stupid not to. If you like there music, don't you want to make sure they can afford to make more ?


Sidenote:
Definately buying Johnny Cash's last album, in the very near future. Wow. That is some powerful stuff.
 

DWKB

ASFN Icon
Joined
May 15, 2002
Posts
18,224
Reaction score
7,491
Location
Annapolis, MD
Agreed to a point.

But, it is harder to find more "out of the mainstream" music these days that is for sure.

Although, you can always browse youtube, etc., etc.

As for the question: Clutch - Strange Cousins from the West.

I always buy the CD of bands I really enjoy. Kind of stupid not to. If you like there music, don't you want to make sure they can afford to make more ?

I actually think it's easier to find new music than it used to be. With Apps like Pandora for your iPhone or satellite radio for your car you can find all sorts of bands.

Hell go to any of the many summer music festivals and you'll come across a dozen new bands putting out great music that you've never heard of before.
 
OP
OP
Linderbee

Linderbee

Let's GO, CARDINALS!
Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2005
Posts
29,189
Reaction score
2,811
Location
Longmont, CO
Today's music isn't garbage. Example A is the last album I listened to beginning to end was Mumford and Sons "Sigh No More".

If music today sucks to you then you're either not looking hard enough or you're getting a bit old IMO.
I didn't mean to say all of today's music is garbage. We were discussing in a different thread that record labels & producers aren't as concerned with putting out "complete" albums like they used to (even that, to me, is debatable). Today's albums only seem to have one or two really good songs on them, and the rest is filler crap.

Your example of Pandora & such was one of the arguments as to why this is happening. We can cherry pick our music now, so why bother putting together an entire album of good stuff?
 

DWKB

ASFN Icon
Joined
May 15, 2002
Posts
18,224
Reaction score
7,491
Location
Annapolis, MD
I didn't mean to say all of today's music is garbage. We were discussing in a different thread that record labels & producers aren't as concerned with putting out "complete" albums like they used to (even that, to me, is debatable). Today's albums only seem to have one or two really good songs on them, and the rest is filler crap.

Your example of Pandora & such was one of the arguments as to why this is happening. We can cherry pick our music now, so why bother putting together an entire album of good stuff?

I understand what you're saying and I'm not arguing with it except that I think it's really been that way forever regarding popular music. The single has always dominated the album concept regarding sales and large distribution.

Artists, the ones who make music not to be rich and famous, but because they love the art, are still putting out good albums. Arcade Fire, a very "out of the mainstream" group as Rugby would say just one album of the year. The National just put out a great album. I think it's easier for these bands to be found than it was when we only had FM radio and Tower records to go through.

Then again, maybe that's where the perception comes from that I personally am not seeing. The big record labels are dying from their glory CD days thanks to changing technology and the little guys don't need to wait to be scooped up by them and splattered all over the usual mainstream media sources.

Look at Rugby's comment that he buys albums to support the bands he likes. That certainly doesn't hurt, but it's an old concept. Bands really make their money off of tours as opposed to album sales. That is the best way to support the band. It's also why bands are giving their albums away free now. Anyways, I didn't mean to derail the thread. I'm sorry for that Linderbee
 

Gaddabout

Plucky Comic Relief
Joined
Jul 2, 2004
Posts
16,043
Reaction score
14
Location
Gilbert
I understand what you're saying and I'm not arguing with it except that I think it's really been that way forever regarding popular music. The single has always dominated the album concept regarding sales and large distribution.

Yes and no. I would suggest the TOUR used to dominate the album concept, and the single is what sealed the deal. In the days before MTV, you had to go to a tour and catch an opening act, bought their stuff, created a buzz, then the label could get a single on the radio. That ended with MTV, pretty much, and sort of signaled the end of the small label tour. It changed live music forever. Music became less something to be experienced and more something to be consumed.

Artists, the ones who make music not to be rich and famous, but because they love the art, are still putting out good albums. Arcade Fire, a very "out of the mainstream" group as Rugby would say just one album of the year. The National just put out a great album. I think it's easier for these bands to be found than it was when we only had FM radio and Tower records to go through.

I think of Arcade Fire being very mainstream in the 21st Century way -- they were one of the most discussed musical acts on Twitter last year. They probably received more exposure in one year on Twitter than all the bands receive cumulatively on MTV in 1984. One link to YouTube from the right Twitter account and it changes everything.

On the other hand, Mars Volta is a band that determines to be out of the mainstream, making music that pleases them. Some would call that indulgent. I think we used to call it passion and vision. They also do the album concept, but they know they're shooting for a very small sliver of the pie and they're happy with that. It's a band I doubt has failed to sell out a show in five years, but you won't find labels competing for their name in the lineup.

Then again, maybe that's where the perception comes from that I personally am not seeing. The big record labels are dying from their glory CD days thanks to changing technology and the little guys don't need to wait to be scooped up by them and splattered all over the usual mainstream media sources.

It depends on what you're attempting to do. Small indies still have to abide by some of the rules, namely have a song or two with a pop hook. Young ears are conditioned for a certain kind of thing, and they still need to be told what's cool. The Black Keys worked hard on street corners and whatever venues they could find in the late 90s, early 2000s, and they're essentially unchanged over a decade later. But it wasn't until Jack White said they were cool that they were allowed to be cool. And without the Black Keys, there is no White Stripes. The difference between the two? One stuck with indie and one had a huge mondo label to promote them.

Look at Rugby's comment that he buys albums to support the bands he likes. That certainly doesn't hurt, but it's an old concept. Bands really make their money off of tours as opposed to album sales. That is the best way to support the band. It's also why bands are giving their albums away free now. Anyways, I didn't mean to derail the thread. I'm sorry for that Linderbee

Well, now you can't have it both ways, and there are only two kinds of bands giving away their music: Mega acts that can afford it and acts so unknown it's their desperation attempt to get noticed. And that latter group is a tough one because there are roughly 40 percent less venues in the U.S. to play than there were just 10 years ago (a number that was part of a presentation to the musician union in LA last year), and only about 50 percent of those venues have maintained an ASCAP license. Live local music is dead everywhere save but for a few spots that dot the country, and the idea of a regional tour for new bands is sort of a novelty and a great way to lose money and get stuck in the middle of nowhere.

If you're Eminem, yes, you need to make your money from the tour. After the first 14 weeks maybe you've finally repaid your label the money they dumped into studio time, overhead, and marketing for your new CD and now you're earning gravy. But if you're The Jazz Mafia (April 25th at The Clubhouse in Tempe, y'all!), you are taking collections to pay for a tour that you hope will kick off CD sales. The CD is your only hope to make money and the sales will determine if you make another one or go back and pursue a desk job.
 

DWKB

ASFN Icon
Joined
May 15, 2002
Posts
18,224
Reaction score
7,491
Location
Annapolis, MD
Yes and no. I would suggest the TOUR used to dominate the album concept, and the single is what sealed the deal. In the days before MTV, you had to go to a tour and catch an opening act, bought their stuff, created a buzz, then the label could get a single on the radio. That ended with MTV, pretty much, and sort of signaled the end of the small label tour. It changed live music forever. Music became less something to be experienced and more something to be consumed.

To be fair, the days before MTV are really the days before me. :)
However, I think I need to be more explicit in my statements. I think the acts under major record labels have always relied on the single in popular music. I'm speaking mid 70's and beyond here.

I think of Arcade Fire being very mainstream in the 21st Century way -- they were one of the most discussed musical acts on Twitter last year. They probably received more exposure in one year on Twitter than all the bands receive cumulatively on MTV in 1984. One link to YouTube from the right Twitter account and it changes everything.

Well yes and no. Arcade Fire is no Justin Bieber, Katy Perry, or Lady Gaga. Arcade Fire also isn't consumable for the Clear Channel "**** rock" Rock stations that choose Papa Roach or Skillit instead for heavy rotation.

On the other hand, Mars Volta is a band that determines to be out of the mainstream, making music that pleases them. Some would call that indulgent. I think we used to call it passion and vision. They also do the album concept, but they know they're shooting for a very small sliver of the pie and they're happy with that. It's a band I doubt has failed to sell out a show in five years, but you won't find labels competing for their name in the lineup.

...as well as Ghostland Observatory IMO. I think comparing these bands to Arcade Fire is equivalent to comparing a flea and a spider in size and ignoring the cats and elephants though.

It depends on what you're attempting to do. Small indies still have to abide by some of the rules, namely have a song or two with a pop hook. Young ears are conditioned for a certain kind of thing, and they still need to be told what's cool. The Black Keys worked hard on street corners and whatever venues they could find in the late 90s, early 2000s, and they're essentially unchanged over a decade later. But it wasn't until Jack White said they were cool that they were allowed to be cool. And without the Black Keys, there is no White Stripes. The difference between the two? One stuck with indie and one had a huge mondo label to promote them.


Well, now you can't have it both ways, and there are only two kinds of bands giving away their music: Mega acts that can afford it and acts so unknown it's their desperation attempt to get noticed. And that latter group is a tough one because there are roughly 40 percent less venues in the U.S. to play than there were just 10 years ago (a number that was part of a presentation to the musician union in LA last year), and only about 50 percent of those venues have maintained an ASCAP license. Live local music is dead everywhere save but for a few spots that dot the country, and the idea of a regional tour for new bands is sort of a novelty and a great way to lose money and get stuck in the middle of nowhere.

If you're Eminem, yes, you need to make your money from the tour. After the first 14 weeks maybe you've finally repaid your label the money they dumped into studio time, overhead, and marketing for your new CD and now you're earning gravy. But if you're The Jazz Mafia (April 25th at The Clubhouse in Tempe, y'all!), you are taking collections to pay for a tour that you hope will kick off CD sales. The CD is your only hope to make money and the sales will determine if you make another one or go back and pursue a desk job.

I'm admittedly out of my element here, but is it not true that more of your dollar goes directly to the band through a concert ticket purchase than a CD purchase? That was my original point.
 
OP
OP
Linderbee

Linderbee

Let's GO, CARDINALS!
Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2005
Posts
29,189
Reaction score
2,811
Location
Longmont, CO
Anyways, I didn't mean to derail the thread. I'm sorry for that Linderbee
I enjoy the discourse--no apology necessary. I'm pretty sure I've derailed more threads than I have stayed on topic. :D

And besides, it's all in the same topic-ish.
 

Mulli

...
Supporting Member
Joined
Jul 16, 2004
Posts
54,951
Reaction score
7,942
Location
Cold Harbor
Not as long ago as the last time I referred to something as an album. :)
 

Gee!

BirdGang
Joined
Nov 17, 2003
Posts
26,222
Reaction score
27
Location
Gee From The G
I have no idea who Arcadia Fire is other then they won the best album of the year on the Grammys.. And when that happened I said to myself "who the **** are they"? Then turned the channel.. Eminem should have won that award in my eyes.. His new album is complete and rare these days..
 

Louis

DJ Roomba
Joined
Nov 28, 2005
Posts
5,316
Reaction score
2
Location
Winning Friends and Influencing the People in My H
Gee, you are lucky that you didn't see Arcade Fire's atrocious live performance at the Grammy's.

I can pretty much count on the Black Keys, The Hives, Arctic Monkeys, Lupe Fiasco, Kid Cudi, Jimmy Eat World, Kings of Leon, John Mayer, and Adele to release albums that I will enjoy from start to finish and can listen to over and over again.
 

Gee!

BirdGang
Joined
Nov 17, 2003
Posts
26,222
Reaction score
27
Location
Gee From The G
If you're Eminem, yes, you need to make your money from the tour. After the first 14 weeks maybe you've finally repaid your label the money they dumped into studio time, overhead, and marketing for your new CD and now you're earning gravy. But if you're The Jazz Mafia (April 25th at The Clubhouse in Tempe, y'all!), you are taking collections to pay for a tour that you hope will kick off CD sales. The CD is your only hope to make money and the sales will determine if you make another one or go back and pursue a desk job.

I dont recall Eminem having much marketing for his new album.. I remember him tweeting saying a new album was coming then a single came out and everyone went nuts waiting for the album.. I really dont remember ads or anything on hip hop websites I visit.. Eminem has currently sold just under 4 million copies in the US alone for his new cd and almost 7 million sold in the world.. I dont think his budget was that big for the album.. And I dont think he has any tours planned as he is working on Dr Dre's Detox.. He might do a few cities but not a tour..

I get your point Matt, but Eminem wasnt the best example..
 

Gaddabout

Plucky Comic Relief
Joined
Jul 2, 2004
Posts
16,043
Reaction score
14
Location
Gilbert
I'm admittedly out of my element here, but is it not true that more of your dollar goes directly to the band through a concert ticket purchase than a CD purchase? That was my original point.

As recently as the 90s this might have been 80 percent true. Labels were still ginormous and you could guess the contract based on band status. You knew REM had megabucks regardless if they sold another album because they had a label bidding war. And you knew whatever new bands shared a label with REM were the ones paying for REM's signing contract.

Here's how this typically works, even today:

- A label signs you and offers you a recording contract. You might get a little upfront money which you and your bandmates promptly blow by buying everyone in the bar a drink.

- You go spend 50 hours in a studio, half of which is just getting sound and watching the producer talk to his spoiled daughter about why she can't get a Mercedes. There's an engineer there and maybe every now and then someone from cartage for the gear you rented to make these recordings. Then you spend another 50 hours fixing the crap you just recorded. If you and the label are really careless, you're practicing and writing songs in the studio, which sends costs through the roof. Big labels don't let new bands do that unless they're with a whip-crack producer.

- You meet with the label's marketing staff and they tell you the name of the CD, what single they're going to support, when it's going to drop, how much money they're going to spend marketing it, and when and where you're going to be the next 300 days. It's usually at this point they have you sign some more docs where most bands learn they are now being billed for all the studio time, producer time on the phone with his daughter, cartage, food for everyone, marketing, printing, and who knows what else.

When you first signed your contract you thought you were getting paid. It's right about now you realize you were going into indentured servitude and now you have to spend a year or two on the road on the Yellow Snow Beer Tour to gain enough money to pay back your label for the luxury of recording, marketing, and distribution. For Hole, IIRC, Courtney Love said they started their first label tour about $2.5 million in the ... well, the hole. At the end of that tour, they each went home with about $40,000 for all of their troubles. That was pre-tax net income. So you betcha, Hole wanted their CDs sold because it was the only way they were going to pay the rent.

I think this whole "bands make most of their money from the tour" thing was a combination of seeing megabands do exactly that -- Pink Floyd, Rush, Springstein, Police, etc. -- and people wanting to justify illegally downloaded or shared music. As a general rule, though, unless you're well-established, tours aren't much more than indentured servitude, and the residuals from the CD are what young artists still need. Besides, if the music doesn't SELL, young artists don't get to make more music. Most bands, maybe 60 percent or more, fold while still owning the label money.
 
Last edited:

Gaddabout

Plucky Comic Relief
Joined
Jul 2, 2004
Posts
16,043
Reaction score
14
Location
Gilbert
I dont recall Eminem having much marketing for his new album.. I remember him tweeting saying a new album was coming then a single came out and everyone went nuts waiting for the album.. I really dont remember ads or anything on hip hop websites I visit.. Eminem has currently sold just under 4 million copies in the US alone for his new cd and almost 7 million sold in the world.. I dont think his budget was that big for the album.. And I dont think he has any tours planned as he is working on Dr Dre's Detox.. He might do a few cities but not a tour..

I get your point Matt, but Eminem wasnt the best example..

You're probably right, and Eminem is big enough his only deal is for distribution. He probably does his own production, hires his own people, etc. Ray Charles was the first guy to cut a label deal where he kept his masters. That's the platinum standard now for most mega stars I think. If you front the money to produce your stuff, you get to keep them.
 

DemsMyBoys

ASFN Icon
Joined
Nov 18, 2008
Posts
12,454
Reaction score
4,912
Location
Cave Creek
Solid? Every single song?

Rubber Soul or Pet Sounds.

It's hard to peak before you can even drive. :p
 

ajcardfan

I see you.
Supporting Member
Joined
May 13, 2002
Posts
42,289
Reaction score
33,704
Overkill - "Ironbound".
Crowbar - "Sever the Wicked Hand"

Not one bad song on either disc.
 

azmike74

Hall of Famer
Joined
Sep 20, 2005
Posts
2,169
Reaction score
78
Location
Peoria, AZ
I've been giving this some thought. I can't think of a better answer than my first thought: "Dark Side of the Moon"

Edit: After looking through my ITunes, I see Alice in Chains, "Dirt" and "Jar of Flies" (only an EP)
 
Last edited:
Top