Album vs. Tracks

There is a great article in the NY Times today about Trent Reznor of Nine Inch Nails. Most of the article deals with Trent himself, and the fact that he is really on the cutting edge of musical distribution.

One interesting thing about the article was Reznor discussing the iPod. On one hand, he thinks it’s great that “a million people have it (newest album) on their iPods.” That is because Reznor posted his album on the nin.com website for free download. He creates albums and not just tracks. So he is also saddened that once his album is on an iPod, it will most likely get played in a shuffle format where tracks will be heard individually as opposed to as an album.

This flies in the face of what most of the record industry is doing right now. Look at rap/hip hop. They go for the hit. The album mentality is not there. They want a song that will do well in downloads, as a ringtone, as a ringback tone, and for the radio.

Perhaps Reznor is on target in getting people to hear his album as a whole. By giving it away himself as a whole, there is less incentive to download particular tracks as to download the album in its entirety. Reznor can’t stop the shuffle, but the free album option lends itself to more listens of the album as a whole than putting an album up on itunes where people can buy songs individually.

I took up Reznor’s offer to download ‘The Slip,’ on his bill. I am not a Nine Inch Nails fan. But the album was free. To be honest, that is the first album I have listened to in its entirety for a good while. Reznor succeeded in having me take his album as a whole.

Artists will need to continue to come up with innovative methods to encourage their fans to listen to the album instead of just a few songs. The artists also need to write the albums as a story, and not as a compilation of songs they think will be hits.

Stay tuned,
Erik
erikrostad.com