The demise of the physical single format

[AndyK]

News online today states that Mercury records have announced they will no longer release singles in a physical format. We've kn0own about it for over a year in the UK now with no proper Meat Loaf releases to support HCTB, but they've made an official announcement (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ukpress/article/ALeqM5jpKkMboOyurYRmdS4xbF23irUm4g?docId=N0205811300985270458A) now.

[allrevvedup]

makes sense i think, as much as I hate to see it happen.

People can buy whatever song they like now from an album via itunes and amazon so releasing one physical single seems pointless now.

[CarylB]

One more seemingly inevitable nail in the coffin. I bet Mercury wish they were handling that poor silly child Rebecca Black, who may never produce anything musically worthwhile in a "career" that may be over in a heartbeat .. but it's about fast bucks gained any way they can now, not developing artists and celebrating music :(

Caryl

[AndyK]

One more nail in the coffin. I bet Mercury wish they were handling that poor silly child Rebecca Black, who may never produce anything musically worthwhile in a "career" that may be over in a heartbeat .. but it's about fast bucks gained any way they can now, not developing artists and celebrating music :(

Caryl

Actually I don't think that the music industry has changed too much over the years at all. In my view it's always been about the "fast buck", consider the contract that Meta and Jim entered into with Cleveland and the subsequent court cases to get the royalties they were owed. Likewise read some of the autobiographies of people involved in the music industry in the 60s and 70s and things really aren't too much different to today really. Sharon Osbornes autobiogrpahy is a great insight into how things were run from a management perspective back in the day.

There were as many one hit wonders in the 60s as there are today, and as many cover versions in the charts, the Beatles and The Stones spent much of the formative years of their careers playing cover versions, infact their first albums contained pretty much all cover songs, and they only developed as songwriters once they were established acts. The big difference between them and many of the acts of today is that they had (still have!) the talent.

The main difference today is that the advances in technology have allowed the music moguls to feed the taste-challenged masses via the constant, instant, in your face media with those who are talent-challenged, and the taste-challenged masses lap it all up.

[CarylB]

Yes, I suppose you're right. They've always been a greedy money-focused lot .. it just seems worse these days, and I can't help but feel there was a bit more nurturing 30 years ago rather than just chuck them in for a quick chart success (a la Cowell) and drop them without a backward glance.

In this though, you hit the coffin nail on the head :-)

The main difference today is that the advances in technology have allowed the music moguls to feed the taste-challenged masses via the constant, instant, in your face media with those who are talent-challenged, and the taste-challenged masses lap it all up.

Caryl

[Wario]

Not surprising. Physical formats in general are going the way of the dodo.

Books, the news paper, music, and videogames will soon be digitaized into Kindle, Google News, MP3s, and digital serves via game console respectfully.

[A Slice Of English]

Not surprising. Physical formats in general are going the way of the dodo.

Books, the news paper, music, and videogames will soon be digitaized into Kindle, Google News, MP3s, and digital serves via game console respectfully.

Personally, I will never give up on physical format books. I get a great deal more satisfaction from turning a page physically to read the next part of the story than I ever would scrolling down on a computer screen.

[Monstro]

A real shame but unfortunately to be expected, been on the cards for a while. Guess I'm just an old fart but I like the physical copy, also the collector in me finds it difficult to look at my hard drive in the same way as I look at a shelf full of CD's.

[The Flying Mouse]

Personally, I will never give up on physical format books. I get a great deal more satisfaction from turning a page physically to read the next part of the story than I ever would scrolling down on a computer screen.

A real shame but unfortunately to be expected, been on the cards for a while. Guess I'm just an old fart but I like the physical copy, also the collector in me finds it difficult to look at my hard drive in the same way as I look at a shelf full of CD's.

:twisted: :up: :up: :up: :up: :up:

[evil nickname]

Physical formats in general are going the way of the dodo.

Probably not. Physical formats have several benefits over digital ones (like you can still read a book when its battery died, LPs won't get lost when your harddrive dies and you didn't make a backup, etc.) As long as there are people to whom physical releases have a value, they will get made.

Also: the whole entertainment industry needs to figure out a global, cross-platform solution for distributing content at a reasonable price if they want to succeed. Try downloading the "If I Can't Have You" single when you're in The Netherlands. Or using Linux. Or when you don't want to use freaking iTunes. Let me tell you: ordering a book from Amazon.com is a lot easier.

[The Flying Mouse]

As long as there are people to whom physical releases have a value, they will get made.


:twisted: Which is why i'll never buy a download.
I may be fighting a losing battle, but i'm not going to go to the trouble of learning to dowload and burn a CD when doing so will encourage the record companies to abolish physical releases completley.

[PanicLord]

I think for singles it makes sense, but I hope albums will continue to be made physically. Either that or we need higher quality files to download. I mean, it has been years since storage space was a problem and broadband lets you download even massive files quicky.

[The Flying Mouse]

I think for singles it makes sense, but I hope albums will continue to be made physically.

:twisted: Why?
What's the difference?

If the record companies can take your money without the problems of putting together something physical, then they'll only be too happy to do it.
The release of an album will cease to be any kind of event.It'll be just one more option on the dowload list.

Makes you kinda wish for the days of the vinyl picture disc huh?

[carole]

A real shame but unfortunately to be expected, been on the cards for a while. Guess I'm just an old fart but I like the physical copy, also the collector in me finds it difficult to look at my hard drive in the same way as I look at a shelf full of CD's.

Same here, nothing compares to having the physical single in your hand. But at least they are not singling Meat out, it was always so frustrating seeing other artists singles being released, but not Meat's.

Carole

[duke knooby]

so are the days of a smash hit single to break an album a thing of the past, if so, will we see a further decline in song writing and album making?

[Monstro]

God I hope not, t'other half has been asked to do the lyrics for a recording project and I wanna be rich lol.

Don't think there'll be a lack of new stuff, just the way it's released.

With Mercury releasing that statement though I do wonder if it's anything top do with the coming takeover, getting to be a VERY few companies owning the labels now.

[BostonAngel]

Sucks for someone like me. I buy most of my music on CD. Don't have my own computer. The ones that I have access to don't have a CD burner. Don't own an i-pod, etc. These electronic gadgets are rather pricey and I have very limited resources. Things like rent, food, utilities, etc take most of my pay (when I am actually working) Downloading music doesn't make sense for me because the only time I can listen to it is when I am sitting at the same computer that I actually downloaded it to.
Loved my nice vinyl album and single collection. I love my CD's too! If they do away with music in physical form and have it available only electronically, my music collection will remain stuck in the stone ages because I won't be able to get anything new.
Not to mention that the record company's end up losing a big chunk of revenue on electronic format because too many people copy and share music files. It is so easy to do and so readily available. Whether it is ethical or not, people do it all the time.

[evil nickname]

Not to mention that the record company's end up losing a big chunk of revenue on electronic format because too many people copy and share music files. It is so easy to do and so readily available. Whether it is ethical or not, people do it all the time.

How I wish that everybody would just stop saying this like it is true. Yes, the entertainment industry is making less money than before. No, there is no compelling evidence that this is due to 'pirating' and/or 'illegal downloading' through the internet. There has been a lot of research to the contrary. Like this one (http://www.vancouversun.com/business/technology/truth+about+copyright+pirates+profits/4483243/story.html), for example, that concludes that 'piracy' is the result of the entertainment industry failing to get their products to the people who want them. (Like me, who would have bought the IICHY single, but couldn't because I'm in the Netherlands and using an operating system for which there is no iTunes available. Not that I would want to use that bloatware, but still.)

[Monstro]

How I wish that everybody would just stop saying this like it is true.

Sorry, but just to clarify, are you saying that the record companies aren't losing money to piracy?

[evil nickname]

Sorry, but just to clarify, are you saying that the record companies aren't losing money to piracy?

Oh, I'm sure that they lose some money due to people downloading music without paying. But I highly doubt that 'piracy' is the sole reason that music sales decline year after year after year. Not every 'illegally downloaded' album or song is a lost sale.

It's a whole lot more complicated than just saying that the declining revenue is caused by 'piracy' alone.

[Dave]

Well, take the newest Britney Spears CD, Femme Fatale, prime example of "piracy" working to their advantage. The album had a "planned leak" with bonus tracks tacked on to the main product. I snagged it up to give it a listen, even reviewed it on my site and got a nice thank you from a Jive Records approved Britney fan site for "helping spread the word" about the album. The simple fact of the matter is that I have to agree with Evil Nickname here, piracy is not THE crippling factor in the music industry.

[BostonAngel]

How I wish that everybody would just stop saying this like it is true. Yes, the entertainment industry is making less money than before. No, there is no compelling evidence that this is due to 'pirating' and/or 'illegal downloading' through the internet........

I wasn't saying that it was the only reason records comanies are losing money. It is most definitely a contributing factor.
I am one of the guilty parties when it comes to "pirating and illegal downloading". Almost every piece of music that I have on my computer has been something that has been sent to be by someone else. I have not legally paid to download it to my computer. I do have a few free downloads. Granted, I don't have all that much music on my computer. I know people that have quite a collection. There are many factors that contribute to lost revenue, illegal downloading being only one of them. I will always be one of those people that likes there music, books, etc in physical form. I want it to be something that I can literally hold on to. That's just me

[AndrewG]

So probably no physical CD singles either for handbasket if Meat were to stay with them in the UK? I guess it doesn't matter really given how little they seemed to push the singles for HCTB. :roll:

Link here (http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/12850186)

[AndrewG]

Is this really "off topic" considering it's Meat's record label? :?

[PanicLord]

:twisted: Why?
What's the difference?

I dunno man, it's just the way that I feel ;)

For me, I tend to buy a single to see if I like the track / artist / style of music. It's also nice and quick and easy and cheap. Therefore I don't really care about the box or the book or the 3 other progressively worse mixes of the same song, and could do without extra cases clogging up my shelves.

For my favourite artists' albums I prefer a physical CD so I can read lyrics, maybe get the story, see if I recognise the writers, and also in part just because it is nice to have a physical thing - an actual object.

For general music buying I am happy with either MP3s or CDs.

[Wario]

I wonder if with the death of physical cds in general in the future (face it, that will happen whether we like it or not), Greatest Hits compilations will also die.

[AndyK]

I wonder if with the death of physical cds in general in the future (face it, that will happen whether we like it or not), Greatest Hits compilations will also die.

Doubt it, they'll bundle the "greatest hits" tracks with a couple of new studio tracks or unreleased live tracks to entice people to download the lot for them to get hold of the new stuff. It happens already with the physicall CD so I can't see that changing.

[Sarge]

As much as I prefer physical releases, the number of physical singles I have bought over the years is very low. I'm not happy about what has become of the music biz and I hope that albums will remain to be available on CD / vinyl but a crisis (in case it really is one) can trigger innovation. Modern technology, new communication channels and the fact that music can easily be copied / duplicated are not only a potential threat to sales figures, they can also provide artists with new, more flexible and more easily accessible ways to publish and promote their work.

It requires constant hard work and creativity though, as music, art, film, literature, etc. won't be as elitist as they used to be and almost everybody will have similar tools available, so it might get harder to stand out from the crowd and attract the audience's attention for a longer period of time.

[...] 'piracy' is the result of the entertainment industry failing to get their products to the people who want them. (Like me, who would have bought the IICHY single, but couldn't because I'm in the Netherlands and using an operating system for which there is no iTunes available. Not that I would want to use that bloatware, but still.)

Exactly. What's the point of excluding a large number of potential customers? And what's the point in making "singles" available for download without promoting them sufficiently? Neither Peace On Earth nor If I Can't Have You was properly advertised or played anywhere at the time of their release, as far as I remember. And why was Los Angeloser released as a "single" in Germany while the song was played on the BBC (!)?

[dottie]

A real shame but unfortunately to be expected, been on the cards for a while. Guess I'm just an old fart but I like the physical copy, also the collector in me finds it difficult to look at my hard drive in the same way as I look at a shelf full of CD's.

I totally agree Monstro....each and everyone one of my CD's/Vinyl has a memory attached to it......