Albums - a thing of the past?

I think it's funny how everyone used to always hear the singles, THEN they would consider getting the album.  Now were back to just singles.
 
Can you even imagine how much would be missed if Albums like Abbey Road were never made?  I can think of several other examples too.

I think that the paradigm shift is affecting the pop market. The Beatles started making albums that were more than just a collection of singles as they were moving into more "uncharted territories" and music was becoming something you'd listen to not just dance to to paraphrase something I've heard once.
 
I guess its disposable nature is finally catching up again with pop.
 
I would think that heavy metal fans still enjoy albums - though in recent years, even classic bands like Iron Maiden have started offering longer and longer albums, and I'd certainly like to see them go back to 45 minutes max kind of albums. Likewise, classic rock, and jazz and all...
 
I think there's still a market for albums. I can't imagine David Gilmour fans being happier with a single than a full length album.
 

craigb
Another reason I like albums is that very often there are so-called "filler" songs on them that I end up liking more than the singles that are used to sell the album (and overplayed on the radio).

And when the single is Something+Come Together and the fillers are songs like She's So Heavy, Because, Oh Darling and such, well, uh, you know you should be glad...

As to whether the LP as a form is dying; I don't think so. The reality is that most acts weren't album acts, ever, really. I think people who do it well will continue to do so. There are lots of artists that work better as singles artists, and I can see that becoming more of a thing; I like Katy Perry, she's made some big stomping pop tunes. But I don't think anyone needs a Katy Perry LP. Not saying that snarkily, I think she's really good.

 

John T
Modern 80 minute LPs are such a drag. I mean, double LPs have always been tricky...

Exactly.
 
As a general rule, all the best double LPs I bought back in the day were live albums (the only notable exception that comes to mind off the top of my head is The Clash's London Calling). An hour and a half live set was a perfect fit for two LPs, and 35~40 minutes for a studio album was just about right, with the added advantage that one LP would fit nicely on to one side of a TDK C90 for the motor.
 
Another relevant, but related factor is that it's little wonder that back in the 70s and 80s, most bands seemed to be much more prolific with their albums than they are today. It's pretty obvious I suppose seeing as they only had to write and record half the amount of material per release compared to filling an 80 minute CD nowadays.
 
I suspect that, in general, current bands probably don't write any more or any less in the CD age than their forebears did in the 'golden' age of vinyl. And not just because they might only release an 80 minute CD album half as frequently as they would a 40 minute LP. My theory is that the change is a little more subtle than that, in as much as a lot of the 'filler' tracks that now find their way onto a CD album would have, at one time, been published as the 'B' sides of singles.
 
But even though I know I'm still getting the same amount of music, I still think I'd prefer bands that I follow to release 40 minute CDs, just twice as often.
 
And don't get me started on the difference in the artwork between an LP and a CD.
 
 

Off the top of my head, the only double (studio) albums that really work for me are Electric Ladyland and Physical Graffiti. The Wall also works, but that's a whole different kind of journey.
 
Even some of my all time favorites like NIN The Fragile I find too long. Not that I don't like the songs, but running at over 100 minutes, there's just too much to ingest at once. Not to mention that beyond 70-ish minutes, you practically need to schedule time for those things in your agenda.
 

Glyn Barnes
Deciding the play order even for albums of unrelated songs used to be an art form and it can be quite startling when the familiar order is disturbed.

Definitely!  What would Zep's Heartbreaker be without Living Loving Maid following it?  Or the Car's Moving In Stereo without All Mixed Up immediately after?  There are a bunch of examples that sound jarring when played separately.
 
Obviously, this is even more apparent with concept albums.

slartabartfast
With web distribution and every guy [or girl] who can manage an upload declaring himself a star, it is quite possible that a single hit will define a musical career again.

Like that turd "Friday" by Rebecca Black that has over 60 million(!) views on YouBoob...

Bristol_Jonesey
I guess were just damned fortunate to grow up when we did

We're supposed to grow up?

Rain
... 
These days, however, albums have become so incredibly long (while our attention span was taking a dramatic dive) that I rarely listen to recent albums.
...

I guess that you will never listen to a Beethoven or Stravinsky, or Tchaikovsky, if your attention span is stuck on the rock mentality of 3.4 minutes (that's e or 4 minutes) per song, that MUST have lyrics telling you that this or that happened, or is important so you know better!
 
That's a top of the pops mentality for a commercial society ... the veritable "Blade Runner" that you and I will be fighting against in the future, and we must stand against that complacency.
 
It's like saying that you are getting too old and making love now is ... 3 to 4 minutes, over and out! And then wonder why things didn't go right! And life is getting boring ...
 
It's not even about the album! It's about the people that push this stuff that are trying to make you feel guilty for not buying it. It has been like that for 40 years, when music companies were complaining about all these small bands stealing sales from the larger groups and artists ... but nothing was said that those same bands and artists were putting out total ****, as an excuse for more **** and call it art. Sort of a Jean Genet just came alive and is delivering us "Our  Lady of Flowers" in one nice neat little package ... and you are supposed to like it. Well, the language is pretty and the descriptions are insane ... but in the end, it's sick and sad and pathetic!

i buy albums, on vinyl even, more than anything else the last 4 years or so, and they're usually very nice objets with coloured heavyweight vinyl, nice packaging, great smell, etc, and a recent stat said in the uk vinyl sales are the highest for donkey's :-)

Moshkiae
 
 
They will take a suggestion to add a note from another guitarist, but if the same suggestion came from someone that is not a guitarist, they will say that you are not a musician ... and have no idea what it might sound or not with that one note in there!
 

Mosh, I can't say I agree with that. I think musicians listen to everybody and it becomes information that they will process along with everything else in hopes that they can create. In the end they (we) have to make the call and lay down what we "feel" is good.
The reason I can't say I disagree with you is because there are people that listen but may not hear what is being said. It happens. Happens to us all. I can't say it happens because of one being a musician or not.
 
 

In my very humble opinion, not all advice is good advice.  An artist will receive all kinds of advice from a wide variety of sources.  If they tried to follow them all, they'd never finish anything.  Most of the musicians I have known personally were willing to consider advice regardless of the source.  A good idea is valuable because it's a good idea, not because of the person who offered it.  In my experience, somone with a signficant degree of skill or expertise in my particular artform will often provide very detailed and precise advice based upon their experience.  Someone without these skills may have a broad idea, but may lack the language or detailed knowledge to convey their meaning.  Good and bad ideas may come from either source. 
 
Whenever I have a discussion where someone says, "There are no stupid ideas," I have to bite my tongue because I just thought of 17 of them.  Of course there are bad ideas.  That's why the good ones stand out. 
 
The artist must choose whether or not to follow a piece of advice.  It is, after all, their work.  When an artist chooses not to follow someone's advice, it only means that they disagreed and chose to go their way.  That's what artists do.  That's what drives some of us to create our own stuff.  We play the songs and styles we want to hear.  We write the stories we want to read.  We paint the pictures we want to see.  It's not because we're too arrogant to listen to other people tell us what they want us to do.  It's because we have our own vision for our art.  In the end, isn't that what we really want from an artist?

When Tull brought out their 'Bursting Out - Live' double album I took the day off college to listen to and absorb it, poring over the photos and liner notes. I miss all that magic.