Wow..looking at this thread makes me glad I chose to simply bow out of a recent discussion on here. Even when people agree to disagree you will find several posts of attempts to get in a last word lol. I think I have said this before but music is right up there with religion, politics and guns when it comes to creating highly subjective opinions presented as and believed by the person stating such to be facts. Most, right or wrong, you can rehash your statements hundreds of ways but once it becomes you vs them on a topic, you will simply take turns rehashing. We all do it now and then. The key is to come to a dead stop when it happens and try to get back on topic.

Back to the topic.. I think another factor in the decline of albums is that they are notas needed. Ask yourself, why were albums created to begin with? I mean this as a somewhat rhetorical question but something to think about. We all belong to generations that were born to a world that had the album as the norm. It made since to deliver collections of songs rather than one at a time for a number of reasons. Playing one song at a time used to mean physically taking out a 45 putting that black thing in the center of turntable or one of those plastic yellow things. It meant marketing and promoting one song at a time. It meant one trip for each song. Technology has made these things non-factors or at the least severely reduced them. It only takes a few clicks to play any single song from anyone in any order on demand. Our tendency to be nostalgic tells us that albums were so much better but I'm not sure we would have listened to them from 1st to last track with such frequency if we had the tech we do now to . The ability to conveniently skip songs did not come along until the CD.

Rain
You know, I've been thinking about this whole argument, and maybe it's more than just albums that are a thing of the past.
 
Back in the days, when information was scarce and albums often had to be custom ordered and all, one could think that there was a certain merit in stepping off the beaten path and finding music that did not have a big record company to promote it.
 
I remember ordering albums by bands we knew nothing about from a catalog - w/o even a picture or anything. You didn't get to preview those. And you often had to pay more, because that stuff was imported. All we knew is that they'd toured with a band we knew, or that they were listed in the liner notes of a record or something. There was a lot of guess work.
 
You had to do your homework if you wanted to get an idea of what was out there. You had to have that curiosity. And I guess it meant something.
 
But nowadays, everything is just a click away. Knowing stuff don't mean a thing.
 
Whether it's Lady Gaga or Van der Graaf Generator - one may get you tons more hits in a Google search, but the end result is the same. Practically everything has been logged somewhere and is accessible from virtually anywhere by anyone.
 
In fact, a quick iTunes search and I found a bunch of Van der Graaf albums and Amon Duul and tons of those. So anyone can just grab them off of iTunes or Amazon or then stream them on Grooveshark on YouTube.
 
As a matter of fact, all those bands have been around for so long that they're pretty much established. Maybe they haven't grown in popularity, but they're as readily available as the next Beyonce single. And they've been around for so long that anyone who's into prog rock knows about them. They're the established acts, the classics every fan know about.
 
Still can't get any Tool from the iTune store though.
Now, that requires some homework. :P
 
 

 
I remember years ago initially thinking, the Internet has leveled the playing field and made it oh so much easier to publish ones own music all with just a click = done. And get their own EPK and Website(s) published (online). Butt I did not more carefully think about all the cons;
 
1) There are very clever programs (Software) and abundant libraries of loops readily available, therefore requires no music theory or musicianship skills to create music - -
 
2) And also, because it's oh so easy for anyone to publish his/her music = the music scene is way, way overly saturated; 
 
3) On top of the massive pile are releases by major labels and established independent labels or Sub-Labels (is another term), to better explain, independent labels that are affiliated with the major labels. So,
 
4) The majors and their affiliates have their contacts, support and invested money (majors spend millions) to more than kick-start marketing campaigns (major media exposure).
 
5) The economy has taken a beating - much cheaper for these labels to invest, to focus on releasing "Singles" and this also make is quicker, more efficient, more focused media reviews.  
 
6) All these hugely popular download music sites all offering "Singles" and; 
 
7) It’s oh so much cheaper to release music targeted for above mentioned (6) whereas CD's are more expensive; it cost virtually nothing to release MP3 and other downloadable formats. If a new band wants to be successful; 
 
9) Labels rely on a good marketing strategy along with contacts to kick-start their release – and bands need to perform; to help build up their following (fans) and this will also attract major labels and media attention. Usually at the very least, show information published and if the band is great, a review (published). This will get self-independent bands struggling to compete with the majors and sub-lables reasonably good exposure. 
 
10) Whoa, I almost forgot to mention torrent sites and streaming sites. Streaming sites has severely impacted self-independent bands for example, unless a band is with a major label, they will get much less attention and much less per-streaming ($)! Again, all focused on per-song, per-play ((Singles)) Sure the album is listed, but most people will hear the first few seconds and skip to another band.  Tip: Put your best song up front, on top of the playlist. 
 
11) There's a lot of misinformation and scams. 
 
 
Anyway, I released an album and a year later requested a take-down except for the CD which is available at Amazon. From thereon people have to buy the album with no option to purchase per-song; "Singles". As explain, the music scene (distributor/retailers) are mostly setup to release an album but with the "Singles" (per-song downloadable format) option.  
 
IMO I should not have release an album because: I jumped the gun and unfortunately, due to health reasons I will not perform live anymore. Oh well, I never liked being in the spotlight; I never liked the commercial "super-hyped" aspect of the music scene. I remember watching a documentary about George Harrison and yeah he felt the same way. Therefore, as you can imagine I am in a wee bit of a difficult situation but have other plans to workaround it. Meanwhile, I have to take it easy, one step at a time - in my case that be, one tiny step at a time.
 
- -  
 
Thanks (in reply to your previous post)
 
Wish you and yours all the best! :) 
 
 
 
 

dubdisciple
 The ability to conveniently skip songs did not come along until the CD.

I don't agree because it wasn't really inconvenient to record favorite takes off albums
to a cassette. Wasn't anymore inconvenient than burning a compilation CD IMO.
Most component home systems had cassette record/players. At least that is true with the boys
I grew-up with.
 
 
 

Hi,
 

SteveStrummerUK Hang on a minute, when did this suddenly become about my playing abilities?
...

 
I don't look at my "craft" as just "fun". I look at my writing as my life, and getting better on it is important to me!
 

The simplicity or not of any piece of music is irrelevant to whether it’s enjoyable to listen to or not.

 
So history of music is just about "enjoyment", and the rest is crap?
 
Sounds like a 20th century fan-rock comment!
 

...
Who says “the Clash's work does not stand up very well against a lot of writers, painters, musicians and other artists out there”?
 
You?
...

 
I DO.
 
And I like comparing all the arts, since all the "artists" are in the same pot, so to speak.
 
As much as I want to add all the folks here, I can't ... because many of them are thinking with their egos, not their work! You can not stand out in the crowd doing the same thing as anyone else, or someone else's work!
 
But you're not hearing me talk about the individuality needed to get there ... the "you" that I talk about all the time! Instead you turn this discussion into some stupid point about me not liking the Clash or caring about Black Sabbath ... well I do have Sabbath Bloody Sabbath and Sabotage, their only two albums I enjoy!

spacey

dubdisciple
The ability to conveniently skip songs did not come along until the CD.

I don't agree because it wasn't really inconvenient to record favorite takes off albums
to a cassette. Wasn't anymore inconvenient than burning a compilation CD IMO.
Most component home systems had cassette record/players. At least that is true with the boys
I grew-up with.
 
 
 

Apples and oranges. I recorded my albums to tape too.   You are comparing the creation of a compilation a process that will take you at bare minimum the length of the sum of the songs with a process that takes seconds without having any additional equipment. Hardly in the same category of convenience from time factor alone.  With a cd changerger I could get to any of hundreds of songs in seconds before you managed to tape one song without loss of fidelity.  The irony of this is that cd technology is now dated because CDs are dying a slow death too because they are now less convenient than the many forms of media players and on demand streaming.

mosh...seriously...let it go

dubdisciple

spacey

dubdisciple
The ability to conveniently skip songs did not come along until the CD.

I don't agree because it wasn't really inconvenient to record favorite takes off albums
to a cassette. Wasn't anymore inconvenient than burning a compilation CD IMO.
Most component home systems had cassette record/players. At least that is true with the boys
I grew-up with.
 
 
 

Apples and oranges. I recorded my albums to tape too.   You are comparing the creation of a compilation a process that will take you at bare minimum the length of the sum of the songs with a process that takes seconds without having any additional equipment. Hardly in the same category of convenience from time factor alone.  With a cd changerger I could get to any of hundreds of songs in seconds before you managed to tape one song without loss of fidelity.  The irony of this is that cd technology is now dated because CDs are dying a slow death too because they are now less convenient than the many forms of media players and on demand streaming.

You stated, " The ability to conveniently skip songs did not come along until the CD."  which I do agree with- it was not inconvenient.
If you want to make it a time factor, fine.  You are the one if fact comparing the two processes based on time.
 
That fact is that it wasn't a problem or inconvenience at the time.

washing clothes by hand was not seen as inconvenient at the time.  The Model T was once state of the art.  The Sony Walkman was revolutionary at the time.  DIpping a feather pen in ink was not seen as inconvenient either...until we progressed.. I did not say in my intitial statement that I felt people thought it was inconvenient at that time because I could not expect [people to see the future. I made a statement that you quoted and you added an element that I did not claim. I was perfectly satisfied with how I did things then, but I certainly would not go back to it. Semantics aside,  my point was that once a medium came along that allowed us to simply skip the songs that did not immediately grab us we were more apt as a society to do so.

dubdisciple
 The ability to conveniently skip songs did not come along until the CD.

I really don't care what you meant or what you may want to compare it to.
I read that statement as it is and I don't agree with it. Twist it any old way you want.
The fact is, we could, did and it wasn't an inconvenience. I'm done with it.