http://news.yahoo.com/s/h...ost/073413

A Good Album is More than Just a Collection of Singles

By Jermaine Dupri

Some people find it hard to understand my man Jay-Z's decision not to let iTunes break up his American Gangster album and sell it as single tracks. They say he's fighting the future and losing out on sales from fans who only want to download singles. But I say it was a stand somebody had to take in the music industry. Jay is speaking for all of us.

He's not the first. He's not the lone cowboy in all of this. Radiohead and AC/DC have turned their backs on iTunes for the same reason. Doug Morris, the CEO of Universal Group, has been fighting Steve Jobs on this for a minute now. But Jay is at a level people are going to pay attention to. He's had 10 number one albums. He may run Def Jam but he's also an artist who put his heart and soul into something that he wants people to hear all the way through. As the creator and investor, he has every right to demand this.

Not only that, I believe he's starting a movement that's necessary. More artists and producers are gonna take back control of how their art is sold because his strategy has paid off. Maybe Hova coulda sold another 100,000 to 200,000 units by playing it iTunes' way, but he still had the number one album last week. He STILL sold 425,000 units. Even more, he's proven you can still sell an album without those guys.

Jay made everyone realize that iTunes taking what we give them and doing what they want with it isn't the way it has to be. He put the light on and made other people realize, "Oh these guys are just selling our music, they ain't making it." If anything, WE made iTunes. It's like how we spent $300,000 to $500,000 each on our videos and MTV and BET went ahead and built an entire video television industry off of our backs. We can't let that happen again. These businesses exist solely because of our music. So if we as artists, producers and label executives stand up, those guys at Apple can either cooperate, or have nothing for people to buy and download on their iPods.

Apple thinks that's never gonna happen. They think that we as the record industry will never stick together. But Universal sells one out of every three records. All it'll take is for Warner Music to say, "You know what, I'm with you," for us to shut 'em down. No more iPods! They won't have nothin' to play on their players! We can take back the power if we're willing to sacrifice some sales to make our point.

These days people just assume that you need a number one single to have a number one album. But look at what's really happening. Soulja Boy sold almost 4 million singles and only 300,000 albums! We let the consumer have too much of what they want, too soon, and we hurt ourselves. Back in the day when people were excited about a record coming out we'd put out a single to get the ball going and if we sold a lot of singles that was an indication we'd sell a lot of albums. But we'd cut the single off a few weeks before the album came out to get people to wait and let the excitement build. When I put out Kris Kross we did that. We sold two million singles, then we stopped. Eventually we sold eight million albums!

Did consumer complain? Maybe so. But at what point does any business care when consumer complains about the money? Why do people not care how we - the people who make music - eat? If they just want the single, they gotta get the album. That was how life was. Today we should at least have that option. Yeah, it's about the money, but it's also about quality. Creating each album as a body of work that means something gives the consumer something better to listen to, It's that simple. Otherwise all anyone would care about is making a bunch of ringtones.

A good album is more than just a collection of singles. American Gangster was a story with a beginning, middle and end. I came in at the end and did the last song, "Fallin'." But every joint was related. Each song gets better from listening to the one next to it, and the one after that. I didn't just sit by myself in my studio in Atlanta, crank somethin' out, and throw it in the pot.

That album was the product of the best minds in hip hop today: Jay, Puffy, the Neptunes, No I.D., Just Blaze and me. We all came together and threw ideas around. Me and Jay had long conversations about our favorite mafia movies, and that moment in all those gangsta stories - Scarface, The Godfather -- when the hero makes his big mistake and falls. We came in with respect for each others' craft so the whole album could do right by the story. We made quality music for our consumers. We made art.

None of this is new. Every record is in some way a concept album. The whole always strives to be better than its parts. I dedicate a whole chapter in my book to this process. Every thing I produce is a product of me spending time with the artist and getting to know where his or her head is at. Usher's Confessions album was all about where he was at that point in his life. Same with Mariah's Emancipation of Mimi.

Even if I'm not executive producing and I'm brought in at the end on someone else's album, I listen to what everyone else has done and try to make my tracks fit. I'm like an interior decorator who comes into a house and f.ixes up one room. It doesn't look like every other room, but at least it picks up some threads so that room looks like it belongs in the same home. Every album is created for you to hear the next song, especially on rap albums. Rappers make intros on their records for a reason- they want you to listen it to set the mood and get ready for that second song.

I'm not saying that music can't ever be sold as singles. Not every album is equal and consumers are always going to try to cherry pick the songs they like. But that doesn't mean the people who investing their time, money and sweat into a record shouldn't have the right to decide how it's gonna be sold, whether that's in single units or as a whole. My book, Young, Rich and Dangerous: The Making of a Music Mogul, came out in hardcover last month, but Simon & Schuster doesn't let the book stores tear it up and sell it chapter by chapter. A record is no different.

Asking us to let other people mess with all our hard work like that is disrespectful. It's like when you go an art auction, and an Andy Warhol painting is up for sale at $5 million, but a buyer is allowed to just by off the top right hand corner of the canvas for a hundred thou'

Apple, why are you helping the consumer destroy our canvas? We don't tell you to break up your computers into bits and pieces and sell off each thing. When you go to the Apple store you may only need one thing, but you have to buy all their plug ins and stuff. You have to buy their whole package, even if you don't necessarily want it, or your equipment won't work. We're just saying, if you have the audacity to sell your products like that, don't treat our products as something less than yours.

Respect the craft!

**

Jermaine Dupri, who was named the most successful R&B producer of all time by the Guinness World Records 2007, is a Grammy-award winning music producer, president of Island Urban Records and author of Young, Rich and Dangerous: The Making of a Music Mogul (Atria, October 2007).

bboy87 said:

Of all time? How did that happen?

iTunes sells Prance's LoveSexy the album as one long mp3, just like the CD was untracked.

I think Jay-Z should have tried that if he really felt the album should have come as a whole on iTunes.

I agree 100% on this, this was also discussed by Elton John about a year ago when he told Jay Leno that he didnt download from iTunes or have an iPod. Elton said someone took the time to record an album, i dont want a soundbyte of who they are, i want the whole thing. I totally agree with this thinking. Next year the Beatles are set to go digital, but should they? I dont think they should, someone shouldnt be able to piece together their music for 99 cents.

This has clearly hurt album sales, and of course Downloading has too but lets be real, Rihanna had 4 top singles already and yet just passed 700,000 albums sold. Back in the 80's and early 90's before soundscan took over, when you always had the "Physical Single" (be it cd single or cassette or vinyl) you had artists selling singles and selling albums. And also back then, the weight of sales to airplay was clearly put on SALES, now its almost all airplay, big difference. Back in the 80's you could have someone like THE CARS release and Album "heartbeat City" and sell 4 million copies and have 5 top 20 singles from it, and it wasnt like the Cars where a really big band that could sell like that, it just was the way things were marketed. You had fans buying the singles and the albums, getting the singles for mixes or unreleased cuts, and then the casual fan just buying the song they liked, but it worked then, it doesnt now.

I totally agree though on NOT selling tracks for 99 cents, if you think Digital isnt the death of music and the way we think of it, then you are wrong. More labels should stand up to iTunes and not give their stuff over like this, if they did then they "might" see a rise in album sales and YES a drop in singles sales, maybe it would balance out, maybe it would help, but someone needs to step in and do it already.


BTW that quote by JD about Andy Warhol is exactly what Elton John said over a year ago in his talk with Jay Leno, glad someone was listening to it
[Edited 11/20/07 14:20pm]

Jermaine Dupri said exactly what I've always said and pretty much everybody in the music business knows ...

Apple is evil

Steve Job is evil

They only care about selling ipods NOT the artists...


In just 10 years things have change in worst for recording artists... Artists don't make money off of their music anymore...

But I disagree when JD talks about taking control back

You can't fight technology... RIAA tried and they lost...

this is a lost cause...


The only way to save music is to find a new way to remunerate artists for their music because the young kids don't want to pay anymore, they are used to download for free...

JackieBlue said:

Must be in terms of sales. It sure as hell can't be for creativity.

krayzie said:

But thats not the whole deal, they have to find a way of re-marketing music, you cant make your sole source KIDS, kids by nature are not a loyal music buying public, especially now when everything is a sound-byte, from news to music everyone wants stuff in a short story and they dont want to sacrifice. The industry has to just cut the head off the beast now, the need to break the hold that iTunes has on them, at least that whole 99 cent bullshit. This of course wont hurt older artists or ones with more loyal fans that will still go buy a whole album of their favorite. But they are failing to talk to the BIGGER beast in the room and thats Soundscan, once this took over this is when it all went down the drain. I was scanning the difference in the number of number one hits before soundscan and after, before soundscan there were an average of 25-30 different number one singles a year (this is when SALES counted) when soundscan came in late 91 the weight of Airplay and Sales changed, it was almost ALL about airplay and about 10-20% sales, well the first few years with soundscan the average OF DIFFERENT number one singles was 9. That is a huge change overnight, though no one was suspect to what caused it, hmmm maybe something with BUYING all the radio time for a select few songs.

phunkdaddy said:

Yeah, it's for chart stats and sales.

Maybe they can start selling albums in SD card forms to insert into mp3 players.

I'm just thinking of ideas

I tell you what..when artists start making albums worth buying THE WHOLE album for, I will gladly shell out more than 99 cents per track. Till then, I think Steve Jobs and everyone else are kings for not making us, the consumers, buy a shitty product for 2-3 standout tracks.

I believe it was Michael Jackson who once said, every song should have the strength to be a single. I agree.

Timmy84 said:

There is something really scary going down with Soundscan, i didnt realize it until i was searching a Top 40 book and in the back it listed every number one single year by year, and the fact an average year before soundscan there would be 25-30 different number songs, and then right after soundscan and AIRPLAY became the main factor, there were between 9-11 different number one songs, that is scary, i think like in baseball when the owners all got together to tear down free agency "Collusion" it was called, no one has caught on that labels are buying the airplay, and their chart positions by using Soundscan, a system that everyone thinks is on the "up and up"

Vanilli said:

Im not buying into that, i hear that complaint all the time and it doesnt hold water at all, mainly because i can look through tons of crappy records i bought in the 80s where i had to save my allowance for weeks to buy, i wasnt crying about it. Sorry but this era of consumer wants everything for nothing, dont work like that, if you dont want it dont buy it, if you are suspect that the Soulja album is going to suck dont buy it.

Vanilli said:

Co sign!

bboy87 said:

Disney did something like this for some of their acts. I remember buying a lil card for my niece for That So Raven.

lastdecember said:

I can't help but think that what Elton is saying is very hypocrical. Is he an album's artist? Maybe, but he sure had a ton of hit singles and still keeps finding new and interesting ways of rereleasing them to either new audiences or to resell to fans...whatever you want to call it. Itunes is not the greatest hope for music however it is certainly better than depending on radio.

I don't think we can ever hope for the return of the physical single in America. As it is, the maxi single is dying (the last people still interested in the format are dance artists). The thing that is shockingly good about the digital single is this...It's the great equalizer. All singles cost the same. Someone in a Mariah thread mentioned the insanity that was "dumping", which was lowering the price of physical singles to next to nothing for a hit song. Now every single is 99 cents. As for radio controlling what the hit singles are...that is dying out fast. Did Britney hit number 3 based on all those DJs that goof on her? Radio was mildly supporting the singles but huge sales helped it through the roof. Sure, it might be a bunch of crazies buying multiple copies but at least they bought them (and yes, record companies can buy them, too but that is slightly more honest than buying off music programmers and/or DJs with coke....). I agree that massacring an album is not a good thing but considering the quality of some albums, you gotta to at least give credit to people buying digital and not stealing! That is very simplistic view and I don't agree with it 100%. The fact is that there is no quick fix to the problems of the industries....just hopefully some clean band-aids here and there...Itunes might be an old bandage, but it's sticking for now.

When it is all said and done I would rather by a whole album than just single tracks. I can always pick which songs will end up on my ipod.

bboy87 said:

That's cool. I heard the Barenaked Ladies released an album on a USB key.

VinnyM27 said:

Elton was always an albums artist like Stevie Wonder was like Prince was like Billy Joel, these are artists that had tons of "singles" (real singles, not airplay singles) but they also sell tons of albums for the most part.As for repacking hits, thats what labels do to make their money, mainly because they dont have to worry about paying for promotion or working out a financial deal with the artists, its 100% profit for the label NOT the artist at all. I do think the single elimination was the dumbest thing the industry ever did, and it was a joint conspiracy with Soundscan and labels and radio, the fact is that singles sell fine in the UK people still buy them, mainly for bonus tracks or mixes, its just a smarter way to market, but the 99 cent idea is dumb, and it is "dumping", and they shouldnt even be counted as sales, there should be a commercial single release and that should be the song you are able to buy for 99 cents, not every song on an album.

The thing is that the labels and iTunes could work together on this but they dont want to. I still believe in singles but if the idea of Cdsingles is over than that is what should be issued to iTunes. An album delivered to iTunes should be sold as a whole. The only time a single should be sold is when that is the single released, just like the old days, release a single, maybe have a bside or a remix or two or an instrumental etc.. then let it have a set amount of time to be in print/available just like singles used to be and then pull it out of the 99 cent offer or whatever the price may be.

the ironic thing about what JD is saying is that, of all the work i've heard by him and produced by him, that's ALL it is: a collection of great singles, and not an interesting, unified whole.


but hey, whatever

Raze said:

hahah I know right!! When's the last time he did a whole album anyway?

the first Xscape was quite cohesive though.

Vanilli said:

Not that bullshit again...

Tell me how many albums do you like entirely ?

Vanilli said:

Steve Jobs is killing artists... He make people stop buying albums... Back in the day you have to buy an entire album for 2 or 3 good songs... This is how it used to be...

It's disrespectful for artists...

It's like going to a concert and only pay for the performances that you liked... Nope, you have to pay for the ENTIRE CONCERT...

Vanilli said:

Oh Yes agree but he never said people should only buy their favorite songs from an entire album...

krayzie said:

But that's exactly what people USED to be able to do, back in the day. There were actual singles that you could buy in the store. You COULD buy just the songs that you liked. Look at where the industry was then, and look where it is now.

By the way Jay Z's album isn't worth buying the full thing for.

I used to buy CD singles all the time for extended and remix versions, especially imports. The only reason I stopped was because record stores started disappearing, less of the music I liked was available and the prices for even domestics was becoming too costly.

ok...i have a dumb question.


What is the difference of buying the .99 song from itunes and going to a record store and buying the .99 45 single that me and my mom use to buy when I was much younger?


I'm really asking because I don't see the difference but I'm sure I'm missing something. I'm with Vanilli though...there are too many filler tracks on cds.

Rhondab said:

absolutely nothing. and the truth is, singles do help sell albums, whether it's the $.99 single in the record store or the $.99 single on iTunes.

i always find it interesting that with all of the decrying of illegal downloading, it was at exactly the same time that illegal downloading started and reliably being able to go into a record store to buy a single stopped that the industry started suffering.

who's to say which had the greater impact?

Its not about eliminating singles its just about going back to the old way of putting them out. Every track on someones album shouldnt be available for 99 cents each, thats just stupid. If someone releases a single then it should be available but it should be the way singles were, a-side b-side or a mix etc.. and it should be available until the single runs its course and the label issues another single. I think you are going to see ALOT of artists start fighting this breaking up of their albums, and im talking about Artists not the Soulja and J Holiday one ringtone wonders. If artists that have the power like a Jay Z or Elton or whomever start walking away from iTunes you will see this change in a heartbeat.

Technically the 99 cent single shouldnt even be factored in to "sales" on the charts, mainly because its below selling list price which like i said is called "dumping", which is something labels do all the time for chart positions for new releases (but thats another story).
[Edited 11/21/07 8:41am]

Itunes is most certainly not the future - however its making the industry address the problems technological advancements have posed.

I am of the opinion that these advancements should help benefit the artist - and take power away from record companies. Its strange no that both Jay z and Jermaine Dupri have their fingers in record label pies?

They do have a point that Itunes option of breaking an album up somewhat destroys the craft that goes into making music (how ironic coming from someone as hit single oriented as Jermaine), but its simplifying it to say this is killing the industry. The industry has been the architect of its own downfall in being so slow to react to these changes, and for extorting money out of the record buying public for waay too long.

The artist is not losing control - the greedy record execs are. the same ones who have no grip over the industry any more and are scared of it. I still buy CD & vinyl albums of all the artists i like as I love the physical format of music, but i have found the internet has allowed me to be exposed to artists and music I would never have discovered otherwise.

Good Morning

Here is my opinion,

Shouldnt artists appreciate that consumers are purchasing the singles that they like? I mean, if I would look at Soundscan and saw that my 3rd single has been downloaded 500,000 times?

I would say that whatever I did on that particular track has struck a positive nerve with the consumers and I would try to recreate that vibe on my next cd!

If using a Sitar and a Tibetan chant with a Hip Hop drum beat has been voted the most popular track via Itunes, then my next CD is gonna have that all over the place!

Im just sayin (or barkin)

Mutts