So to much fanfare and Twitter noise the new Kaiser Chiefs' album has dropped in a format being hailed as a "game changer" by many industry types and enthusiastic commentators. So what's the jam?
The album is a collaborative effort between Universal Music, advertising dons Wieden + Kennedy and, of course, the band themselves. The basic premise is that fans [read: consumers] get to pick 10 tracks from a possible 20, design their own art work and then download the product for a fee [£7.50]. Furthermore the version designed can then be put on sale with the designer receiving £1 from any further sales. They can even get a web-page to house their album. Snappy stuff and (given that the PRS, PPL and MU are so (*bitter personal experience) stuck in the past and recalcitrant to different monetary models) a logistical miracle.
Personally, I like the remuneration idea a great deal, even if in practice it seems fundamentally flawed. Yes the idea of investing in a product (music no less (imagine that!)) then making potential return upon your "taste" is nice. However, the return is premised on a "potential" factor (which is always alluring when we're talking money), so everyone will want their own because: a) they want the potential of return and b) they'll want something unique. The trade in pre-designed versions is going to be very small indeed, thus not offering any kind of return. If you were buying an "off-the-shelf" version designed by someone else perhaps it should be discounted therefore correcting the imbalance that, to my mind, exists inherently in this model.
But this is nitpicking really, new financial models that actively encourage people to pay for music are always to be applauded, so hats off to all parties concerned. There are many issues facing music (many of which are elucidated upon, by Wyndham Wallace, in this excellent essay published in the Quietus a couple of weeks ago) so any attempt at reforming an industry so traditionally inert to it should be welcomed.
My real issue is what this means for the album per se. I spoke to a multi-platinum record producer this morning about this venture (who shall remain nameless) and he likened it to being given two films, selecting your 10 favourite scenes and stitching them together. Yes the scenes will be exactly the same but the narrative, flow, essence and intention of the record will be compromised, lost, if not entirely distorted. The industry does need saving from itself and I'm certainly not naive enough to suggest that changing "product" isn't a necessary step; but the album should be a statement and an articulation of time, place and space not merely a collection of songs. This is why people rave about albums and not Greatest Hits. Public Enemy's A Nation of Millions or Nick Drake's Five Leaves Left (to take two disparate but entirely relevant examples) would not endure under this pick-n-mix system.
Yet, for a band like the Kaiser Chiefs (who specialise in rock-pop ditties shrouded in unintentionally-abstract platitudes, sweet nothings and beer drenched choruses) this does seem to work; so perhaps it's case of "horses for courses" (as one of their future choruses might put it).
Props nonetheless, an impressive execution.
Shaun Savage
No comments:
Post a Comment