Re: Adele - 25 (November 20th)
 

This is why sales charts are completely meaningless today. They're really "best selling albums among soccer moms and old people.".

Re: Adele - 25 (November 20th)
 

Absolutely untrue. Believe it or not, there are actually plenty of younger people who still but physical media. Certainly not as many as there used to be, but they do exsist.

Re: Adele - 25 (November 20th)
 

I guess it depends on your definition of "plenty".

The idea of having movies on discs is becoming a foreign concept to the youngsters... and that's a newer trend... music on discs have been outdated for a long time now to them. I have some of my CD orders sent to work, and it seems like everyone under 30 asks me why I bother with it instead of downloading it (legally or not). Hell, I'm being asked that by more and more 40 year olds now... people who grew up on physical media.

I'm sure a good chunk of highschool kids have never owned music on physical media in their life.

Re: Adele - 25 (November 20th)
 

Speaking as a suburban father of teenagers, this is not the case in my experience. Physical media is completely alien to my kids and their friends. Buying a CD is a laughable concept to them, as laughable as "waiting until your show is on".

Re: Adele - 25 (November 20th)
 

I get what you're saying. I don't disagree completely.

I'm just saying, if it were the other way around... if Adele instead announced that her album was ONLY on streaming services, those same folks who are willing to spend $10 on her album for one song... they'd at the very least be aware that streaming is a thing, and maybe they'd be willing to spend that same $10 to check out what the fuss is about, listen to her entire catalog, or 10 million other albums.
Sure, many won't bother. That's okay, too. But those hold-outs were never going to consider it anyway. They're not the target audience. The point is to make everyone aware, and the only way to do that is when a major act -- like Adele, or Taylor Swift, or Coldplay or... not many others -- steps up. Someone who already makes headlines, making headlines in favor of streaming, not against it.

Right now, the message is "Don't try these services because they don't have Adele or Coldplay or Taylor Swift or Black Keys." That's great for Adele because she can sell 2,500,000 copies of her album. But that doesn't do anything for the folks who just want their songs to be heard, kind of like how she was before she got noticed.

And that's not to say that every shitty Adele-clone deserves to be heard by Adele's fans. It's just that streaming makes it SO easy to check out talented artists that you'd love if they were actually on your radar.

Anyway... I'm just saying... there's only a tiny handful of artists that can affect change in the industry, but they all seem to refuse to do it, because it means less week-one sales for them. All it takes is one of those "big" names, that truly gets it, and people who wouldn't otherwise consider streaming would suddenly be willing to give it a go.

:up: Exactly right. I can push books and records and Blu-rays on my kid all I want. In the end, she's likely not going to care about the physical items themselves; just the content within.

Re: Adele - 25 (November 20th)
 

Hello is a good song to lead off the album. I don't care for the first half of the album very much.

I like Hello and think it very finishes very strong with the final four cuts, 8,9,10, & 11.

Nothing close to as good as her last record. Kinda surprised it took four years, and this is all we got.

Re: Adele - 25 (November 20th)
 

.

Well, my experience comes from working in an actuall music store, where I see it happen on a daily basis. I'll admit, it's nothing like it used to be, but it still happens. Just saying, physical media is far from dead

Re: Adele - 25 (November 20th)
 

So...you're basically saying the big name musicians should put their albums on streaming services in order to promote those services out of the goodness of their hearts. What do you think the long view is for the artists themselves that they are somehow missing? Streaming services just aren't making the artists very much money, so why would they want to promote them?

I think you may be overestimating subscription streaming as "the future". It's part of the future, but there will always be a significant contingent of music fans that want to own albums even if only in digital form. These days you can own an album digitally and never have to do any mp3 file management yourself. The major digital retailers immediately put your purchase in their cloud allowing you to stream it to any device or mark it for offline listening within their respective apps. All the data an artist can get from a streaming service they can also get from a digital sale and a direct album sale is arguably more meaningful because it's not just a 'trial run' that a subscription-based stream can be for a listener.

Re: Adele - 25 (November 20th)
 

Isn't that kind of like conducting a survey at Baskin Robbins to determine if people like ice cream? You see it often because you work at a music store, but you aren't seeing the youngsters who are NOT buying physical media. What you're seeing represents an extremely tiny drop in the bucket.

Agreed, physical media is far from dead... but I'm sure it's not the young people who are keeping it alive still.

Re: Adele - 25 (November 20th)
 

Kind of, but you're absolutely right. There's zero obligation for them to do it. That's why I said I get it: If you're Adele and you can sell 2.5 million albums, why the hell would you give that up?
And all I can say is :shrug: yes, I think big name artists should do something to help promote the little guys (at least the ones that they personally think make good music), but I completely understand why they feel no obligation to bother. That's the dilemma, I guess. But why restrict the album from streaming at all? If, as suggested here, people who want to buy are going to buy anyway, then what's the harm? I guarantee the number of people willing to listen is much higher than the people who buy. Just as an example I saw elsewhere, Major Lazer sold 2 million copies of their hit song Lean On. But it has 526 million streams on one service. That's insane. If Adele just put her album everywhere (purchases, streaming, etc.) then I'm sure her numbers would be even more ridiculous. It's not as bold a move as saying "no sales" but it helps test the waters to see what streaming can really do for an artist.

Fun fact: When Adele's Hello was released, Lionel Richie's Hello (totally different song) got a 50% bump in weekly streams. It sure as hell didn't get a 50% bump in sales, though.

Streaming isn't about up-front week-one sales like the past. It's about longevity. What people continue to listen to and what events cause people to listen to something, not what they can sell. Everyone's focused on unit sales, but as someone else here said, that doesn't matter as much as it used to.

Fair. I agree with this. I'll clarify. I think streaming is the future for the vast majority of listeners, but people who want to own will continue to play an important part, especially during the transition. And I myself even continue to buy albums when I feel that they're worth it. But not every album is worth $10 to listen to once. Not every track is worth the $1.29 or $0.99. If it were me, I'd rather know that 900 people listened to my track once, and 100 bought it, than just knowing that 99 bought it.

Yes, absolutely. That's awesome. Those features were driven by streaming-only services though. Personally, and this is where I differ from what you're saying, I still don't want to 'own' digital copies of songs, even if they're managed automatically by the digital retailer. I'd rather subscribe to hear the songs I haven't bought on the fly. But to be clear, I GET why people are okay with it. I'm not saying they shouldn't be. But in the "bigger picture" people are headed away from ownership, and towards access. It's why Netflix and Uber and AirBNB are so huge and unstoppable.

Again, there's nothing wrong with ownership of music or whatever. I still buy stuff too (I bought a record for $27 this weekend, knowing I could stream it if I wanted to). But the post-Napster music industry needs to understand that the vast majority of people have moved on.

The biggest disgrace, in my opinion, is that most music listening is happening on YouTube. Not iTunes. Not CDs. Not legit streaming services. Random nobodies upload complete albums to YouTube, add an album cover to the video stream, and anyone can listen to it. Sure, royalties are paid because of YouTube's sound-matching algorithm, but from all accounts, it's only a fraction of what legit services are paying, and the random uploader is getting all the views on his account, not the artist.

Last I heard, iTunes and Amazon didn't provide any of this kind of data for digital sales, but I could be mistaken. If so, that's great. It's super valuable information that I think EVERY artist needs to see. In this "data" era, that stuff is critical and artists should get together to fight for that stuff.

Anyway, I didn't want to derail this thread. It's hard to avoid since, arguably, Adele made it something to talk about, but I want to respect the intent of the thread, which should be about her album, not her album's place in music history and how it affects (or doesn't affect) the community as a whole.

So, regarding 25: I haven't heard it. Hello is a pretty damn good song though. I'll keep listening to it on my streaming service of choice. :)

Re: Adele - 25 (November 20th)
 

Well Adele could care less about our bitching about streaming. And people still bought her album.

https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/2...973.html?ltr=1

Adele says Hello to a world record with 2.43 million albums sold in four days

Alert the presses: Adele’s 25 has sold 2.433 million albums in less than four days, breaking the all time record for most albums sold in one week, with plenty to spare.


Billboard expects the new record to sell 2.9 million by week’s end, blowing away the 2.415 million unit mark that the previous record holder, *NSync, set in 2000 with No Strings Attached. 15 years later, global recorded music industry revenues in the streaming age are nowhere near where they were in 2000 — but that hasn’t stopped Adele. Billboard reported the powerful start for the debut today. (Notably, Billboard/Nielsen Music only began tracking album sales in 1991.)

The pop superstar, loved by both young and old, notably withheld 25 from music streamers like Spotify and Apple Music. While it’s difficult to quantify exactly how much of an effect the decision had on album sales (1,500 streaming plays are equated as a single album sale under Billboard’s current system), the decision to withold the album from Spotify, Apple Music, and others was clearly the impetus for at least some Adele fans to buy the record on CD or digital download.

Adele is a phenomenon,” said Billboard co-director of charts Keith Caulfield to the New York Times. “She connects with fans in such a way that they want to invest in her, and her music.” The New York Times report also noted that a spokesperson from Target, the U.S.-based big-box chain which is selling an exclusive version of the CD with three extra songs, said that 25 had the “biggest opening-day sales of an album in the store’s history.”

The record is the first from Adele (now 27) since 21 came out nearly five years ago. Considering that record’s music industry dominance — including seven Grammy awards, more than 30 million records sold, and a chart-topper in more than 30 countries — the industry was hotly anticipating its follow-up. The fires were stoked when the first single released for the record, Hello, started burning up the sales charts as soon as it debuted, including selling nearly half a million copies in just its first two days.

One thing’s for sure: execs from XL and Columbia, the record labels which co-released 25, are going to be celebrating this week.

Updated 11/24/2015 by Ryan Waniata: As expected, Adele’s album 25 has broken the previous record for most albums sold in a week, with days to spare.

Re: Adele - 25 (November 20th)
 

Dan - you make fair points and I too don't want to derail the thread too much with extended conversation about streaming. I agree with you that there is a general trend away from "ownership" although I think music, perhaps more than other media types, lends itself to a significant level of ownership for several reasons that I won't take up space with here. I also think the "little guy" musician just trying to make is going to do everything they can to get their music heard and whether Adele chooses to put her album on a streaming service isn't going to impact their decisions at all.

Re: Adele - 25 (November 20th)
 

I picked up the Target exclusive, but haven't had a chance to listen to the whole thing yet. I'm about 5 songs in and will agree, this isn't in the ballpark of 21. I heard her on NPR yesterday talking about how she collaborated with some pop producer who worked with Taylor Swift. I would say he did the same thing he did to Taylor and took a phenomenal unique sound and destroyed it.

This is odd, or maybe not -- in both my wife's car and mine the CD does not load any info to the stereo (track titles, album title, etc.).

Re: Adele - 25 (November 20th)
 

It gets better, in my opinion. I only have the 11-track regular version, but the final 4 songs on that, 8, 9, 10 & 11 I think are all great. And it's a good thing they were because the album overall wouldn't have been very good without them.

Re: Adele - 25 (November 20th)
 

Been giving 25 a few more listens ... I'm standing by my "not as good as 21" assessment, but I have softened up a lot on this. Throwing Copper is right, the front side of the album is a bit weak but it gets better as it goes. I do recommend the extra tracks for a few bucks more.

Even with the criticism of the first few tracks, they aren't bad songs. They are a bit "over produced" which takes the emphasis off of Adele's performance and instead focus on cumbersome drum beats.

Re: Adele - 25 (November 20th)
 

Hello is so over produced that when I heard it on the radio I thought it was some kind of Adelle knock off.

Overall I don't care for any of her music. I can't imagine a concert by her being remotely interesting. You can't play her music at a party. What is her music good for?

Re: Adele - 25 (November 20th)
 

Saving Thanksgiving ;)

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/e2zyjbH9zzA" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Re: Adele - 25 (November 20th)
 

Yes, saw that last night. I liked her live version of hello a lot more.

I just don't get her. Her persona is so manufactured and yet no one seems to care. She's got tons of makeup and I think that's not even her real hair, it's some kind of wig. She's as phony balougne as Katie Perry yet for some reason people take her a whole lot more seriously.

Her closest equivalent is like Celine Dion I suppose, yet for some reason young people like her.

Re: Adele - 25 (November 20th)
 

Why do you think her persona is manufactured? I don't believe that at all. Check out the cover story Rolling Stone did on her in recent weeks. I enjoyed the hell out of it. She seems real to me.

Re: Adele - 25 (November 20th)
 

Yea, like or hate her music - "manufactured" is one of the last words I'd use to describe Adele and her music.

Re: Adele - 25 (November 20th)
 

What I mean is that it seems to me she's just a plain looking overweight girl from England. But they scoop on all this makeup and eyelash extensions and I'm pretty sure that's a wig. It's like, "I think there might be a person in there somewhere." Just own being fat already. Mama Cass was fat and cool.

She's hiding under just as much artifice as Katie Perry. It's just not as candy colored.

She's marketed as a more mature, serious act than Perry or Ga Ga or Miley, but she's actually just as gussied up as all of them.

Re: Adele - 25 (November 20th)
 

Like most Saturday Night Live segments in the last two decades, funny for the first 1/3 and run into the ground for the next two and a half minutes.

This one was much better:



"Manufactured" is a very interesting choice of words. Not sure it is accurate. If you said "overexposed" I might see your point.

I don't think her size has ever been an issue and it is part of what makes her gorgeous IMO. Yeah, I'll agree the makeup gets caked on for promo shots, but she is naturally beautiful and not in the fake way most pop stars are. She was rocking the dress she wore in the NBC show the other night.

https://pmchollywoodlife.files.wordp...lead.jpg?w=600

Re: Adele - 25 (November 20th)
 

I watched that concert special the other night. It was okay. I felt like it was heavily edited from the actual concert. Some songs she sounded good like Hello and others she sounded a little rough like Set Fire to the Rain.

Re: Adele - 25 (November 20th)
 

^Accurate.