What if we don't stick to a genre?

[thecontrolcentre]

Sorry if this has already been asked, but when you say you plan to release an album, what exactly does that mean? Digital download? CD? Vinyl? Do you have a label interested in you, or is this a DIY release? How are you planning to sell/market it?

[Functional]

Sorry if this has spread been asked, but when you say you plan to release an album, what exactly does that mean? Digital download? CD? Vinyl? Do you have a label interested in you, or is this a DIY release?

Going DIY is probably not an option considering that we want CD & Vinyl and DIY that would be just too much work. We think that local indie labels will give us a warm welcome and she (the singer) has contacts to some and doesn't seem to doubt our chances in getting into them. Hell, I won't even accept anyone mastering our tracks (apart from myself), so as long as I do well on that job, the indie label would probably be that much happier with us.

But I feel bit unethical about this, because long-term I want us badly to be associated with a label such as Modern Love or Tri-Angle records which are filled with artists that have inspired us. It's very unrealistic to expect them be interested of us ever, but if there's a chance, it's very hard to say no to them.

reminds me of Goldfrapp first cinematic, then nudisco, then edm, then psychedelic, then 80's synthpop and finally epic folk songs.

Oh yes. I actually loved their first album, but unfortunately wasn't all too in on that synthpop-stuff especially. It's actually interesting how many people associate Goldfrapp with trip hop despite the fact that most of their material seems not to settle down with that genre, no matter how loosely is defined!

[thecontrolcentre]

If that's the case I would suggest you ask the label which tracks in what style they think they can market. Different labels will have different target audiences. Good luck with it.

[Functional]

If that's the case I would suggest you ask the label which tracks in what style they think they can market. Different labels will have different target audiences. Good luck with it.

Good point actually. Now to think of it, I've read some interview with Andy Stott where he gave the impression that his associate in the label (Modern Love) was very involved not only in the process of picking songs but also in the creative process. Are they often involved like that?

Guess we could compile something and send it to labels to get their attention, to get involved as soon as possible with one.

[thecontrolcentre]

Definitely send out some 3 track demos to labels. Pick the three songs that best represent what you do.

[jancivil]

the thing that's missing here is what is the compositional sense of this 'album'. a lot of guesses as to what the (imaginary?) audience will do with it along with your own perceived lack of cohesion means an album nobody cares about, surely? make the album an album.

The Crimson album, the first three particularly, well that project accommodated the myriad musical interests and talents of a seemingly disparate band. It works because the flow and pacing reflected their vision, and compositional acumen. They seemed to have a leader of sorts, what was his name?

Short of that, you pretty much need the guiding hand such as mentioned with that group you like on Modern Love; yes, there is involvement. Even The Beatles enjoyed a producer (an actual one, not a beatsmaker), George Martin. It sounds like you're going to need guidance, and even such as let the label choose what they can market in terms of "a genre".

[dark water]

The easy answer is yes, of course you can release an 'album' of diverse genre material.

The key issue is what expectations you have or hope for regarding its success.
You may very likely have to compromise, edit or re-record (create new) songs depending on your aims and those of the label / 'imagined audience'.

But no, there's no problem putting anything onto an album if the musicianship and vision is of good enough quality and you're happy to own it.

[Functional]

Definitely send out some 3 track demos to labels. Pick the three songs that best represent what you do.

I'll do that. Thanks for the advice, really appreciate it though I often forget to mention. Same applies to every other reply in this thread in so far!

the thing that's missing here is what is the compositional sense of this 'album'

What does "compositional sense" mean in this context? It seems hard thing for me to grasp. Does it mean some sort of structural sense between the songs and their passages? Some sort of contextual thing inside the album? This is probably a stupid question, but I just have to be honest here; I don't know what an "album" is. To me, for the most part, they have been a compilation of songs. Very rarely exceptions exist, but these are just the obvious cases such as intro song setting the "mood" for what's coming.

Short of that, you pretty much need the guiding hand such as mentioned with that group you like on Modern Love; yes, there is involvement. Even The Beatles enjoyed a producer (an actual one, not a beatsmaker), George Martin. It sounds like you're going to need guidance...

That makes a lot of sense then. I mean, I've wondered for a long time regarding the fuzz about those labels. It doesn't take a lot to figure this all out, but I've just not put any thought at all into this until now. I could imagine that being associated with experienced people can only be for the better. And I guess those are the places where people share their secret production methods with each other as well.

All in all, i think you're correct. Despite being in that "DIY to the max" mentality, fact is that I'm very inexperienced in anything related to music that isn't within the project file of Cubase (and one could very well argue — reasonably so — that same holds true there!). In fact, if it wasn't for the singer, I'd still be doing some random short clips, sort of teasers that something could be there but... yeah. That DIY-thing just doesn't work in every sense.

[bit off-tracked]

Speaking of that, in fact, other potential examples of how much variance there can be. Before I met up with the singer, I used to do these stupid* clips. We both think that they do represent the "direction we want" (at least for the two I will present), so I guess on behalf both of us, I could use them as an example as well. http://picosong.com/HL6W/ & http://picosong.com/HLbb/ (I actually posted the latter one in some thread a long time ago!). Before these I was more into EDM-stuff, but that was a short-lived phase in the end.

*after the singer heard the experimental one, "t6", she seemed impressed and definitively wanted to work with me, so I guess they weren't all that stupid in the end!

[\bit off tracked]

and even such as let the label choose what they can market in terms of "a genre".

Is there a possibility that they cannot really market things necessarily in terms of genres, unless using really wide categorization schemes such as "electronic" (which, to some extent, seems to be unpopular)? Oh well, I guess labels find a way if they like what they hear and that's enough. It's their job after all.

The key issue is what expectations you have or hope for regarding its success.
You may very likely have to compromise, edit or re-record (create new) songs depending on your aims and those of the label / 'imagined audience'.

We don't personally have any expectations of our success nor do we have an imaginary audience in our minds. My concerns have more to do with how our music is best presented to people in album format if we opt in for that. Doing albums makes sense, but I personally can't tell of many examples where songs are that disconnected from each other, whereas I fear that this will be the case of us considering where we're currently heading.

[jancivil]

I'll do that. Thanks for the advice, really appreciate it though I often forget to mention. Same applies to every other reply in this thread in so far!

the thing that's missing here is what is the compositional sense of this 'album'

What does "compositional sense" mean in this context? It seems hard thing for me to grasp. Does it mean some sort of structural sense between the songs and their passages? Some sort of contextual thing inside the album? This is probably a stupid question, but I just have to be honest here; I don't know what an "album" is. To me, for the most part, they have been a compilation of songs.

Well, at one time that is pretty much what albums were, a collection of songs. And there was one, maybe two songs which were figured to be hits, singles.

But, a significant artist like Frank Sinatra had albums that had a flow; and this, let's say more mature audience maybe would sit and listen to a side or even the whole.

But for rock artists, there came a time where not only would a (literary or extramusical) concept occur (Sgt. Pepper's, TOMMY - A Rock Opera), but the work could be received as a unified whole just in terms of the music. Court of the Crimson King was brought in as an eclectic mix. BUT, you'd dig the whole side if not the whole album at a go. How this works is, someone with a compositional sense made decisions.
One factor is this was a band with a SHOW, the reason they were on a big label and $$$$ was expected was the show was so well received. So the pacing and flow of the album(s) likely were arrived at building a show. This is fairly typical, the live show informs the album. Some groups did write in the studio, piece together the record and rehearse it for the tour subsequently, but that's ultra luxury time.

Since this is all news to you, I'd advise starting out more modestly with shorter releases than whatever length is called 'album' today. (Used to be 30, 35 minutes. I remember Quicksilver Messenger Service had a 25-minute side, Who Do You Love, which was unheard of. Now CDs hold 70-some minutes.)

Anyway, SO:

Definitely send out some 3 track demos to labels. Pick the three songs that best represent what you do.

and maybe then:

A producer (an actual one, not a beatsmaker). It sounds like you're going to need guidance...

I could imagine that being associated with experienced people can only be for the better. And I guess those are the places where people share their secret production methods with each other as well.

Despite being in that "DIY to the max" mentality, fact is that I'm very inexperienced in anything related to music that isn't within the project file of Cubase.[...] That DIY-thing just doesn't work in every sense.

Well, there isn't necessarily much if anything on your record that can't be accessed in your .cpr, but you want to see what's done in the real world. Or what's not done. Not to mention the distance someone outside your process naturally has, the needed objectivity.

[Functional]

But for rock artists, there came a time where not only would a (literary or extramusical) concept occur (Sgt. Pepper's, TOMMY - A Rock Opera), but the work could be received as a unified whole just in terms of the music. Court of the Crimson King was brought in as an eclectic mix. BUT, you'd dig the whole side if not the whole album at a go. How this works is, someone with a compositional sense made decisions.
One factor is this was a band with a SHOW, the reason they were on a big label and $$$$ was expected was the show was so well received. So the pacing and flow of the album(s) likely were arrived at building a show. This is fairly typical, the live show informs the album. Some groups did write in the studio, piece together the record and rehearse it for the tour subsequently, but that's ultra luxury time.

Oh, great point in it's entirety. I think actually it could help us a lot if we thought of this in terms of live performance. We want to have a "show" and do "our thing". Something special to us. We're not sure yet what it will exactly be, but our theater background* surely will help us in figuring it out. Whatever it will be, it probably will be something that tries to invoke sadness. We actually plan to go on some field trip around Europe in next year to check out some of the acts we love live, maybe learn a thing or two and perhaps even get connected with them if luck would have it.

*well, I was a sound designer, but still very involved, whereas she is an actor + is employed in theater

I think it's especially the specific moments in songs that actually make up the show, not only the vibe. At least this has been my conclusion after working for two years in a venue in the sound department, sometimes even get to mix them with the M7CL & rack gear. Sort of like how you have "hit singles", you have these special moments in each song. And bit surprised as I am, I think we actually have those and that there's a lot of good material for live.

But here comes bit off-topic issue that still is relevant. It's also been bothering me and it's highly related to live performances. So lately there has been this "huge" debate in EDM circles about their live-stuff being about pressing "play". Some exceptions do exist, such as Carl Craig. But for majority of the artists, especially in the "bigroom EDM" or whatever they call it these days, they don't actually do much else than "press the play button". Many seem to suspect that they don't play live because the music wasn't really "live" to begin with. It was likely sequenced in a DAW and playing it live would most likely mean that you'd be just playing some simple parts.

So as you can guess, we also have this sort of problem. I'm the "beatsmaker" sort of type. It's hard to justify my presence on the stage, even if I did play around with reverb & delay (which could be a lot of fun!). I can play piano to some extent (my mother, a classically trained pianist, has taught me a thing or two), but it just feels far too artificial to arbitrarily pick up some parts of a song and play it on a keyboard. Or to play some simple basslines with our Minibrute. It just feels like you're trying to give this impression to the audience where you're something that you're not.

But as luck would have it, I guess most people will focus on the singer anyway and simply not mind my presence all that much, nor really care most likely what I'm doing. Just wonder if it's bit unorthodox to just play around with delay & reverb effects and be there. Any thoughts? It could be a fun thing to mock — "you know something is wrong when a person who doesn't even play any instrument passes as a musician"

In future, I think we're going to get actual instruments because that's fun. Pan drums are common in our songs and I think it's sensible to get at least one or two as a starting point. But for now, no such luxury.

Well, there isn't necessarily much if anything on your record that can't be accessed in your .cpr, but you want to see what's done in the real world. Or what's not done. Not to mention the distance someone outside your process naturally has, the needed objectivity.

That's a nice way to put it. So, I guess I gotta bring this topic again next time. Those demos & sending them around. Regarding the "actual producer", I'm not sure if we can afford one. And I doubt that record companies could afford providing us one, except perhaps for the occasional consultation. But do they do that?

Really appreciate all this advice!
And I guess you're right with the album length. We could do EP as our first non-single release and it's probably less stressful. Meanwhile it would also provide us with the valuable information of reception.

[Jace-BeOS]

I don't stick to any genres, and I barely know what they are by name and sound. However, I do think that an album should have some amount of cohesiveness. The songs should flow from start to finish and feel like they belong together, even if as only a group of friends. I'm a fan of the concept album, which it seems the mass market has zero interest in. In fact, the mass market has no interest in albums any more. I prefer albums to individual singles. I buy complete works, not individual songs.

If you want to release your work based on albums, collections of songs, rather than piecemeal, I recommend you to divide your music tracks into a couple of somewhat cohesive albums, and release them sequentially (two or three albums of different styles, where each album is consistent within itself as much as possible). This way, you can appeal to listeners of multiple genres without selling them half an album they don't care for (or worse; if they liked one track out of the whole, you're not likely to get them to follow you).

Another option is to create more than one "artist identity". Publish one set of songs under one name and publish another set of songs under another name. That way, listeners who like one set of songs can look out for more under that artist identity and not be left feeling blindsided if you release two successive albums with vastly different styles and sounds. One of my favorite web-based artists, Herwig Holtzman, has numerous artist identities for each of his styles. For example, his releases under "Das Gritli Mosser" are almost entirely different from his releases under "Photophob".

It's entirely artistically valid to explore new styles as your skills and interests evolve over time, but I think it's best to try to present a cohesive whole where the variation within a single album is not so dramatic as to feel like the songs don't belong together or come from the same artist as each other.

[Jace-BeOS]

As for studio vs live: there are artists who make their live sound intentionally different from their studio sound so as to make the material more interesting for live performance (this includes replacing sequenced parts with performances, even if it's just manually triggered and dynamically "playable" chunks, or even hiring instrumentalists/players to translate the "studio-as-instrument" parts into live instruments). Nine Inch Nails live is very different from NIN on the albums, for one example. Changing the music to create a live experience can inspire you later in the studio, too.

[jancivil]

Note well, record companies don't really provide you with anything. Typically they will spring for a producer but they're only ever loaning you money. I can't imagine that bit of reality changing over the yrs. No artist can afford all this, especially marketing. So you can see why it's a group with a show that gets signed.

So yer not really a musician, that's not novel, you (the label hires em, even to make the record. That's less necessary with DAW product obviously.

I donno anymore. I never bought an album that was just whatever, collected. Even the Monkees' albums were cohesive works. That used the cream o' the crop of LA studio players.

[cron]

It's certainly possible to make a cohesive albums of disparate material, but I suspect this works best when the material is approached as an album work from the outset. Fantasma by Cornelius is a wonderful example of a record that's stylistically all over the place yet comes together as an album length work. Even the individual tracks lurch around unpredictably - Seashore And Horizon is essentially 2 different songs alternated - but that unpredictability mirrors the album's structure and it all just works.

On the other hand, starting with a bunch of stand-alone tracks and wondering how to sequence them probably makes things much more difficult. It can be done though. Holly Herndon's Movement is essentially a compilation of tracks made for other things rather than an album, but it's a triumph of track sequencing. It somehow weaves between dry 'academic' computer music and dancefloor bangers without ever sounding forced.

[brainzistor]

People, labels, record companies, top lists, dj's, radios, tv stations, everyone likes to label things and to slap stamps.
I myself was interested and involved in all sorts of music.
Who's gonna be fine with my Sonic Youth-ish song and then Com Truise-ish song? No one.
That's why I work under 6 different names (all different genres) and I'm completely fine with it.

Put it in a context:
You go browsing on Bandcamp, you find some band/artist, you play the first song and it's alternative rock
and the next song is some orchestral cinematic music, the next one is synthwave, the next one atmospheric DnB.
Each song can have quality as much as you want, but because it's a circus they cancel each other out.

So, let's say the listener liked dnb, he wants to hear more dnb from you, is there another dnb track, will you create
another dnb track, was this just one dnb track you'll ever create?...
and the connection between you and the listener is LOST.

Nobody is stopping you to work under different names.
It's one thing when you mix several genres in one song and your music is like that, for example Faith No More,
but if you have songs that are completely different genres, that's not gonna work.