Album - tour album - tour cycle = wrong?

[Jules]

A few nights a go I was hanging with a live booking agent friend. He has several established international 'legends' on his books and if you want them to play in the UK & Europe, you have to go through him. He's filled Wembley stadium several times with his acts.

Anyhow, not to name names, but one of his smaller acts from the US seems caught up in a dreary album / tour - album / tour cycle.

Every new record - the manager assures my live agent friend "this new album is going to be the breakthrough one!"

And its all getting a little tired...

My friend reckons the manager isnt doing his job and should kick some managerial ass and hold the artist back a tad, break the mould and make an effort to make the next recording SPECIAL and not just the "same old same old".

I've met this artist and I reckon if you asked him what he did, he would say I record then tour - "that's what I do"

Perhaps that's not ALWAYS the best plan...

Is album - tour album - tour the ONLY way to go?

[Fletcher]

I've worked with several acts where their cycle was more like make album, tour on that album... write the next album during that tour... tour both records, make the next record, tour on the strengths of both while writing the next... the show stays fresher that way, the new material is better rehearsed [and in my opinion, better defined as it's been "audience tested"], and over all the bands have grown more as artists while working in that manner.

I know one band that is out right now that is doing something similar to that but recording all their shows... the idea being that at the very least they'll get basics for the next record during some soundchecks... maybe it'll work, maybe it won't [duing the latter years, this was how most of the Frank Zappa records were done... it's not a revolutionary idea... but it does seem to help stuff stay fresh].

[kevinc]

That`s one thing I`ve noticed in general.

Bands 20 - 30 years ago used to come out with records every 6 months or so even if they were big names.

Then it was once every year for a while.

Now it seems like once a band has a hit they squeeze the album for every last possible sale for about 2-3 years until everyone can`t stand the band anymore. Then their next album is a flop because they can`t write as good anymore.

I wish it was still at the point where the artists were coming out with new music more frequently.

Even at the level I think your talking about Jules a bands just going to get better the more they record and the more they write.

[Jules]

What I am puzzling about is how there must be some folks out there that cant see PAST the album / tour / album syndrome... Blindly just recording it then taking it on the road and I wonder what part we as engineers & producers play in it.

Some producers get called in to provide a direction diversion / break dont they?

Quite a lot of established acts have taken a "Daniel Lanois break' haven't they? Fiddling about with modal tunings and recording all live in one room etc.... Its almost gotten to the stage where you haven't made it untill you colaberate on a record with him!

Rock acts will call in hip hop producers to 'mix it up a little' Rolling Stones Dust Brothers? Neptune's?

Can anyone think of positive career moves in the form of producer / musical direction changes that have kept an act fresh?

David Bowie producing Iggy Pop's Lust For Life album was cool... Kinda all downhill after that though....

[djui5]

Originally posted by Jules
Can anyone think of positive career moves in the form of producer / musical direction changes that have kept an act fresh?

It's risky but crossover albums sometimes work.

I think a lot of a bands success depends on the music, not whether they tour right after writing albums or not....but if the music's good and they tour right after, then write albums while on the road, then that's a great band who works hard and writes good enough music to keep people that interested. I think if a band has records that aren't that interesting, it don't matter what they do.
It all comes down to the music in the first place, and the bands willingness to work hard. Also if the music isn't wrote well in the first place then it don't matter how long they're in the studio recording or taking breaks, it won't work out...
Just my thoughts.

[BattleAngel]

I know that I write something like 5 songs a day which usually boils down to two or three great hooks, which over the course of two or three days bois down to one or two great new songs that keep getting better. So while writing on the road definitely works artistically, I know I'd love and be able to release two records a year of essentially evolving material- but something tells me labels aren't interested in putting out new music that often. If they were, I think we'd all be a lot better off, and bands would learn how to write sick sick sick material in a lot less time, making material that is fresh and alive, rather than labored over and stale.

[shipshape]

It kinda sounds like the manager is more along for the ride than actually managing the artists career, and it sounds like the artist is caught up in a losing cycle also 'cos of giving in to his situation.
A good manager would definately shake things up a little as in putting him with different people to work with etc, taking him off the road and having him write rather than tour . He's gotta take some kinda new aproach or his audience will dwindle along with the record sales. I have worked with artists stuck in that same place..and have re-invented themselves or at least tried a different aproach, sometimes it didnt work the first time....but eventually something will klick. I am working with a band right now who went thru the same thing. they now have a top 5 single in the U.S. and they needed support from the label and the management, big time,in fact they changed labels also and it has payed off.

[jpaudio]

Just had a conversation about this yesterday in fact.

I blame pressure and lack of development on the behalf of the artist's label, and not many managers are much good at fighting that.

A band has their whole life to write thier debut album. They've worked on the same songs for years sometimes, played the hell out of 'em live, learned via trial and error what works for them and what doesn't, and probably demo'd those songs several times before even signing a deal to begin with. Then they get thrown in a studio with a reputable-name producer, bang out a solid album, get some decent opening slots and maybe a small headlining tour of their own, and next thing ya know, the label wants you back in the studio.

WHAT???

But they were on the road, living up the dream, having the time of their lives playing every hole-in-the-wall dive on both sides of the Mississippi. They didn't have time to write new material, let alone demo it and try it out live.

But according to the contract, it's time to deliver.

Hence the sophmore jinx, which crushes more musician's careers than a groupie with the clap. But even if they're lucky enough to get past that, it'll still take another highly successful album before they have the freedom or financial resources to take a mobile rig on the back of the bus and actually attempt to create in less-than-favorable conditions. Thus begins the vicious cycle stated herein.

[alphajerk]

i dunno. msot people i know [musicians] are constantly writing new songs. hell, one band i had just finished up has 7 songs ready to go on another album... and funnily kept ****ing up at teh CD release party by introducing the song as being on their next album.... well i thought it was amusing. and the new songs kick ass. im looking foward to recording them if they come back.

[natpub]

Agree with JP, that is what I see em do very frequently. Even if they are constantly writing, there is a big diff between the cream of the crop of all the years leading up to disc 1, and the cream of what they come up with in year 2. Sophmore jinx indeed.

There are plenty of creative solutions to the issue, Jules, they just rarely involve big record lables :-)

I find that corporate time-tables and the nature of contractual obligation tends to stifle creation, which does not necessarily follow the fiscal calendar.


-KT

[SolipsismX]

This thread is confusing me. What's wrong with promoting every album with a tour? Are you talking more about not taking time to write the songs in between? I can see that being an issue if the songs aren't ready, but then there is the whole "lack of direction and same old sound" issue being brought up.
This, to me, has nothing to do with the album/tour cycle but with the artist lacking any creative ideas. I also don't understand how side projects will help. In some cases, side projects are just ways for the artist to put the next album on the back burner because they are scared, lazy or don't have any new ideas at the time.
I think in most cases, artists (not just musicains) grow dull simply because they got lucky the first time, but simply aren't that creative. I think most musicians accomplish their work just "jamming" and not really thinking on a bigger scale of "how will I challenge myself or the state of music." They usually don't know HOW to challenge things and in a lot of cases, don't even care to. It's especially hard for some musicians to be motivated to change/challenge themselves when the most minute changes in other artists are viewed by so many as great evolutions. The best example I can think of is madonna. She constantly gets complimented for reinventing herself, when in reality, she's just changing her wardrobe and keeping her dance music updated.

[BattleAngel]

What does any of this matter if a record label will only put out one CD per act every maybe two years?

What I'd like to know is whether or not there is any hope for those of us who are just constant producers of getting our material released if we have the cajones to write and record an evovlving line of stuff. If I could, I'd *just* be putting records out, and by the dozen ;-)

[jpaudio]

Originally posted by alphajerk
i dunno. msot people i know [musicians] are constantly writing new songs. hell, one band i had just finished up has 7 songs ready to go on another album... and funnily kept ****ing up at teh CD release party by introducing the song as being on their next album.... well i thought it was amusing. and the new songs kick ass. im looking foward to recording them if they come back.

You're right Alpha, most creative-type guys are always writing and coming up with fresh ideas, but it's the development time that is lost. That first album was in development for years, the following releases will be lucky to have 2 months of down time before the band is thrown back in the studio.

[BattleAngel]

Agreed, JP. That's why the record I'm doing now is going to have only three or four songs I've had for more than 2 years. Anything I carry around longer than that and don't do anything with gets the axe- unless it's SUPER sweet. Which is what these three or four songs are ;-)

[ttauri]

Originally posted by jpaudio
That first album was in development for years, the following releases will be lucky to have 2 months of down time before the band is thrown back in the studio.

Meanwhile, the expected length of an album has gotten so long with CDs. Maybe it would be easier to keep a comfortable flow between albums and touring if so dern many songs weren't needed for the album. I mean, Pretenders II was 45 minutes long. And even when albums were that length there were still songs I skipped!

Or if there were ways to sell non-album material. I look back at the part of my record collection from when I was in the main buying demographic, and it includes--EPs, singles with non-album b-sides, non-album singles... Right now I think it's either do the full-length album or maybe have a new cut on a movie soundtrack (for rock, anyway... pop, hip-hop, dance are somewhat more fluid, tho still victim to overstuffed, underfocussed LPs). Perhaps mp3/iTunes sales will change that... I dunno.

Weird how more and more music is required to make an album, while meanwhile, the radio that promotes it plays less and less variety.

Peece,
T. Tauri

[jpaudio]

Not a bad way to look at it BattleAngel. That band I posted on the mp3 page, Beyond Mirth... we went through 3 EPs and about 15 different songs in 2 years before we came out with a solid 5 songs for promotion and shopping purposes. Not that ANY of the songs were bad at all, but some were more focused than others, some were carry-overs from older times, others were spur-of-the-moment inspired-by-that-awesome-new-CD flash-in-the-pans. There were even 2 songs that we tracked for each EP... so 3 different versions each of 2 songs, and none made the final cut. Sometimes, even if an idea is cool or something seems to work well live, it doesn't cut it in the studio, no matter how hard you try to make it work. And if you're under the gun and don't have the time to figure that stuff out, you end up an album loaded with under-developed ideas.

Take a band like System of a Down, one of my favs and a huge sophmore-album success story (some people don't even know they had a moderately successful debut album before all those radio singles)... they wrote and tracked over 30 songs for their 2nd CD, just to have plenty of insurance if one song that seemed awesome in writing/rehearsals didn't cut it under the scrutiny of the studio. They didn't play any new stuff live at all before that 2nd album, so it was really a shot in the dark that ended up hitting the mark for them. Plenty of other bands have missed the target bigtime under similar circumstances.

[lucey]

[Originally posted by Jules
What I am puzzling about is how there must be some folks out there that cant see PAST the album / tour / album syndrome... Blindly just recording it then taking it on the road and I wonder what part we as engineers & producers play in it.

It's backwards and Fripp has been saying so for 15 years. Some time to develop is all in the first record, after that it's a crapshoot that tends to go bad. Unless it's a 'touring/writing' freshness like Fletcher described, it's a 'exhaustion/writing' cycle that is more common.

Quite a lot of established acts have taken a "Daniel Lanois break' haven't they? Fiddling about with modal tunings and recording all live in one room etc.... Its almost gotten to the stage where you haven't made it untill you colaberate on a record with him!

Radiohead didn't call in Lanois, but they started playing music like musicians do, instead of crafting pop rock with stunt engineering. You can poke fun at modal tunings and live music recording all you want, but it worked pretty well for them.

Can anyone think of positive career moves in the form of producer / musical direction changes that have kept an act fresh?

You mentioned Lanois, one of my faves ... Emmy Lou's 'Wrecking Ball' was 20 years of new career for her.

'Blood Sugar Sex Magik' was a producer move that freshened it up significantly. That 'under the bridge' anthemic ballad was Rubin's idea and revived/opened up their career.

[jpaudio]

Originally posted by lucey
'Blood Sugar Sex Magik' was a producer move that freshened it up significantly.

It was also a band at their creative peak, and even with their current chart success, have failed to come close to the beauty of that album over the past 13 years since it was released.

Off topic, but I don't understand what people saw in the last two Chilli Pepper albums, but i guess that's just a taste thing... well they sound like shit too, maybe it's more than tastefuuck

[lucey]

Originally posted by jpaudio
It was also a band at their creative peak, and even with their current chart success, have failed to come close to the beauty of that album over the past 13 years since it was released.

Off topic, but I don't understand what people saw in the last two Chilli Pepper albums, but i guess that's just a taste thing... well they sound like shit too, maybe it's more than tastefuuck

i'm not sure it was their creative peak, more likely their last records sound like shit from bad production or mastering-from-hell

Rubin encouraged the ballads and everything kaedis did to be recorded, not just the funk ... so that was huge. to have taste, courage and trust with a producer.

[jpaudio]

Originally posted by lucey
i'm not sure it was their creative peak, more likely their last records sound like shit from bad production or mastering-from-hell

Rubin encouraged the ballads and everything kaedis did to be recorded, not just the funk ... so that was huge. to have taste, courage and trust with a producer.

i definately agree, Rubin gave them an environment that brought out the best in each member, and the group as a whole... but you also have to realize that Frusciante and Chad Smith joined the band just in time to record the previous album, Mother's Milk, and took a while to really feel comfortable with Kaedis and Flea as bandmates. By the time they hit the studio for BSSM, they were more of a tight-knit band than ever before, and ever since IMHO. That's the one album where each band member's strengths were truly realized and captured. I think Frusciante forgot how to play guitar when he came out of rehab

[Ted Nightshade]

We got nothing to do with the bigtime and never will, bigtime being what it is, and us what we are, but we seem to come up with 4 to 6 magic things per tracking frenzy, and then tear our hair out trying to make it a "complete album" by dredging up some so-so stuff or thinking about doing another whole tracking frenzy in order to get enough great stuff together. Only every handful of magic tracks seems to really belong together and not necessarily with the next stuff or the last stuff...

Well no more tearing out the hair, if all we get is 4 great tracks we'll put it out like that rather than water it down. Leave 'em wanting more, I say. Good rationale, anyhow.

We have several full length albums worth of really good material, culled from way more than that over the years...

You know, the Beatles got me to thinking that when a song is released, it's freshly written. Certainly that was not true of a lot of bands- I've heard Wailers bootlegs that had songs from all their later albums, from the earliest times. Seems like most of the writing was done early, and a few new things ended up on each album. A balance of the hot-off-the-griddle and the toured and true.