Here's the standard model for major pop artists today: Albums come every 2 to 4 years, with usually 3 (if you're lucky 4) singles released off it, spread out about 4 months apart, to keep the album in the limelight for a year. The story is the same for the US and the UK, with perhaps slightly more singles released in the latter country. With about 4 months between singles, there is a bit of a gap between singles, unless they are huge hits. In 2004, we had 4 singles from Usher, but apart from the final 5th from Confessions early this year, there's been none in 2005 and won't be any more until he puts out another album. There were 4 releases from Kelly Clarkson within the last year, but none the year prior. Basically you get a wave effect of a year in the light followed by a year off.
However, looking at the UK upcoming singles releases list this week, I realized that several major acts are putting out new singles only a couple of months or less after their last. Will Young's "All Time Love" is out Jan 9, just 8 weeks after "Switch it On." Girls Aloud's "See the Day," out Dec. 19 comes only 5 weeks after "Biology." Westlife, whose "You Raise Me Up" was released Oct. 24 and is currently #2 on the UK chart, is following it with "When You Tell Me That You Love Me" on Dec. 12; with just 7 weeks between them, it's possible they will both be in top 10 at once. Even James Blunt's "Goodbye My Lover," coming 11 weeks after "High" is pretty fast.
The "wave effect" I mentioned earlier is a recent phenomenon. In the '50s and '60s, major pop acts released a steady stream of singles. The Beatles put out a dizzying 14 singles in the US in 1964. Elvis Presley put out 6 in both 1956 and 1957, and frequently 5 singles for a few years thereafter. Unlike today, these artists didn't take 2-4 year breaks between albums: there were at least 2 singles from the Beatles every year between 1964 and 1970, same for Elvis between 1956 and 1972. Granted, these were the biggest recording artists of their time (perhaps all time), but lesser artists of that period were similarly prolific; Brenda Lee put out 4 singles a year between 1960 and 1963, Bobby Vinton averaged about 3 a year (without a break) between 1962 and 1969.
Even in the '80s, popular acts put out more product. Madonna had 3 or 4 singles each year between 1984 and 1989 (except for '88 when she took a year off for Speed The Plow). Prince had usually about 2 or 3 singles a year between 1983 and 1989.
For whatever reason, it was the '90s where the music industry greatly slowed the speed of new releases for an artist and radio really stretched the length of time it played a song. 1996-97 was Celine Dion's peak, with Falling Into You, but the album generated only 3 singles, released 6 months apart, but the first 2 each spent 30 weeks in the top 40. Third Eye Blind released 2 singles from its self-titled album in 1997, but waited a full year before releasing the third, as the second, "How's it Going to Be," spent 40 weeks in the top 40. The biggest "stretcher" award for the '90s has to go to Goo Goo Dolls, who put out 4 tracks from Dizzy Up the Girl, between April 1998 and April 2000, an average of 8 months between releases. At the time when "Broadway" came out in April 2000, I thought they had a new album, but no.
Thankfully, things seem to be going faster now, with major artists creeping back into releasing 5 singles from an album (Usher, Kelly Clarkson, Gwen Stefani, etc.), keeping radio fresher and fans more interested. And why not? In the US at least, artists are no longer obliged to release a physical single, a situation that irritated me in late 90s/early 00s, but isn't a big deal now with digital sales available for album tracks. If the new release schedule is any indication, perhaps things will be even faster next year.
No comments:
Post a Comment