Sufjan Stevens on the Existential Crisis of the Album

Posted on 19. Oct, 2009 by refe in ARTISTS, MUSIC INDUSTRY

The album has reigned as the prince of popular music formats for nearly a century. Yet, it’s become unclear how long this reign will last. Digital technology has transformed the way many listeners experience music and fueled a resurgence of the short-form single.

For the past several years bloggers, critics, industry pros and consumers have contributed to countless articles and comments discussing the merits of this transformation. Most of these discussions have revolved around business models and economics. If the album becomes obsolete, what will it do to industry profits? How will artists continue to make money? Conspicuously missing is any thought given to how all of this will effect music as an art-form.

I recently stumbled across an interview between Exclaim’s Vish Khanna and songwriter Sufjan Stevens that approaches the issue from a very different perspective.

For many years Sufjan Stevens was known for his prolific songwriting and ambitious projects. Between 2000 and 2006 Stevens released seven expansive albums. This month he will release two new projects, Run Rabbit Run which dropped on the 6th and multimedia set the BQEwhich will be released on the 20th. However, the last conventional album he released was back in 2005 with Come on Feel the Illinoise.

Many of his numerous fans have been wondering what’s up, and speculation came to a head a couple of weeks ago when Stevens made some comments that some took as an announcement of retirement.

When Vish Khanna asks Stevens to clarify he quickly dispels any rumors that he is calling it quits, but he goes on to give some insight into why he has waited so long to put out a true follow-up to Illinoise.

I definitely feel like ‘What is the point? What’s the point of making music anymore?’ I feel that the album no longer has a stronghold or has any real bearing anymore. The physical format itself is obsolete; the CD is obsolete and the LP is kinda nostalgic. So, I think the album is suffering and that’s how I’ve always created—I work with these conceptual albums in the long-form. And I’m wondering, what’s the value of my work once these forms are obsolete and everyone’s just downloading music?

What does an artist do when his medium suddenly becomes irrelevant? The pundits are usually quick to urge the artist to simply switch to a new medium, because their concerns are typically focused on the business aspect. Other artists and die-hard fans will generally encourage the artist to stick to his convictions and forget about what the rest of the world is doing.

The pundits are obviously missing an important point, which is that music is not simply another product to be bought and sold. It’s an art, and the album is an art-form. The artists – and especially the fans – often forget that music is also a business and that the artist has to make money if he’s to continue making art.

So what’s a guy like Sufjan Stevens to do?

First of all, the album isn’t dead, nor is it likely to be anytime soon. Blogger hyperbole and personal existential crises aside, nobody ever said Stevens can’t continue putting out full-length conceptual epics for the remainder of his career.

It can be easy to look at the current state of the industry as a whole with all of its transitions and tribulations and lose sight of the fact that each artist and each fan’s experience is different. Just because the market is moving away from a particular format doesn’t mean everybody needs to abandon it immediately or risk becoming obsolete.

Sufjan Stevens’ fans love his work largely because of the way he has used the album format to communicate his artistic vision. If he continues to release in the album format his fans are likely to continue buying and listening to his music that way.

The same goes for any artist. Don’t get so wrapped up in the latest fashions and buzz-words that you lose sight of your own unique offering. If an established career artist like Sufjan Stevens isn’t immune to this I would imagine that many more new artists stumble get caught up in it all the time. You want to put out nothing but epic concept albums? If you can find the audience then I say go for it. You want to write 90 second musical haiku and release it in bundles of 20? If that’s what you’re passionate about and you can find a way to make it work financially, who has any right to stand in your way?

I have come to advocate a model of continual creative output where an artist releases a song or two at a time in shorter intervals for the purpose of increased fan engagement. I feel strongly about this type of release strategy because I believe it gives emerging artists the best opportunity to cultivate a strong base of core fans and keep them connected. I’m not alone in that opinion – the concept has begun to really catch on recently. But don’t confuse any one model’s acceptance with the idea that you have to give up your own vision. Maybe Sufjan Stevens would find success in smaller, more frequent releases. Or maybe he’ll come up with something completely new. But if you can’t really get behind it as an artistic form then it likely won’t work well for you anyway.

Write great music and present it in the way that best expresses what you’re trying to say. If you start there and you are serious about building your career the business models and economics will fall into place over time. Read everything you can about what is working for others and incorporate what you feel will make you successful. But don’t lose sight of your own vision and your own style in the process or you’ll risk stalling your career, in some cases before it really begins.

Share it if you like it:

Tags: album, economics, music, release strategies, Sufjan Stevens

15 Responses to “Sufjan Stevens on the Existential Crisis of the Album”

CN Byrd

19. Oct, 2009

In these days of micro attention spans and random playlists, it would indeed be sad if album oriented artists became discouraged to create based on the root mean public flavor of the moment. I believe human intellect will take over and the pendulum will swing back the other way. There is certainly a place for catchy singles, but I feel the best place for them is on a concept album.

Reply to this comment
Greg Nisbet

19. Oct, 2009

Great post, Refe. I agree that there is still plenty of room in the market for concept albums from artists who are compelled by a vision that necessitates such flights of musical fancy. Stevens’ “50 albums for 50 states” proclamation back in the day may have been impossibly optimistic, but as the starting point for a grand concept it produced some phenomenal music that may not have been conceived within the bounds of a lesser vision.

Reply to this comment
refe

20. Oct, 2009

It’s important to remember that what is happening in the larger music marketplace is never as important as your own fan base. If people are buying what you are selling why worry about what everybody else is doing? Embracing innovation and new ideas is one thing, but giving up what you love to do and what others love about your work is something very different.

Reply to this comment
Studio Manifesto | Sufjan Stevens on the Existential Crisis of the Album | Studio Manifesto

20. Oct, 2009

[...] From Creative Destruction [...]

Reply to this comment
Paul

20. Oct, 2009

Nice article Refe, you really hit the nail on the head with your points about music being an art form and not just another “product”. I am personally pretty fed up with the “album is dead” nonsense that has been the gospel of music futurists for the past few years. Albums will always make more sense for certain kinds of musicians and bands and they never did make sense for pop entertainers – that was just a ploy by the big record companies to put together more expensive “products” and increase the profit margins.
Also, the argument that releasing less music, i.e. E.P.s & singles, more often to “stay in the public eye” also has little merit in my opinion. I can agree that an album every 3 years is a bit risky, especially for new bands that are trying to gain some traction, but an album every year or 18 months perhaps with a few singles in between should be more than enough. I can only say how I feel, but the more a band throws things out there in bits and pieces the more desperate it appears and I tend to shut off after a while. I may be showing my age here when I say “absence makes the heart grow fonder” but I don’t think I am alone in that sentiment.

Reply to this comment
- refe
  
  23. Oct, 2009
  
  I disagree with your second paragraph, because I think that the way the majority of listeners are consuming music today is much different than it was when the traditional 2 year album cycle became prominant. The single as a fomat has experienced a huge resurgance. Smaller, higher quality releases more often capitalize on this.
  
  That doesn’t mean this is true for every listener, of course, in the same way that the article points out that not every artist should feel compelled to give up the album. But Artists should be aware of the benefits to this new approach, just as they are aware of the benefits of releasing a full album.
  
  Reply to this comment
  - Paul
    
    26. Oct, 2009
    
    Perhaps saying the more frequent release schedule has “little merit” was a bit strong but I would still be interested in hearing about some concrete examples, maybe from bands or artists who have tried things both ways over the past few years.
    In the end, bands and artists should do what feels right for them and keep track of what works and what doesn’t and then decide how much they are willing to let the realities of contemporary commerce dictate over their artisitic method.
    
    Reply to this comment
Blaise Alleyne

22. Oct, 2009

I think it’s true that the album is no longer necessary. It used to be a necessary container for music, but that’s no longer the case given the internet and all that jazz.

However, that doesn’t mean that the album can no longer be useful. Most of the time, there’s little reason to group songs together but for distribution or convention, but Sufjan Stevens would be an exception. His albums are truly albums. There is a reason the songs are together.

I’d hate to see him stop making albums.

Reply to this comment
- refe
  
  23. Oct, 2009
  
  I think that’s an important distinction. The album is no longer necessary as a delivery format, but can still be very effective as an artistic platfom. This is good news, because (optimistically speaking, anway) we now have the opportunity to get rid of the filler but keep the high-concept high-quality works from artists like Sufjan Stevens.
  
  Reply to this comment
  - Blaise Alleyne
    
    23. Oct, 2009
    
    Agreed, strongly.
    
    Now… if we could just get Sufjan to realize this!
    
    (ps love your blog)
    
    Reply to this comment
    - refe
      
      13. Nov, 2009
      
      Thank you!
      
      Reply to this comment
Cookie Marenco

26. Oct, 2009

I appreciate your sentiments and agree that the artist makes the choice of a single or a album or a concept. Too many artists are wrapped up in fashion and what the ‘other guys’ are doing. Just cuz Walmart is selling a disc for $9.95, why do indie artists feel they have to do the same? More to the point, if you only have 3 good songs, why fill up an album with 12, most being filler crap? Sell the singles. For that matter, why stop at a 72 minute album? Why not a 16 hour song cycle? Vinyl was optimum with 18 minutes per side. Good times!

But, for the record, the album’s dominance only came about in the 70’s. Prior to that, singles kept the music business alive. A return to the single isn’t unusual.

At our label, we sell both one of a kind singles and albums formats. Though we sell fewer album downloads, the dollars between albums and singles are equal at the end of the day. That being said our physical product outsells downloads by 3 to 1 on a dollar basis. If you’re an artist who is also in business and cares about your customers, you should to consider what they want … or you decide what to give them and let the buyer decide whether to support you.

Eventually, artist and fanbase settles into a comfortable spot. Either you make enough money or you don’t to keep your art alive…. or you marry someone rich, as in the words of Lou Harrison, an acclaimed American composer.

Reply to this comment
- refe
  
  13. Nov, 2009
  
  True – I should have clarified that the album originated 100 years ago, but your right – it only became dominant in the last 40 years or so. Still – it’s been at the top a while now!
  
  Reply to this comment
shakti sawan

13. Nov, 2009

what’s the point of music? what’s the point of eating food…its just gonna pass through the body and end up in the gutter isn’t it. profit is profitable up to a point. ultimately everyone faces at one time or another a deskilling of sorts. the best thing would be to select a line of work that doesn’t get automated or computerized (which btw is damned difficult today)…artists have always starved while their scientific counterparts lived in the lap of luxury. sorry but thats the way it has been (who said life was fair)

Reply to this comment
Forrester’s New Music Release Strategy for Independent Musicians | Hans Erik

18. Nov, 2009

[...] album is dead they say, or at the very least, the CD is on it’s way out. A few months back Forrester Research [...]

Reply to this comment