1. Please take 30 seconds to register your free account to remove most ads, post topics, make friends, earn reward points at our store, and more!  

Is it better for bands to release 5 albums of good material than release 10 of fluff?

Discussion in 'Miscellaneous [BG]' started by twdavis13, Sep 26, 2009.

  1. twdavis13


    Dec 14, 2008
    Better to release 5 albums of great material over 15 years than release 10 albums of fluff in 10 years??
  2. Kevinmach


    Dec 7, 2008
    Judgment call.

    If you asked a record exec, they could probably cite some statistic that says the average band is only hot for a X amount of years anyway, and might well suggest releasing as many albums as possible.

    But it seems to me that most bands releasing fluff wouldn't be around 10 years unless it's a fluke (not that I am saying they don't exist, Def Lepard comes to mind).

    I also think it depends on who your target market is... clearly, some listening audiences are far more critical than others.
  3. putting out crappy work in quantity instead of less,but quality work is a bad idea for anyone in any field....if you plan on longevity.... quality lasts.....you may make some quick money with fluff but you will never get your reputation back with any amount of cash
  4. makanudo


    Dec 26, 2008
    two words, Slayer and Megadeth, both bands have 11 albums released and keep selling every seat in the house and out of it..
  5. sarcastro83


    Jul 27, 2007
    Toronto, ON
    Obviously... that's like asking if you'd rather have ten pounds of poop in your pockets or only five dollars...
  6. Jazz Ad

    Jazz Ad Mi la ré sol Supporting Member

    5 good albums is an insane lot for a band. Most will only produce 1 in their entire career.
  7. Yes, less is more.

    Listen to the lyrics of this song by Rupert Holmes.

    Makes you think, doesn't it? ;)

    Mike :)
  8. There is a band call Thrice and the have released 3 albums in the last 4 years and everyone has been amazing. MewithoutYou has released 4 albums in the last 6 years and they are all fantastic. Some bands can just make great music, it doesn't matter how often they put them out.

  9. Joey3313


    Nov 28, 2003
    It's relative.

    I think everything Thrice has ever done is awful.

    So what may be "fluff" for someone, might be the greatest thing ever recorded to someone else.

    Also, how many records is the "fluff" selling vs. the band that takes their time? Once money is a factor, answers change.
  10. Valerus


    Aug 4, 2005
    Austin, Texas
    mewithoutYou is an example against the argument, yes. They are one of the best bands I've ever had the joy of listening to and seeing live.

    And are we considering popularity/breakthrough success to be factors? I mean, the band Agalloch has made 3 near-perfect albums (an album every 4 years or so) but no one's ever heard of them. (if you have, your musical tastes are wonderful)
  11. Have you heard Beggers yet? Their best work to date.

  12. Joey3313


    Nov 28, 2003
    I didn't mean to get into an argument/discussion about Thrice, just trying to prove my point.
  13. selfblessed


    Dec 29, 2006
    Phoenix, AZ
    Are you serious? Look out in the crowds! Middle school and high school punk stoners and people that didn't graduate high school. Yeah those are awesome bands!
  14. Beggars is not bad, but it is painfully soft.

    Sometimes all of that sensitivity doesn't translate into actual passion when you hit record.

    I love Agalloch.

    Normally I hate acoustic music and all of that black/post metal stuff, but neofolk has something going for it. Acoustic simplicity, post-metal pretension, and black metal atmospherics make a decent combination... but each alone are not so alluring.

    That has always been thrash metal's audience.

    Nu-metal and Metalcore's audience is much worse, but they are even more popular as a whole than thrash.
  15. JTE

    JTE Supporting Member

    Mar 12, 2008
    Central Illinois, USA
    Wow- This is my exact argument against just about every "orginial" local band/writer/whatever I've had contact with. They think because they pooped it out, it's gold instead of the offal fecal matter most of it is.

    Music is too important to be treated so lightly as to release poor material. One album of good songs is more important than ten albums with five good songs between them.

  16. I want to make an apt but tasteless reply to this post (as I usually do), but it defies logic itself. Who passed Robert Christgau's torch of unapologetically-opinionated-to-a-fault music criticism onto you?
  17. Valerus


    Aug 4, 2005
    Austin, Texas
    It all depends really. I agree with some of your points.

    You like neofolk? Acoustic?
    Try Drudkh's Songs of Grief and Solitude. They're black metal but that album is strictly acoustic/folk. and it's AWESOME.

    Heard of Wolves In The Throne Room? They are wonderful black metal from the US. I was taken away by their atmosphere.
  18. LaklandBass


    Jan 26, 2005
    I think since its kind of on the subject we should praise KMFDM for having like a million albums that all sound unique yet manage to still be that kmfdm sound.
  19. Alvaro Martín Gómez A.

    Alvaro Martín Gómez A. TalkBass' resident Bongo + cowbell player

    Check the complete Boston discography out. Tom Scholz is a perfectionist and he's been in trouble with record labels because of that. In spite of the long gaps between albums, Boston has its well-deserved place in the annals of classic rock.

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.