Cold compress

When it was first announced that downloaded music would count towards chart placings, a small tear of regret weaved its way down my grimacing face. It was solid proof, against my stubborn denial, that MP3s were here to stay. Now, I’m not a luddite by any means and innovation in technology is something I embrace, but this was different. As far as I was concerned, music was something to be loved and worshipped in all its glory – not compressed and distributed without artwork. Surely the artwork is crucial? Not a PDF file tagged to your download, but a proper paper booklet with the smell of a newly printed document. Often, the whole mood of an album is dictated by its sleeve. It’s part of the record, not an optional appendage.

But this isn’t a new complaint. The same thing happened when CDs slowly replaced vinyl; audiophiles moaned (and still do) that while CDs were a step forward in convenience, they were a big step backwards in sound quality and artwork. Gone were the big, 12” gatefold sleeves and in came tiny, soulless booklets behind polycarbonate windows. And now it’s happened again. Downloads are another strike for convenience but sound quality has taken a further, more pronounced, blow. And surely it won’t be long before most albums are available for download only and bands won’t even need to design a sleeve.

I still think it’s sad, but I no longer have the right to complain. Why? Because most of the music I buy these days is downloaded. I could be petty about it and vote with my feet but I’d be doing so at the expense of my better interests. Downloading does have benefits and it’s easy to see why it’s so popular; you can take your whole album collection on the move with you. You can cherry pick the songs you want without committing to a whole album. It saves on plastic and paper. You can buy an album at any time of day without leaving the house, and it’s cheaper (if not quite cheap enough). On balance, these are undeniable improvements. So I’m reluctantly on board.

Anyway, all of that was just a distracting preamble to what I was originally going to post about which is album durations. Last night I downloaded three albums: Accelerate by REM, The Age of the Understatement by The Last Shadow Puppets and Seventh Tree by Goldfrapp. The first two both clock in at 35 minutes, and if you strip away the bonus tracks on the Goldfrapp record it limps home at 41. Is it me, or are albums getting shorter? In the old days, a solid 45 minutes was the least you’d expect from an LP. I remember when Morrissey’s Kill Uncle was released there were gasps of horror that it was only 33 minutes long. How could he short change us so blatantly? Now, it’s barely an issue. Concise songwriting is all very well, but surely a couple of extra tracks wouldn’t be too hard to manage would they? You still pay the same for a short album, after all. If artists were forced to offer their work at a lower price for failing to meet a certain duration, I suspect they’d be keener to wring out a few more tracks.