Clarification, "good guys," and some free music.

I would like to think that my message was sufficiently conveyed in the subtext of my previous post, but just to be sure, because in the conversation that is now emerging in the wake of my post, it seems that some have perhaps misconstrued my main points. I would like, therefore, to make these central points explicit in an easy-to-parse bullet-point format.

• It was not my intention to tar all indie record stores with the same brush. Just as with most subcultures, there are good seeds and bad seeds. I recognize that, have recognized that for some time, and I therefore tend to only patronize (and try to be a vocal champion of) those who I consider to be, to put it in very reductionist and polarizing terms which are perhaps a but disingenuous but ultimately kind of necessary, the "good guys."
• Nor was it my intention to disparage the good folks at Record Store Day. As I said in the previous entry, on the first Record Store Day I visited, if memory serves, five shops, arriving at the first one an hour before opening to find that I was the only person crazy enough to do so. Anybody who went to a record store this past Saturday knows how exponential the growth has been in the past two years. That first year, there were very few publicized exclusives, and they were all, I believe, from upper-tier indie labels - Matador, Merge, and Beggars, as I recall. The co-opting of Record Store Day by major labels (Warner Bros. in particular) has been curious to watch, and ultimately a necessary step in the growth of Record Store Day that unfortunately causes the onset of the standard independent paradox - one feels happy for the growth and sustainability of the event, but at the same time feels a slight sting as it no longer feels like it is yours alone. It's like watching your favorite band suddenly become huge, which is obviously a sensation I know somewhat well. But seriously - no anger toward the Record Store Day people should be read into my post. I know they are doing what they can with what they have, and frankly, the sometimes disorganized and ramshackle nature of the proceedings lends it a charm that has been steadily disappearing from record shopping culture since the rise of the internet.
• I am not a fan of individual "speculators" who purchase rare records for the sole purpose of resale value, and I have not tried to hide this at any time. Usually, somebody who knows the resale value of these records is himself (or herself) a music lover, and therefore knows how it feels not to be able to get one's hands on something one wants due to the opportunism and greed of others. So what you have, then, is music lovers screwing over other music lovers for a few bucks. I know the economy is tough, and I am not going to judge you as a person if you do this. However, I am going to make a judgment call on your particular action and say it's a shitty thing to do. It doesn't make you a terrible person, but it's still a terrible thing to do to one of your own. And I know that this point will likely get accusations of having a "holier than thou" attitude, but frankly, I think having principles and sticking to them is underrated these days, and I'm not going to back down on mine.
  
• The thorniest issue in the resulting discussion revolves around the one that I feel most strongly about, and which was meant to be the main thrust and eventual target of my ire and frustration: the stores themselves that withhold this stock from the customers supporting the brick-and-mortar stores to flip on eBay, usually for exorbitant Buy-It-Now prices. Record stores flipping products on eBay, sometimes at inflated prices, is nothing new, but it's something that has seldom been talked about. And in the past, and even in general, I don't necessarily have a problem with this; it is an example of stores adapting to a new economic climate and business model. What does it matter if an old Velvet Underground 45 goes for $100 on eBay, or if it sits collecting dust in the basement of an obscure record store in Brooklyn with a $100 price tag on it? For better or for worse, this is a capitalist, free market economy. Supply and demand applies in person as well as in online transactions. However, the Record Store Day stock is another store. In the words of the founders of RSD,

  This is the one day that all of the independently owned record stores come together with artists to celebrate the art of music. Special vinyl and CD releases and various promotional products are made exclusively for the day and hundreds of artists in the United States and in various countries across the globe make special appearances and performances. Festivities include performances, cook-outs, body painting, meet & greets with artists, parades, djs spinning records and on and on. Metallica officially kicked off Record Store Day at Rasputin Music in San Francisco on April 19, 2008 and Record Store Day is now celebrated the third Saturday every April.

In other words, it is meant to be a community event. As I interpret it, and I believe that Ms. Colliton and Mr. Kurtz confirm this in their comments on my previous post, the customers are just as important a part of Record Store Day as the stores and the musicians are. It's about what happens when the three come together. As somebody who spent a significant amount of his free time growing up simply hanging out in an independent record store, and later becoming an employee in this same store (RIP Full Circle Records), the idea of community and socialization is important to my conception of what an independent shop represents. The brick-and-mortar customers are the lifeblood of these shops, and I read RSD as a way of rewarding them for their continuing loyalty to a business model that many have written off as anachronistic.

By withholding these releases, by not even giving the brick-and-mortar customers a chance at these releases, the record stores have in a sense broken an unspoken pact of responsibility. They have sold out the patrons who would support them and keep them afloat for a quicker buck. These shops do not deserve our support or our patronage if they are going to disrespect their customers so callously and blatantly. I have seen some comments from others stating that they would rather their record store flip the product without giving them a shot at it if it means they can compete with Wal Mart and iTunes - my point of view (and, again, my principles show on my sleeve here) is that we don't need stores that have no respect for or loyalty to the customers who support them. Loyalty goes both ways, folks.

No, we will never put an end to record flipping and amateur eBay entrepreneurship. That is just a fact of our economic system. However, in a capitalist environment, the consumer can vote with his or her wallet. We can point out the stores that are betraying their customers. We can make examples of them. We can spread the word. We can shame them. We can stop supporting them until they give us the same loyalty and respect we would give them.

Frankly, I am just happy to see that some conversation has started as a result of this post. I am a bit overwhelmed at the amount of attention that my little navel-gazing and venting blog post has attracted in a short amount of time, but if it gets people thinking and talking about this, and perhaps deciding what role principles should play in their own conception of retail ethos, then I have more than done my job. I want to thank those of you who have supported me, spread the link through internet fora, agreed with me, or even challenged or disagreed with me. Just keep talking about it. Keep the discussion going. Things can change.

For those of you who have gotten through the preachy and self-righteous portion of this post, I'd like to direct you to some of the good guys that I have had the pleasure of dealing with int he independent music retail world. Please, whenever you can, support these establishments, because they truly do deserve it.

• Vintage Vinyl Records - Fords, NJ
• Princeton Record Exchange - Princeton, NJ
• Harvest Records - Asheville, NC
• Bull City Records - Durham, NC
• Landlocked Records - Bloomington, IN
• Criminal Records - Atlanta, GA
• Sound Fix - Brooklyn, NY
• Academy Annex - Brooklyn, NY
• Other Music - New York, NY

And, finally, to reward those of you who have made it all the way through my screed, here is the promised free music. First, let's foil the entrepreneurs who are trying to profit by flipping copies of the Blur Record Store Day UK exclusive. The reunited band released their first new song in seven years, "Fool's Day," in a limited edition of 1,000 7-inch singles that are obviously woefully sold out. Fortunately, the band have made the song available to anybody who wants it for the price of an e-mail address. Click through below to download "Fool's Day" in either 320 kbps mp3 or uncompressed wav format.

Blur - Fool's Day (download)

Next, don't fret that you didn't get your hands on one of the 600 copies of the Hold Steady LP. Instead, courtesy of NPR, you can stream the entire Heaven Is Whenever album and listen to it as often as you went until it is released on May 4 by Vagrant Records!

the Hold Steady - Heaven Is Whenever (stream)

NPR is also offering a full free preview of the new Broken Social Scene record, Forgiveness Rock Record, also out May 4 on Arts & Crafts.



And, finally, experience the sheer addictive awesomeness that is the new LCD Soundsystem record, This Is Happening, courtesy of their own damn selves. LCD really is getting better with each album, and I highly recommend giving this a listen or ten. This Is Happening is released on May 18.

LCD Soundsystem - This Is Happening (stream)

I just want to give a huge thank you to Eric Harvey and the New York Magazine Vulture Blog for helping to spread my thoughts and get conversation going, and another thank you to all of you who are participating in the conversation.

Six inches forward and five inches back.

So, my copy of the new Spoon single, "Written in Reverse," arrived today on colored 7-inch vinyl, and it is gorgeous, as you can see:

Handling the single, and already eagerly anticipating the release of Spoon's next album, Transference, on January 19, I began to think of the relationship of 7-inch singles to albums and EPs, and specifically about the place of 7-inch singles in the contemporary, increasingly digitized music industry. While I think that the continued presence of (and even increased popularity of) the 12-inch album and, to a lesser degree, the 10-inch EP in the musical environment has been vindicated to a point where acceptance of vinyl in the mainstream is not a radical concept, the 7-inch presents a quandary. While albums and EPs are collections of songs that are meant to be listened to together, and often play for 15 to 20 minutes per side without the interruption of having to flip the record, singles are another story entirely. I mean, was there ever a time when the single would have been considered convenient? It really is the most work-intensive method of listening to music; considering that a typical pop single traditionally clocks in at around 3 minutes, and sometimes even less, it seems that one would hardly have time to sit down and make oneself comfortable before it would be time to get up and flip he single over to the B-side. Is the continued existence of the 7-inch single simply a byproduct of superficial nostalgia and vinyl fetishism?

Strictly speaking, the more I think about it, the existence of singles doesn't make sense. It just seems counter-intuitive. Aside from the whole flipping sides issue, there is the simple economics of it. In an age of 99-cent digital track downloads, $10 full-album downloads, and new release CDs often offered for $7.99 at the big box stores, what incentive is there for music fans to put down five dollars (or more) on two songs? Especially in the current economic climate, it does not seem to be a particularly sustainable model.

When one looks at the way the music industry is structured, the very idea of a single (at least in the traditional definition) also appears to be bordering on archaic, and charting the recent history of the single proves to be quite illuminating in terms of how the music industry has changed over the years. At this point it should be noted that I am not claiming to be a music historian, nor is this an academic blog, and so my understanding may be flawed or my explanations oversimplified or generalized to a degree where I miss the point. I do believe, however, that my overall argument, that the single has largely gone from being its own entity to a promotional tool for a more expensive album to an afterthought on the verge of antiquity, holds true.

My look at singles will begin in the 1960s, when it seems that the UK and US music industries had very different ideas of the purpose of singles. Bands such as the Beatles, Rolling Stones, and Jimi Hendrix Experience often looked at singles and albums as separate and yet equally legitimate entities. It had been common practice (and a practice that was sometimes adopted in the late '70s UK punk and postpunk scenes, as evidenced by a glance at the discographies of bands such as the Clash, Joy Division, and New Order) to eschew including tracks from singes on album releases on the UK pressings of albums. A single seemed to be viewed more as a self-contained statement in itself than simply a building block for a larger statement or entity. However, the corresponding American releases of these albums, which were often delayed, frequently consisted of bastardized tracklistings, with the tracks often resequenced and some album cuts excised from the running order in order to make room for the more recognizable hit singles which would be used to sell the album to the American market. This is the reason so many early Beatles and Rolling Stones albums (not to mention, notoriously, Jimi Hendrix Experience's Are You Experienced and the self-titled debut from the Clash) had sometimes drastically different tracklistings in the UK and US pressings.

Moving into the '70s and '80s, singles by and large tended to be culled from an album and sent to radio as a kind of promotional tool for the album. Frequently (as evidenced by my own nonscientific "research," i.e., browsing my record collection), even the B-sides of singles during this period were culled from the album, sometimes in slightly remixed form. Clearly, during this period of heavy AOR, singles were merely used as a tool for selling an album, although some bands, primarily in the UK, continued the tradition of releasing standalone one-off singles.

In the 1990s, the single seemed to enter a golden age of sorts as CDs became more and more ubiquitous (we shall conveniently ignore the "cassingle" trend). In the US the "maxi-single," which often contained 2 to 5 "B-sides" - the term stuck in spite of the fact that it no longer made any sense - became the standard format for CD singles. Record labels in the UK, however, engineered an even more effective way of wringing money from the record-buying public: the 2-part CD single (later to expand even more extravagantly into a 3-part CD single, sometimes augmented with a separate DVD single and a limited edition 7-inch with an exclusive B-side). Artists such as Radiohead and Björk released some of the iconic multi-part cd singles, often in several different formats across various European territories. A song such as Radiohead's "High and Dry," for instance, was released in, I believe, about 6 different formats, each with a different selection and configuration of B-sides and none collecting them all in one place.

Moving into the aughts and the rise of the digital marketplace, the concept of a single has become almost outdated, almost a quaint relic. CD singles have all but disappeared from the shelves, with the live cuts, outtakes, and remixes that previously would have been CD single fodder now being relegated to deluxe editions of new albums or to "digital EPs." Digital album leaks have rendered the advance single obsolete, although bands will still frequently pre-release one track from their next album digitally as a teaser. With MTV and VH1 basically being reality television channels these days, and with the rise of streaming video websites, video directors are now free to go places that network execs and the FCC would never allow them to go before, and videos are frequently now more a process of artistic statement than album promotion. With the iTunes model of cherry-picking tracks, the labels have lost control of what tracks to emphasize in order to market an album, which would seem to make the process of music marketing more democratic and egalitarian. The trade-off, however, is that the artist no longer has much control over how the package is presented. An album such as The Hazards of Love by the Decemberists, for instance, relies on its careful sequencing and on being presented as a whole rather than piecemeal by track; while this may be an extreme example, it perfectly displays the artistic loss that unfortunately seems to go hand-in-hand with the digital movement.

Ultimately, artistic presentation is the charm of the 7-inch single, and it is something that I firmly believe the digital file will never be able to replicate. Yes, there is an element of vinyl fetishism involved in the 7-inch single. Yes, there is perhaps some misplaced but well-meaning nostalgia, some willful anachronism. But ultimately it is about the music. As wasteful as the constant side-flipping seems to be, there is something to be said for the concise presentation, the self-contained quality of the package. There is a charm to these two songs that someone thought belonged together on a small slab of vinyl. It's a diversion from the other big, pressing things of the day. It feels special. And, really, when you get all this AND it's on ultra-cute pink marbled vinyl, really, could anybody with a pulse resist it?