Forthcoming singles... how do you decide how many?

[retrofuturist]

I'm just wondering what decides how many singles will get released off an album. Personally, I don't see why you'd stop until the next candidate for a single would be projected to fall short of the Top 20. Maybe this is what happens... maybe this is why London got canned as a 3rd single from Release?

New singles keep the spotlight on the album, keeping it in the charts and building more momentum for the album and give fairweather fans more incentive to purchase. Therefore, I can't understand why anyone would go in with a predefined statement that a particular album will have x number of singles taken from it. It doesn't seem to make business sense.

Think of Very for an example... classic album.... 5 singles... but even then, EMI could have kept going. I think A Different Point Of View would have been a guaranteed Top 20 hit... so why not keep going??? Hit single after hit single demonstrates the album is of high quality and will boost long-term sales and raise the profile of the artist.

With Fundamental... we've got I'm With Stupid first, then Minimal. Top tracks and probably a good progression. General consensus appears to be that S&G Show, Integral and Numb (or maybe even Fugitive) all have "chart potential".... so why not rank them in order of likelihood to succeed and keep churning them out until you have reason to think that the next one on the list would not chart high enough. Hit single after hit single would also show that the "boys are really back", and that this isn't a duff album (like maybe people consider Bilingual, Nightlife & Release)

Just my thoughts on the matter... what do you think?

[patrick]

maybe this is why London got canned as a 3rd single from Release?

I have both London CDs. It didn't get canned everywhere.

Think of Very for an example... classic album.... 5 singles... but even then, EMI could have kept going.

In a way they did. Absolutely Fabulous came out in the middle of the Very singles which effectively gave them a string of six continuous hits.

[BlueSwan]

Singles are expensive. The video alone is a major cost. Most singles are actually money-loosers for the record companies, unless of course they help sell more albums. This is the crucial element: will the single sell more albums. It won't if radio isn't gonna play it and only the fanbase makes it hit the top 20.

[Eldritch]

Singles are expensive. The video alone is a major cost. Most singles are actually money-loosers for the record companies, unless of course they help sell more albums. This is the crucial element: will the single sell more albums. It won't if radio isn't gonna play it and only the fanbase makes it hit the top 20.

Exactly. And that's why there has been less and less singles released from PSB albums as it has become clear that third or fourth singles have no effect on album sales. There are some exceptions like Depeche Mode – their albums usually drop straight off the radar too and the post-album singles have no effect on them, but they have such a fanatic world-wide fan base, that their singles actually make money in the long term, because of the collectability and the recycling releases: the singles boxes, the remix album...

[retrofuturist]

Is the unprofitability of singles in the modern era mainly attributable to internet downloads (legal or otherwise) and the resulting decrease in demand? Are there any other key factors?

It's a shame really because CDs would be actually cheaper to print now than ever before.

I guess this means the days of the "charity single" are probably gone. Lucky Absolutely Fabulous came out in the 90s rather than now!

It's all pretty interesting really... I guess only time is going to tell what impact incorporating internet downloads in the charts is going to have. First inspection points to more bad than good, but I guess it was inevitable that it had to happen at some point.

Thanks for your perspective folks.

[stew]

that london CD was wicked with all them mixes on they should have released it...

[!]

This is why I don't think they should have more than 3 singles.

They don't really sell anymore and the whole point of them is to promote an album. That's why I think Numb should be the 3rd and final single because then they would have presented the album fairly well.

[patrick]

They should put out an EP featuring a catchy single that's not on the album to boost interest. They've done this three times before...