Pages

Showing posts with label Elvis. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Elvis. Show all posts

Wednesday, 25 February 2015

The Curious Phenomenon of the EP



With physical audio formats seemingly disappearing and then reappearing again these days, it can be confusing to work out what exactly is the product an artist is really trying to sell.

It's pretty easy to work out what an album is, or a single, but an EP (extended play) is a format that is ambiguous at best. especially when you introduce the Mini-LP into the mix.

In the earliest part of the 20th century, up until 1948, the single was the dominant format. Two sided 10-inch diameter shellac records, playing at 78 rpm, with one song on each side. At that speed, it confined the playing time to little over 4 minutes per side. Longer pieces, such as classical music needed to be split across multiple records, and as such they would be bundled into large books that resembled a photo album, and they would be called an "album". In the early 1950s these were superceded by a 7-inch 45rpm single.



In 1948 the Long Playing record emerged. 12 inches in diametre, playing at 33rpm and allowing for an average of 20 minutes per side. In America the RIAA stipulated that the maximum amount of material on an LP was 35 minutes (it was revised and expanded later on). It took a while but it soon became the dominant recorded music format.

However, as the LP was considered an artisan product, a luxury item with the price tag to match, record labels came up with cheaper alternatives to shore up their revenue base. They introduced the 10-inch LP, a mini-LP usually carrying 8 songs (4 a side) and a maximum playing time of around 13-15 minutes a side. By the 1960s these were all but obsolete, but during the 1950s these were hugely popular, with Frank Sinatra being one of the most popular selling artists with albums like "Songs for Young Lovers".

With the rock and roll boom, it was originally thought that teenagers only bought singles and not albums, but despite Elvis and the Beatles selling large amounts of albums, they were still expensive, so in Britain they came up with a mid-range product that would be a little more collectable and valuable than the single, but not as expensive as the LP. The Extended Play, or EP for short, was a four song 7-inch record that featured similar style packaging to the LP but at a fraction of the cost. They were given unique titles, similar to albums.



The EP was the same size and speed as the single and compressed the grooves on each side to allow for up to 7.5 minutes a side playing time These were massive selling items in the 1960s but fell out of favour with major labels in the 1970s. Independent labels and punk bands took to the EP in the 1970s and beyond, but the majors confused the issue by starting to release 12-inch equivalents of an EP in the late 1970s and 1980s. These usually contained 5 tracks and ran at around 20 minutes.

Major labels also introduced a new format in the 1980s, the 12-inch "Mini-LP" which was longer than an EP but shorter than an LP, but that also confused the classification of certain albums. For example, Alice In Chains compiled two EPs together in one package on two discs as "Jar of Flies/Sap". "Sap" had 5 tracks (4 listed on the sleeve and label) and ran at less that 20 minutes, while "Jar of Flies" has 7 tracks at lasts for almost 30 minutes. Is one an EP and the other a mini-LP? "Jar of Flies" topped the Billboard Album Chart. Is it regarded as a short LP?

Elvis Presley's first LP had 12 tracks and lasted 25 minutes while Pink Floyd's "Animals" has 5 tracks and has a 40+ minute duration. Is one a mini-LP?

Not exactly. The British Recording Industry classifies the EP as "any record with more than four distinct tracks or with a playing time of more than 25 minutes is classified as an album for sales-chart purposes. If priced as a single, they will not qualify for the main album chart..." as described by the Official Chart Company.

The Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) defines an EP as "3-5 songs OR under 30 minutes, whereas a single is allowed to contain up to 4 songs."

In this modern age of downloads, the EP still exists in the form of a short release of just 4-5 songs lasting less than 20 minutes, and it still a common release format for young artists who don't yet want to create a longer form piece, and to attract all the scrutiny and analysis that goes with it.

This probably doesn't simplify the matter, however it is not a simple matter to begin with. In my own mind, if the release has 4-6 distinct tracks, lasts around 20-25 minutes and as a unit it has a title unto itself, it is an EP. A single has a lead track that gives the unit its name plus a number of b-sides or bonus songs (sometimes up to 4 or 5, not counting remixes). A mini-LP has 6-7 tracks and lasts up to 30 minutes. An Album has a duration of over 30 minutes and, unless they are long songs, 8 songs or more.



Using this criteria, I don't consider "For The Working Class Man" by Jimmy Barnes as an album, but rather a double 12-inch EP. It is billed on the sleeve as a having 5 new tracks and a "bonus disc" of seven remixes. Both discs total 45 minutes and is a single CD. It charted at #1 on the Australian album chart in spite of this.

Do you have a favourite EP? Tell us below in the comments.

Tuesday, 21 August 2012

35 years ago...

35 years ago last week (yes I know I'm running a bit behind!!!) Elvis left the building...for good...through the bathroom...*

I don't know quite what it is about the man and the legend that is - or was, rather - Elvis Presley. His legacy has endured this long and it looks like it will continue to do so.

It's hard for me to grasp what it is about him that is so compelling, being born out of time from when he was most influential: I only have the music to refer to. I missed the excitement of the early TV appearances which cemented his image in the hearts and minds of impressionable teenagers everywhere.

The Allmusic Guide sums him up beautifully:

Not necessarily the best, and certainly not the most consistent. But no one could argue with the fact that he was the musician most responsible for popularizing rock & roll on an international level.

No-one can deny the impact he had as a performer in his early career. The bulk of his records from the 1950s, pre-Army conscription in 1959 are raw and passionate and compelling. After 1960, the quality of his releases varied dramatically, from some stunning singles to out and out rubbish. And there is just so much of it that it's difficult to find the gems among the junk.

The cynic would suggest that the sheer volume of product the man created would indicate that he was mostly a money-making enterprise - anything with his face on the cover was bound to be a hit. And it's true, he did record anything and everything to give the fans another record to buy. But, the demand was there, all he had to do was meet it...

...to be fair, is most of Elvis' legacy based on his image and distinctive voice? A lot of what makes Elvis's early work so compelling is his backup band - Bill Black's thumping bass and Scotty Moore's thrashing lead guitar, the sound of which launched a thousand George Harrison's. Elvis was just the voice and the face - Scotty Moore arguably did more to inspire the next generation of rockers than Elvis did. In fact, Keith Richard said in an interview recently that when he went to America, he wanted to meet Scotty Moore instead of Elvis.

Elvis didn't write his own songs - he outsourced all his material. The songs he is remembered for were made famous and/or popular to an extent by others before him. This isn't a barrier however - Frank Sinatra never write a song in his life either and it didn't hurt his career either. But, if nothing else, he presented a radical new style of music in such a way that the world sat up and took notice. At the time, in the mid-1950s, that's what the world needed. And those songs have endured. Elvis was the deliverer.

The one thing that really annoys me about the man ironically is not really his fault. It's not the ridiculously convoluted discography, the cheesy films or the sequinned Vegas jumpsuits. It's those bloody Elvis impersonators!!! I've never seen a good one, and the very thought of them makes me cringe. Most of them can't even hold a candle to the real thing and if they actually had any real talent, they'd try and make a musical career under their own image and their own songs and not those of Elvis. These people just take the cheese factor and amplify it to unbearable levels.

I guess at the end of the day the impersonators do remind us that there was only one Elvis and that even when he was awful, in film or on record, he was still better than any impersonator anywhere. May he rest in peace.

*I knew he had all sorts of clever ways of leaving the building to escape his rabid fans, but this is ridiculous!