Second Album Syndrome

Here's a story for ya. Its a familiar story, based on my observations of the British music industry.

A band gets a record deal after years of writing, toiling, playing gigs, building a fan base, and honing their craft. Its their big opportunity, what they've been waiting for all their lives, and they pour their years of creativity and songwriting into their album. Its brimming with urgency, creativity, passion, and ideas. Its been a lifetime in the making in the minds of the band. The album gets released, and people are so impressed with this album, the radio stations, TV and the music press begin to champion it. There's a real buzz about the band, and on the strength of this first album, the band are now stars. Everyone loves them, and after the festival season, the tour, the album, and some singles in the charts - everyone wants to hear more, they want to hear it now, they want to hear it yesterday if possible. So the band heads back to the studio to work on their follow up album. But its not the same, they're not toiling anymore, they poured a lifetime of creation, distilled, into their first album, now they have 6 months to produce a follow up. Seeing as the first album did so well for a debut, the record company are investing more money, the band have the best studios, producers, engineers at their disposal. So what happens? The band use songs that didn't make it onto their first album, and they attempt to write a set of songs in six months that are expected to match what took them years to achieve first time round. The new album is clearly not shaping up as good as the first one, but that's ok, with the extra money from the record company, the album is treated to some extra production, more effects, more instruments, some extra post-production. With the helpful praise and arselicking by some 'yes men' from the industry, the band feel they can do no wrong, and are satisfied that they have created a worthy follow-up to their outstanding debut ablum.

But they haven't. They have made an increasingly typical second album. It lacks the energy and charm of the first album, the material isn't as strong, and the whole thing is way over-produced. It's born of commercial neccessity rather than desire and creation. Following the success of the debut album, and now due to the demand for the second album, it's hyped to the hilt by the media, almost to a frenzy. A tour is booked, but its an arena tour rather than a tour of clubs where the fans first fell in love with the band.
The album is released in a chorus of corporate fanfare, there's posters on every bilboard, adverts on the telly, and all seems rosy for the band. Corporate music rags like Q give the album a quadruple page spread and a solid 4 - 4.5 star review...
But then people listen to the album. The independant music press are the first to notice. This album is no where near as good as the first, the songs don't get you going like the old ones. Where's the energy? Why is it so over-produced? Oh No! The curse of the second album!


This is how bands catch 'Second Album Syndrome'. Its on the rise. So many great sounding bands have fallen victim to it in recent years. The Kaiser Chiefs, Kasabian, Razorlight - are a few examples of bands who've gone from exciting prospects from their first album to dissapointing MOR corporate juggernauts by their second.

Its hard to say where all of the blame lies, but I think there's too much pressure on bands to turn around the goods so soon for a follow up. If you look at the bands who havent bowed to the pressure - eg Franz Ferdinand, Kings Of Leon who left it a couple of years between debut and follow up, they are all much more critically acclaimed and maintain a rapport with their 'real fans'.
Food for thought, I hope.

I like your writing you have a good grip on whats happenening there. You sound like you work in the recording industry at some level. Very in tune with whats going on.

I have sat in on plenty of song writing sessions for a few currently big bands, and plenty not so big ones, and I can confirm that they have 6 months to come up with a new album. In reality it's more like 14 months or so, but it goes by fast and most of that time isn't spent on song writing. Do a tour then back into the studio.

From what I can see, is yep they do take a few tracks that were rejected by the A&R for the debut album but that the band or producers really liked. They spruce up the songs a bit and then toss them on the album, but these songs usually only amount to half the album. Most of what we would concider the "B Sides" The songs are deemed by the A&R as "not the first single for the album that I'm hearing in my head", or "ehh that sounds like it could be a 3rd or 4th single released for the album" "what we need is some spiffy producers to come in and write you guys a few hits, the song that will be the first single released for the album, rhonda (assistant) call Jack Puig's people and see what his scheduel is"

Where most of the time is spent from my experience is in the A&R trying to find ways to amplify the next albums selling potential(read sell out). They do this by soliciting the best or most popular pop producers that are working in the industry at the time. The names change with the decades but right now there are about 8 heavy guys producing the majority of pop rock albums (go to all music and look it uo if you don't believe me). WHich is why they all sorta get buried in the mass of other bands that all suddenly begin to dovetail sounds and sound the same...the same producers & songwriters is the broken part of the formula. The part that needs fixing.

So they try and get these producers they solicit 4-5 at a time and the bands go in to each producer/songwriter's studio and do conceptualizing, writing and basic tracking in about 2-3 days per song. yep thats it thats how long fall out boy, linkin park, and others take to write the songs for their follow up albums. No joke. The singer or guitarist might be able to slip in a few things they've been working on on the side but thats only if it's approved by the producer, thier own managers, and then finally if it sneaks past the A&R. The A&R listen to all the song submissions from the producers and then poop poo some acclaim others, look biasedly at their favored producer at the time, all sorts of stuff. The songs that make it through the A&R selection process then get the green light to be re recorded and maybe touched up a bit in the writing and then they send over the master to the A&R and they approve the mix to be acceptable for the album and the rest is history.

So frequently the producers or songwriting teams that worked with the band on the origional CD to devlope their sound aren't even asked to come back and work on the second album. The labels want to go sell out on the band for quicker profits.

Remember the day when A&R developed acts and released albums from bands every few years, and each album release was a big deal. The music was almost always well written true to the band, plus you got to see how the band changed or matured over the few years since their last album came out. Those bands were developed over time by the labels and are the only ones that have box sets 10 years later. not the fall out boys etc.

just my .02

I'm seeing the exact thing happening to the "Artic monkeys" right now, which i think is a good thing cause i hate them lol

Now since all the big bands have relased albums hopefully there 2nd ones with flop,i hate new music I,E ..Razor-Light,Artic monkeys,Snow patrol,Keane,the zutons etc....

[edit on 24-4-2007 by Disgustipated]

Damn and I was about to mention Arctic Monkeys in the last post.

Yeah, Hanson had that same problem. They ran out of material after their first album.........go figure. Plus the singer got pubes on top of that.

Peace

Funny you say hanson. As I type I'm looking at a double platinum RIAA plaque for Hanson's "Middle of Nowhere" sitting above my desk. Yeah we helped them with their first album. Still have a box of promo vinyl records of Hanson that the label gave us. We keep em for the memories.

The music was lame gotta agree there, and if they didn't have well connected people backing them they would have never gotten anything period. The guys in the band were so nice and endearing that one couldn't but help them. Seriously they were pretty good kids at the time. have no idea about them now. At the time I was working partime at the company answering phones as a receptionist, Moved up just a bit since then, but I got to help out and watch everything go down.

Powerful people in the industry practically held their hands as they went on mettings with label execs. Hanson.... memories.

Also as far as material went, hanson really never had any. The labels halped them out a whole lot with that one. COuld explain what happened with a follow up LP.

Still think MMMM Bop is an annoy piece of work though, glad they aren't around anymore.

I personally believe that this also depends on the kind of music....

Say punkish britpop like whats populair now has barely any innovation in its genre. One reason for this is quite simple. Its punkish and simple.