Why have Underworld messed up albums with wrong track choices - Page 2

Blueski · #11 03-14-2006, 02:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by myshkin

Compared to the early days philosophy of something like the great Dirty Epic release that was virtually an album in its own right, there seems to have been a downturn in value for money by UW. Though maybe we're on a new chapter now with the Riverun releases.

you can't release an single with 3+ tracks anymore, bc then the single won't be considered to the chart in the uk. i'm sure u/w would still release singles like in the 'dmbwmhm' era, but their record company wants to see the singles go to the chart.

irishboy · #12 03-14-2006, 02:36 AM

i think one of the cool things about uw is that they do put good stuff out as b-sides and not just filler tracks - it means that every piece of output from the band has the same high standards applied to it and the results are the reason we all come to this forum

jose m · #13 03-14-2006, 02:46 AM

the rules for singles did change.you used to be able to put upto 40 mins of music on a cd single and if you called them mixes of the same track then that was ok with the charts hence born slippy,born slppy nuxx,dark and long,dark train mix etc,etc.underworld seemed to flaunt the rules to give us more when they could but rules don't allow it now !

i thought that the downloads go along way to address this.

myshkin · #14 03-14-2006, 05:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jose m

the rules for singles did change.you used to be able to put upto 40 mins of music on a cd single and if you called them mixes of the same track then that was ok with the charts hence born slippy,born slppy nuxx,dark and long,dark train mix etc,etc.underworld seemed to flaunt the rules to give us more when they could but rules don't allow it now !

i thought that the downloads go along way to address this.

Sounds like a big part of the reason Rick and Karl have gone down the download direction all right. Never lost faith n their attitude.