New Demos Going Up (Chaotic Neutral)

[Guest Idioteque]

Yeah that's where E.P's come in, or even bonus tracks. First 200 preorders get 2 downloadable songs or itunes exclusive type thing. 
You get to release these tracks you were iffy on & let the fans become familiar with them so if you ever felt like pulling it out in a setlist one night, you could.
(Just like Oh Be Joyful & Big City Life). 
 

[mackie1023]

I will admit though that the "Christmas morning" feeling is an amazing experience as well.

 

It also pains me that my son will never know the agony of waiting patiently until the moment the radio station plays your favorite song and you can finally record it to a cassette, but of course during the ending fade out the DJ comes back on with some cheesy bullhonky and you have to wait again. Then finally scoring a stereo with a double cassette so you can record that song into it several times in a row effectively eliminating the need to continually rewind.

 

Ah, technology.

[Prairieboy]

I will admit though that the "Christmas morning" feeling is an amazing experience as well.

It also pains me that my son will never know the agony of waiting patiently until the moment the radio station plays your favorite song and you can finally record it to a cassette, but of course during the ending fade out the DJ comes back on with some cheesy bullhonky and you have to wait again. Then finally scoring a stereo with a double cassette so you can record that song into it several times in a row effectively eliminating the need to continually rewind.

Ah, technology.

Those were the days!!! :)

[Outtahere]

What Matt's saying is a sad truth and I get it. I was born before CD players arrived in our homes... which meant that we had to wait until they were affordable before getting one. Vynil and cassettes were king in my home for a decade and a half of my existence. They both had the same advantage for artists who make full records: it was a pain to skip a song and they had two seperate sides. It took me a while to consider Mother's Talk and I Believe fom Tears for Fears' Songs From The Big Chair as something else than the end of a side and the beginning of the other. Same with The Seeds of Love which to me has an A side containing the singles and a B Side consisting of another type of songs. Those records are hard to listen on a CD as a whole because the seperation is still there in my mind. 

 

The arrival of Naspter and iTunes were a double edged sword. On one side, it allowed people who like certain songs off a record to only buy those instead of not buying it altogether or making a mixtape by borrowing the record from someone they know. On the other side, it has changed the way the generations that followed listens to music. Recently, Noel Gallagher was saying how he had to explain to his 14 years old daughter what a record sleeve was and that yes he had to decide what was going to be on that little image in the square that appears on the top of her music app... because she never buys any physical music let alone full records.

 

Matt's post probably explains why Chaotic Neutral doesn't really flow as his previous records do. But I don't understand why an artist cannot make a full on record and stil sell tracks. For someone buying tracks, the running order doesn't really have any importance. 

 

It strange because, to me, Chaotic Neutral was more of a curve ball than Lights of Endangered Species which I loved from one side to the other instantly. It took a lot of listens to enjoy CN and there are songs I still don't like. Is it a result of Matt being underwhelmed by making records as he seems to be in this post or is it just because I didn't connect with some songs? It doesn't really matter. The point I'm trying to convey is, although a lot of songs from Chaotic Neutral definitely go together, it's certainly more a collection of songs than a record per se. To me, it's like Vancouver MKII. I had the same feeling with that record.

 

I do hope he returns to making records. But given this last post, I doubt it... he's always been a great record maker.

[Gomo]

Billy Corgan started some strange concept album by releasing one song at a time, once a month. He cited the death of the album and the way single song sales have skyrocketed as reasons why it didn't make sense to produce and sell a traditional album anymore. He started out on track with his original plan, releasing a new song each month. Eventually the time in between releases got longer, the songs got weirder, and then he just ended up making a full album again anyway, and another one since that. Not sure what that really proves, but that's what Matt's post reminded me of.

Edited October 4, 2015 by Gomo

[Outtahere]

First, I don't release anything these days that I'm not 110% behind. This record is no different. In fact, it has more personal favourites on it than any record I've ever made.

 

It's interesting how some responses automatically just return to the "give us everything" mindset. Bonus tracks, etc. Releasing demos as bonus tracks is, to me, not attractive. They're sonically skeletal representations of ideas. Big City Life and Oh Be Joyful were both recorded in a world class studio. They were not demos. So, too, was Rooms.

 

Further, capturing something on a demo and live are totally different. Live is entirely in the moment, you don't get to re-track things. It's that second, that minute, and it'll never be the same again.

 

Another matter which many fans overlook are the true financial realities of their suggestions. Artists with money can do a lot of things. If I had the money, I'd do a lot of things. But the money I make is all used to support my family. I got rid of my house. I got rid of a lot of bills, but even then touring is my livelihood. That said, in Canada it's a tricky thing. 30 people can complain I'm not playing in Saskatchewan for example, but the fact is that stopping there could cost me money. The same is true for Newfoundland. You have to be smart about it. There are markets that are your bread and butter and others that just cover expenses in the gaps between those markets.

 

I know people have certain perceptions about music, but in Canada it's not the same as in other countries. Were I American and had the level of success there over 20 years I'd be a wealthy man. Same goes for the UK. But not here. The "Canadian reality" applies just as equally to Australian bands, for example. There are exceptions, mind you, but they're usually limited to one or two bands that predominantly do most of their business here at home.

 

Touring the States for me actually costs me more than sitting at home doing laundry, which is why I don't do it. I had my chance to play the game there 16 years ago but just couldn't stomach what a "game" it was. I'm 44 and the chance of some "breakthrough" south of the border is long past. And I'm totally comfortable with that and have been for about 15 and a half years. The "fame machine" in the US is something I would never want to be part of. In fact, I consider myself lucky, not unfortunate, that I never had major success down there.

 

Everything costs money. If you're just starting out you'll eat shit to get on a big tour, getting maybe a 400 dollar honorarium a night with a label paying your expenses while you slip further and further into debt. And even if you are successful eventually, most acts now sign 360 deals which means labels get half of touring and merch revenues, something that in my day would be seen as utterly criminal. So in the end you owe so much money, which has to be paid back before you make money, that you're either an extreme success and that process is quick, or you're a relative one that could quite quickly become a financial liability.

 

Then there's bands that apply for grants and funding, which I have done in the past. And the truth is it could be better spent on someone else, younger artists that are driven to make inroads down there. I'm not one of those artists. If I could make a little money touring in the US I would and that be cool. Do club shows, have fun. But I don't want to get touring grants just so I can break even or even lose money.

 

The realities of the music business and the perceptions of those outside it are very different. People assume you should be able to do "this or that" because so and so did it. It's not, nor has it ever been, that simple. And it never will be.

 

Oh I'm certain you're 110% behind it. One would be foolish to release a record with material that's just meh to him (even though some do obviously). How are you suppose to support it for months if you don't enjoy it? 

 

I can't say if you were responding to me or the Billy Corgan post but, I was actually saying two seperate things: first that, personally, some songs don't connect with me which has nothing to do with, second, that I felt that the flowing of the record itself feels weird a bit, as if some songs go together and some don't (but again this is a very personal point of view). From your post, I got the impression you released more a collection of songs rather than a record in the classic "thematic" meaning of the word, hence my comparison with Lights which was a perfectly flowing cohesive record and remains one of my favourite records of all time of all artists.

 

And I didn't give the demos a listen so when you put the record on SoundCloud, that was my first listen. I ended up buying the record which means I like the record. 

 

That being said, the artistic industry is a bloody mess. What I'm going to say is going to sound ludicrous I know but a lot more money is going into making hot dogs than making filet mignon. You're in the filet mignon side of things: it takes time, effort, money and in the end not many people will appreciate it. On the flip side, weiners costs a lot less, sells a lot more and become the cash cow of the companies running the industry. So unless you're financially self-sufficient, you're screwed. 

 

But from what I see, with Warner, you seem to have a more similar experience to the Avalanche era with Universal as in they actually help promote the record. I'm still debating the purpose of a video nowadays but still I'm happy to see you're actually getting support this time. Lights should have gotten that kind of support and same with Arrows but unfortunately, the people you were with at the time did not bother. And that's a shame.

[Guest girl]

I'll not lie. I'm damn lucky to have grown up when I did. To have lined up at A&A records and bought The Unforgettable Fire the day it came out. Back then vinyl was the norm, not the exception. So you went home and listened and had absolutely nothing to "connect" to other than the music and people you knew that liked it as well. And when the band came to town - you went and finally got to put people to the music, even if they had a music video.

Yup, I know the feeling. I have done this every year a new abum has come out for MGB/MG, beginning with Loser Anthems. There is no better feeling.

I even did it for this one. I signed up for Maple Music's one-week shipping option, but apparently that was too long of a wait for me. I bought another CD at HMV on September 25, so now I have two. Next time, I'll opt for same day delivery.

 

This year was a little different though. Demos were posted publicly on matthewgood.org. I never paid attention to demos before, until he started doing that.

Edited October 5, 2015 by girl

[Gomo]

Thanks for the insights, Matt. It does make me better appreciate the acoustic shows you've been able to swing down in the US over the past 7 or 8 years.

 

Any word on the next single from the album? Do you get to choose it? Do you care?

[Guest Idioteque]

Apologies to Matt if he's taken any of our words as complaining & nagging, im sure that's none of our intentions. I think it's a learning experience when an artist explains things to fans that we don't fully understand like the industry & financing.

 

I'm sure you've been asked before but have you ever considered Indiegogo or Pledgemusic? For an album or small project you're directly working with your fans. From small bands with no money to huge bands with money (Modest Mouse/Silversun Pickups) I've seen it be pretty beneficial. Especially when it comes to merchandise bundles that fans can purchase or donate straight towards your project.

 

Protest The Hero has a really insightful video on the subject.

https://vimeo.com/57246728

 

A band called Lions crowdfunded their tour van, The Tea Party crowdfunded their vinyl pressing of "Edges Of Twilight 20th Anniversary" So there's vast options of things you could get "help" on. 

The only reason I bring this up is because you as an artist & your concerns about the financial side of recording & merchandise/touring could be helped by fans like me, Anton (he talked about not wanting to buy a ticket on stubhub in another thread) & thousands of other fans who find comfort in knowing every dollar spent on an MG item goes directly to you, clearly not every dollar since there's taxes & fees but hopefully you get the point. 

I remember a few years ago during a Prince tour they added 1 CD to every ticket so if he sold out a 1,500 seat venue, he technically sold 1,500 CD's. Which I'm sure with Prince's wallet that's fully possible to do but I've always wondered why bands don't do this more often. 

I've been seeing fans & artists work together more & more lately because it's financially beneficial for all parties, whether it be musicians or directors or authors. 

 

So what's your thoughts on crowdfunding?

[Frank]

Matt I find it pretty hard to believe a Saskatchewan tour date would not be a profitable stop given you have to drive through one of the two large cities to end up in Winnipeg which aside from critical mass at the event should be a relatively easy path to profitability.  The last two shows I have attended in Regina have been pretty full houses venues maybe could be a little bigger but curious what type of attendance drives a profitable show?  Just a little disappointed by your comments given there are a dozen smaller centres getting shows and we're passed over in Regina for a second consecutive tour.  Disappointed Saskatchewan resident number 31.

[Guest girl]

Awesome and funny video. The dog was the best part of the video. That was like a Music Industry for Dummies video. I don't know anything about the music industry. That was easy for me to understand, in plain Engish terms. I enjoyed that. I wouldn't mind contributing to something like that and be a MG album share holder.

 

It's interesting that they do this kind of thing with movies as well.

Edited October 5, 2015 by girl

[Guest Idioteque]

I know right? What better way for fans to give back after +20 years of amazing music! 

[Guest girl]

I was curious and went to Protest The Hero's website. Cool. Look at all of the people they thanked on their website.

http://www.protestthehero.ca/thanks

 

That's a lot of share holders. The album liner notes was probably huge. Well, it looked like it worked and they made their album. Good for them.

[Guest Idioteque]

Yeah I pre-ordered their vinyl. But you can do anything with crowdfunding, like have fans send in 5 second video clips of themselves lip-syncing a single & make that a music video or donate $100-$200 & you can be a fly on the wall for the next studio recording, or a secret acoustic performance somewhere. 

Obviously Chaotic Neutral is finished, it's 10/10 in my books & he's always outdoing himself as an artist, but for his next album this could be food for thought. In a perfect world Matt deserves everything because he's one of the greatest musicians in the world, his music literally saved my life & I'm not throwing literally around loosely. Yet due to 2015's music industry, piracy, lack of air play, finances & 1000 other problems I could name that weigh down the people who do this for a living, it's sad that somebody with so much talent has to depend on live shows to make money, even though I know that's how it's been for a long time it shouldn't be that way. Crowdfunding just seems like 1 less problem off the back of Matt & would help in the long run. I like the idea of an artist directing their focus towards the hardcore fans which makes that connection even stronger knowing you got to help out on the new record & your +$10 actually went into his hand so he can do what he loves. Also what better way to reach those 30 fans in Saskatchewan "Hey I know I can't play out there but want to be on my next record?" & let the fans pay the bill, or "match" whatever is raised, it's your playground.

Again I know absolutely nothing about this topic & it's all hypothetical. But coming from someone who wants to be a musician and understands the consequences & from a fan who jumps at any opportunity to help out an artist/band I love, the last thing you ever want to read is the reality from Matt's last 2 posts about the sacrifices he has to make for his art. 

It's 12am & I'm going for a walk, sorry for the rant lol. But I shall leave everybody with a quote! May mean nothing to some but the world to others.
 

The world is full of fucking ‘why’ people. You tell people something they’ll tell you ‘why’. You throw a rock you’ll hit somebody with ‘why’ like ‘Hey man I want to make a movie’ and they be like ‘Why? Why do you think you can do that, why? Nobody else is doing it, why are you doing it? There is so much fucking ‘why’.

You go out and you find ‘why not’. You surround yourself with ‘why not’. People are just like ‘why not’. Where you are like ‘Hey man I’m gonna try something’ their like ‘Yeah, why not, let’s give it a shot’. People will try to help you do your dreams, make your dreams come true and you do the same for them. We’re all in this together.

It costs nothing to encourage a fucking artist.

You have to make sure that keeps going, to encourage other people. To tell other people it’s worth the shot. Just like Wayne Gretzky said “You miss 100% of the shots you don’t make”. It’s always worth the fucking shot.

I’m talking about artsy shit you know writing a blog, making some music, making a movie, making a fucking cupcake store just anything that’s not fucking ‘we must do this because it’s part of my job or this will get me money’. It’s just some shit you just do to see if it can be done.

Live a ‘why not’ life because we are all going to fucking die screaming. So make sure, when you die screaming, you are totally fulfilled. So you know you took all the shot and you went after everything you wanted to or at least tried. Take the shot. The shot is always fucking worth taking.

I took my shot and it’s nothing but pussy and donuts!

And I’m here to tell you go give it a shot. Go out and… try.

- Kevin Smith

 

[hoogie]

First, thanks to Matt for giving his candid thoughts about his situation and the state of the music industry in general.  I can't imagine trying to make money in this day and age.  Especially as a Canadian musician.  I don't think anyone can fault you for your tour schedule.  The harsh reality is that going on tour is the only real way for artists to make money.  If you're going to lose money, or even break even, why bother unless you're just starting out and trying to cut your teeth.  Booking a venue costs money.  If you're playing for 30 people, you're clearly not going to make any money that way.  In my opinion, make whatever choices you need that are best for you.  All I want is to continue enjoying your music.

 

I would definitely support any Kickstarters or similar programs that you could use.  Paying a bit more for a vinyl or something and giving you a chance to get it out there is well worth it.  I missed the deadline to support Super Troopers 2, but they had an awesome program to fund the movie earlier this year.

 

"Demo-itis" sucks.  I always listen to the demos, as I did with this album.  However, I can appreciate them, and the difference between them and the album track.  It's like having a bonus experience with the song.  It's awesome to see where you were before going into the studio.  I'm certainly not going to shit on any of the changes you've made, because it's not fair or realistic to shit on something that you're doing as a favor for us, the fan.  I like being able to listen to both, so kudos to you for giving us the chance.  That being said, I understand if you choose not to release them going forward, because basically, people are assholes.

 

I will continue to support you going forward with whatever you do because your music has changed my life in an amazing way.

[foats]

It has often been said that with risk comes reward.  Matt, would you consider the risk of having your touring band learn an older catalog of songs and maybe playing a full album each night to be worth the risk?  The amount of fans who would love to hear song A or B live could certainly prove to fill a concert venue.  Another money maker would be to issue t-shirts of old album covers.   A beautiful midnight or Underdogs shirt would be great.  Maybe film a DVD of each album live in it's entirety for people who can be there live and you have more sales.  Perhaps even do a go fund me to fund the DVD'S?   Many people on here would love to see It happen but what is needed to get to this point?

[uglyredhonda]

Without trying to speak for Matt - the real problem for him as far as crowdfunding goes is that he's still in the major label system.  (I assume Warner Bros funded the recording.)  And I feel like Matt has acknowleged a little bit of discomfort in doing things via crowdfunding.  Truthfully, Matt's bigger than a lot of the bands being mentioned here - he's still a festival headliner in a lot of places.  But I think the finer point is that he's basically focusing on income, less on trying to spend money to grow the audience.  It's not that he necessarily needs crowdfunding to go to Saskatchewan - more that if he can't be profitable there after twenty years of playing, it's probably not going to happen.

 

The 90s band Failure probably had the best crowdfunded anything I've ever seen.  Last year on their reunion tour, they were having trouble selling *signed* merch on their website.   I bought a bunch of signed stuff for basically nothing.  Then they crowdfunded their album, and used the exact same items as "bonuses", and "charged" at least twice as much for the same items.  And people bought.  It was to the point that they used their PledgeMusic project page as a de-facto web store for most of this year.  http://www.pledgemusic.com/projects/failure

 

But doing music that way really is a completely different model.  It's hard to even explain it, and maybe even wrap my head around it.  It's basically where the band and their management are working as artist and label.  That can't work for everybody.

 

As far as Matt's stuff goes, my biggest suggestion for him would be to basically do what a lot of bands are doing now: focus on the die-hards.  The die-hards will always spend stupid money for the artists they love.  (We just do.)  For example, I feel like a bunch of us have already bought two copies of the album.  If sharing the demos during the writing process is undesirable, it'd be great to have a digital expanded edition of the album that has all of the demos (maybe including the rejected songs) for like $5 more.  If it's digital, the production cost would be minimal.

 

And there are a lot of other crazy ideas that might work without a massive amount of effort.

 

I'd be bummed if the demos stopped happening, with one minor reason: that making the "All You Sons and Daughters" demo available may have made it possible for the final version to exist at all.  (Always possible that Matt would have finished it another way, but I thought it was cool that The Bored had a little piece of a hand in helping make a song happen.)

 

 

The album is dead as a popular music medium, but it's still surviving in some respects through the (somewhat bizarre) popularity of vinyl.  If you buy something on vinyl, it'd better be something good front-to-back.  There's nothing worse than trying to skip songs on vinyl.  All of those kids who are buying into vinyl as a music medium have to also buy into the idea of the album.  Plus, people are somehow willing to spend $20-$30 for an album.  (This is probably the biggest concern about the Chaotic Neutral vinyl delays.)

 

We have had single eras before.  Most music bought pre-mid-1960s were singles.  It wasn't until the mid-60s Beatles, Pet Sounds, etc., that the album became the album.  And, honestly, CD singles were the predominant format in the UK in the 90s - people weren't necessarily buying albums.  (The weird up-side of that era - you could buy Oasis' Morning Glory, then buy each single as they came out, and basically get an entire other album out of the b-sides.)

 

But, admittedly, most twentysomethings today don't even enjoy music through singles.  Most of my twentysomething friends listen to Spotify or Pandora 24/7, and it ends up being a random mix of everything.  (As an anecdote, I was surprised when one of my most music-knowledgable twentysomething friends had no idea who Tame Impala was - they never came up on his channel/playlist.)

 

Having said that, I'm guilty of being iPod-on-shuffle.  I rarely listen to full albums start-to-finish, even stuff that I've listened to for years.  I miss it sometimes, but I know that before the iPod, I was stuck listening to a single CD or a mixtape - there was no way to have all of my favourite songs at my fingertips.  Now, my main playlist has 5000 songs.  I essentially work new songs in one-at-a-time.  I still buy a lot of albums, but I usually don't spin and album front-to-back, over-and-over like I did in high school.

 

It's still a bit mind-blowing to me how popular vinyl is now.  I never thought that would happen.  In the late 90s, vinyl was huge among indie bands because it was so unbelievably cheap - way cheaper than making a CD of any length.  Split 7-inch's were the indie-band format of choice.

 

 

Btw - we live in an era where someone will spend $20-$30 on a single-show poster, but might not spend more than $10 for album.  (I can't imagine how much money bands like Pearl Jam and the Foo Fighters make off of merch, and it has to be multiple times what they sell in music.)

 

 

As an aside - the weirdest demo-itis story I can remember. 

 

A friend's band was working on their major label debut.  The lead singer had self-produced a solo album a couple of years before, and the band thought that one of the songs on it would be good for the album - and the label agreed.  Weeks later, when the band finished the new recording, they took the finished song to the label, and the label rejected it.  They didn't like the new vocal take.  They were so used to the solo version that they actually made him bring in the master reel(s) from it, transferred the vocal to digital, and used Pro-Tools to edit it into the new band recording.  And that's how it was released.

 

I only heard that story because, when I first heard the album, I hadn't heard the solo recording, and I told the lead singer that the vocals on that song sounded strange - completely different from the rest of the album.  It stuck out like a sore thumb.  Truth be told, he no longer sang like that.  (I thought his current voice sounded better.)  That, and the solo take had some obvious flaws.  He explained the whole thing - he was actually pretty upset about it.  And it really was one of their best songs.  (I could literally write a book about all of the label nonsense that I heard from those guys.)

Edited October 6, 2015 by uglyredhonda

[daniel_v]

First, I don't release anything these days that I'm not 110% behind. This record is no different. In fact, it has more personal favourites on it than any record I've ever made.

 

It's interesting how some responses automatically just return to the "give us everything" mindset. Bonus tracks, etc. Releasing demos as bonus tracks is, to me, not attractive. They're sonically skeletal representations of ideas. Big City Life and Oh Be Joyful were both recorded in a world class studio. They were not demos. So, too, was Rooms.

 

Further, capturing something on a demo and live are totally different. Live is entirely in the moment, you don't get to re-track things. It's that second, that minute, and it'll never be the same again.

 

Another matter which many fans overlook are the true financial realities of their suggestions. Artists with money can do a lot of things. If I had the money, I'd do a lot of things. But the money I make is all used to support my family. I got rid of my house. I got rid of a lot of bills, but even then touring is my livelihood. That said, in Canada it's a tricky thing. 30 people can complain I'm not playing in Saskatchewan for example, but the fact is that stopping there could cost me money. The same is true for Newfoundland. You have to be smart about it. There are markets that are your bread and butter and others that just cover expenses in the gaps between those markets.

 

I know people have certain perceptions about music, but in Canada it's not the same as in other countries. Were I American and had the level of success there over 20 years I'd be a wealthy man. Same goes for the UK. But not here. The "Canadian reality" applies just as equally to Australian bands, for example. There are exceptions, mind you, but they're usually limited to one or two bands that predominantly do most of their business here at home.

 

Touring the States for me actually costs me more than sitting at home doing laundry, which is why I don't do it. I had my chance to play the game there 16 years ago but just couldn't stomach what a "game" it was. I'm 44 and the chance of some "breakthrough" south of the border is long past. And I'm totally comfortable with that and have been for about 15 and a half years. The "fame machine" in the US is something I would never want to be part of. In fact, I consider myself lucky, not unfortunate, that I never had major success down there.

 

Everything costs money. If you're just starting out you'll eat shit to get on a big tour, getting maybe a 400 dollar honorarium a night with a label paying your expenses while you slip further and further into debt. And even if you are successful eventually, most acts now sign 360 deals which means labels get half of touring and merch revenues, something that in my day would be seen as utterly criminal. So in the end you owe so much money, which has to be paid back before you make money, that you're either an extreme success and that process is quick, or you're a relative one that could quite quickly become a financial liability.

 

Then there's bands that apply for grants and funding, which I have done in the past. And the truth is it could be better spent on someone else, younger artists that are driven to make inroads down there. I'm not one of those artists. If I could make a little money touring in the US I would and that be cool. Do club shows, have fun. But I don't want to get touring grants just so I can break even or even lose money.

 

The realities of the music business and the perceptions of those outside it are very different. People assume you should be able to do "this or that" because so and so did it. It's not, nor has it ever been, that simple. And it never will be.

On the subject of touring, if anyone is interested there's a good little article here that gives a specific breakdown of said costs that are associated with it. 

http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/2014/11/25/band-just-finished-28-day-tour-made-much/

Edited October 6, 2015 by daniel_v

[RileyLewis]

I can't speak for the venue costs in Saskatchewan, but the shows I've been to of his (Vancouver tour and Lights tour) he had a lot of people there, probably 700-1000 at Vancouver (in large theatre) and 300-400 at the club venue (was maxed out).

 

On the whole album vs playlist thing, I understand where Matt and other purists are coming from, but I disagree to an extent. I think the only reason we put albums up on a podium is because it's the way it's been done for so long and the industry was restricted by it. If vinyls or CDs had been 100x cheaper or had 100x more space we would have seen different types of releases, but we didn't because we were limited by the medium. But now there are no limitations, so there are different models. Sometimes I enjoy listening to a whole album front to back...and other times I only like 2 songs out of 12, so I only ever listen to those. There is nothing inherently wrong with one approach or another.

Edited October 6, 2015 by RileyLewis

[Guest girl]

As far as Matt's stuff goes, my biggest suggestion for him would be to basically do what a lot of bands are doing now: focus on the die-hards.  The die-hards will always spend stupid money for the artists they love.  (We just do.)  For example, I feel like a bunch of us have already bought two copies of the album. 

Yup, that's me. My purchases for Matt Good related stuff surpassed the threshold this year. My wallet is looking pretty empty.

[andydanger85]

Yup, that's me. My purchases for Matt Good related stuff surpassed the threshold this year. My wallet is looking pretty empty.

I am in the same boat. iTunes, CD, LP versions of the record and a concert for my girlfriend and I including VIP. Worth every penny, let me tell you!

[Prairieboy]

I am in the same boat. iTunes, CD, LP versions of the record and a concert for my girlfriend and I including VIP. Worth every penny, let me tell you!

Lol I'm almost in the same boat as you, finally got around to ordering the vinyl last night to go along with the CD and iTunes versions and the concert tickets. I better start socking away some cash for the vinyl back catalogue when it becomes available :)

[Williammunny11]

While I support the idea of 'crowdfunding' in general, I will totally echo previous posts by saying that I think it works well for some artists (Failure is a great example), and not so well for others.

 

As an obscure 'DIY' artist myself, I try and support an artist in the way that I would want to be supported.  Where physical media exists, I tend to purchase it directly from the band (as opposed to streaming or iTunes).  I know for my own releases, this is BY FAR the format that generates me the most income.

 

As far as Chaotic Neutral goes......I can't stop listening to it!  Much prefer an album that slowly grows on you, revealing new layers with each repeated listen, as opposed to one that simply is what it is.

 

'Harridan' is an amazing song!

[Prairieboy]

Harridan is growing on me...just like Mutineering and Fall of Man and several other gems buried away in the albums. Long after the singles have worn out their welcomes, I find myself skipping ahead to songs like these.....

[Outtahere]

It took a lot of listens but now the album's settled in for me. The only songs I don't like are No Liars (cowbell and weird synth thingy after the first chorus) and Los Alamos which I find long and meandering (I know I seem to be alone in this situation). I systematically skip these now. I'm not in love with Girls in Black (see what I did there?) either but I don't skip it. 

 

I think All You Sons and Daughters doesn't belong on this record. The song is OK in itself but it lacks the general feel of the rest of the album.

 

Moments, Kid Down The Well, Tiger By The Tail, Cloudbusting and Cold Water all have the same vibe. Add Harridan and Army of Lion to add a heavier and more rockish vibe and you've got a great record.

 

Harridan to me is like Non Populus for this record. The solo at the end is just awesome.

 

Holly McNarland's voice on Cloudbusting is superb. As it's been said before, Matt and Holly's voice were made to sing together.