Boards
Is every single album leaked before release these days?
I'm not 100% sure where all leaks come from, but I'm assuming a lot are journalists/industry people who decide to upload their promo copy?
I've got in front of me a promo copy of the new Boys Noize album, and there's an aural watermark type thing, saying 'this is a promo copy' across various different EQ levels and frequencies, something that would be pretty hard to remove. Is it not possible for record labels to put this on every promotional album they send out? Its still possible to hear and review the record, but you certainly wouldn't want to keep that version. Or is that just not viable?
$$$'s
watermarking costs money. so for records that dont sell much, it's not cost-effective.
also at some point, unwatermarked copies need to go to get pressed up, and delivered to shops worldwide, which takes a while. at which point the unwatermarked cd is passing through many, many hands.
Yeah I heard a few of those Boys Noize tracks with the watermark on
I think it does put you off listening to it until a proper copy is available. They did the same thing with Benga's 'Diary Of An Afro Warrior' I seem to remember.
The new Converge album leaked recently and they've tracked down the dude who did it via watermarks like that
They've named and shamed him online too. So yeah, it's possible. But not all leaks come from the promo/journo stage, some leak way before promo copies and watermarks can even be created.
I think generally you get a bit fucked when it reaches the final phases
It is possible to contain an album quite well up until the last minute (ie. don't even allow copies out of the record company HQ) but at the final phases a lot of people have access to it. That guy was kind of a dick with Converge, though I do wonder how often this happens without journalists etc being named and shamed.
Might not be journalists though
A lot of leaks happen from inside a record company, pressing plant or distributor. It's not always press copies that get leaked.
Though, I'm sure that journos are just as likely to accept the release group's backhanders than anyone else.
so no one's prepared to consider the possibility that some (many?) "leaks"
are intentional? like part of the marketing strategy?
whilst it's not wholly impossible,
it'd be a pretty stupid idea to make a record widely available for free before you make it available for a price.
not at all
While I'm not at all suggesting that it's a common strategy, it's easy enough to imagine albums being deliberately leaked with the aim of generating "buzz".
Given how simply it is for albums to be ripped, uploaded and shared as soon as they're available commercially, it's not as if NOT leaking the album before the official release date is really going to prevent it from flying around the net eventually.
If you operate on the assumptions — debatable, to be sure, but not, I'd argue, wholly illegitimate — that:
* those who don't already d/l for whatever reason (be it principle, laziness, incompetence or whatever) won't suddenly change their habits for this particular album
* those who do d/l as a matter of course are not likely to NOT d/l this particular album
* those who d/l leaks as an interim before buying the physical release once it's out will, also, not change their habits for this particular album
i.e. if you operate on the not entirely unreasonable assumption that people's downloading/purchasing principles and habits remain relatively consistent in relation to each new download/purchase opportunity, then leaking an album before its release isn't really going to affect sales — EXCEPT with regard to two variables:
1) the number of people who (a) only download when they can't buy from a shop AND (b) do not go on to buy those albums that they've already downloaded
2) the likelihood that the pre-release downloaders judge the album as wow or woe
If (1) is large, then yes, leaking an album before the release date is a pretty stupid idea. We'd need to do some market research to determine how significant is the proportion of music consumers who'd fit this category.
With (2), though, there's room to either fuel or cool sales. If the album's shit, and your internal and informal feedback suggests it's not going to be well received, then, yes, giving everyone the chance to find that out before they can buy is a pretty stupid idea. (This is the same principle as film distributors not running previews of films for the benefit of press reviews: i.e. don't give anyone advance warning that the film's crap.
IF, however, the album is great, and you think you're on something big, then the buzz that could be generated by a pre-release leak may very well translate into increased sales — concentrated in the first week of release — which are very important for upping chart placings, getting radio listing, etc., and basically getting the ball rolling for an extended life for the album.
As with any aspect of the music "business", it'd be a gamble, of course. But I'm prepared to bet my record collection that that gamble has not only already been made by more than one player but has actually paid off for some to boot.
not intentional as such
as its still technically possible to get in quite a bit of legal shit if you are found leaking something. but in a lot of cases where unwatermarked lps are sent out frequently and early, it's pretty clear the motivation behind it.