Everyone goes on about albums, and whilst I agree it's great to have a marvellous album where every song fits nicely and it's perfect, in reality there aren't many albums like that. I think albums in general aren't really half as important as everyone seems to think they are.

There's a few bands/artists in my top ten of all time (if I was to make one) with fairly imperfect albums which have several songs I always skip (Mclusky's "TDBYAMITINOF" a couple of Eels albums, hell, even the Velvet Underground and Nico), but it's irrelevant really. An artist might release 10 albums which if you looked at individually you might say "ok 6 tracks are great the rest isn't", but they might have 50/60 great songs from those albums. This isn't some ipod generation thing, I like great albums I can listen to through in on go with no skipping, but I've always thought this.

So my point is.....screw the sanctity of albums. I don't get why EVERY band has to do the album thing (obviously it has to do with the record companies as well). It'd just be nice to have more bands just releasing singles or EP's or whatever, doing something a bit different. There's loads of bands doing things differently in a musical sense but who still go along with the "concept album" (practically all albums are concept albums if you think about it...) idea that you must package your music in a nicely ordered collection to be listened to in one go.