Catching up on some Zeropaid this morning, two articles caught my eye. Bands 'urged to cut album tracks' about record labels asking their artists to slim down their albums:

"The final choice will always be the artist's, but I feel - and consumer research bears it out - that the public thinks albums have too much filler," Mr Ienner told the paper.

Unfortunately they don't name any artists except Outkast (for having a lot of songs on their new album) and Bruce Springsteen (for having only 8 on Born To Run). I don't think Outkast's doing too badly.

That article is also really funny if you read it as a call to action to reduce album content when you contrast it with the article Indie-Structable Rock Scene Smashes Major Labels:

"Bands are looking to make a good, solid album that you want to buy rather than an album with two singles and the rest is filler," said Andrew Katchen, a music writer for the Boston Globe. "There's less of an expectation and money funneled into an indie record, as opposed to say a Nelly album that has to sell millions of copies just to recoup marketing costs."

Ie. If you reduce the cost of an album and marketing and so on, it becomes much MUCH easier to make a profit.