Packaging

[Richard Pinnell]

OK, so bringing this here away from the Recent Purchases thread....

Personally, I am a massive lover of CD packaging. I am being totally serious when I tell people that at least half of the inspiration for me to set up a CD label was the opportunity to design CD sleeves again.

Packaging obviously does not change the sound enclosed on a CD. A CD sounds the same whether you have the packaging or not, but good packaging can certainly add something extra to the music, a further dimension to consider, an additional viewpoint on what the music may or may not be conveying.

I have 41 copies of the first Cathnor disc here that were overpressed by the CD manafacturer. It would have made financial sense to have sent these out as reviewer/promo copies, but without the sleeve art they would have been unfinished, so I have kept them here (they make good coffee coasters

When I arrived home this evening the first two discs on Ben Owen's beautifully packaged Winds Measure label were awaiting me. The refined, simple design matches the music perfectly and frames the music perfectly into one highly desirable package. Yep, a package, a product, one tiny cog in the whels of capitalism, but for me they are beautiful pieces of art lovingly put together in a manner that befits what they contain. That'll do me.

[user_1843]

"...but for me they are beautiful pieces of art lovingly put together in a manner that befits what they contain. "

WORD UP, SON.

[fearandpanic]

A CD sounds the same whether you have the packaging or not, but good packaging can certainly add something extra to the music, a further dimension to consider, an additional viewpoint on what the music may or may not be conveying.

While bearing in mind the pitfalls of crude analogies, the same could be said of a book design. It may affect something slightly in the reader's mind (so would the size, weight, typeface, etc. of the particular edition). That doesn't mean I'd confuse it for the artwork.

I have 41 copies of the first Cathnor disc here that were overpressed by the CD manafacturer. It would have made financial sense to have sent these out as reviewer/promo copies, but without the sleeve art they would have been unfinished, so I have kept them here (they make good coffee coasters

I think the "unfinished" comment is insulting to the musicians involved. If you have some kind of genuine audiovisual collaboration in mind, shouldn't your name be on them?

The refined, simple design matches the music perfectly and frames the music perfectly into one highly desirable package.

Urgh. Desirable to buy? Or to "experience"? (Is that the same?)

Yep, a package, a product, one tiny cog in the whels of capitalism, but for me they are beautiful pieces of art lovingly put together in a manner that befits what they contain. That'll do me.

If it's "products" you want to make available you could sell biscuits. They too can have nice, desirable designs.

[Richard Pinnell]

While bearing in mind the pitfalls of crude analogies, the same could be said of a book design. It may affect something slightly in the reader's mind (so would the size, weight, typeface, etc. of the particular edition). That doesn't mean I'd confuse it for the artwork.

No neither would I. Why would anyone? I do believe it would add to the artwork, but as I said, it wouldn't change what already existed.

I think the "unfinished" comment is insulting to the musicians involved. If you have some kind of genuine audiovisual collaboration in mind, shouldn't your name be on them?

I don't consider it insulting at all. I consider the complete item to involve a piece of music, a few written words and an accompanying image or two, that directly reflect the music. My name is on them, albeit under a pseudonym. Is the packaging as important as the music? No of course it isn't, but its part of the piece of art I have published and I do not intend to send out an unfinished item.

Urgh. Desirable to buy? Or to "experience"? (Is that the same?)

its not the same entirely, but its close. The item is designed to be desirable. i do realise that is a terrible sin to you, but thats the way I wanted to make them!

If it's "products" you want to make available you could sell biscuits. They too can have nice, desirable designs.

is there a point to that comment?

[vegetable mind]

i appreciate packaging, especially as someone who designs and handmakes my own....but i view that in an artist's perspective so i don't feel inclined to comment on it. as a consumer, packaging will always draw my eye, and of course i prefer something nicer than the average jewel case, but why do we buy and listen to music? it's for the music, not the packaging. i'm in it for the sounds

[jkudler]

fearandpanic - do those comments even count as marxist examination (assuming that's what you're trying to do)? seems more like knee-jerk aphorisms to me.

I think the "unfinished" comment is insulting to the musicians involved. If you have some kind of genuine audiovisual collaboration in mind, shouldn't your name be on them?

why would it be insulting?! the musicians expected their cd's to be professionally pressed and packaged by cathnor - i feel confident in guessing that they had some agreement to that extent. so of course the cd's sans packaging would be considered "unfinished." most musicians i know might say, "oh yeah, the music is finished, but the packaging/cd is still being worked on. i'll let you know when it's ready." creating a package generally means having respect for that package and the final, ahem, "product." i've definitely seem more than one label owner or musician revel in how nice a freshly released cd looks.

to me personally, i like to buy hard copies (as opposed to downloading), partially because i'm really attracted to the total package. it really affects (for better or for worse) how i receive the music. we can get into semiotics or not, but there are plenty of "signs" encoded in how things look. i know a cd-r with fucking logos of the manufacturer and some sharpie over it usually screams "lazy" or "clueless."

i like having some kind of relationship with the physical object. i listen to music on my computer, and sometimes on burned cd-r's, but those are places i store my resume! i like when people come over and look through my cd's and borrow them, or when i check out people's collections that i stay with. maybe it's romantic, but i like the social aspect, and i like that it keeps the music less "cheap." it's not one of 2000 things on shuffle in my ipod. .

-j.

[bryan]

I like to think of packaging as an opportunity to give the music context.

What might give cover design a bad name are seemingly arbitrary choices of artwork that, when coupled with the music, offer nothing to the experience.

..or you could go the Francisco Lopez route and try to do away with both titling (another chance to associate meaning) and packaging by offering up "Untitled # ___ " pieces in blank jewel cases. .. but in this case it's obviously carefully considered because it fits with the goals he has for his music.

Too bad I can't remember where I read this.. but there was an article on CD packaging in relation to major labels.. and it was pretty much saying that the labels themselves could care less about the look of the music.. it's just product to them.. and that it's really up to the artist when it comes to making a nicely designed package.

In fact, I can think of something like Pearl Jam and their "Vitalogy" disc which was an elaborate design .. I think when these big groups do this it has to come out of their pocket and it doesn't have as much to do with a label marketing strategy as you'd think.

[fearandpanic]

fearandpanic - do those comments even count as marxist examination (assuming that's what you're trying to do)?

Why are you introducing Marx? You assume too much (speaking of knee-jerk reactions).

so of course the cd's sans packaging would be considered "unfinished." most musicians i know might say, "oh yeah, the music is finished, but the packaging/cd is still being worked on."

This particular case involved the blurring together of the music and the packaging into some artistic whole. If this really is happening, all of the "artists" should presumably be credited as such. Or is this a case of modesty?

By claiming it's "unfinished", the design must be some essential feature; the designer a true collaborator. I think this isn't happening here. The titling of these albums still shows a hesitance to "come out in the open." It's insulting to the extent that packaging—designed to increase product desirability, it seems—is placed on equal footing with the music as an essential element.

to me personally, i like to buy hard copies (as opposed to downloading), partially because i'm really attracted to the total package.

I do too. The opposite side of the coin to exaggerated fixation on packaging is not no packaging at all, but less fixation on packaging.

I appreciate suitable design, by the way.

i like having some kind of relationship with the physical object.

Yes. This relationship doesn't have to be one of aggresively crass fetishising, though.

[cleanzero]

fearandpanic - do those comments even count as marxist examination (assuming that's what you're trying to do)? seems more like knee-jerk aphorisms to me.

I think the "unfinished" comment is insulting to the musicians involved. If you have some kind of genuine audiovisual collaboration in mind, shouldn't your name be on them?

why would it be insulting?! the musicians expected their cd's to be professionally pressed and packaged by cathnor - i feel confident in guessing that they had some agreement to that extent. so of course the cd's sans packaging would be considered "unfinished." most musicians i know might say, "oh yeah, the music is finished, but the packaging/cd is still being worked on. i'll let you know when it's ready." creating a package generally means having respect for that package and the final, ahem, "product." i've definitely seem more than one label owner or musician revel in how nice a freshly released cd looks.

to me personally, i like to buy hard copies (as opposed to downloading), partially because i'm really attracted to the total package. it really affects (for better or for worse) how i receive the music. we can get into semiotics or not, but there are plenty of "signs" encoded in how things look. i know a cd-r with fucking logos of the manufacturer and some sharpie over it usually screams "lazy" or "clueless."

i like having some kind of relationship with the physical object. i listen to music on my computer, and sometimes on burned cd-r's, but those are places i store my resume! i like when people come over and look through my cd's and borrow them, or when i check out people's collections that i stay with. maybe it's romantic, but i like the social aspect, and i like that it keeps the music less "cheap." it's not one of 2000 things on shuffle in my ipod. .

-j.

Can I subscribe every single word?

[user_1843]

"This particular case involved the blurring together of the music and the packaging into some artistic whole. If this really is happening, all of the "artists" should presumably be credited as such. Or is this a case of modesty? "

this is where i go bonkers.
music and the art that goes with it would create an artistic whole. you dont go buy the disc, and then go buy the art for it do you?

since when are artists excluded from the credits on an album?? isnt their artwork on the cover kind of a big part of what you see when you receive jamz?

[maRi]

so if a cd cover doesn't match my armchair, or pillows, or my coffee cup, clothes, my package of biscuits, i'm not going to listen to the music?

[William Hutson]

so if a cd cover doesn't match my armchair, or pillows, or my coffee cup, clothes, my package of biscuits, i'm not going to listen to the music?

Yes. Exactly the point. Finally somebody on this board gets it. Today I've only allowed myself to listen to Beggar's Banquet because the red type over the yellow image matches perfectly with the color scheme of my outfit. I don't really like the music, but that's clearly not the point. It would be incredibly tacky of me to listen to something that clashes. On top of that, I expect the same behavior from everybody else on this board, especially those who would suggest that record packaging should have some degree of artistic worth.

[jon abbey]

funny, I only listen to Beggar's Banquet because it advocates sleeping with underage girls. to each their own, I suppose.

[fearandpanic]

Various DVD producers often go out of their way to make "desirable packages" to entice people to buy them; though they stop short at imagining them to be a part of the film. This would cause anyone to object, I'm sure, though it's being fairly casually applied to music here.

Unless the musicians have some specific conceptual involvement in the accompanying artwork—like the Hafler Trio, or Keith Rowe, say—I'd consider it incidental. Within that cateogry it can be more or less pleasant. Appeals to its essential nature (or its artistic pretentions) aren't even remotely convincing, especially with the kind of terminology that's been flying around so far.

[user_548]

Various DVD producers often go out of their way to make "desirable packages" to entice people to buy them; though they stop short at imagining them to be a part of the film. This would cause anyone to object, I'm sure, though it's being fairly casually applied to music here.

Unless the musicians have some specific conceptual involvement in the accompanying artwork—like the Hafler Trio, or Keith Rowe, say—I'd consider it incidental. Within that cateogry it can be more or less pleasant. Appeals to its essential nature (or its artistic pretentions) aren't even remotely convincing, especially with the kind of terminology that's been flying around so far.

I think the analogy with DVDs is inapplicable for a couple reasons. First of all, the films that are often commited to DVD have been initially released in a form independent of the DVD packaging (when released into the theater). Therefore it was not concieved with the DVD package in mind as the sole form of its presentation. Additionally film usually has two components, aural and visual so the need, for me, to impose a further visual component to it is lessened.

That being said, I still consider the experience of watching some of the DVDs that I have to still include the packaging. As an artifact the DVD itself still includes the packaging, the extras, the booklet etc. Whether or not I use them all the time is incidental as I'm still exposed to them. From a different angle, the film isn't the menu, but the menu is part of the film.

Would you be more comfortable if I said that, when listening to a CD, or an LP, I take all of these things into consideration, rather than saying, when listening to music?

Also, just to be clear, this is a personal observation about how I listen to/experience music. I'm not trying to argue that everyone experiences it the same way, or even that they should, this is just what I've observed about how I listen/watch/read.

[fearandpanic]

I'm directing this at you, Richard, only to the extent that you introduced yourself and your work to the thread to get the ball rolling. They're just my generalised comments about the limits of packaging; hopefully other examples of other peoples' work can be introduced to get off the Cathnor releases.

I do believe it would add to the artwork, but as I said, it wouldn't change what already existed.

How does it add to it without changing it? I can see how the packaging looks nice, but sound and image can't be magically "added" together. They can sit side by side, certainly.

Does the collaboration begin when you play the music and are are looking at the packaging? Do you have to look for the whole hour, or just every few minutes to refresh the image? A crap design (like the kind of thing I'd be capable of producing) would certainly result in some ugly mess, but once the music was on (or, rather, once it was bought), what difference would it make?

I have plenty of CDs that look like they could have been designed by me, and I can answer: no difference at all.

I don't consider it insulting at all. I consider the complete item to involve a piece of music, a few written words and an accompanying image or two, that directly reflect the music.

So it's incomplete without the written words? This is the kind of thing that pseudo-arty conceptual music is always being criticised for, and often rightly. Elements that lie outside the work, that aren't fully incorporated in it, but that you're supposed to "take into consideration"? Does the music stand by itself or not?

is there a point to that comment?

Yes, me objecting to your use of the term "products" to refer to pieces of music.

[jon abbey]

I'm going to pretend for a second that you're genuinely asking this question...

Does the collaboration begin when you play the music and are are looking at the packaging?

well, clearly if you're buying the CD (and not listening to MP3s), you see the cover/design before hearing the music. ideally this puts you into the general right frame of mind (Mari: what is "right"? what is "frame"? what is "mind"? ok, we get it) to listen to the music.

the best possible example I can think of is the Sean Meehan solo project from last year, where you have to put in some thought and consideration into even opening the package, so hopefully when you get to the music itself, you treat it with more respect than you would just any old CD.

[grisha]

to me personally, i like to buy hard copies (as opposed to downloading), partially because i'm really attracted to the total package.

I do too. The opposite side of the coin to exaggerated fixation on packaging is not no packaging at all, but less fixation on packaging.

actually, the opposite of exaggerated fixation on packaging is no packaging at all. opposite of exaggerrated is exaggerrated. less fixation on packaging is a so called 'grey area'. btw, don't take it as a personal attack, but i'm amazed at your willingness to argue about topics you have no direct experience with with people who actually do, and your unwillingness to accept that they may at least partially be right.


back to the topic. packaging is important. important for the package. cd/lp is a package, and a work of several people. is the visual part of package important for music? i don't think so. can it affect the way we perceive music on the cd? yes. and as a product/package, a cd that is intended to come with any sort of artwork is quite obviously unfinished. package as a whole is unfinished. music is finished, and then it leaks to indietorrents.

Unless the musicians have some specific conceptual involvement in the accompanying artwork—like the Hafler Trio, or Keith Rowe, say—I'd consider it incidental.

it's hardly incidental. i'd like to think a person listens to music before coming along with the art. music influences the package. maybe not the way the artist would like, and obviously subjective (concider two version of packaging for Eh) but it's not the only thing that's out of his hands after his music is heard by the others.

[fearandpanic]

actually, the opposite of exaggerated fixation on packaging is no packaging at all.

For "actual" CDs, which I was limiting mysef to, and where some packaging is required, it isn't. Put more clearly (and in the context of JKudler's comment), he was suggesting that my dislike of Richard's excessive fixation on packaging in some way suggests a support of mp3s or some non-tangible computer file instead. (He was wrong.)

opposite of exaggerrated is exaggerrated. less fixation on packaging is a so called 'grey area'.

Okay, this is pretty silly. I was suggesting a reduction in packaging-fixation, that was clear enough.

btw, don't take it as a personal attack, but i'm amazed at your willingness to argue about topics you have no direct experience with with people who actually do, and your unwillingness to accept that they may at least partially be right.

Thanks! I have a critical facility myself, though. And it's a discussion board, not a received-wisdom-dissemination board.

is the visual part of package important for music? i don't think so. can it affect the way we perceive music on the cd? yes

This seems contradictory to me. If it affects what we perceive how is it not important? Or is the effect so minimal as to be unimportant (that'd be my experience.)

Is the music incomplete without the packaging? That's the main dividing point of the thread, presumably. In pieces like Meehan's I'd say: yes, the design has some conceptual weight. But these types of conceptually integrated works are reasonably rare (maybe even underexplored.)

[jon abbey]

consider two version of packaging for Eh

you mean Schnee.