ITT: Albums for retards

>album has a cover with artwork

>album cover is just a colored background with the bands name

>album has a title

>album

>album is a hologram that hurts your eyes if you look at it

>album cover is a gif

>cover is shitty artwork done by one of the member's children

>album has music on it

>album has a theme

>Album isnt on streaming services

industry retard

>He doesnt use streaming

>album is a part of a series of albums

>album art has a black kid with an afro

80% of what I listen to?

>album art is the rapper as a child

>album is hip-hop

Heres your trophy

Streaming is far and away the least desirable delivery vehicle for recorded music you idiots. Let's break it down:

Buying a physical copy, whether vinyl, CD or other (whether in a store or online):

PROS: you now own a permanent physical copy of the album. As long as you have this, you don't have to keep it saved on your computer(s). You can do whatever you please with it. Physical copies also commonly include album artwork and liner notes which give you a further tactile conneciton with the artist.
CONS: You just spent money to get this thing. It also takes up space.

Piracy:

PROS: You didn't spend any money to get the files and they don't take up any space (apart from HD space of course). You still get to keep permanent copies of the files you just have to watch data rot a bit more closely if you're serious about hanging onto them for years (and not re-downloading, say).
CONS: In all likelihood you have a version of reduced quality, which is missing stuff: just such as the above album art. There is an outside chance that some scary cease and desist letter will be sent to you if you keep it up, but don't worry too much.

Streaming:

PROS: none.
CONS: You get neither/none of the above pros with streaming. You pay for it, and you don't get to keep a permanent copy of your own. This is idiotic on every level.

Good bait my man

t. Faggot

>when you write a long post and are actually serious but in the course of writing it you think it'll be called pasta when you're done with it and it gets called bait which amounts to the same thing: long soggy noodles

>when user is wrong

No one can refute this

I think that if everyone that streams was banned from Sup Forums there would be a lot less normalfags and underage

No one cares

You really have to expand on the streaming pros and cons.
PROS: Doesn't take any space, neither physical nor digital. No discs or files to keep track of. Only costs a small monthly fee for access to a large (possibly expanding) library. Legal (some people care about this).
CONS: Consumes data from your (possibly limited) internet contract. Library, though large, is still incomplete and it may be necessary to pay for multiple services to access all desired music. Music can be deleted from the library without notice. Audio quality is often reduced to save bandwidth.

Clearly this autist cares a great deal, and the poster who you just replied to (who I know for a fact is not the same as the autist) also cares, so you're clearly wrong.

Even if it were true that no one cares (it isn't), then it would still be more important that no one can refute the above argument, because that's the more important of the two things. For example, you haven't refuted the above. So you're wrong that way too.

Thought of another con: Have to use software provided by the streaming service to access music. This means that your music will be divided over multiple players if you use multiple services and you can't make playlists that include music from more than one.

All me guys dont worry

...

proof

Go get treatment for your condition you normie fuck

What condition? (This is (You) by the way.)

>(You)

who?

>album is discussed online

>album has the 3 singles as tracks 1-3 and then the rest of the 14 tracks are either demos or alt takes or commentary about those singles

add another con:
CON: I've noticed that a lot of the songs are not the originals, but re-recordings that bands have done after swapping labels or more often, still, edited versions from soundtracks.

This used to be the way it was done with artists like Chuck Berry that swapped out labels every so often and had long careers - you can put out a greatest hits album even if your old label owns your previous recordings as long as you own the song and re-record it.

Cracker did this around 2000

>album cover is furry porn

are you fuckin telling me i can't get crackers greatest hits from the original recording sessions? that better not be what i'm hearing

>Album is an album