In the 50s and 60s there were some record companies (I think RCA was the big one) that tried releasing 7-inch vinyl records, with the big center hole and all, but were actually 33 1/3 rpm. These obviously could hold more music than the 45 rpm version, so they’d put two songs on each side. Those were EP’s. My older sisters had some.
Meanwhile, a standard 12" vinyl disc could hold something like 16-20 minutes on a side, which meant 10-14 songs per disc, and those were the LP’s.
It wasn’t until the disco era (mid-70s for those of you too young to remember) that the record companies started releasing longer dance mixes on 12" vinyl and calling them either EP’s or 12" singles.
And yes, I know that the EP was much more successful in England, and yes, I believe thre was even a 10" disc tried (which really screwed up the automatic changers.)
Yes, there were 10" EPs, and the word “album” is still applicable to works that were not released on vinyl. (Album is a better name for the recording itself; by calling it the group’s CD, you leave out other formats like cassette.)
Yeah, I know the proper terminology, but I’m describing the de facto lexicon within my particular subculture of a subculture of a subculture
RE: whether CDs and cassettes cassettes count as albums…
There was actually a bit of a controversy raging in the international punk scene about this recently. In the US and Europe, there are still a fair number of record pressing plants in business, and their prices are reasonable. Vinyl has been the format de rigeur because a)it’s cheaper and b)sounds better.
The last big “rebirth” of punk rock in the early 90s brought a whole new surge of bands and labels from outside the US and Europe, who would get duly put down by american record reviewers for putting out CD-EPs with only a handful of songs rather than 7" (thereby supporting an inferior “corporate” format at the expense of good, old-fashioned vinyl).
The non-US/Western Euro bands raised a BIIIIG stink. turns out that putting out vinyl is prohibitively expensive in most parts of the world.
“Whoops,” said the yanki record reviewers. “Our fault.”
So it’s ended up that US and Western European bands have no excuse for releasing stuff exclusively on CD, while everybody else gets some slack. Since 70-80% of the world’s punk rockers live in those two areas, the general disdain for CDs has pretty much stuck.
kunilou:
The generation gap isn’t so bad… at least I still listen to records…
Black455: sheesh… cont on the collector scum to argue about this…
I seem to remember from my youth that this was a term that indie collectors used amongst themselves, but in case I’m remembering incorrectly, we do not encourage that kind of language in GQ.
b) No way in hell.
Note that the argument over vinyl vs. CD is a long and bitter one among audiophiles, and I don’t mean to turn this thread into that. So if any debate arises, it might be better in another thread. (Or use deja news to check out the multi-year, multi-thousand message threads in newsgroups like rec.audio.high-end or rec.audio.opinion.)
Ugly