\nengagement as director of publicity for a record label (cue obligatory
\n“boo’s” and “hisses”) while the current director is on maternity leave,
\nwhich means I have to sneak in a post about classical music album art
\ntoday.
<\/a>What I Hate About You, Classical Album Covers
by Amanda Ameer<\/b>
<\/b>
1. Instruments<\/b>.
\nIf an album says “Hilary Hahn, Violin” and lists the violin repertoire
\nshe’s playing, must she have her violin in the photo to, what, prove <\/i>that she’s a violinist because she…has one?
<\/b>2. Mood.<\/b>
\nWhy so serious?<\/a> ALL THE TIME. Some repertoire is serious, yes, but some
\nis fun! The photos should match the mood and general aesthetic of the
\npieces on the disc, obviously. I hate to bring Mischa Barton into this, but
\nimagine how (much more?) terrible these ads would be if her body language, make-up,
\nhair, expression and general look were the same for a Keds<\/a> ad and an Iceberg<\/a> ad:<\/p>\n
4. Fonts<\/b>. <\/b>Script 5. Refusal to have fun. <\/b>Some rep is kind![\"mischa.jpg\"](\"http:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/lifesapitch\/mischa.jpg\")
<\/span>3. <\/b>Photos.<\/b>
\nMust there be a photo at all? How many high-selling albums actually
\nhave photos of the artists on the covers? Not that high sales are the
\nmost important thing, necessarily (although check back in with me after
\ntomorrow), but how many “popular” albums have photos? I took a gander
\nat the top five albums on the general Billboard chart and the top five
\nalbums on the classical chart this morning:<\/p>\n![\"albums.jpg\"](\"http:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/lifesapitch\/albums.jpg\")
<\/span>
Actually,
\nthere were more artist photos on the “mainstream” album covers than I
\nthought (do we think that cute, cute baby is “Lil’ Wayne”?), but my
\npoint is that not having a photo on a classical album is barely even an
\noption these days, whereas you see albums with different art and photography on
\nalbums in other genres all the time. <\/p>\n
\n= classical, right? Sometimes I find it hard to believe that the
\ndesigners even thought about the repertoire and the artist when
\nchoosing fonts for the artists’ name, the album title and the
\naccompanying information. If it were up to me, the artist’s name would
\nbe in the same font on all of their albums<\/a> (and on their website and in
\ntheir press materials) and only the album title and track listing would
\nchange fonts. <\/p>\n
\nof funny, and actually, some artists are kind of funny, too. Think
\noutside the box set! Here are two I like a whole lot:<\/p>\n
![\"planets.jpg\"](\"http:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/lifesapitch\/planets.jpg\")
<\/span>![\"1Karajandvorak.jpg\"](\"http:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/lifesapitch\/1Karajandvorak.jpg\")
<\/span>![\"13084.jpg\"](\"http:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/lifesapitch\/13084.jpg\")
<\/span>![Why so serious?<\/a> ALL THE TIME. Some repertoire is serious, yes, but some\nis fun! The photos should match the mood and general aesthetic of the\npieces on the disc, obviously. I hate to bring Mischa Barton into this, but\nimagine how (much more?) terrible these ads would be if her body language, make-up,\nhair, expression and general look were the same for a](\"http:\/\/megantower.files.wordpress.com\/2008\/01\/batmanreturnsthedarkknightposter.jpg\"){kind=link}