Not putting the name of the artist or album on the cover is always a wank move

[Rev+]

Well, isn't it?

[samadriel]

Nah, it's fine.

[jamiefairlie]

no, it's actually perfect.

[The Mollusk]

I got no issue with it. It's when the spine is blank (CDs, IDGAF about vinyl) that pisses me off.

[Goldentony]

cant think of a shitter gripe, kids starving out there

[Keebleman]

Not as bad as films which don't show their title until the end.

https://www.cookdandbombd.co.uk/forums/index.php/topic,69771

[Pauline Walnuts]

Not really, no.

[purlieu]

Unless the title is incorporated into the cover artistically, somehow, it's more often than not a hindrance. Most of the time, no title is better.

[Dr Rock]

Simply add the band and album title with tippex.

[Huxleys Babkins]

It's a nice idea, but usually undone by the record company needing to put a sticker with the names on there.

I remember buying a few CDs where the bands had eschewed a jewel case and clearly taken a lot of effort to pick out a specific texture of cardstock and printing method to really show off the artwork they'd commissioned, only for the record company to just stick a big sticker in the corner. Not even on a cellophane wrapper, just straight onto the sleeve so you risked damaging the sleeve to remove it.

[Replies From View]

As long as the disc is firmly wedged into a cardboard sleeve that thoroughly damages it as you pull it in and out, I am easy

[sevendaughters]

i remember a pal of mine bought a van Gogh print online and when he unrolled it said VINCENT VAN GOGH across the bottom and just took away from the image. that is why i've never had the artist name on any of our covers.

a bigger wank move is self-titling a non-debut record.

[Replies From View]

Quite hard to find an unsigned Van Gogh picture these days.  He attended a lot of conventions.

[gilbertharding]

a bigger wank move is self-titling a non-debut record.

That makes The Beatles The Beatles wankers under your metric, and Abbey Road condemns them according to the OP. Fair enough.

[sevendaughters]

That makes The Beatles The Beatles wankers under your metric, and Abbey Road condemns them according to the OP. Fair enough.

also one of my favourite albums of all time - Labradford S/T - but I don't make the rules even though I did here

[SpiderChrist]

Abbey Road has the band name and the title on the cover, just not on the front.

[Replies From View]

a bigger wank move is self-titling a non-debut record.

Difficult to know when this is a smart move, though, as a self-titled record seems to be saying something about its status within the catalogue.  It being the first record (which one may assume has had a lot of years of stewing ideas behind it) rather than any later ones sounds quite sensible, otherwise a group seems to be implying that their sixth album is their absolute zenith which it won't be, or their final album which is hard to plan for as well.



In short, dunno, but don't think it's a wank move.

[Replies From View]

Abbey Road has the band name and the title on the cover, just not on the front.

I think you'll find that 28 IF is what the Beatles would have been named in 1969 if the real Paul McCartney had not been unlawfully mauled by Martha, his imposter's sheepdog.

[DJ Bob Hoskins]

Martha, his imposter's sheepdog

Not even the best in show in the Beatles.

[Johnny Yesno]

also one of my favourite albums of all time - Labradford S/T - but I don't make the rules even though I did here

Also Autechre. The joke's on them, of course, since everyone calls it lp5.

[purlieu]

Always thought LP5 was called ae, to be honest, what with the fact that it comes in a special jewel case with 'autechre' stamped on the front an 'ae' stamped on the back.

Blur's self-titled made sense as it was an intentionally career-redefining album. Wire's less so, as it's decent but really not very different from the albums released either side of it.

I quite like it when bands just number their albums - the first four Led Zep ones, most Pete Namlook records - but less so when they give up the numbering after a point.

What's the feeling on having the band name on the front but not the title? Oasis did it for most of their singles, as well as Be Here Now, there are other examples but none come to mind at the moment. I think that idea's a bit shit, to be honest.

[holyzombiejesus]

Sleeves with no title or artist often look really great. Thinking of some of the Felt albums and other Creation acts. Not that keen on House of Love but that debut looks brilliant.

The biggest wank move for me is labels that put their records in sealable plastic sleeves. Dicks.

[sutin]

Neither Kimono My House or Propaganda had the artist or album name on the cover.

Argument over.

[The Mollusk]

Neither Kimono My House or Propaganda had the artist or album name on the cover.

Argument over.

Actually there are two different issues of the "Propaganda" cover which feature both the band name and album title in two different styles.

ARGUMENT RESUMED

[chveik]

your the wank move

[sutin]

Actually there are two different issues of the "Propaganda" cover which feature both the band name and album title in two different styles.

ARGUMENT RESUMED

Going with Island's first UK pressing my man. But yes, that one is a bit more up in the air than Kimono.

[lazyhour]

Francoise Hardy had eleven self-titled albums. I doubt anyone else can beat that!

[The Culture Bunker]

Francoise Hardy had eleven self-titled albums. I doubt anyone else can beat that!

Chicago have had at least 15 albums that are just their name followed by a number, if that counts.

[chveik]

Francoise Hardy had eleven self-titled albums. I doubt anyone else can beat that!

Jacques Brel had thirteen

[purlieu]

I always liked Franz Ferdinand's idea that every one of their albums would be self-titled with identical cover design, just in different colours depending on the mood of the album. Then the label said fuck off that's commercial suicide the band changed their mind for no obvious reason.

Pete Namlook got up to Namlook XII, then he started adding subtitles for XIII onwards, which is a shame as he'd win that one hands down otherwise (he was up to Namlook XXVII when he died).