View Full Version : Posthumous Albums

12-30-2007, 06:05 PM
What is your opinion on posthumous albums? Do you own any yourself?

For those of you that don't know, a posthumous album is an album that is released after the artist dies, and is put together by other producers.

I personally don't think too highly of them, because I think the artist should have control over what comes out from him or her. They usually don't stack up to the original artists' work. What if they wouldn't want to be associated with whatever they were doing? I also think it's pretty eerie to listen to for some reason. I don't have any myself, but what do you think?

12-30-2007, 06:51 PM
It really depends. "Streetcore" by Joe Strummer, for example, was actually better than the other stuff he released post-Clash, while "From the Basement on the Hill" by Elliott Smith was one of his weaker albums.

But I don't think it's disrespectful in all cases. In some, namely every posthumous Nirvana release, it is strickly done for money reasons. Cashing in on a band that has a dead member is a brilliant, quick way to make money. But some of them are done with respect, like the two I mentioned, and released because they were essentially already done by the time the artist died.

The Nirvana stuff has been pretty interesting to watch, though. The entire debate over who had the rights to the songs almost seemed more like a war over who got credit for being the ones who finally released the stuff.

I actually find the endless amount of "best of" compilations where the label sticks a nostalgic picture of the deceased band member on a CD cover then releases the same 20 songs that are on every other "best of" a lot more disrespectful. The first example that comes to mind is the Doors. I've only seen a handful of their actual albums in stores, but I've seen more "best of" CD's than I can count.

12-31-2007, 04:02 AM
Jeff Buckley's album is amazing. Although i haven't heard it all the way through yet.