Its just a pre-release... (2 Viewers)

[Moguri]

I always wondered about this statement. Is a pre-release song really any different to the "real" comeback song?

I imagine songs are usually not created with the thought, this will be a title song, this will be a pre-release and this will be a b-side. The songs are created and than later on someone decides oh I think thats the best one for whatever reason, so lets make it the title. (if I'm wrong about this, please correct me!)

So assuming what I just said is correct, what is even the point of saying "its just a pre-release"? In the end I see no real difference, both songs get an M/V and you can never influence which one will be more popular

 

[centen]

The way I think of it is: a pre-release is functionally acting as marketing for the title track and the album itself. It's there to deliver hype so you'll preorder the album, pay close attention to the comeback, and stream the title track. A good pre-release will ideally show you the color that the comeback is aiming for, without being TOO similar to the title itself. (For example, (G)I-DLE's My Bag for the Tomboy comeback.) A pre-release will ultimately get less promotion (e.g. on shows where only one song can be performed, the group will perform the title), and it typically costs less to produce the promotion they do produce for it. It's technically possible for a pre-release to do better, but with the way Korean idols market their albums (one title per album before moving onto the next one), it's unlikely. (Compare this to American marketing tactics, which is to promote an album for as long as there is interest in it. Katy Perry's Teenage Dream had six singles and a reissue with two more singles before her next album, three years after Teenage Dream first dropped.)

And it may also help to look at situations where a pre-release would have been the right approach. GOT the Beat's first mini was mis-marketed by using the title itself where a pre-release would have been better. By the time the "official" MV had dropped, people who wanted to listen to the song had already been listening to it for over two weeks. There was nothing to get hyped for, because the meat of the comeback had already been revealed.

 

[Ahsoka]

Might be that they might expect the title track to be more popular when picking which comes first? So they might say that in an “oh the title track must be the song that’s considered the best, the prerelease is one of the songs that’s either more controversial or song with a less popular reception song”. Just like while all the songs are supposed to be popular theoretically, the bsides are often the ones they judge as having less of a potential for popularity, though some also work with the concept better maybe too. Though also sometimes songs are written with the intention of that song being the title track. I’ve heard of that before.

 

[Abeamus]

A pre-release basically just gets a song out there without needing any official promotion like Mamamoo+ released Chico Malo but they'll only promote when GGBB comes out.

Now some groups have pushed what a pre-release means exactly to an extreme like KARDs first release was December 2016 and their debut was July 2017.

It's just a promotional tactic to get more hype on a bside pretty much like I remember YG calling Forever Young a title track shortly before Blackpinks album released which worked in a similar aspect.

 

[Moguri]

The way I think of it is: a pre-release is functionally acting as marketing for the title track and the album itself. It's there to deliver hype so you'll preorder the album, pay close attention to the comeback, and stream the title track. A good pre-release will ideally show you the color that the comeback is aiming for, without being TOO similar to the title itself. (For example, (G)I-DLE's My Bag for the Tomboy comeback.) A pre-release will ultimately get less promotion (e.g. on shows where only one song can be performed, the group will perform the title), and it typically costs less to produce the promotion they do produce for it. It's technically possible for a pre-release to do better, but with the way Korean idols market their albums (one title per album before moving onto the next one), it's unlikely. (Compare this to American marketing tactics, which is to promote an album for as long as there is interest in it. Katy Perry's Teenage Dream had six singles and a reissue with two more singles before her next album, three years after Teenage Dream first dropped.)

And it may also help to look at situations where a pre-release would have been the right approach. GOT the Beat's first mini was mis-marketed by using the title itself where a pre-release would have been better. By the time the "official" MV had dropped, people who wanted to listen to the song had already been listening to it for over two weeks. There was nothing to get hyped for, because the meat of the comeback had already been revealed.

6 singles form one album is quite impressive I always wish kpop companies would be less set in their ways with those things too. But that illustrates my point quite well, I bet from the 6 songs they did not all do equally well and the earlier released songs did not heavily outdo the later songs (or maybe even one of the later ones was more succesfull?)

I understand that pre-release songs are less promoted, but I just think its not justified to say "its just pre-release" in a derogative manner, as the fact how much it is promoted or if its called title or pre-release, does not really speak on the quality of the song

 

[Moguri]

Might be that they might expect the title track to be more popular when picking which comes first? So they might say that in an “oh the title track must be the song that’s considered the best, the prerelease is one of the songs that’s either more controversial or song with a less popular reception song”. Just like while all the songs are supposed to be popular theoretically, the bsides are often the ones they judge as having less of a potential for popularity, though some also work with the concept better maybe too. Though also sometimes songs are written with the intention of that song being the title track. I’ve heard of that before.

yeah you are giving more the company perspetive now, I meant more how fans react to it

but yeah, from company perspective the title track should is the one expected to do best, as they pour the most ressources into it

 

[Ahsoka]

yeah you are giving more the company perspetive now, I meant more how fans react to it

but yeah, from company perspective the title track should is the one expected to do best, as they pour the most ressources into it

Oh yeah, but I think fans just expect to be more blown away with the title than prerelease because they expect the company to correctly guess reactions to the songs and think they saved the best for titles (though obviously it varies so much for people). Or they’re just not eager to dislike a title track, which is more promoted and used in different things than a prerelease is. In that sense it’s probably better usually to dislike the prerelease than title since the title will be surrounding you everywhere. There could be lots of different reasons for them to think it’s just a prerelease tbh.

 

[Myth]

A pre-release won't have as much effort or budget put into it as the title. Most of the promotions, stage outfits, and mv budget will be going to the title. Pre-releases create hype and the title is essentially the hype. The main point and push.

Does that excuse a weak pre-release? No, as a pre-release is extra budget and time spent to bring more hype to the comeback and title, you want it to be successful, but it's still not where all your money and effort will be going to ergo, you'll realistically have higher expectations for the title.