Music fanatics constantly seek new artists to listen to and end up falling in love with them. Debut albums significantly shape and impact fans’ lives, and are listened to on repeat. Several years later, those artists work on brand-new music, and a second album is expected to drop. And fans are absolutely ecstatic.

However, they listen to it and find themselves a bit disappointed. They were expecting something so much more. They feel let down as loyal followers of this artist, and they’ll likely keep listening to the artist’s debut album, because frankly, this new one is awful.

For example, Arcade Fire’s _Funeral_ made fans fall in love with the band. It was revolutionary and it’s considered a classic and influential album among many indie rock fans. However, when Arcade Fire followed up that record with _Neon Bible_, many fans were let down.

This dilemma is what music fans call the “sophomore slump.” It typically occurs when an artist has an amazing first album, but their follow-up falls flat. It’s generally expected that an artist’s debut will be better than their sophomore effort. However, is the sophomore slump actually real?

While there are plenty of bands who have amazing debut albums but deplorable sophomore albums, this might not always be the case. There are many artists who have spectacular sophomore albums, some even exceeding their initial efforts. The quality of an album solely depends on the artist.

There are several factors that perpetuate the myth of the sophomore slump. For starters, fans typically have an extremely strong bond with an artist’s first record. These are what we hear first, unless we’re late to the party and discover a musician later in their career. It’s usually refreshing and exciting, and we form a personal, emotional attachment to that album.

Then, when that artist releases a second album, we feel that it’s something we’ve already heard before, or it falls short of our expectations. Due to its novelty, we don’t have the same connection with the album because all of our emotional efforts as fans have already been devoted to their first record. Thus making us music fanatics prefer premier records.

Yet, there are plenty of latter records that are superior to former ones. This shows that the sophomore slump is a myth. The quality of music doesn’t depend on if it’s a debut album or a sophomore album. It’s completely dependent on the artist.

There are tons of examples of sophomore albums that are better than their predecessors. For example, most Modest Mouse fans would agree that _The Lonesome Crowded West_ is their best album (and also their second album). _Chutes Too Narrow_ by The Shins is superior to _Oh, Inverted World_ (But I do believe both are fantastic records).

Also, Passion Pit’s _Gossamer_ is more cohesive as an album in terms of thematic elements and fluidity than _Manners_. _Doolittle_ by the Pixies is more revolutionary and widely known than their debut effort, _Surfer Rosa_.

Those are just a handful of examples among many later albums that are widely acknowledged as superior to their predecessors. Don’t get me wrong though — all of the artists listed above also had amazing debut records, though their sophomore albums overshadowed those.

It may seem obvious, but the quality of an artist’s album simply depends on that artist alone. Some have spectacular debut albums, while others excel in those succeeding. This unpredictability keeps music lovers guessing and hungry for more.

_Edited by Victoria Cheyne| vcheyne@themaneater.com_