| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
progismylife 
Forum Senior Member
Joined: October 19 2006
Location: ibreathehelium
Status: Offline
Points: 15535
|
 Topic: When albums go on for too long
Posted: February 02 2007 at 18:48 |
 salmacis wrote:
I disagree that 666 drags. I personally think it's probably the most compelling double album I know of alongside 'Soft Machine Third'. Pretty much incomparable, both of those sets. |
Pretty much yeah. I am listening to Soft Machine right now and it is pretty captivating. Same with 666, an album that just has to be listened to a bit at a time so as to not overwhelm the senses.
|
 |
el böthy
Prog Reviewer
Joined: April 27 2005
Location: Argentina
Status: Offline
Points: 6336
|
Posted: February 01 2007 at 23:45 |
MajesterX wrote:
el böthy wrote:
Also, many times there is so much material in an album, that it´s very hard that they are all killers, and no fillers what so ever. Of course, this is no general rule, as I can prove it. Lateralus is one looooong album, clocking 76 minutes, yet it´s soooo well done, that the whole thing doesnt even have a second of filler.
If you ask me albums shouldn´t run more than 60 minutes, at least there is a reason for them to go that long... maybe concept albums, or if there is trully no filler thrue out the 70 or more minutes...
What do you think?
|
 ...And you have a quote from James Maynard Keenan from TOOL in your signature????
I've never met a big tool fan that complains about albums longer than 60 minutes.
|
Well...there always a first time! 
|
"You want me to play what, Robert?" 
|
|
MajesterX
Forum Senior Member
Joined: December 30 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 513
|
Posted: February 01 2007 at 18:40 |
el böthy wrote:
Also, many times there is so much material in an album, that it´s very hard that they are all killers, and no fillers what so ever. Of course, this is no general rule, as I can prove it. Lateralus is one looooong album, clocking 76 minutes, yet it´s soooo well done, that the whole thing doesnt even have a second of filler.
If you ask me albums shouldn´t run more than 60 minutes, at least there is a reason for them to go that long... maybe concept albums, or if there is trully no filler thrue out the 70 or more minutes...
What do you think?
|
...And you have a quote from James Maynard Keenan from TOOL in your signature???? I've never met a big tool fan that complains about albums longer than 60 minutes.
|
|
|
|
soundspectrum
Forum Senior Member
Joined: September 14 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 201
|
Posted: February 01 2007 at 13:09 |
|
really it all just depends on the album. but you have to take into account that it doesnt matter because its a subjective argument. At the end of the day half of us will be for it and half against. but i think albums cant be too long, but i have no faith that any band could put out an album exceeding 74 minutes that wont either take conditioning or devotion.
|
|
salmacis
Forum Senior Member
Content Addition
Joined: April 10 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 3928
|
Posted: February 01 2007 at 07:46 |
|
I disagree that 666 drags. I personally think it's probably the most compelling double album I know of alongside 'Soft Machine Third'. Pretty much incomparable, both of those sets.
|
|
richardh
Prog Reviewer
Joined: February 18 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 26371
|
Posted: February 01 2007 at 02:38 |
The Lost Chord wrote:
666 is the longest album it just drags on for too long |
Aphrodites Child? If so then its best to listen just to the second disc IMO which is much stronger than the first disc.
|
|
MadcapLaughs84
Forum Senior Member
Joined: February 21 2006
Location: Mexico
Status: Offline
Points: 658
|
Posted: January 31 2007 at 23:10 |
|
I think 50-60 minutes it's okay for an album
|
|
|
|
The Lost Chord
Forum Senior Member
Joined: June 23 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1907
|
Posted: January 31 2007 at 23:04 |
|
666 is the longest album it just drags on for too long
|
|
el böthy
Prog Reviewer
Joined: April 27 2005
Location: Argentina
Status: Offline
Points: 6336
|
Posted: January 31 2007 at 21:17 |
I also dont think there is such pressure. I remember listening to the big selling artist a couple of years back, like Green Day, Linkin Park and Blink 182 to name a few, and they were all under 50 minutes...
|
"You want me to play what, Robert?"
|
|
Snow Dog
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: March 23 2005
Location: Caerdydd
Status: Offline
Points: 32995
|
Posted: January 31 2007 at 14:40 |
richardh wrote:
Snow Dog wrote:
richardh wrote:
I Artists are under pressure to deliver 70-80 minutes for a CD
. |
I'm not sure this is accurate. I have heard no evidence that a band must fill an entire CD. Many Cd releases these days come in at about 45 - 55 mins.
|
I didn't mean from the record company as such but presumably with the potential to fill a CD with 70 minutes of music there must be a feeling that the whole thing should be filled with something? The CD format creates its own pressure in that respect. |
Oh I see. Well I don't think this is neccesarily true in most cases either because I have seen quite a lot of short CDs, from pop bands too.
|
|
|
|
richardh
Prog Reviewer
Joined: February 18 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 26371
|
Posted: January 31 2007 at 14:22 |
Snow Dog wrote:
richardh wrote:
I Artists are under pressure to deliver 70-80 minutes for a CD
. |
I'm not sure this is accurate. I have heard no evidence that a band must fill an entire CD. Many Cd releases these days come in at about 45 - 55 mins.
|
I didn't mean from the record company as such but presumably with the potential to fill a CD with 70 minutes of music there must be a feeling that the whole thing should be filled with something? The CD format creates its own pressure in that respect.
|
|
Zargus
Forum Senior Member
Joined: May 08 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 3491
|
Posted: January 31 2007 at 09:52 |
|
The longer the beter, i want music from my money since i dont dl any music but buy it the more music i got for the money and the longer the albums are the beter. I have nothing agains short albums ither its up to the artist how much music he wana put on the albums but i prefer long albums.
|
|
|
|
Snow Dog
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: March 23 2005
Location: Caerdydd
Status: Offline
Points: 32995
|
Posted: January 31 2007 at 08:23 |
richardh wrote:
I Artists are under pressure to deliver 70-80 minutes for a CD
. |
I'm not sure this is accurate. I have heard no evidence that a band must fill an entire CD. Many Cd releases these days come in at about 45 - 55 mins.
|
|
|
|
richardh
Prog Reviewer
Joined: February 18 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 26371
|
Posted: January 31 2007 at 03:01 |
|
I think the CD format has encouraged filler.Nowadays you even get 10 minutes of silence at the end of some albums!! Artists are under pressure to deliver 70-80 minutes for a CD which in old money would have been a double album.I never was a great fan of doubles though and it gets even worse when you get double CD's.Despite being a fan of IQ I really don't want to listen to all 120 minutes of Subterranea in one sitting.
|
|
NotSoKoolAid
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 24 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 507
|
Posted: January 30 2007 at 18:56 |
Glueman wrote:
It does not imply that! If you choose to mis-interpret my post then that's your problem.
The quality of a piece is judged by the listener. It's up to them to decide what proportion of an album they actually like. No two people are going to view a record the same way.
Records were 25-45 minutes long due to the constraints of vinyl. There is no excuse to put out a short album nowadays. If an artist cannot fill 60 minutes of quality music, for the sake of argument, per year, then that says more about their lack of creativity than anything else. Other than re-issued pieces with bonus tracks, I do not accept that anyone adds sub-par material just to pad out a release. It’s an extreme insult to the artist to presume that those few tracks that you may not like are to be considered “filler”. There is NO such thing as filler. And if a person cannot sit through 60 minutes + of an artist then that also says as much about attention deficit as it does the quality of the material, which is, again, in the ear of the beholder.
And it’s not juxtaposing art and money. When a product is marketed it should be priced according to various criteria – one of which is value for money. To sell two records for the same price – one of which is 30 minutes and one of which is 79 minutes is a blatant rip-off.
And the words are spelt "MEASURED" and IMPLIES"! |
You don't seem to understand many things. Selling me two discs for the price of two, when I and most other people only enjoy one disc-worth to begin with, is a rip off. A gigantic double the price rip off infact.
Also, with an album such as Sola Scriptura, One or Testimony by Neal Morse or The Flower Kings' double albums (really perfect examples) all feature a number of songs in which there are numerous parts that seem unenjoyable, uncreative and far too boring. I have plenty of patience, I've heard stranger bands in my lifetime. I've heard thousands upon thousands of bands, really. When a guy like Morse shines, he really does shine, and same for Roine Stolt, but they simply release so many tiny inserts, or sections of songs people DONT enjoy (because those tiny bits are not creative), it takes quite some effort and time to fast forward several nth minutes.
Obviously an artist can release whatever he wants, but it doesn't mean anyone's going to like it.
Why paint the world when you can paint something specific?
Lack of focus, and it does exist.
I didn't make this up to make you angry, though I presume, Glueman, you will be angry I disagree with you.
|
|
salmacis
Forum Senior Member
Content Addition
Joined: April 10 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 3928
|
Posted: January 30 2007 at 16:53 |
'Awake' is actually one of DT's best albums to my ears. It's quite diverse, with some of their most progressive material- 'The Mirror', 'Erotomania'/ and 'Space Dye Vest' I rate very highly.
I think whether albums go on too long is an entirely subjective opinion. For example, some fans and even band members (Rick Wakeman stand up) dislike TFTO for its length but I honestly could say I love it from beginning to end. 'The Ancient' aside, which is a real experimental track and quite unlike anything they'd done before, I don't see why it causes such controversy. It's a halfway house between CTTE (sides 1 and 2) and Relayer for me (sides 3 and 4) with characteristics of both.
I feel The Lamb is perhaps more controversial. Again, I love that album but it actually required more effort for me than TFTO did! There's such a large amount of music on there and it's so dense sonically (some people actively dislike the production too) that I could see why that divides people. But it's high up on my personal favourite list of Genesis albums-in my top 5.
But the double album I'd nominate as being one I personally feel is too long is The Flower Kings' 'Unfold The Future' as I was saying on another thread. There's so much material that does nothing for me whatsoever- I could only pull an album's worth of material I like from the 2 discs. I've had that album for a year or more now and if I'd have not bought 'Paradox Hotel' on the off chance (and to claim on a money off voucher in all honesty- needed a few pounds more to use it), I'd probably not have given their other stuff an airing based on UTF. But I'm glad I did as I like most of their other albums. Yet I still don't get that one myself. But then it's their 'recommended' album here, lots of fans swear by it and that's exactly what I mean by it being subjective.
And I'll continue to give UTF a listen in case it suddenly 'clicks'.
There are some non double albums that I find to be too long, though. A Passion Play I find a real chore as there are no hooks to my ears, it seems to be an attempt to 'better' TAAB, when in my mind it clearly doesn't- the 'Hare That Lost Its Spectacles' bit makes me cringe with embarassment. And then I get to 'Olias Of Sunhillow', a shrill sounding affair with little variety for me as it all starts to sound similar after a while, imho, and all a bit one dimensional to my ears. It's technically impressive in that Anderson did all of it himself, but I find it a dirge, quite honestly.
But again, some swear by these two albums and love them.
|
|
The T
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: October 16 2006
Location: FL, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 17493
|
Posted: January 30 2007 at 16:25 |
Ghost Rider wrote:
The T wrote:
Ghost Rider wrote:
Anything by Dream Theater does go on way too long. "Awake" just seems to go on forever.
*ducks under flame shield, seeing The T. appear on the horizon*
|
Two things:
2) When I come, you won't have time to duck. My anger is manifested so swiftly, you will think a dream theater concert just ended, so brief and to-the-point my vendetta will be.
|
Theo (I think this is your name, right?), that was NOT a cheap shot. I may have poked fun at DT in the past (before I became Admin, that is), but what I wrote above is deadly serious. I have got six DT albums at home, but the only one I've managed to listen to relatively often and enjoy is "Images & Words". Please read my DT reviews if you want confirmation that I can tackle the issue in a serious, objective way.
|
Teo, without the H
Kidding I was, no problem of course. 
But I'm DEAD SERIOUS about my coming vendetta if you keep that attitude!!!!
|
|
|
|
infandous
Forum Senior Member
Joined: March 23 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 2447
|
Posted: January 30 2007 at 14:56 |
|
The truth is, this all depends on the listener. As good as Dream Theater is, personally I have trouble paying attention to Scenes From a Memory, while fans of the band call it a masterpiece. I happen to think that all the Flower Kings albums are quite good. I don't consider any of them to have "filler". There are a few songs I don't care for (probably about 5 or 6, mostly shorter poppy songs), but they are not "filler" to everyone. But again, other people would probably find an album like Unfold The Future interminably long. I think every single track on it is fantastic, with only 2 or 3 songs being merely "good".
So there are albums that seem too long to me that are under 40 minutes, and some that are 140 minutes that I absolutely love. My only real issue with long albums is not that I loose interest or can't pay attention, but that it is such a time commitment to listen to them. That is why I listen to stuff in my car, on my MP3 player, while doing dishes, etc.
Also, I never skip songs (except bonus tracks at the end of some remastered albums), because I always feel like the artist put them there for a reason. For the most part, if I like a few songs, I like the whole album. Prog bands tend to be good like that for me.
|
|
Norbert
Forum Senior Member
Joined: October 20 2005
Location: Hungary
Status: Offline
Points: 2506
|
Posted: January 30 2007 at 07:55 |
It's really subjective. For me 28 minutes of Reign in Blood is longer than TFTO and The Lamb together.
Among my all time fave albums there are under 40 minutes long and some double albums.
Some albums contain unnecessary tracks like You not Me on FII, so they are too long with 1 or 2 tracks, but that's a very big flaw.
|
|
andu
Forum Senior Member
Joined: September 27 2006
Location: Romania
Status: Offline
Points: 3089
|
Posted: January 30 2007 at 05:33 |
Glueman wrote:
It does not imply that! If you choose to mis-interpret my post then that's your problem.
The quality of a piece is judged by the listener. It's up to them to decide what proportion of an album they actually like. No two people are going to view a record the same way.
Records were 25-45 minutes long due to the constraints of vinyl. There is no excuse to put out a short album nowadays. If an artist cannot fill 60 minutes of quality music, for the sake of argument, per year, then that says more about their lack of creativity than anything else. Other than re-issued pieces with bonus tracks, I do not accept that anyone adds sub-par material just to pad out a release. It’s an extreme insult to the artist to presume that those few tracks that you may not like are to be considered “filler”. There is NO such thing as filler. And if a person cannot sit through 60 minutes + of an artist then that also says as much about attention deficit as it does the quality of the material, which is, again, in the ear of the beholder.
And it’s not juxtaposing art and money. When a product is marketed it should be priced according to various criteria – one of which is value for money. To sell two records for the same price – one of which is 30 minutes and one of which is 79 minutes is a blatant rip-off.
And the words are spelt "MEASURED" and IMPLIES"! |
Interesting thoughts. Still, I would say some of your arguments do not hold. Sometimes artists do not put out large amounts of material not because they can't , but because they restrain themselves in order to achieve higher perfection (if I may say so). I'll give you some examples. Cezanne is considered one of the greatest artists of modern times. However, he was so severe on himself that he often distroyed his own work in anger, every time he felt the didn't "capture the initial emotion" on canvas exactly the way he wanted to have it. Probably many of the paintings he destroyed were also masterpieces - he did have a blustering temper and it's possible that many of his outbursts weren't justified. However, what he left us is one of the greatest modern artistic patrimonis. An extreme example, now: one of the greatest dutch painters (among Rembrandt and Van Gogh; and he's also one of the greatest ever) is Jan Vermeer. His work consists of about 40 paintings and it's higly probable that the complete number of works he's done (including those that were lost for ever) is only larger by a few tens. What do you choose - do you choose to say he's a lesser great artist because he didn't have the inspiration to leave us several hundred works (as other geniuses did) or are you thankful for the way he managed his effort in order to do leave us 40 masterpieces? I guess that by your arguments Vermeer is just a minor artist...
One other issue. You say a 40 minutes long record shouldn't be payed the same as a 60 minutes long record. I know that in the free market, prices are only primarily based on the characteristics (quality & quantity) of the product; the final product is always chosen in direct relation with the estimation of the possible buyers' intent to give for the product. For example, even if I can objectively agree that the X album is equally good as the Y album, I would agree to pay a lot more for the Y album because the artist or the music has a stronger (and probable impossbile to define by words) appeal for me - or I simply am much more interested in it even if I can't know what the album contains... There are other criteria then lenght for asseising an album's value, you know. I would pay more for 30 minutes of brilliance then I would pay for 70 minutes of just good music!
|
|
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
When albums go on for too long
