bring back the 40 minute album

[TurdBerglar]

you can stick like 60-80 minutes on a cd, right? it seems like most bands come up with their 8-10 songs that they really like and to fill the space they just jam in unfinished/unpolished shit. that unfinished/unpolished shit usually seems it could have a real good potential if just given more time to work it out. save that shit and work on it and release it on later albums instead of just throwing it out there to fill the cd.

[Drederick Tatum]

this also applies to prog bands. I don't have the time or energy to sit through your warbling and noodling just to hear one sweet riff. get to it the riff quickly and then repeat. stop at between 30-40 mins.

[TurdBerglar]

and to those bands that can effectively fill an hour+ cd with good shit, you can stop it to. just realease two fucking albums. release the next one a year and half later. i hate waiting three+ years between albums especially when i find it difficult to listen to an 60-80 minute album non stop! it gets boring after about 45 minutes, guys! i always find myself not really knowing the last few songs on a long cd just because i've usually lost interest by then.

[Documad]

I agree. Beck's Guero is a good example of an album that could have been good if he took out the filler.

[Waus]

The Strokes last album was a good example.

Who knows, maybe if artists start doing their music online directly to the fans the entire "album" format will become obsolete.

I hope not.

[ericlee]

the mars Volta is guilty as charged. When they jam, they make real decent music but I dont want to hear all of that other bullshit they do. Alot of mike patton's stuff focuses on just noise. His cd with the xecutioners could have been a great cd but there's only about five songs that you can actually jam out to.

[Auton]

if it makes you feel better, we'll probably be getting 20 minute "album" downloads within the next 10 years. albums just aren't marketable anymore. I'm not saying i like that (and i wasn't seriously suggesting that would make you feel better).. there's nothing better to me than a roughly 35-50 minute album, but major labels are going to skip the whole album thing together pretty soon... and a little while later major labels themselves will also come crashing down. wait and see.

[KingSpanner]

and no more albums with more than one vinyls in the sleeve

[balohna]

the mars Volta is guilty as charged. When they jam, they make real decent music but I dont want to hear all of that other bullshit they do. Alot of mike patton's stuff focuses on just noise. His cd with the xecutioners could have been a great cd but there's only about five songs that you can actually jam out to.

TMV's latest album cut out almost all the jamming for some reason (the songs even have really awkward endings sometimes, as if the jams/ambience were literally cut after being recorded). Their second album had way too much, their first one had a nice balance and is probably their strongest work so far.

My favourite album of this year so far, The Con by Tegan and Sara, is only like 36 minutes long but the whole thing is solid. The songs themselves never drag on (1:30 - 4:00 long mostly, 14 of them) and each one is worth listening to.

As much as I love the 90's Beastie Boys albums (I consider CYH my favourite album ever) they probably would be even better if they were designed as albums rather than a collection of new tracks. I prefer CYH and HN to IC, and the main reason for that is probably because CYH and HN flow much better. IC really feels like a mixed tape or something. As much as it pains me to say this (because I have a place in my heart for every track on all three albums), they all could have been improved by being 40 minute albums. One thing that can and should be taken from punk rock and applied to any genre is the power of short songs. One or two short verses, a couple choruses, and maybe a bridge/breakdown in there somewhere is all you need. Especially if you want to keep people with short attention spans interested.

[mickill]

A lot of these decisions aren't left up to the artists. Especially if they're on a major. Particularly the frequency with which they're able to release albums etc.

But yeah, I'm not into long albums. Especially double albums not named Exile On Main St, London Calling, Physical Graffiti or The Beatles (which all still have their fair share of filler).

[balohna]

The Clash's Sandinista! is a good album despite being almost 2 hours too long. I think some long albums are meant to chronicle the best stuff the artist was able to create over a certain span of time. Shorter albums are often more focused and feel a bit more like a completed piece. This isn't always true though, there are some great and focused 1 hour+ albums out there. Sonic Youth's Daydream Nation comes to mind, as does London Calling.