Yeah, this is pretty easily my least favorite song of the three released so far. Still good, but not as interesting as the last two imo
American Slang and Run The Jewels first album are also great 10 track albums. and Baysides Killing Time. also ETIDs Hot Damn
You can really have as many tracks on an album was you want imo, just make sure they're all good songs, fit in well together, and flow gracefully from track to track. Sometimes I feel like certain stuff could be released as B-sides just to trim it down to be a tad more concise on certain releases.
I definitely agree, but there are cases of astounding albums that are just too long. My preference is usually somewhere from 11-13 songs per album because it's more likely I can digest the whole album in one sitting.
To be honest, my preference for shorter, leaner albums is mostly because my walking route near my house takes my almost exactly 40 minutes, and I often find that 10 song albums clock in around 40 minutes. And listening to music on walks is one of my favorite things.
there are albums that exist that are both too short and too long. and there are great perfect albums that are both very long and very short. this conversation is useless
I don't think one is better than the other, I just have a slight preference to shorter records. But I mean I love the new 1975 for example, which certainly doesn't rely on brevity. And my all-time favorite is TDAG which is nearly an hour long.
yeah thats why i would never say i prefer one or the other because my favorite records ever encompass both long and short length records.
I agree with these recent posts. The 1975 released one of my now all-time favorite albums this year and Moving Mountains' S/T is also one of my all-time favorites so I really just want an album I think is great that I can enjoy and love.
I think if I really considered my favorite records I'd find the same thing to be true, this is just a trend I've noticed lately. For one reason or another I'm more drawn to shorter records. It's something I've recently become cognizant of, especially this year. But ultimately it's a minor thing and length almost never factors into my feelings about the music itself.
I agree on 11-13. 11 or 12 is typically the sweet spot for me. Depends though. Obviously there's an endless number of great records that are 10 songs, sometimes even 9. Of the top of my head, Basement's last record was 10 tracks and even though I loved pretty much every song, it left me wanting more. Records that are too long are a lot worse though. Way too much going on usually and harder to keep my interest peeked for listening through in a single sitting.
numbers of tracks is even more useless for me since i listen to so much music where 5-10 minute and sometimes even 15-20 minute tracks are completely normal. like one of my favorite albums this year is what one becomes by sumac which is 5 tracks but one of them is 17 minutes long. and one of my fav records of all time is alleluja dont bend ascend which is four tracks with two stretching to 20 minutes
I guess I'd say I care more about overall length than number of tracks. Very long albums tend to lose me, of course this isn't true in every case but it's fairly rare that I really love an album over an hour
When I think about it all it boils down to is if an album can keep me engaged for the entirety of it's run time. You could send me a 2 hour record, and if I was interested and engaged for all 2 hours, I'd be pleased. It's only when an album starts to feel bloated or overstuffed that length becomes a problem, in my eyes.
skinny fists and f# a# are for sure alot better than allelujah imo. people were too harsh on yanqui, its my favorite alot of the time. i guess everyone came around on it more recently
i love all of them. asunder included. band is a top 10 band for me and they formed my tastes having heard them when i was 14 or 15