I think this could prompt an interesting discussion in several ways.

The longer running CD format has been great in some ways, especially for the concept of Greatest Hits for those bands who have more than a few good songs. 18-songs on a Tom Petty greatest hits, or a 30-song Sam Cooke greatest hits, or Hot Rocks or Creedence's Chronicle now playable without once turning the record side, those are pretty nice advantages.

The question I would ask would be: what new releases by artists (i.e. not compilations) in the CD era are 60 minutes or more and still work? Soundgarden's Superunknown works for me at this length, as do several Spiritualized releases, and I'll try to think of some others.

I don't think there's anything inherently special about 40 minutes. The key is putting out an album that is consistent from beginning to end. There were plenty of good double albums in the good old days which now completely fill a single CD with good music from start to finish (i.e., London Calling). The problem was that bands who could only muster up about 30-40 minutes of "good" stuff still felt obligated to use the space available--especially when CDs were a new format. Hence, more room for junk! When your space is limited, you edit out the filler.

Great question, and I want to hear people's opinion on this for sequencing my own records, as I always write far too much material. Is quantity better, or being concise? Would people rather have a mass of material to sift through and determine their own playlists, since I can always think of great B-side tracks by artists I love that are better than what they put on their albums at times.

The '40' minute mark was always good for me in the vinyl days because it was a comfortable length of time to listen to a record with your full concentration, (not doing housework, as background music etc).

Between the 47-60 minute mark, and it was harder to allot the time for listening, because odds were likely you wouldn't get through the whole thing before you were interupted or had other places to be.

The 70 minute CDS today seem to be major artists padding their albums out with endless segues and skits, (your rap stars, your Janet Jacksons etc).

Now, with the rise of the IPod, I imagine a lot of people listen to albums in transit, and fully expect to be interupted without getting throught he record in one session, so longer albums probably don't worry people so much.

As Loophole said, I honestly believe it's down to the strength of the material as to how long it *feels*. I think a tight time limit means writing has to be concise.

Anyway, here's what I've bought this year that falls into the time limit suggested:

- the Ark, Prayer for the weekend, 11 Tracks, 42 minutes.

- Duane Dolieslager, the Opposite of Optimist, 12 tracks, 35 minutes. (great concise writing, sounds like Michael Penn).

- Field Music, Tones of Town, 11 Tracks, 31 minutes.

- Tim Finn, Imaginary Kingdom, 12 Tracks, 39 minutes.

- Great Lakes Myth Society, Compass Rose Bouquet, 12 tracks, 42 minutes, (album of the year for me).

- Ladybug Transistor, Can't Wait Another Day, 12 Tracks, 41 minutes.

- Rilo Kiley, Under the Blacklight, 11 Tracks, 38 minutes, (weak, intentionally 'dumb' material).

- Richard Swift, Dressed Up For The Letdown, 10 tracks, 38 minutes.

- Suzanne Vega, Crime and Beauty, 11 tracks, 35 minutes.

- You Am I, Convicts, 12 tracks, 36 minutes.

And strangely enough, i've noticed they all got played regularly, as opposed to albums I bought this year from Fountains Of Wayne, Crowded House, Roger Manning Junior, and Jason Falkner, to name a few, all of which ran from 47 - 59 minutes.

I don't think that for an album to work as an album it has to be able to be listened to with full attention in one sitting. We use reflection and repeat listens to fully appreciate albums. You might even listen to some tracks more than others without undermining the idea that the whole album represents a statement of some sort or a concept. Narrative is not the only, or best, way for a concept album to make a point. In fact, I would argue that music, especially rock music, is not especially suited to story-telling.

STATS! STATS! STATS!

Number of 2007 releases bought so far: 95
# of individual discs: 101
# of individual tracks: 1193
Avg # of tracks per album: 12
Avg # of tracks per disc: 11
Total length: 72 hours, 56 minutes, 53 seconds
AVG ALBUM LENGTH: 46:04
AVG DISC LENGTH: 43:20
AVG TRACK LENGTH: 03:40

Ten Shortest discs (including EPs and CD singles):

"Your Kisses Are Wasted On Me" CD single -- The Pipettes (15:38)
STICKING FINGERS INTO SOCKETS -- Los Campesinos (16:06)
LON GISLAND -- Beirut (16:29)
THE CAVALRY OF LIGHT -- Lavender Diamond (16:42)
WHAT IS FREE TO A GOOD HOME? -- Emily Haines (20:46)
KNEES UP! --Cannonball Jane (22:54)
IN THE ATTIC OF THE UNIVERSE -- The Antlers (26:43)
LOSIN' IT! -- Vancougar (28:43)
AND THE HUN HANGAR ENSEMBLE -- A Hawk and a Hacksaw (29:20)
OBLIGATORY VILLAGERS -- Nellie McKay (31:33)

Ten Longest Discs (including multi-disc sets):

SUPER SCISSORS -- Barbara Manning (3 discs, 139:12)
ALL OF A SUDDEN I MISS EVERYONE -- Explosions in the Sky (2 discs, 91:15)
FUTURE CLOUDS AND RADAR -- Future Clouds and Radar (2 discs, 88:30)
YOUR SECRET SAFE / LUZERNE -- The Trolleyvox (2 discs, 83:23)
GONE: A COLLECTION OF EPS -- Mono (76:39)
SENCILLOS -- La Buena Vida (5 discs, 74:06)
UMA TARDE NA FRUTEIRA -- Jupiter Apple (71:30)
LA VIE D'ARTISTE (OST) -- Tim Gane and Sean O'Hagan (2 discs, 68:54)
BOX OF SECRETS -- The Green Pajamas (67:38)
SPIRIT IF -- Kevin Drew (65:20)

So basically, yeah, it seems like there may be something to the idea that the average CD length is coming down.

Good responses so far, and I like how Townspeople have taken them in various directions. First off, thanks Great One, for the objective report. Seriously, this was teh first thing I had hoped would be accomplished. I'm amazed that you have things so well cataloged, but less so since you ranked in the vaunted Man Muscle category along with alexmagic on that Rolling Stone quiz.

I think there IS something to keeping a CD of pop/rock songs in the 40-minute zone. To compare a 65-minute CD (greatest hits collections excluded) to a double (vinyl) album doesn't quite work because the double album is still digested in 20-minute bites. The first overly long CD that always comes to mind for me is Matthew Sweet's Girlfriend, which as much as I loved it, just didn't know when to say "Good night."

For sequencing one's own material, I can say from experience that less is often more, but it's really hard to leave one of your babies behind, isn't it? Good luck, Homefrontradio -and wish me good luck in return!

Mwall, I'm sure I have some more musically driven CDs that I like at the longer length. It's the CDs overloaded with 3-minute, hook-laden, tightly structured gems that get lost past the 40-minute mark, perhaps no matter how great the songs are.

Hey, the Great48, what's the Future Clouds And Radar disc like? I really liked Cotton Mather but importing it from the US costs a fortune, (usually the postage is 2/3 the price of the cost of the CD). Is it worth the outlay?

BigSteve - probably just my tastes, as I like to really analyse songs and arrangments, so i like to hear a complete journey to learn more about flow, and identifying what types of sequencing works, but I agree that most albums take a long period of listening to full appreciate, which is why i'm wary of 'first day reviews' online.

I don't think albums work as 'linear stories', but I think when a writer is on the ball, and arranges the album based upon certain themes, the results can be brilliant.

Mr. Mod - the vinyl version of 'Girlfriend' ends after 'Your Sweet Voice', and at 12 tracks, is much stronger for it.

And ditto to the babies thing. You work so hard and then have to cull ruthlessly, lest you end up as Tori Amos, Robert Pollard or Prince. Wouldn't mind hearing what you're up to though.

Hey, the Great48, what's the Future Clouds And Radar disc like? I really liked Cotton Mather but importing it from the US costs a fortune, (usually the postage is 2/3 the price of the cost of the CD). Is it worth the outlay?

Hmm....well, *I* like it, but be forewarned that it doesn't really sound very much like Cotton Mather, and going into it expecting Kon-TIKI PART II will lead to disappointment.

I also really like the Future Clouds disc. He's still mining his basic psych/Revolver influences, but it's a more free-floating, diverse affair than Cotton Mather's stuff.

I had to go back and look up an earlier era just for the contrast. Here's 1991, around the start of the too-fucking-long CD era and also the year that Matthew Sweet's GIRLFRIEND came out. Now, note that my records for this far back are nowhere near complete, so this is inconclusive data, but...

# Albums: 48
# Discs: 50
# Tracks: 691
Avg # tracks per album: 14
Avg # tracks per disc: 13
AVG ALBUM LENGTH: 55:41
AVG DISC LENGTH: 53:27
AVG TRACK LENGTH: 03:52

SHORTEST:

TREMOLO -- My Bloody Valentine (18:43)
YOU ARE HERE -- The Letter Five (22:29)
MY BRAIN HURTS -- Screeching Weasel (29:52)
DICK BARTLEY PRESENTS ONE HIT WONDERS OF THE 1960s -- Various Artists (32:59)
EVERYWHERE OUTSIDE -- Antietam (35:53)

LONGEST:

ELECTRONIC -- Electronic (52:24)
THE SINGLES COLLECTION -- The Specials (52:12)
DRUNK WITH PASSION -- The Golden Palominos (50:39)
BOAT -- Blab Happy (49:41)
DON'T GET WEIRD ON ME, BABE -- Lloyd Cole (48:18)

Mwall, I'm sure I have some more musically driven CDs that I like at the longer length. It's the CDs overloaded with 3-minute, hook-laden, tightly structured gems that get lost past the 40-minute mark, perhaps no matter how great the songs are.

As I consider this issue further, I think that's an important point. The CDs that I like at 70 minutes are by bands who tend to work in more extended suites, a la Spiritualized. If you're playing shorter songs, then a 60-minute time limit might seem more or less unreachable.

But 40 minutes is still to some extent arbitrary. Haven't the Hives been proving in recent years that it can be too easy to forget that a lot of good LPs in the 60s and even some later were 28-33 minutes long?

Haven't the Hives been proving in recent years that it can be too easy to forget that a lot of good LPs in the 60s and even some later were 28-33 minutes long?

I bought 'Summer Cherry Ghosts' (2004) by Timothy Monger this year. Nine songs, 26 minutes, but those 26 minutes minutes *count*. Gorgeous baroque chamber pop, probably only as long as a Nick Drake album. It's short, but it doesn't feel so, but it makes it perfect to escape into the world he's created for a while, because it doesn't require a great time investment.

http://www.timothymonger.com/audio.htm

Check out 'Cleveland Heights' and 'Radio Harvest'.

I think I like the "Less is More" approach, and that's just as a consumer. If you don't have a half hour's worth of material, then wait until you do. If you have 100 minute, don't trim it to 73:00. Pick the ten absolute best and leave it at that. The Dexateens, Buffalo Killers and Radio Moscow all have made albums I play a lot, and they're just over a half hour. There's just no disappointing stuff, and when I'm done I'm blown away and wanting more.

Then there's some longer stuff, like Built to Spill. I really like them a lot, but their albums could use a little trimming, though sitting through the songs I'd probably cut certainly isn't a miserable experience, but then I hear something like The Woods by Sleater/Kinney and I wouldn't change a thing.

For me, I feel just as ripped off if I buy a cd and it's not a half hour as I do if I get 16 songs, of which only three are any good. It pisses me off and makes me like those three songs less and I figure that band is off my radar now. If there's no crappy songs, and it's just a little wasted space, then that can't happen.

I think more and more people never listen to albums anymore. They just collect songs and hit shuffle. It's their life, and I'm not saying they're wrong, but I think they're missing out by not listening to albums.

Mwall, 40 minutes or less is what I'm getting at. There are definitely many fine 30-minute albums.

Had a listen to 'Girlfriend' today, leaving off the last three songs. Definitely prefer it that way.

Just noticed the chorus of 'I've Been Waiting' has the same chords as the chorus of 'I Want To Hold Your Hand', slowed down.

Homefrontradio wrote:

Just noticed the chorus of 'I've Been Waiting' has the same chords as the chorus of 'I Want To Hold Your Hand', slowed down.

Really? This sounds like a job for RTH Labs!