opinions on album length

Yngvai X

Dark Emperor
Jul 18, 2002
3,466
13
38
41
Woodland Park, NJ
www.myspace.com
This is something I'm curious about, as it pertains to myself. I'm about to start shopping my album to record labels when it occured to me that my album is on the short side. Its total time is just under 37 minutes and there are only 6 tracks. So, my question is, to potential buyers, is this discouraging to you when it comes to purchasing an album? Keep in mind that Slayer's Reign in Blood was only 29 minutes, and in terms of the number of tracks, some Progressive albums have had as little as 3 songs on them (albeit they were all a good bit over the 10 minute mark). The way I see it, yes, it is short and there are only 6 tracks, but they are 6 very strong tracks, theres no filler at all.

Just wondering what others think about this.
 
however long it takes to "say" what you need to be "said". don't gauge your music by length... i know several 79min discs that aren't worth nearly as much to me as some 40s.

quality before quantity.
 
40-45 is still a good length for any release. Just because you have over 70 minutes at your disposal doesn't mean you need to use it all. I'll take all killer, no filler any day of the week over longer with mixed results. Call it a common problem in a digital age.

my 2 pennies :)
Glenn
 
A lot of Children of Bodom's albums are on the short side, and still worth every penny. It's the content, man. If you've picked the songs that you think are the best and meet your standards for the album, stick with it.

Edit: As always, let us know how the progress is going. I'll order a copy the day it's available.
 
I'll be the first to say it would discourage me. Take Beyond Twilight - Section X for example, it's an awesome band and a kickass album, but there's only 8 tracks, 2 of which are not full length songs. It seems to end too fast. The really great albums that stick with me always seem to be the ones that have awesome music AND at least 11 tracks or so. Recreation Day, New Mythology Suite, Black Halo... I'd say that unless the songs are all long, anything under 9 tracks is a little disappointing. As far as minutes, yeah, 37 is short! But how much do you expect from the album, because if the songs are good you can still get a bunch of fans etc.

EDIT: And by the way, Section X still does kick ass and I love the whole thing, so don't worry TOO much :D
 
IMO there's no cut-and-dry answer... each case has to be judged individually.

Some short albums are the perfect length.

Some short albums are too short.

Some long albums are the perfect length.

Some long albums are too long.

I think 40-50 min is a pretty safe way to go... not too long, but enough so the listener doesn't feel cheated.
 
You could always write more songs...but it's better to have a short album than a long one where the "extra" songs are half-assed because they were only written in order to make the album longer. So, only make it longer if you can record a few songs that are equally (or more) well-written than the others.
 
matt, a lot of us have heard your stuff on your site...judging by that, you shred, and, you could probably release it with fewer tracks and people will still buy it...cuz you rule.
 
Personally I tend to go for albums that hit the 50 minute mark or over...but there ARE great exceptions. I think Cynic's album Focus is one of the shorter ones, coming in at 36:15. I love it to death...but I keep thinking there needs to be more. It gives me a feeling of something unfinished.

Mind you, I haven't heard your work, though...this is just a general opinion.
 
Rose Immortal said:
Personally I tend to go for albums that hit the 50 minute mark or over...but there ARE great exceptions. I think Cynic's album Focus is one of the shorter ones, coming in at 36:15. I love it to death...but I keep thinking there needs to be more. It gives me a feeling of something unfinished.

Mind you, I haven't heard your work, though...this is just a general opinion.

I agree with you on Cynic's album. It has such great compositions that I wish the songs longer!
 
I don't normally look at the length when buying an album, though i guess it could influence how much i enjoy an album once i've bought it. Obviously, prog albums tend to be expected to be long, while "shred" albums don't necessarily have to be, so i guess it doesn't matter too much :P
 
For me, the ideal length is between 50-60 minutes, with some exceptions, any sort of death metal or instrumental album that sticks to one theme wears off for me after 40 minutes, and I greatly admire bands that can put out wide ranging albums that approach the maximum running time, Perfect Element and Terria (both over 70 min) being among my favorites of all time.
 
ThornsOfSorrow said:
You could always write more songs...but it's better to have a short album than a long one where the "extra" songs are half-assed because they were only written in order to make the album longer. So, only make it longer if you can record a few songs that are equally (or more) well-written than the others.

Well the album is being mastered right now, so its a tad too late to add anything to it lol.
 
Dude, don't worry boutt he album Length, I complain about length only when you get some crappy band with like a one hit wonder... being the majority of bands out there! Symphony X is well known for Long songs, and long albums... But they also got what it takes to make it that long! If you feel its to short and are worried, release it as a Single dude, tones of bands release singles.
---
The ultimate goal is, think about the crowd you are appealing to! If you like the length and you think it sgood music. do it!
 
Yngvai X said:
Well the album is being mastered right now, so its a tad too late to add anything to it lol.
Haha well in that case, I'm sure the length will be fine, as long as all the songs are good. And from what I've heard from you, I don't think you'll have a problem with any of them not being good. Yeah, it is short, but there have been shorter CDs that are still very good. Anyway, good luck with your music. :)
 
So it will be instrumental? If so, the length doesn't matter that much. As there is no need of story or concept. Even Mike Oldfield's tubular bells has got only two parts and is under 30 min, heh.
 
There are some kickass albums that are 38-39 minutes long. I can't think of a Maiden CD that's a whole hour long. There are advantages to shorter works, too. When listening to a CD I tend to be one of those boring, anal people who have to listen to every track in order, so if I'm waiting a little while to go to class or something I just play In Memory or Angelic Voices Calling. My commute to high school was about 45 minutes so I played a CD and by the time it was done, I was at school.
 
Beelzebub said:
There are some kickass albums that are 38-39 minutes long. I can't think of a Maiden CD that's a whole hour long. There are advantages to shorter works, too. When listening to a CD I tend to be one of those boring, anal people who have to listen to every track in order, so if I'm waiting a little while to go to class or something I just play In Memory or Angelic Voices Calling. My commute to high school was about 45 minutes so I played a CD and by the time it was done, I was at school.
I can think of many (very nearly or over) hour long Maiden CDs...let's start with Brave New World, Dance of Death, Fear of the Dark, The X Factor, I think Virtual XI is nearly an hour in length....only their early stuff is like 40 minutes long...all of their later material is all right around an hour per album....

As for 40-minute albums, I tend to prefer longer CDs...it just seems like I'm getting more of my money's worth...I won't have heard everything in one half hour...