Your preferences regarding number of tracks on a cd

[CF87]

I love long songs.

Sometimes you seem to be getting really into a song and it just ends, then the next song just seems like it takes off from that song making it not much different. Sometimes longer songs have more of a distinct and diverse style between tracks. You use a lot of ideas on one song causing you to have to reinvent yourself. You can write 3 shorter songs in maybe one setting so it's similiar, but a more long song might takes weeks or months causing you to make parts in different moods and settings. A lot of shorter songs sound similiar because they're structured the same with 3,4 parts.

 

[ohiogrinder]

depends on how long the songs are

 

[V.V.V.V.V.]

I love long songs.

Sometimes you seem to be getting really into a song and it just ends, then the next song just seems like it takes off from that song making it not much different. Sometimes longer songs have more of a distinct and diverse style between tracks. You use a lot of ideas on one song causing you to have to reinvent yourself. You can write 3 shorter songs in maybe one setting so it's similiar, but a more long song might takes weeks or months causing you to make parts in different moods and settings. A lot of shorter songs sound similiar because they're structured the same with 3,4 parts.

Yes.

 

[CF87]

YES

I love you man!.

 

[V.V.V.V.V.]

I LOVE YOU TOO PLATONICALLY!

But really, long songs in death metal give me a weird sense of appreciation for the band even though I may not've heard em yet...for instance, early In-Quest.

 

[TylerTheNuke]

Well, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 12, or 13 tracks are my preferred numbers. More tracks is bad because the song lengths have to be shortened or it is too long and kills me. I guess if songs are 3-4 minutes and very varied, then I like more tracks. NIN's the fragile is an example of an album with tons of tracks that I like. As for 4,6,8,and10, those numbers just don't do it for me. They are too straightforward. You need an odd number because it is harder to divide and it has a center number. Know what I'm saying? Btw, having at least one epic track makes an album way better for me. I think my ultimate number is 6 7-minute tracks and 1 11+ minute epic.

 

[DarkBliss]

I don't mind the number of tracks. The important thing is that the album remains interesting and engaging throughout. However the majority of really good records, I've heard, contain 8-9 songs.

 

[Pitiless Wanderer]

I will say my opinion, which I am sure has been shared by other posters although I have been unable to read the replies so far.


Generally, I don't like albums with more than 10 or 11 tracks. But it depends on the music. I find the more extreme an album is musically, I can only take so much of it. If a band plays more catchy songs, then song count isn't a big deal, really. If a band plays brutal death metal and there are 14 songs on an album...I can't get into the album. I might like some songs, but will have problems recommending the album as a whole. A good case in point would be the new Unleashed album which I downloaded the other day. It has 15 songs, I think. Some of the songs are good, some are just filler, so I could say "yea, songs 1 4 and 9 are good" but wouldnt really recommend the entire album as a classic.

 

[The Bringer]

I perfer an album to have about 7-10 songs. Anything more just gives chance that there will be more filler, those ideas could (most the time) have been moved into other songs on the album. (A good example is Reroute to Remain by In Flames)

And for length, I really like songs being about 5-7 minutes long. Even a diverse 7 minute song will go by quickly when it is actually GOOD. Songs should never be long for the sake of being long.

 

[5thSeason]

does it really matter???

I dont care if its one 50 minute track like Edge Of Sanity - Crimson or if its 100 tracks. If its good its good.

 

[Carcassian]

As long as there's little filler, I don't give a damn how long it is.

QFT.

 

[Scarifier]

Anything exceeding 60 minutes of music gets tiresome, but atleast you're getting your money's worth.

^ i hate this bullshit "get you moneys worth" the value is in the music not the amount of mb or minutes the cd contains.

I agree with the thread starter on Obscura, and i find "Empire of the sands" the last song on "The Key" irrelevant to the album.

I prefer 8-9 songs (6 if they are long songs, like you all been saying depends on the songs) and albums around 40 minutes is preferable.

 

[Dev]

7-9 . All my favorite albums fit.

 

[Nico]

4-5.

 

[The Bringer]

^ i hate this bullshit "get you moneys worth" the value is in the music not the amount of mb or minutes the cd contains.

I agree with the thread starter on Obscura, and i find "Empire of the sands" the last song on "The Key" irrelevant to the album.

I prefer 8-9 songs (6 if they are long songs, like you all been saying depends on the songs) and albums around 40 minutes is preferable.

I hate that too. Unless the album had been worked on for 2 years or more I highly doubt 40 of that 70 minutes is worth my money. Unless a band has really kept a lot of melodies, riffs and demos around for awhile and are just surfacing some along with new ideas for each album I think a band will only be capable of making 30-45 minutes of QUALITY music.

 

[Satanstoenail]

does it really matter???

I dont care if its one 50 minute track like Edge Of Sanity - Crimson or if its 100 tracks. If its good its good.

Thank god someone finally said it.

 

[Alex78]

lol, I don't care at all. there are great albums with 5 tracks as well as 15 tracks.
some bands seem to think that for being progressive they have to write 10+ minutes songs but I don't think that's true.

 

[Life Sucks]

Long songs are cool. I don't really like it when a CD is one long song, like the new Scald, for instance. Many of my favorite songs are long songs (Primordial - the Coffin Ships, Mourning Beloveth - Narcissistic Funeral, Mjolnir - Bis Der Tod die Zeit Besiegt, etc.).

 

[Saparmurat_Niyazov]

As many others have stated, 5 - 10 tracks is a good range, however I don't really like recordings that are shorter than 30 minutes (thus, I dislike EP's).
I would also agree that anything over 50 minutes is probably too long, and though I like a few epic songs here and there, I think 4 - 6 minutes long is the perfect length for a metal song. Don't get me wrong, I've heard many excellent songs that are 2 minutes or less, and conversely have heard others that are 10 minutes+. I would ultimately conclude that total running time is a more important characteristic of a quality album rather than the quantity of songs.

 

[V.V.V.V.V.]

I actually love EPs and death metal/goregrind/etc. albums shorter than like 35 minutes. To me an EP is anything the size of what fits on a 3" CD (~22 mnutes), even though the standard EP is like 31 minutes or something? Anyway, I like EPs, they're cool.