Lately I’m finding that there seems to be too much music out there that would benefit from some good editing. In other words too many tunes are just unnecessarily too looooong. In my opinion any track that’s over 5 minutes long needs to be exceptionally good or else it overstays its welcome and makes me want it to end after about the 3 minute mark. Maybe this the downside of the convenience of digital playback that urges you you to zap to the next track when things start to drag on. Or is it maybe that some artists are trying to fill a creative void by repeating themselves ad nauseam?
Maybe you have an excessively short attention span.
Don’t listen to progressive rock then
Do you have some examples?
I can’t get enough Bruckner, 20+ mins is no problem for me for just one part.
That’s always good advice.
Ha ha, I was waiting for that
Interesting thought. I listen to a lot of space rock instrumental stuff and lots of it has a tendency to go for a lonnnnng time but I really like listening to it. On the other hand I found the last two Iron Maiden albums full of overly long songs and wished they would have edited some of them down a bit.
Sounds like a ‘pop’ music problem. I thought an average of 3 min was the standard, with only exceptional tracks up to 5 min making it because otherwise radios wouldn’t play (and likely would talk over or cut off much of the ‘excess’ anyway. But certainly not an issue with the music to which I listen (e.g. prog, classical, opera, heavy rock, blues).
Probably developed wih age. In my teens I thought the drum solo in Inagaddadavida was waaay too short.
I listen to Aisle of Plenty by Genesis or the acoustic intro on Thick as a Brick.
Classical is a slow burn.
Examples? Off hand…Well just now I was listening to an unplugged version of Boz Scaggs’ Lowdown. Enjoyed it at first but was happy when it finally ended.
I could dig for more examples but need to focuse on my supper/bottle of Muscadet.
I imagine one of the worst punishment: be locked in a room, attached on the bed, and be obliged to listen to the “ gates of delirium “ by Yes, full volume. 21 minutes 50 seconds.
My god. I would finish in a psychiatric hospital after that.
If you ain’t diggin the groove man - 2 minutes is too long.
To be fair, the final section “Soon” is a classic and we had the single version as one of our wedding songs
We can’t like the same things. If I put you “interlude “ tune by Miles Davis in the Agharta album, you will be certainly in the same position as me with Yes .
I have been listening to the final side of Lou Reed’s Metal Machine Music RCA vinyl release - it is infinite in track time - it never ends until your stylus wears out.
Not my favourite track of theirs, as they had started their decline by then (by my measure), but nothing untoward and infinitely more enjoyable than any soul or jazz track I’ve ever heard - with most of them even 3 minutes is more than enough for me to demand earplugs or run screaming from the room with my hands over my ears!
The interesting thing, however, is that from previous posts I gained the impression that you suffer from listening fatigue after listening to anything for more than a short time (from memory an hour or two?)
My answer: I suffer from listening fatigue after listening to anything THAT I DON’T ENJOY for more than a VERY short time.
My listening sessions are generally during around 2 hours. Generally on mornings. After I like to do something else , not stay at home. It’s just that.
I must be a bit slow I often think most of my music is too short.
Don’t think he even listened for all 4 sides.