Soda Pop Queen Posted April 20 Share Posted April 20 Depends on what the creative aim is. That being said, everyone cannot and should not do long track albums just because. Even the few long albums that I love could be elevated even more by trimming a few tracks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackOfHearts Posted April 20 Share Posted April 20 12-15 is the obvious sweet spot. Anything more should be for a deluxe or a re-release, and shouldn't be more than like, 20 altogether. Things in the 30-track range are typically bloated and feel like a chore to slog through midway through. I'm sure both the hive and the sweaties are hyped, but I bet there's lots in their ranks that feel the same as me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erreur2 La Nature Posted April 20 Share Posted April 20 An album should do 12-14 tracks. More feels like a lot to digest and I honestly would not listen to an album that has... I don't know maybe more than 16-17 tracks which is already enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devin Posted April 20 Share Posted April 20 depends on the artist but i prefer shorter albums. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saddy Posted April 20 Share Posted April 20 Def 10 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Batsy Armada Posted April 21 Share Posted April 21 Ultimately, it just depends on the overall quality of the album. If an artist can maintain the quality throughout a 30-track album, being consistent and solid in sound, then I'm all for it. But if it's filled with filler, to where I start zoning out while listening to it, then it just becomes tiring and bloated and I just find myself waiting for the album to be over. I've found myself wishing some albums were, indeed, shorter; just as I've found myself wishing that some albums were longer. I'm just in love with music, though, so I'm going with 30 tracks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FailSafe Posted April 21 Share Posted April 21 10 tracks if my fav artist releases every 2 years. 30 if every 4 or so years Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alldeezy Posted April 21 Share Posted April 21 13 - 16 track albums .. 30 is too long and 10 is too short 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CécredSpaces Posted April 21 Share Posted April 21 I will never knock artists for releasing a lot of songs and feeding their fans. I wish my faves did that. However, they need to curate better which tracks make it to the "standard" version of the album. Save the bloat for deluxe releases. The standard has to be excellent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex21kw Posted April 21 Share Posted April 21 Albums should be enjoyable, and I like to listen to albums start to finish. That means 27 or 31 track albums will always have skips. I think 13-16 track albums are the best and allow you to focus on each song and discover each song more and more with every listen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
makeawish Posted April 21 Share Posted April 21 10, a few more if they're short song artists but albums shouldn't be much more than 40 minutes ideally. i'm absolutely refusing to engage with the taylor album beyond the 16 track version and it still drags a little twds the end like that. the idea of there being another hour beyond that is very 'nope', i'll think about it in a few months or something Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kiss It Better Posted April 21 Share Posted April 21 it doesn't matter how long an album is as long as it's great cowboy carter is 27 tracks with 1h19m long and it's cohesive and doesn't feel long to me meanwhile solar power is 12 tracks with 43m long and it's boring and feels dragging to me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Slayne Posted April 21 Share Posted April 21 (edited) 30-tracks is more commercially viable in streaming era but yes, quality does suffer and those albums are incredibly bloated and full of filler (yes, this applies to Cowboy Carter too). 10-14 tracks seems to be the ideal length for albums to serve back to back quality without feeling bloated and repetitive. Edited April 21 by John Slayne Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raphy23 Posted April 21 Share Posted April 21 16 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trent W Posted April 25 Share Posted April 25 I had to cut Cowboy Carter and TTPD into 8-10 track playlists I honestly don't have the time to stream 27-31 long track albums and they are my faves There are some tracks that I moderately love and have to leave out because my music time is limited and don't want to hear only one artist. Also with the amount of releases lately it's getting too overcrowded What do you think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladiator Posted April 25 Share Posted April 25 (edited) My sweet spot for albums is around 17 tracks. I want a runtime of 45-60 minutes. Ellie Goulding usually delivers the perfect length LP for me. Cowboy Carter I can listen to from beginning to end without a single issue. For Tortured Poets, because of how different both sides are, I listen to one side or another exclusively. Edited April 25 by Gladiator Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bloody Willy Posted April 25 Share Posted April 25 12 tracks is the ideal number imo 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sonny Posted April 25 Share Posted April 25 I don't hate them, but it takes a long time for me to get into them, especially if they're like really conceptual. 12-13 is perfect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TitanicSurvivor Posted April 25 Share Posted April 25 my favorite album ever is stripped, what do you think i think about 15+ track long albums? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
50thStateofMind Posted April 25 Share Posted April 25 only if they arenʻt good otherwise I do prefer a concise album. CC is one of the few LONG albums I can listen to front to back. Where it gets tricky is time - I can usually only listen during commutes, which is 40-45mins a day. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SLUTTVFTV Posted April 25 Share Posted April 25 i enjoy more music of course, but i can't bring myself to listen to an album longer than 16 tracks/1 hour, unless I'm playing a record Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cruel Summer Posted April 25 Share Posted April 25 Not at all - if I like the music, then the more we get the better. For the most part I wish all my favorite artists would expand their ideas and give us both more tracks and longer tracks. The one exception would be a concept album where the artist says everything they need to say with like ten tracks. In those cases, I'm fine with how short they are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScorpiosGroove Posted April 25 Share Posted April 25 no, people just have fried attention spans. most people can't even get through a movie anymore without whipping out their phones as long as the material is good and serves a purpose, concept, story etc it could be +50 tracks for all i care. if there's a lot of filler a 12-14 track album would be preferable of course. i'll always take long albums where you can cut the songs you don't like over albums that feel too short/not fleshed out enough 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Princess Aurora Posted April 25 Share Posted April 25 Nope Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Illuminati Posted April 25 Share Posted April 25 (edited) As a fan I always *want* as much content from my faves as I can get. But in reality there's very few long albums that I have enjoyed thoroughly, so I suppose yes. I loved Renaissance and Midnights but listening to their follow ups in full length is pretty much impossible Lana is not immune to it either, I think Lust For Life would be a good album (despite what people say) but it drags on for too long and I always skip through the middle tracks. The perfect album flows well from start to finish and stays catchy throughout imo, if an artist can do it with a long project without drowning out the highlights that's amazing Edited April 25 by Illuminati Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts