Customer Discussions > Music forum

Does anyone play full albums anymore?


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 151-175 of 224 posts in this discussion
Posted on Dec 12, 2012 10:11:56 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Dec 12, 2012 10:12:58 PM PST
And the countless hours spent making those mixed tapes. You didn't want to run out of tape but neither did you want to leave too much at the end. If the last song you chose ran too long, you'd rewind the tape and choose a bit shorter song to end the side. And hitting the pause button at just the precise moment at the beginning and end of each song was another challenge. It may have been harder work making up mixes back then, but it was more interactive and definitely a lot more fun.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 12, 2012 11:26:08 PM PST
stevign says:
When making a compilation you had to add up the time of each song and figure out if the total would match the length of one side of the tape, not a fun job.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 12, 2012 11:26:19 PM PST
Hinch says:
When albums were two sides, one side was usually sixteen to twenty minutes long, sometimes a little more, making a total of about 45 minutes. Now with cds, an album can be up to eighty minutes. Maybe less was more. An artist had to pick the best of his material to go on the more limited time on an album.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 12, 2012 11:31:31 PM PST
Recently there have been more cds going back to the standard 10-12 tracks, unlike the 90s and early 2000s where everyone was filling up 70-80 minutes just because they could. And yes, there were too many songs that got released that wouldn't have been prior to the CD age. I find 45 minutes ideal for listening in one sitting.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 13, 2012 5:01:27 AM PST
Chazzzbo says:
Exile -

>>"One side of this tape may be of longer duration than the other to ensure album continuity"<<

Certainly beats the ugly propensity labels had for the fade out/fade in on 8-tracks with long songs...

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 13, 2012 7:12:13 AM PST
stevign says:
re: "Maybe less was more"

It probably was. If you recall, only a few "double-albums" really worked, the overwhelming majority of them had at the very most an album and a half worth of good stuff.

* By the way, were bands back in the late 60 & 70s mostly contracted to put out 1, or 2 albums a year, I can't remember?

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 13, 2012 7:25:23 AM PST
stevign says:
re: "Recently there have been more cds going back to the standard 10-12 tracks"

We use to pay somewhere between $3.98 and $4.98 for an album and got 45 minutes or so of music. Then CDs came out offering many more minutes of music but at a price of $13 to $16 bucks. That was a hard pill to swallow. Now we can chalk that up as inflation but if bands start reducing the amount of songs or minutes on a CD by half or by a third, I would definitely feel ripped off if they didn't lower the price accordingly.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 13, 2012 7:30:28 AM PST
The standard price from what I remember in the late 70s was 7 or 8 bucks for a record. CD prices have dropped substantially, especially now with the talk of phasing them out. You can find many titles fairly cheap.

Posted on Dec 13, 2012 7:49:28 AM PST
stevign says:
When I got into Jazz about 6 years ago, the majority of what I bought was remastered albums from the 50s and 60s. As you can imagine, one album (30 to 45 minutes) would only fill up half of a CD's space. Studios then had a decision to make; either leave it as-is or fill the remaining space with other songs. My complaint isn't with what has come to be called "filler", it's how they went about adding it.

Some studios would just tack some extra songs on the end of a CD and that would be that. That's fine with me, if the extra songs sucked, you could just stop the CD and take it off. What I REALLY hate is when they stick an "alternative take" in between each and every song. I mean come on, who wants to listen to every damn song twice in a row, even if it is a tad different? I've only seen a CD recorded that way a few times and hopefully they shot the moron who thought it would be a good idea.

* To see an example, use this link to view Satchmo Plays King Oliver:

http://www.allmusic.com/album/satchmo-plays-king-oliver-mw0000662236

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 13, 2012 8:51:20 AM PST
stevign says:
re: "The standard price from what I remember in the late 70s was 7 or 8 bucks for a record"

Not surprisingly, the cost went up. Nowadays I buy used CDs whenever and wherever I can, of course they have to be in excellent condition. I normally pay about 8 bucks for a good used CD. Also, there's a New & Used album and CD shop about 30 miles from me; they have a huge inventory. This saves shipping costs because I do have jobs that require me to travel to that town a lot.

http://www.everydaymusic.com/

Posted on Dec 13, 2012 10:24:14 AM PST
gusula says:
But then there were those double cassettes - 45 minutes a side, which actually totals more than the 78-80 minutes on a standard CD. Not long ago I bought one of my favorite cassettes of all time - Molly Hatchet's "Double Trouble Live" on CD. Instead of making it a double disc to accommodate all the music on the double cassette, they trimmed two songs to make it fit a single 78-minute CD. My two favorite songs, by the way. Grr....

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 13, 2012 10:28:31 AM PST
Skynyrds "One More From the Road" was like that as well until the deluxe edition. Fleetwood Mac's "Tusk" originally had an edited version of "Sara" on it to make it fit on one disc but now they use the full length version. If I'm not mistaken, somehow since its inception, the total time on a CD has increased from 74 or 75 minutes to about 79 now?

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 13, 2012 10:38:21 AM PST
stevign says:
re: "But then there were those double cassettes"

Really? I don't think I ever saw one of those.

re: "they trimmed two songs to make it fit a single 78-minute CD. My two favorite songs, by the way. Grr...."

That's just plain wrong. There's only one recording engineer who would do such a thing, and that's Cartman.

Posted on Dec 13, 2012 10:42:03 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Dec 13, 2012 10:42:59 AM PST
There were 90 minute cassettes (45 minutes each side), perfect for an album on each side...or a two record set..if the two records ran longer than the 75 minute CD time, to keep it at one CD they had to trim songs. "T For Texas" on "One More......." was trimmed off on the original CD.

Posted on Dec 13, 2012 11:10:35 AM PST
vivazappa says:
I had a double cassette of...drum roll please...Andrew Dice Clay!
Now why did I hafta go and tell everyone that?
I hope nobody thinks any less of me now than you already do because of that faux paw ;)

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 13, 2012 11:24:28 AM PST
stevign says:
re: "Now why did I hafta go and tell everyone that?"

Self-loathing? The need to do penance? A cry for help?

Posted on Dec 13, 2012 11:31:06 AM PST
vivazappa says:
It beats jumping!

Posted on Dec 13, 2012 11:31:46 AM PST
MyRidesHere says:
No,your still an awesome individual! But your faux paw was a faux pas.

Posted on Dec 13, 2012 11:33:44 AM PST
vivazappa says:
I can pronounce paw...but WTF is pas..it needs another s...pass...or a t...past...or a ahh forget it.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 13, 2012 11:40:58 AM PST
stevign says:
And if you jumped off a cliff we would most assuredly miss you. But if you "do" decide to jump, I suggest a curb.......with no traffic present.

Posted on Dec 13, 2012 11:57:24 AM PST
vivazappa says:
Good idea since:
"All of us do time in the gutter
Dreamers turn to look at the stars"

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 13, 2012 11:37:36 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Dec 13, 2012 11:44:23 PM PST
Hinch says:
Good point about double albums. Many cds are equal in length to 3 or 4 albums sides.

I'm not sure about being contracted to release a certain # of albums a year. It seems Elton John used to put out an album every six months. Some artists took a year or two for each album.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 13, 2012 11:41:27 PM PST
Hinch says:
The only Grateful Dead album I own is RECKONING. It was a double vinyl album. A song or 2 was left out to make it fit on a single cd.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 13, 2012 11:43:39 PM PST
Hinch says:
Some artists reissued albums with 2 on a cassette. I own one of Eagles. I believe it's ON THE BORDER and DESPERADO.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 14, 2012 6:27:54 AM PST
stevign says:
When artists are signed by a recording studio, they are definitely contracted to produce x-number of albums (or CDs) a year, be it one or two. I would be amazed if a studio allowed an artist or a band to slide for 2 years before producing an album, it's just not good business. Perhaps later in a "very successful" career when contract negotiations come around again a studio may have to in order to keep the famous artist/band around. Other than that, I think one album a year is the norm.
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


 

This discussion

Discussion in:  Music forum
Participants:  68
Total posts:  224
Initial post:  Dec 3, 2012
Latest post:  Dec 17, 2012

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 8 customers

Search Customer Discussions