Instinctively liking long songs more than short songs

[Ħ]

DT's most hailed songs on DTF are their epics. A Change of Seasons, Six Degrees of Inner Turbulence, and Octavarium are often an individual's top 3 songs, and are usually at least in the top 10 or so. But this isn't true just of DT. Think of other popular bands on DTF. I'll just consider a few that I'm familiar with:


Porcupine Tree: Anesthetize and Arriving Somewhere But Not Here made top two in the survivor poll this year.
Rush: I always here about how great 2112, A Farewell to Kings, and Hemispheres are.
Symphony X: The Odyssey is the song that probably gets the most attention, and The Divine Wings of Tragedy is often highly regarded as well.
Pink Floyd: Dogs, Dogs, Dogs. Nuff said.
Neal Morse: The Creation and The Door are the songs I hear about the most.




On the flip side, many short songs are rarely regarded better than these longer songs. Examples from DT: Wait For Sleep, Through My Words, and Far From Heaven are often ranked last when doing a ranking of each of their respective albums.


I know this may not always be true. In the Presence of Enemies isn't a song that people really praise too much. Neither is Shine On You Crazy Diamond. But in general, it seems that there is a strong affinity toward liking longer songs over shorter songs.




Is this a problem? Does it lead to less appreciation for shorter songs? Do we sometimes write off shorter songs as "filler" or "too radio-friendly" before giving them a chance?

[glaurung]

This is a fansite for a progressive metal band. It's not like we're representing a very big portion of the population here.

Also,

Neither is Shine on You Crazy Diamond.

....the fuck? Shine on You Crazy Diamond is pretty widely regarded as one of Floyd's best songs and is certainly one of my all time favorite songs.

[KevShmev]

First off, "On" should be capitalized in Shine On Your Crazy Diamond, since it is proper to capitalize prepositions like On when they are part of a two word phrase like Shine On, Carry On (like Kansas' Carry On Wayward Son).  Okay, now that we've got that cleared up...

I think this is the chicken and egg scenario.  While I am sure some have the tendency to automatically go crazy over longer songs, most of the time those songs are the most popular because they are the best ones by the respective bands.

[Gorille85]

I prefer shorter songs in general.

[Ħ]

Maybe I haven't spent enough time in the PF thread, but I don't remembering hearing many people rave about Shine On.

[Dr. DTVT]

Longer songs have more time to develop and expand upon musical ideas, which is why I think I like a lot of longer songs.

[KevShmev]

Maybe I haven't spent enough time in the PF thread, but I don't remembering hearing many people rave about Shine On.

Shine On You Crazy Diamond is commonly talked about as being of Floyd's best songs, by both hardcore and casual fans.

[Ħ]

Maybe I haven't spent enough time in the PF thread, but I don't remembering hearing many people rave about Shine On.

Shine On You Crazy Diamond is commonly talked about as being of Floyd's best songs, by both hardcore and casual fans.

Oh okay. Well, chalk that one up in the "long songs that are considered the best" category.

[KevShmev]

No, we chalk that up to "one of the best songs being considered one of the best"; the length is irrelevant.

[Ħ]

No, we chalk that up to "one of the best songs being considered one of the best"; the length is irrelevant.

...but it might be, that's the thing

[KevShmev]

No, we chalk that up to "one of the best songs being considered one of the best"; the length is irrelevant.

...but it might be, that's the thing

If that were the case, then Atom Heart Mother, Pink Floyd's single longest track ever, would frequently be called one of their best songs, but it almost never is.

Same for Rush's The Fountain of Lamneth.

And Yes' The Ancient.

[glaurung]

No, we chalk that up to "one of the best songs being considered one of the best"; the length is irrelevant.

This.

I can think of a ton of long songs I think are crap right along with a ton of them that I love.

[Ħ]

So this is your position: there is no correlation between a song's length and how many people like it. Remember, we're not talking about your individual taste in music. You might be exempt from the rule. We're talking about the entire DTF population.

[lateralus88]

Here's the way I look at it. Longer songs give you more bang for your buck a lot of the time, and all within one song with a large amount of musical ideas strung into one. With many long songs, you get high quality song writing with flow. Albums with less than 10 songs and some longer songs seem to have less filler material. Not always the case, but I've noticed it. Shorter songs are quicker to put together as compared to a 13 minute track which (often times) is intricately put together and organized. At least, this is the way I look at it. It's not 100% for all long songs, prog bands, etc. but it's claimable. Though, there are a metric ton of short songs as well that are extremely well crafted in a similar light as longer tracks as well. Obviously.

Though, within the last year or so I've stopped flocking around albums because of their longer songs. I used to be like "oh shit 10 minutes I bet it's the best song". But it's not always the case. I generally end up just liking the song that pleases my pallet the most. Regardless of length.

[antigoon]

I actually feel the opposite way. A song being really long just means there's more of a chance of some part of it sucking.

[KevShmev]

So this is your position: there is no correlation between a song's length and how many people like it. Remember, we're not talking about your individual taste in music. You might be exempt from the rule. We're talking about the entire DTF population.

I never said that was my exact position.  You are trying to put words in my mouth.

[Ħ]

Sorry, should have said "is this your position?" My bad.

[Dr. DTVT]

With many long songs, you get high quality song writing with flow.  Shorter songs are quicker to put together as compared to a 13 minute track which (often times) is intricately put together and organized.

Two excellent points Lats.  Post truncated for emphasis.

[lateralus88]

I actually feel the opposite way. A song being really long just means there's more of a chance of some part of it sucking.

Hence there being the flip-side to it. But yes, that is completely plausible.

[PuffyPat]

I feel like when it comes to longer songs the artist tends to put more work into it because they don't have to cut down their ideas in order to fit it into a shorter time frame. Having more length to a song gives the writer the ability to give audience what they really want them to hear. Music always used to be long before radio, and the the only reason that music started getting shorter was because they had to cut down things to make it radio friendly. So I would have to say that a song being longer generally does lead to it being better. But it really does depend on who's writing it because if Ke$ha tried to write a 25 minute epic it would probably be the worst piece of shit ever conceived, but when talented musicians such as DT or PF or any of the bands that are favorites hear write longer songs they tend to be much better because these guys really know what they are doing.

[TioJorge]

With many long songs, you get high quality song writing with flow.  Shorter songs are quicker to put together as compared to a 13 minute track which (often times) is intricately put together and organized.

Two excellent points Lats.  Post truncated for emphasis.

This. Verily. I definitely think there's something to it, H; but I also think it may be in some cases a coincidence that the song just so happens to be long along with the above wonderful statements. I don't think anyone actually looks at a long song and automatically has some kind of affinity towards it, with or without hearing it, since we're talking strictly length. Although on that note I can't think of any ridiculously long songs that are outrightly shunned or hated either. Again, back up to the above points. The circle continues. Fuck circles. No. That's a glory hole.

Myself? I actually like the shorter songs you mentioned more than the longer ones mentioned with the exception of ACOS, which will forever be my saving grace and hailed as a life-changing epic (the only song worthy of being called an 'epic' in my book, thus far anyway). That goes doubly for more recent records, although the music I've been listening to recently hasn't been lengthy for the most part. Even OSI's Invisible Men, which is completely orgasmic, has fallen to my number 2 spot with For Nothing topping it; the former being 10 minutes long and the latter being 3...soo. Then again, I am almost always in the minority when it comes to musical tastes. Awkwardly so.

So yeah, there's something to it I think, though I wouldn't read too much into it. That said, I don't think it's a problem, nor does it detract from the shorter songs; though I can only speak for myself, and clearly my opinions are all black sheep. Which is okay, cause a black sheep could fuck a white sheep up any day. Animal racism FTW. But there's something to everything. Right? I'M NOT JUST LIVING A LIFE OF RANDOM COINCIDENCE, RIGHT!?

P.S. Though 'filler' is an interesting choice of words. I see that word being thrown around here all too often about songs that someone doesn't like that may just so happen to be short. Eh. There's a lot of that though. Like overrated and underrated. My opinions are underrated so fuck.
P.P.S. Through My Words > Everything mentioned. So beautiful. Like a freshly plucked strawberry straight from the rich, dense soil of California, and it just so happens that a fantastically sexy woman plucked it and nestled it between her thighs, saying to you as she does this, "Hey there shit-stick, fuck you" and then we fuck. Nyquil is an ass-kicker and a bully.

[orcus116]

I feel like when it comes to longer songs the artist tends to put more work into it because they don't have to cut down their ideas in order to fit it into a shorter time frame. Having more length to a song gives the writer the ability to give audience what they really want them to hear. Music always used to be long before radio, and the the only reason that music started getting shorter was because they had to cut down things to make it radio friendly. So I would have to say that a song being longer generally does lead to it being better. But it really does depend on who's writing it because if Ke$ha tried to write a 25 minute epic it would probably be the worst piece of shit ever conceived, but when talented musicians such as DT or PF or any of the bands that are favorites hear write longer songs they tend to be much better because these guys really know what they are doing.

Though without a filter a song can sometimes get too over indulgent or cumbersome for its own good. That's part of the reason I can't really get into Transatlantic because there are so many ideas being sewn together it becomes "enough already, seriously"after ten or so minutes. I actually tend to find that longer songs outside of the prog/prog metal genre seem to be more tightly composed and edited and more often worthy of their track length, which is somewhat ironic considering long, expressive songs one of prog's main draws.

[Fluffy Lothario]

I actually feel the opposite way. A song being really long just means there's more of a chance of some part of it sucking.

Pretty much this.

Or if not sucking, not being as much to my liking as the rest. Even if I still like it, it means there's a chunk of the song that I'm not as fond of, and detracts from the overall experience.

As Kev said, for every band mentioned, there are long songs of theirs that people aren't as smitten by. And I think for most, you could point out shorter songs that are very highly regarded alongside the epics.

I'm often quite lukewarm about long songs which are just multi-section collages where it's obvious that a bunch of shorter compositions have been cobbled together to create an "artifical" greater whole. I still enjoy them, but usually not to the same extent as long songs that feel more like a single composition, songs where there was clearly a central idea (or maybe several) which has been explored and expanded, and the song has more naturally or "honestly" been brought to a greater length.

[PuffyPat]

I feel like when it comes to longer songs the artist tends to put more work into it because they don't have to cut down their ideas in order to fit it into a shorter time frame. Having more length to a song gives the writer the ability to give audience what they really want them to hear. Music always used to be long before radio, and the the only reason that music started getting shorter was because they had to cut down things to make it radio friendly. So I would have to say that a song being longer generally does lead to it being better. But it really does depend on who's writing it because if Ke$ha tried to write a 25 minute epic it would probably be the worst piece of shit ever conceived, but when talented musicians such as DT or PF or any of the bands that are favorites hear write longer songs they tend to be much better because these guys really know what they are doing.

Though without a filter a song can sometimes get too over indulgent or cumbersome for its own good. That's part of the reason I can't really get into Transatlantic because there are so many ideas being sewn together it becomes "enough already, seriously"after ten or so minutes. I actually tend to find that longer songs outside of the prog/prog metal genre seem to be more tightly composed and edited and more often worthy of their track length, which is somewhat ironic considering long, expressive songs one of prog's main draws.

There is that too, but I feel like when an artist gets it tight with a long song it is probably going to better than most short songs regardless of how good they are because they don't leave me wanting more.

[Ravenheart]

I tend to be wary of long songs, as I think that can leave too much room for error--such as songs lingering on for too long or sloppily joining together unrelated ideas. At that point, it stops being creative and just becomes stupid.

[Jirpo]

For me it doesn't matter a songs length - I only listen to full albums generally and so it doesn't matter where the tracks are divided as long as it has good flow. You do generally tend to find more lengthy build ups (which I am a fan of) in albums with longer songs however.

[theseoafs]

Rush: A Farewell to Kings

Try again.

As for the topic -- I don't know. The thing about long songs is that a prog artist, recognizing the significance of a so-called "epic" in the prog world, will put a lot of work into making them special. So under that reasoning, epics are probably objectively better (whatever that means).

Also, I find that long songs can accomplish things that long songs just can't. I've heard many great short songs, but few can do what, for example, Arriving Somewhere But Not Here does -- that is, establishing an atmosphere, then taking a listener on a musical journey through multiple soundscapes.

But the song still has to be well-constructed. Extra length, especially if this extra length seems superfluous or repetitive to me, will not make up for lackluster music. (ITPOE, I'm looking at you.)

[Zantera]

A few years ago I was all about long songs, but now that has changed. I think it all comes down to the song, and if it's as good as it can be. There are many long songs where I feel like some sections are unnecessary, and in those cases it's bad, because the song should have been shorter.
Generally I think up to 10 minutes is a good length for a "long" song. There are longer songs that I dig, but generally I think ~10 minutes (or shorter) works the best.

[Ruba]

I don't care, is the song long or short. The thing that matters is, that it is a good song.

[jsem]

A good song is a good song. I don't have a preference for length - well, just not too short - I wanna enjoy it for longer than two minutes.

[BlobVanDam]

I don't instinctively prefer longer songs at all. I often prefer the shorter, more concise songwriting. Although technically DT's longest song is my favourite by them, but I'd say that's arguably because it feels like a compilation of well written shorter songs, than one big long song, and I find some of their other longer songs like ACOS to be overrated.

[kári]

This is a fansite for a progressive metal band. It's not like we're representing a very big portion of the population here.

Also,

Neither is Shine on You Crazy Diamond.

....the fuck? Shine on You Crazy Diamond is pretty widely regarded as one of Floyd's best songs and is certainly one of my all time favorite songs.

/thread

[ClairvoyantCat]

I think that often a song being longer is kind of seen by fans as a statement from the artist in some way.  As in, "I/we had so many ideas for this one that we made it 20 minutes long!"  At least, within the progressive communities (among others, probably) this seems to be the case.  I'm not saying it should be this way, or that it always is, but generally when I see the excitement buzz around a longer song more than any other, that's the kind of statement that the fans seem to be imagining that the artist is making. 

For the record, I prefer short songs.   

[skydivingninja]

I think, at least regarding DT fans, ever since ACoS/Metropolis/LtL, and the sheer quality of those songs, that any news of DT doing an epic sends the fans into a frenzy, and DT have proven that they can write great epics.  So it may be a combination of hype and, in general, good songwriting.  For other bands, especially prog bands, I think it just depends on the quality of the song.  Like Kev said, you hear lots of praise for 2112, but not the Fountain of Lamneth, for example.  Hype may get people excited about longer songs (regarding bands that are well-known for their longer songs) but if the song's bad, then its bad. 

Personally, it just depends on quality for me, regardless of length.  But long songs make me a bit more wary than they used to, just because, as Ravenhair said, there's so much potential to screw up somewhere and kill the whole thing. 

[ZKX-2099]

I was joking around with my brother one day acting like some prog snob joking about and I said something like "the longer the song is the better it is." Which really isn't true. But we started looking at the longer songs in our collections, and those were always ones that we favored most.

The longer songs aren't better because their length... but they are better.