Are DT albums too long?

[Ħ]

The past four albums have breached the 70 minute mark. I rarely listen to DT album-wise anymore, because honestly I get burnt out. DT writes intense songs, but once you lose that adrenaline rush, the excitement dies down fast.


I'd love to see a shorter album for DT12. 60 minutes, max, and it would be perfect. Even an EP would be nice.


What do you all think?

[SeRoX]

Definitely opposite. I even think I want them make longer albums. DT is one the bands I can listen the album from the begining to the end, track by track. So I don't want this magic go away.

[Tomislav95]

Definitely opposite. I even think I want them make longer albums. DT is one the bands I can listen the album from the begining to the end, track by track. So I don't want this magic go away.

[theseoafs]

It goes either way depending on my mood. On the one hand, DT's albums are pretty impossible to digest in one sitting, which is a bummer considering they're an album-based band. However, I'm also really thankful that they put out as much music as they can at one time, given how much time it takes for them to release an album.

[KevShmev]

It goes either way depending on my mood. On the one hand, DT's albums are pretty impossible to digest in one sitting, which is a bummer considering they're an album-based band. However, I'm also really thankful that they put out as much music as they can at one time, given how much time it takes for them to release an album.

Eh?  They usually release one every other year, which, when you consider that their CDs are usually 70-79 minutes long, is the equivalent of the 70s bands that released a 35-40 minute album every year. 

[rumborak]

Yeah. I sometimes miss the "musical trash bin" in their songwriting.

rumborak

[theseoafs]

It goes either way depending on my mood. On the one hand, DT's albums are pretty impossible to digest in one sitting, which is a bummer considering they're an album-based band. However, I'm also really thankful that they put out as much music as they can at one time, given how much time it takes for them to release an album.

Eh?  They usually release one every other year, which, when you consider that their CDs are usually 70-79 minutes long, is the equivalent of the 70s bands that released a 35-40 minute album every year.

Yeah, that's what I'm saying. Although 70's-length albums would be more digestible (and probably better), as it stands they get out an album every 2 years and that just wouldn't be enough DT to hold me over for that long.

[Adami]

Albums are fine length. Songs are too long however. ADTOE was a decent step in the right direction with that. But still, I think DT is at the point of their career where they don't need to have huge long instrumental sections all over the place anymore. We get it. Time to move on.

[KevShmev]

Albums are fine length. Songs are too long however. ADTOE was a decent step in the right direction with that. But still, I think DT is at the point of their career where they don't need to have huge long instrumental sections all over the place anymore. We get it. Time to move on.

Agreed.  Shorter, concise instrumental sections are the way to go, and I am glad that there were quite a few of those on ADTOE.  Bridges in the Sky is easily a song they could have gone overboard with that instrumental section, but the fact that they kept it so short makes the song better.

[BlobVanDam]

No way would I want their albums shorter. For me DT have a very high hit-rate for good music, so I want all the music they can give, plus even the two year wait feels like forever.
Their songs are typically so long, that if they wrote shorter albums, it would likely only be a handful of songs, which I don't like, or they'd be writing shorter songs, which I don't think is necessary or preferable.

And since my favourite DT album is the one that wouldn't even fit on one CD, I really have to object to this idea.

[DebraKadabra]

Not at all.  I kind of agree with SeRoX about longer albums, but only as long as there's quality tuneage on them.

[SomeoneLikeHim]

No way would I want their albums shorter. For me DT have a very high hit-rate for good music, so I want all the music they can give, plus even the two year wait feels like forever.
Their songs are typically so long, that if they wrote shorter albums, it would likely only be a handful of songs, which I don't like, or they'd be writing shorter songs, which I don't think is necessary or preferable.

This. I want to hear as much music as possible.

[BlackInk]

I like that they put as much music as they can on each album.

I would like an EP for their next release, that would be cool. But then they'd have to release something else rather soon afterwards.

[?]

I think the long albums can be justified since there's always a 2-year gap between the albums. However, it could be a good idea to make a shorter album and release the rest of the material on an EP like Porcupine Tree did with Fear of a Blank Planet.

[YtseJamittaja]

Definitely opposite. I even think I want them make longer albums. DT is one the bands I can listen the album from the begining to the end, track by track. So I don't want this magic go away.

 

[hefdaddy42]

As long as they fit on one disc, they aren't too long.  I don't even know what that means.

[wolfking]

DT are acutally one of the only bands I can stand a 70+ minute album from.

[Kotowboy]

DT are acutally one of the only bands I can stand a 70+ minute album from.

Normally because the songs are constructed in a way that they don't feel long.

Also, I know DT puts out an album roughly every 2 years, but I usually feel let down if I wait 3+ years for an album and it's 30 mins.

When the next Tool album finally arrives - I can pretty much guarantee it will only contain 5 or 6 songs.

[Pols Voice]

The more music the better, as long as it's good quality. I don't understand complaints about long albums, because nobody's forcing you to listen to the whole album at once.

[lordxizor]

Given that there have been one or two songs on each of the last three albums that I wasn't terribly fond of, I'd say yes. Both BC&SL and SC could have been better paring down a lot of the tracks to shorter lengths as well, IMO.

[kirksnosehair]

Definitely opposite. I even think I want them make longer albums. DT is one the bands I can listen the album from the begining to the end, track by track. So I don't want this magic go away.

 

[iamtheeviltwin]

Not at all.

DT (and classical music CDs) spoiled me with their album length.  I actually feel pretty ripped off when I buy a CD and it's less than 60 minutes.  If I am going to plunk down $15 or so of my hard earned $$ I want as close to 80 minutes of music I can get.

[Tick]

Hell no!

[chrisbDTM]

i dont understand how an album can be too long. you aren't forced to listen to it all every time. and a band usually puts them out once every 2 years, so as much material as possible is good.

[bosk1]

No way would I want their albums shorter. For me DT have a very high hit-rate for good music, so I want all the music they can give, plus even the two year wait feels like forever.
Their songs are typically so long, that if they wrote shorter albums, it would likely only be a handful of songs, which I don't like, or they'd be writing shorter songs, which I don't think is necessary or preferable.

And since my favourite DT album is the one that wouldn't even fit on one CD, I really have to object to this idea.

This.

As long as they fit on one disc, they aren't too long.  I don't even know what that means.

And this.

i dont understand how an album can be too long. you aren't forced to listen to it all every time. and a band usually puts them out once every 2 years, so as much material as possible is good.

And this.

I don't even understand the reasoning behind such a question.

[Jarzombek]

They could be even longer! I can listen to DT for hours!

[Sir GuitarCozmo]

I actually would be more likely to listen to newer DT stuff, if it was a disc with more songs on it that were shorter.

[Scorpion]

Hell no! If the quality would be less than it is, then maybe, but I think that there was no track on any album since Systematic Chaos that didn't deserve it's record time, and no track from FII before that. As long as they hold that up, they should continue making 80 minute albums.

[N4Player]

Give me a double CD any day from DT. When I listen to them, it is a different experience than any other band. They leave me wanting more. Thanks to DT, a 6 minute song is too short and has me asking "That's all you got?"

[Tis BOOLsheet]

Lol sort of an odd question, but when I go to buy the albums and put them in I don't think "I wish they would give me less."

I don't listen to many DT albums straight through, but the only reason for that is because of songs like Build Me Up, not because the album is too long.

[Dublagent66]

The words "too long" don't apply to music.  It also works both ways.  If you like it, then it's not too long.  If you don't like it, then it's still not too long. 

[Another_Won]

This thread is blasphemy plain and simple.  I'd like a double album with one instumental song.

[Jaffa]

The poll results reflect my opinion quite well.

[ResultsMayVary]

Definitely opposite. I even think I want them make longer albums. DT is one the bands I can listen the album from the begining to the end, track by track. So I don't want this magic go away.

[MrBoom_shack-a-lack]

Well, i will keep it simple:

NO