What if DT released a double album in 2 parts?

[TheGreatPretender]

I was just thinking. I've heard of a few artists doing this.

What if DT said they'd be releasing a double album, but they'd basically release the "First half" at one point in time, and then release the second half later on in the year? Basically, they'd be writing two albums in one session and then divide its release schedule.
Do you guys think this kind of thing is a smart marketing move? Would you be excited for something like this? How do you think it would affect their touring?

[chaossystem]

Do you mean like Yes, Metallica, and Guns"N'Roses have done?

[Randaran]

If it was like the combination of Deliverance and Damnation, that could be great. If it was like SDOIT, which feels more like one album that happens to be on two disks, then no, I would prefer it to be released as one entity.

[King Postwhore]

I would welcome it.  A different spin for DT.  That would be cool.

[SuperTaco]

I instantly thought of System Of A Down's Mesmerize and Hypnotize albums. Recorded at the same time and released several months apart.

If they actually did this, I'd be very excited though. DT are a band that I'd trust to make a quality double album (They did it great the first time). What this would really do is keep that "new album" flame burning a lot longer. Touring would probably be more extensive for the band, I imagine.

[Tom Bombadil]

Depends on if it's good or not...

Cool idea, but if it means they rush through the writing process and release sub-par music, then I wouldn't like it.

[fadetoblackdude7]

Completely against this idea. So many bands wanna release a double album, but it's the record labels that force them to release them 6 months apart to boost sales (Happened with System of a Down, Stone Sour, Thrice, etc.) I feel that it breaks the flow of the albums and I definitely prefer the "old fashioned way."

But I think if anyone has the power to resist it, it would be DT.

[Mosh]

If it was two different "shades" of DT like Opeth's Deliverance/Damnation, then yea that would be really cool. Especially if both albums were around 70 minutes of music. I wouldn't mind the 6 months apart either since I'd want to digest them one at a time.

[TheGreatPretender]

Completely against this idea. So many bands wanna release a double album, but it's the record labels that force them to release them 6 months apart to boost sales (Happened with System of a Down, Stone Sour, Thrice, etc.) I feel that it breaks the flow of the albums and I definitely prefer the "old fashioned way."

But I think if anyone has the power to resist it, it would be DT.

If it actually did boost sales for DT, then why oppose it?

And yes, I would think they'd kind of have the albums be a sort of a yin and yang to each other, taking either different musical tones, or just different in heaviness, or style, or something that distinguishes them from one another, but still gives them, maybe a tonal unity that makes them feel like two very different parts of a big whole.

[wolfking]

Stone Sour's House of Gold and Bones comes to mind to.

I'd definitely be up for it.  Mainly because the break between albums is a lot shorter than normal studio albums.

[Shadow Ninja 2.0]

I don't really have an opinion one way or the other. I guess if it's something they want to do, that's cool, if not, I'm cool with that too.

[TAC]

Do you mean like Yes, Metallica, and Guns"N'Roses have done?

The Illusion albums were released together.

[RaiseTheKnife]

Nah, its just gimmicky for the sake of a gimmick.  Why release them separately if the music is ready?  I can see why this has value in other media (Weinstein Company and "Kill Bill"?  AMC and "Breaking Bad") but do not see the appeal for an album.

[TheGreatPretender]

Nah, its just gimmicky for the sake of a gimmick.  Why release them separately if the music is ready?  I can see why this has value in other media (Weinstein Company and "Kill Bill"?  AMC and "Breaking Bad") but do not see the appeal for an album.

Well, like some people mentioned, to space out the releases a bit. I mean, 140 minutes of new DT music would be pretty hard to swallow all at once. Instead, you get a standard 70 minute album to enjoy, but then you get another 70 minute album a few months down the line, but still that same year. You've had time to process and enjoy Part 1, and can now listen to and enjoy Part 2.

Besides, who says the music would be ready? I mean, maybe they write the album, record and produce the songs for Disc 1, then while that gets released, go on a mini tour or something, then go back into the studio, take what they wrote for Disc 2, then record and produce that. That way, the creative process, the writing sessions are all done at once, so the hard part is done and they don't have to think about it, but then maybe they could take a different approach when mixing and mastering part 2 or something.

I think it could be cool.

[Mosh]

Also, this shouldn't be something that is supposed to be combined and listened to as one album. In my opinion, for this work properly both albums would have to be their own entities, with maybe some themes or musical ideas shared between the two albums but nothing more.

[RaiseTheKnife]

Nah, its just gimmicky for the sake of a gimmick.  Why release them separately if the music is ready?  I can see why this has value in other media (Weinstein Company and "Kill Bill"?  AMC and "Breaking Bad") but do not see the appeal for an album.

Well, like some people mentioned, to space out the releases a bit. I mean, 140 minutes of new DT music would be pretty hard to swallow all at once. Instead, you get a standard 70 minute album to enjoy, but then you get another 70 minute album a few months down the line, but still that same year. You've had time to process and enjoy Part 1, and can now listen to and enjoy Part 2.

Besides, who says the music would be ready? I mean, maybe they write the album, record and produce the songs for Disc 1, then while that gets released, go on a mini tour or something, then go back into the studio, take what they wrote for Disc 2, then record and produce that. That way, the creative process, the writing sessions are all done at once, so the hard part is done and they don't have to think about it, but then maybe they could take a different approach when mixing and mastering part 2 or something.

I think it could be cool.

I see what you're saying re giving 140 mins of music enough breathing room to be absorbed, but unless DT owns the studio, it would be ridiculously expensive and inconvenient to have a sabbatical in the middle of a recording session.  Any hope of making money would be lost in reserving the studio space for that extended time.  The alternative would be to take the risk that the studio is still available or find another facility that is adequate for the bands needs- then begin the process/setup anew.  The headache that would cause and costs involved do not seem to outweigh the benefit in my opinion.  But again it is just my opinion.

As things stand, we are quite lucky with the current output and flow of content DT has been delivering --  DT12 released in Sept, followed soon thereafter by the Holiday Album -- not a double album, but it certainly is generous.  Boston DVD next.

[Grizz]

Metropolis 3.5?

[BlobVanDam]

I think they should focus on writing one strong CD of music. Other albums like this such as Use Your Illusion and Load/Reload turned out very bloated and weak as double albums, despite having a lot of great tunes that could have made one strong album each.
Quality over quantity every time.

[Obfuscation]

Feel like this would lead to a greater chance of one of the albums have songs that feel like filler songs in order to have enough music to cover both albums. But if they were both good with enough good songs that the band was confident in, then yeah sure, why not.

[hefdaddy42]

I think they should focus on writing one strong CD of music. Other albums like this such as Use Your Illusion and Load/Reload turned out very bloated and weak as double albums, despite having a lot of great tunes that could have made one strong album each.
Quality over quantity every time.

This.  Any time this has happened, it's still resulted in about one album's worth of good music stretched across two albums with a ton of filler songs.

I mean, if they came up with two album's worth of music at one shot, then OK, but it seems like a pretty big divergence from their status quo, which I'm not sure they'd be up for.

[?]

I'd be ok with this if both albums/discs had a reasonable length (max 50 mins each) and if they were distinctly different from each other. Worst case scenario would be 140 minutes of homogenous basic DT material including a lot of filler - in that case I'd rather they picked the strongest songs to be recorded for a single disc and throw the rest away or save them for another release.

With regards to touring, I think they'd probably play one EU and US leg for each release instead of the usual two.

[mikeyd23]

I think they should focus on writing one strong CD of music. Other albums like this such as Use Your Illusion and Load/Reload turned out very bloated and weak as double albums, despite having a lot of great tunes that could have made one strong album each.
Quality over quantity every time.

This.  Any time this has happened, it's still resulted in about one album's worth of good music stretched across two albums with a ton of filler songs.

I mean, if they came up with two album's worth of music at one shot, then OK, but it seems like a pretty big divergence from their status quo, which I'm not sure they'd be up for.

Agreed.  I'm not against the concept, but the material would have to be high quality to make the idea work.  It seems like this sort of thing would need to be determined AFTER the music had been written, not BEFORE.  That way, the release schedule, marketing, etc... is designed around the strength of what actually matters, the music.  In contrast, putting the cart before the horse and developing this concept before the music has been created then forces the music to go to a place it may not naturally have gone.

[Kotowboy]

Just focus on one please.


When System Of A Down did it - it was their worst two albums.

[tiagodon]

It could work if it was a Concept Album.

[Shadow Ninja 2.0]

Just focus on one please.


When System Of A Down did it - it was their worst two albums.

But for Coheed and Cambria it was two of their best albums. I don't think it's the method that's problematic, if the music's good.

[tiagodon]

I think Use Your Illusion 1 & 2 (from Guns N´Roses) came up at the same time! GNR is the only band I know that put out 2 albums at once!

[The Dark Master]

I definitely wish they had done that for FII.  In fact, I have often felt that rather then release ACOS as an EP, they should have saved it, and then they could have put it on the second disc of FII in place of Metropolis 2 (I don't think they would have finished the 21 minute version of Metropolis 2 anyways; JP called it something like "the worst attempt at an epic song ever written."  Plus if they still had ACOS waiting in the wings, they probably would have given that song priority, thus still allowing Metropolis 2 to evolve into what it ultimately became)

Plenty of bands have done two part albums that were great:  Helloween (Keeper of the Seven Keys), Avantasia (The Metal Opera), WASP ( The Neon God), Stratovarious (Elements).  I think the resistance to the idea stems from the fact that most mainstream bands who attempted to do this sort of thing, like Metallica and GNR, did so poorly.  I personally love just about every thing DT has ever done, so there is no doubt in my mind that if they were ever to do a two part record, I would enjoy it.

[TAC]

I think Use Your Illusion 1 & 2 (from Guns N´Roses) came up at the same time! GNR is the only band I know that put out 2 albums at once!

Do you mean like Yes, Metallica, and Guns"N'Roses have done?

The Illusion albums were released together.

[PolarizeMe]

But for Coheed and Cambria it was two of their best albums. I don't think it's the method that's problematic, if the music's good.

Agreed. I also tend to think that if Steven Wilson released the two discs from Grace For Drowning separately, I'd still think most of us who like his music would still come to the conclusion that they're great albums. As he once said, he viewed them as two different listening experiences and advises listeners to listen to the two discs as such (I don't to be honest!  )

[PowerSlave]

Just focus on one please.


When System Of A Down did it - it was their worst two albums.

But for Coheed and Cambria it was two of their best albums. I don't think it's the method that's problematic, if the music's good.

I dunno. Everything after Gravity's Union felt like a let down. Everything before that was top-notch, though.

[aprilethereal]

If they did it the Opeth way and release them a few months apart, yes. If they did it the Wintersun way and never release the second part, no.
As others have said, it should come naturally. If they forced themselves to write two albums full of material instead, the result would be more likely to disappoint.

[tiagodon]

I think Use Your Illusion 1 & 2 (from Guns N´Roses) came up at the same time! GNR is the only band I know that put out 2 albums at once!

Do you mean like Yes, Metallica, and Guns"N'Roses have done?

The Illusion albums were released together.

By the way, Guns N´Roses is the coolest name ever. I don´t like the band but I love the name!

[wolfking]

Soilwork were pretty successful in realsing a very strong double CD without much filler at all.

[Nearmyth]

Feel like this would lead to a greater chance of one of the albums have songs that feel like filler songs in order to have enough music to cover both albums. But if they were both good with enough good songs that the band was confident in, then yeah sure, why not.

Yeah this pretty much.

For the sake of doing so, no. I mean bands don't often do two albums "for the sake of doing so" but if they could be made to the best of their ability and not have filler then that would be great of course. If they could do something like SDOIT, but two different albums, that would be really cool. Like two shorter albums. I'd personally prefer that over two 70+ minute albums.

[TheGreatPretender]

Cut songs from FII sessions aside, I can't think of a single DT album that has fillers. I feel like every song on every album has its place.