What makes an album excellent?

[73109]

I'm trying to take a poll here without really using a poll. I want to know, according to you guys, what makes a great album? The number of good songs or a few amount of shitty songs? Now, I know they tend to correlate, but let's take my made up story here.

Your favorite band decided to release a 12 CD mega album with 100 songs. After finding time to sit down and listen to the whole thing, you've come to the conclusion that 50 of the songs are absolutely awesome, and the other 50 suck. How do you feel about this album? Obviously, you feel like the second 50 don't need to be there, however, your favorite band just released more awesome songs in that one album then they most likely have in their career, or close to it. Is this album amazing because of the 50 songs that are amazing, mediocre because of the mix between good songs and bad, or shitty because of all the bad songs?

[Ravenheart]

With a hypothetical album like that with a 50:50 ratio of awesome:suck, I'd say that band was overambitious and should have considered cutting it down big-time. It's not much different from a standard album of 10 songs with 5 excellent songs and 5 horrible songs. In many cases, less is more, but it's also a bit more complex than that.

[jag66]

I'd be happy to get 5 amazing songs off a band I loved, although would prefer it if they'd spent more time say getting an 80:20 split and releasing any other material as B-sides.

[Ryzee]

What makes an album excellent?  Every track on it falls somewhere in the spectrum of good to amazing.  The hypothetical 100 song album from the op where half the songs are great and the other half suck I would consider mediocre.

[King Postwhore]

Quality throughout the whole album.

[Zantera]

Quality and Flow are the two keys.

[Kosmo]

Flow and variety are the most important factors for me.

[MetalManiac666]

Quality throughout the whole album.

[j]

An album that is 50% good and 50% shitty is not a good album.  It may have great songs on it, but if you're an "album" person, I can't imagine 50% being the benchmark of quality.

-J

[TheGreatPretender]

Personally, I think it takes more than just a bunch of good songs to make a good "album." If you have a bunch of good songs thrown together, it's a mixtape.

In a proper album, the order of songs has to be carefully thought out in order to take the listener on a journey. That's why I like concept albums like SFAM.

But it doesn't have to be a concept album. That's why my favorite Iron Maiden album is Seventh Son of a Seventh Son. The way they ordered the songs around, and even a little touch, like starting and ending the album with a same little verse (Seven deadly sins) could help "wrap" the album into a nice little package. And if you do that, then even a couple of filler songs here and there would still FIT into the album and still make it a great album.

It has to start strong, too. The first song should hype the listener up. Then it should be up and down between the energetic songs, and the ballads (or whatever equivalent of in any given genre). I had a whole formula for a good album once, I dunno where it went.

[jsem]

Quality throughout the whole album.

[SPNKr]

The use of melody, structure, flow, and emotion (any kind) on any album gets my attention very easily. People love to hear melody and simple rhythms, it's what makes music memorable.
Of course that's not all there is to it.

[kári]

Excellency, obviously.

[TheGreatPretender]

Regardless, it has to start strong. The first song has to get the energy right up and pump you up for 40 - 75 minutes of awesome music.

[setrataeso]

I consider a good album to follow the same basic criteria as a good movie, book, video game, TV show, or any other artistic medium would: It has to make you feel something.

As long as the listener feels something when they hear an album, and they are happy with feeling that, then the album has succeeded. Bonus points to the artist if the audience is feeling exactly what they had intended. It doesn't matter whether the album makes me feel happiness, rage, sadness, poignancy, thoughtfulness, or respect, if it makes me feel something that no other album has before, that album is considered to be a success.

I don't approve of this "good song vs. bad song" balderdash. If an album only has one "great" song, and 12 "bad" songs, but I really felt something while listening to it, the album is a success.

[LieLowTheWantedMan]

Excellency, obviously.

[73109]

I'm really surprised at a lot of the answers to be honest. To me, an album is good depending on how many good songs there are on it, plain and simple.

[setrataeso]

I'm really surprised at a lot of the answers to be honest. To me, an album is good depending on how many good songs there are on it, plain and simple.

I don't want to disagree with you, because how you judge an album is up to you. But don't you find that sort of a shallow way of looking at it? There's more to an album then just how many good songs there are. The whole consistency, the flow, the feel, the meaning, the lyrics, the process all play a part in it.

[ClairvoyantCat]

I'm really surprised at a lot of the answers to be honest. To me, an album is good depending on how many good songs there are on it, plain and simple.

I hate to use the two words that always avoid a definitive answer in music, but "it depends."  There are certainly some albums where the context of where the songs fit in with the album or and how they "flow" into each other isn't and shouldn't be an important part of how the album is heard.  And in this case, a "more is more" view on things is completely appropriate.  However, there are other albums that are more meant to be heard as a whole.  I'm not saying you "have" to hear them as a whole by any stretch of the imagination, but that was just their intention, and for those the context of the songs and their ability to work together as a cohesive whole can be considered more important than the quantity of quality songs on the album.  So yeah, it depends. 

[73109]

I don't want to disagree with you, because how you judge an album is up to you. But don't you find that sort of a shallow way of looking at it? There's more to an album then just how many good songs there are. The whole consistency, the flow, the feel, the meaning, the lyrics, the process all play a part in it.

I agree that those do play a massive part, and it is because of what you mentioned above that an album like Dark Side of the Moon is revered the way it is. That album has flow and a most of the songs are killer, but to me, at the end of the day, I'd rather a choppy album with 10 good songs than an album that flows well, but there is something missing in the songs. I brought this entire point up because, and I'll probably get some flack for it, of Metallica's Load. The album is way too long, but there are at least 10 songs on it that I consider excellent. So, to me, that album is amazing. Load has more good songs on it than any other Metallica release, to me anyway, and that is why I would rate it so highly, despite having lackluster songs.

Also, quoting you...

The whole consistency, the flow, the feel, the meaning, the lyrics, the process all play a part in it.

Take out the first 2, and you are getting key parts of good songs, seperate from the album as a whole. "Feel" "meaning" and "lyrics" are all aspects of a good song, that when fit together in album form, make a good album. All I do, is I deconstruct an album to its parts and if the parts are good, the album's good. I agree that some albums are better if listened to as a whole, but to me, while it makes it a cooler listening experience, I find something wrong if I can't just enjoy the listening experience of one song in the album. That being said, I'll completely contradict myself when I say sitting down and listening to The Wall is one of the most awesome experiences ever.

[setrataeso]

Hmm, I see where you're coming from, but I can't agree with you at all.

To me, it's not an equation. It's not as simple as finding the album with the most songs I like and saying "that's the best". Sometimes it is. But usually, I absorb the album as a whole.

I agree with your point about enjoying songs individually. I listen to my playlists on random just as often as I listen to albums all the way through. But, that's to enjoy the song, not to enjoy the album. And there's a difference. Take Images & Words for instance, I would say I adore Metropolis, Wait for Sleep, Surrounded, and Take the Time. I like Under a Glass Moon and Learning to Live. I'm ok with Another Day. And I dislike Pull Me Under. Looking at those stats, I only have half of the album in the "god-tier", if you will. Now, if we're using that ratings system, that is not that amazing. Scenes from a Memory and Six Degrees probably have more songs in the "god-tier" than Images & Words does for me. Yet, I&W is still my favourite album by DT. It flows really well. I find the feel and emotion behind that album is something that they have never and will never accomplish again, and the album just gives off a very pleasant vibe. But, I've listened to all of the songs individually and as part of the album, so I'm able to distinguish what is strong and weak in each song, and then distinguish what songs are strong and weak as part of the whole album.

Mild rambling. I don't even know if I got my point across, but I think you get the idea.

This makes me lament LPs. The choosing of song locations, and how the two sides would interact made for a much more interesting listening experience.

[73109]

I definitely see where you are coming from, and I too, am like that every so often. For example, Alice Cooper's Welcome to My Nightmare. By far my favorite concept album ever, and I'd only put a few of the songs in the "god tier," but comparing it to Brutal Planet, where I dig more of the songs, I'd still say WTMN is a better album. I don't know. I see it both ways, but tend to lean toward "the most songs with a high rating." What I'm kinda shocked about is my little hypothetical. Imagine DT released this. 50 ACOSs and 50...whatever you guys hate, and you guys are going to look down at the album? I mean, yeah, it's too long and half of it sucks, but 50 songs! 50! That is what surprised me.

[setrataeso]

Well 100 songs is too much for an album anyway.
But I see where you're coming from.

Well I dunno, look towards something like Octavarium. Pretty much everyone loves the song Octavarium, and there are some other well-liked songs on that album (Root, These Walls, Panic Attack). But then a lot of people really dislike the other songs (I Walk, The Answer, Never Enough). So, personally, I love Octavarium, for the same reasons I've mentioned before. Does the general forum love it? Sort of...for some the bad songs ruin the album, for others, the great songs help make it awesome. For people like me, the individual songs don't play as big a part as the album as a whole, which I think is great.

So, do you like Octavarium? An album that is, for all intents and purposes, half-great and half-not great?

[73109]

Don't ask me about the album. I'll get flack.

[setrataeso]

Don't ask me about the album. I'll get flack.

I'm asking you because I'm trying to prove a point.

[73109]

It is my least listened to with the exception of WDADU.

I dig The Anwer Lies Within, These Walls, I Walk Beside You, and Sacrificed Sons...that's it.

[setrataeso]

It is my least listened to with the exception of WDADU.

I dig The Anwer Lies Within, These Walls, I Walk Beside You, and Sacrificed Sons...that's it.

But where does it rank? Do you like the album?

[73109]

Not really and last (I haven't even given WDADU a shot)

[Portrucci]

Flow and variety are the most important factors for me.

This pretty much (I'd say quality is implied)

I honestly can't stomach those rock/metal albums with 10-12 four minute cookie-cutter songs. That's just a personal gripe really. I do think bands should try to mix up albums with a few different ideas. I like to be able to put on an album without looking at the tracks and be able to clearly distinguish one track from another. So my favourite albums tend to be ones which have that variety and memorability of songs. Flow is also something I feel comes with variation. It's quite hard for a thrash album to flow, but much easier for an ambient record. Is one better than the other? no, but I'm often drawn towards albums that do have that sort of liquid transition between songs...natural progressions of ideas and so forth.

[setrataeso]

Not really and last (I haven't even given WDADU a shot)

Alright, so is Octavarium an exception to your rule?

[73109]

Half the album is good. Not even THAT good. So no, it doesn't.

[setrataeso]

Half the album is good. Not even THAT good. So no, it doesn't.

Ok then.
Also, WTF MAN listen that fucking album dood!

[73109]

Eh. I haven't listened to DT in ages. I don't plan on it until September.

If I may ask...what the fuck were you trying to get at?!?!

[setrataeso]

Eh. I haven't listened to DT in ages. I don't plan on it until September.

If I may ask...what the fuck were you trying to get at?!?!

Well, you're opinion is weird.
If you were going the way I was expecting you to go, you would have said "derp. I like Octavarium, The Root of All Evil, These Walls, and Sacrificed Sons. The other songs are shitty. But I LOVES that albums dawg!"
At which point, I would have pointed out that that is effectively the same statement as your "derp. Does having half an album ACOS-level gold, and half an album You Not Me-level poop make it a bad album?"
However, you don't seem to have a very strong opinion on the album to begin with, so it was pretty much rendered moot.

[73109]

Yes, yes it was...and You Not Me is an awesome song, btw.