What double albums should be a single and why?

Sean Trane wrote: BTW, I disagree with the person who mentionned SM's Third album. All tracks are very different but essential, but yeah, some could use some time trimmings, but never enough to achieve the one-disc duration

That was me. I recently revisited this album and was not impressed. So much repetition through these long songs make it a boring listen. Facelift and Slightly all the Time could have been removed to make it a single album.


SM's first two releases and Bundles are essential, not Third.

Nogbad_The_Bad wrote: Far be it for me to suggest artistic editing but the main culprit for me is The Wall which has about 1 albums worth of good material. Ummagumma could also have been just the live album.

Edited by moshkito - April 14 2020 at 07:05

Grumpyprogfan wrote: Sean Trane wrote: BTW, I disagree with the person who mentionned SM's Third album. All tracks are very different but essential, but yeah, some could use some time trimmings, but never enough to achieve the one-disc duration That was me. I recently revisited this album and was not impressed. So much repetition through these long songs make it a boring listen. Facelift and Slightly all the Time could have been removed to make it a single album. SM's first two releases and Bundles are essential, not Third.

Is not essential for you, I guess you must mean else it would be incredibly arrogant. Third is my favourite album by Soft Machine. "Slightly All the Time" was my original favourite off the album, then it became "Moon in June" and remains so. I often like repetition in music, so that's not a problem for me. To each his or her own tastes and sense of boring.

A lot of music many people like has not given me a good impression, but of course that doesn't mean that they are wrong to like it, that I am wrong to like it, or that their tastes are less or more sophisticated than mine.

I respect artists commonly, and if their vision was to create a double album, then I likely won't tell them they were wrong. There are cases where I might,or with the labels. I could easily conceive of such situations. That said, I'm sure there are albums that I'd have liked to shorten for my personal use, and to edit out noodly bits. I can;t think of any double albums that Id rather own as a single album, but I'm sure there would be many albums that I would rather be half the time or better yet I'd not have listened to any of it.

Edited by Logan - April 14 2020 at 10:28

^ I understood, it's forum discussion, and mostly that involves sharing our thoughts (and sometimes being called on to defend those thoughts). It bothers me nought if you like or dislike the album, nor should it.

Of course, as is said "de gustibus non est disputandum" (in matters of taste, there can be no disputes), which in a sense doesn't make it the best kind of topic for discussions.

It's hard to tell sometimes when people are just talking about their taste or making greater truth claims as sometimes people phrase subjective things as objectively true. For most, this doesn't mean that that they are making universal claims of truth, but with some they really are. I don't like Dream Theater, but I wouldn't claim it sucks. Others would make that claim, and not just as a subjective statement, but as truth writ large. It can be hard to tell as sometimes the nuances of language are lost.

I find myself not to be in agreement with this:

Grubert wrote: Too bad that Facelift is an incredible track, actually their best.

But again, if Gruber means that Facelift is the most enjoyable to him, then we will have no dispute. I can't say he's wrong even if he means objectively, but I am not convinced. I am wary to use terms such as best and worst commonly, but partially that's just a language difference, and disputing semantics I do find very boring.

Anyway, sorry for raising it, it's not a very interesting topic to discuss.

Edited by Logan - April 14 2020 at 14:31

Edited by The Anders - April 14 2020 at 19:47

^ That was basically my position, but I can think of various instances where I think the record producers would have had every right, not only legally, but ethically to refuse to produce a double album. If a record label is financing it is one thing, but also what if the artist decided to fill up half the album with pro Nazi, pro paedophilia etc. messages, the producers say no, and the artist says, "But it's my right to put such stuff, free speech, man". Well, I guess the artist can still try to put it out on his/her/zir own dime, but that might violate contracts. There are cases where both the financiers and the government might shut down that free speech.   Also, it might not always be up to the artist. Take a Misery-like scenario. The solo artist might meet a crazed producer who locks him/her/zir up, hobbles him/her/zir, and forces him/her/zir to make a double album, which is released to an unaware public. Or an artist is extorted into making a double album by a crazed fan. I agree that it shouldn't be our right generally to say, "You should have made that as a single album" even though we might disagree with one half of the double albums being one really long brown note, which causes everyone who listened to it around the world to lose control of their bowels, or it induces misophonia in all the listeners, or it has lyrics so dangerously funny that people laugh themselves to death. Think what might have happened had the Roger Waters album Amused to Death bean a double album. It might have been twice as lethal.

EDIT: On second thought having bothered to read write I wrote, we have that right and I don't support removing the right to express such an opinion, as does the artist generally have a right to make that double album, but that doesn't necessarily make it right. And we have the right to be wrong, as well as the wrong to be right presumably.

Edited by Logan - April 14 2020 at 21:32

BaldFriede wrote: All of you guys are wrong. The mere idea is ludicrous. It is entirely up to the artist what to put on an album. How would you feel if you made a double album and someone suggested you should leave out half of the stuff? You all have the wrong attitude. Learn from this Japanese author: “In my young days I praised the master whose pictures I liked, but as my judgment matured I praised myself for liking what the masters had chosen to have me like.” ― Kakuzō Okakura, The Book of Tea Okakura speaks of pictures, but the same attitude extends to all arts.

GoliathTMV wrote: Barbu wrote: Godspeed - Lift yr skinny THAT ALBUM IS JUST ABOUT PERFECT. What two songs would you cut?

I wouldn't cut songs but I would trim here and there (a good 20-25 minutes).

Now that I have had a year to digest the mess I made last year (A Swarm of Dish Rags), one disc would have been better, plus a significant shortening of that last track of an endless stream-of-consciousness rant.

moshkito wrote: Thank you ... I'm just totally aghast as to how someone can stand here and tell an artist how, when, they should go to the bathroom, or write anything.

Why should the artist have all the say? Why shouldn't the listener have some of the say? After all, the listener is also devoting resources to the music.