Question about album lengths
Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Progressive Music Lounges
Forum Name: Prog Bands, Artists and Genres Appreciation
Forum Description: Discuss specific prog bands and their members or a specific sub-genre
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=25751
Printed Date: November 30 2024 at 05:41
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Question about album lengths
Posted By: Gaston
Subject: Question about album lengths
Date Posted: July 05 2006 at 17:39
|
Some albums range from 40 minutes to 50 minutes. For instance, around
1972 Genesis albums went from 42 minutes to 50 minutes (Foxtrot et al).
I wasn't around in the 70s, were these songs the original songs and if
so can someone explain why some LPs were shorter in length than others?
I was under the impression that LPs were only able to pack about 22
minutes on each side. So I went and listened to aTotT today and I can't
find the middle point (would have to be around 25 minutes) but it's in
the middle of a song. I'm confused. How did Genesis have longer album
lengths? Gaston -------------  
It's the same guy. Great minds think alike. |
Replies:
Posted By: pepo
Date Posted: July 05 2006 at 19:30
| I had the same doubt and someone told me that actually the lp could harbor 1 hour of music (30 minutes each side). Genesis albums like wind and wuthering and and then they were three are over fifty min. |
Posted By: zappaholic
Date Posted: July 05 2006 at 21:23
|
You can fit more than 20 minutes on a side of vinyl - even more than 30 - but audio fidelity decreases as the groove density increases.
------------- "Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard." -- H.L. Mencken |
Posted By: chopper
Date Posted: July 06 2006 at 07:41
The middle point of ATOTT is after "Mad Man Moon", "Robbery" is the first track on side 2.
As someone else said, it is possible to cram more than 20 mins on one side of vinyl but the grooves are closer together and you're more likely to get groove damage, jumps and skips etc. "Selling England" is even longer than ATOTT at 53 minutes. I never had a problem with that album on vinyl, so maybe Genesis had some secret technique.
I think Elvis Costello's "Get Happy" was one extreme as he managed to cram around 20 tracks on it.
|
Gaston wrote:Posted By: Sean Trane
Date Posted: July 06 2006 at 08:00
|
During the late 60's early 70's , vinyls were 180 gr solid wax that could still be easily broken if dropped on the floor, and I have no memory of a vinyl 33 1/3 RPM disc being more than some 22 minutes before 69 (78 RPM only lasted some 10 minutes) As the first oil crisis hit the western world in 73, (vinyls were petrol derived) the records became much lighter and thinner (less matter used but also the reduced weight of the object for transport) came as a quick solution >> another cost-cutting that became evident was the gatefold albums became much rarer than before. The disc could now be bent easier had some kind of elasticity allowing them not breaking when dropping them on the floor (they could be scratched easier though). So the fabric of the disc changed and the groove containing the music (as well as the engraving technology) started evolving, also.
Another thing that allowed some discs to stock more minutes of music (I was shocked to see that Klaus Schulze Timewind album stocked up to 30 mins:side in 76) is the actual dynamics of the music. If you have many changes and a lot of frequencies present in your music, the groove had to be fairly wide, while a slowly changing calm (in terms of dynamics) meant that the groove could be narrower and therefore took that much less space in width allowing for a much onger groove >> hence Timewind's 59 minutes
One thing I am not sure though is whether the space between the groove successive layers actually diminished
------------- let's just stay above the moral melee prefer the sink to the gutter keep our sand-castle virtues content to be a doer as well as a thinker, prefer lifting our pen rather than un-sheath our sword |