Originally Posted by WaspStar

I know a lot of people who hate CDs if only for the reason that they make skipping songs so easy; it seems that there's a certain type of music fan who dismisses the shuffle function as pointless. They also tend to consider compilations not "true" albums, even when said comps include a wealth of non-album tracks.

While I can see where they're coming from, and certainly many albums operate best when listened to in sequence, I really believe that skipping tracks helps one to appreciate a given work. There are plenty albums (or album sides) that I love that I'd never have appreciated had I listened to the entire things all the way through; chalk it up to a faulty attention span or a skewered way of appreciating music, there are usually two or three songs that act as my gateway drug into a given album. No, those songs are, in fact, rarely the singles or the "big" songs.

It might seem foolish to say, but for me at least, this even applies to something like Tommy. I'm not interested in hearing "Tommy, can you hear me" or "see me, feel me" a thousand times each in the course of an hour. Annoying interludes that only function to advance the story and endlessly repeating phrases only distract from the great songs (Sally Simpson, We're Not Gonna Take It, Cousin Kevin) on that album.

This doesn't mean that I never listen to albums all the way through; in fact, the opposite is true. Still, if I'm not in the mood for a certain song, I don't hesitate to skip it.

I guess my position is that I'd rather have twelve great (but unrelated) songs than twelve medicore songs that fit together.

Obviously, there's no "right" or "wrong" here (as with most music related topics), just value judgments. Discuss...

Originally Posted by Roygbiv

But there are albums that ARE sacred, with a sequence of songs impossible to skip, like In The Aeroplane Over the Sea or Loveless.

Originally Posted by lucifer_sam

Guess we'll leave those distinctions up to you to decide what's sacred and what's not.