Anyone Else Dislike Most Long Songs?

Mrd00d · 08-18-2012, 02:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by VEGANGELICA

I don't feel I have to eat the whole box of chocolates or even a whole chocolate candy out of some sense of obligation to the chocolate-maker. If I do try a piece of chocolate that has cherry liquor (a long song), and I find that I don't like the first taste (the first 5 minutes), then I don't force myself to eat the whole thing. And even if I like the chocolate at first, I usually find that I start to get sick of it if the chocolate bar is too big (just like I can start to get tired of a long song).

My point, contrary to yours, is that we can respect a band's choice to make a song short or long, but that doesn't mean we have to listen to the whole song or even listen to the song at all.

My tendency to avoid or dislike longs songs has nothing to do with respect or lack thereof for the musicians. A song isn't the ruler of a single-party dictatorship where we are forced to give only adoration. Music is a democracy where we can express appreciation and criticism, and elect a different song when we want.

In fact, the musicians I know like constructive criticism (when solicited). Giving them my honest opinion, such as by telling them if I feel a song is too long, actually shows my respect for them.

More about this issue of respect: do you feel you have to listen to all of Robert Rich's two-and-a-half-hour song "Somnium" to show your respect for him? And, if so, given that he intended the song for people to listen to while dreaming/sleeping or while awake, do you feel have to listen to it with your full attention to show respect?

If you choose not to listen to this song in its entirety, I won't feel your choice means you lack disrespect for Robert Rich's creative process. Perhaps your choice simply means that you have other ways you want to spend your time:

Great analogy, but, just my two cents:

(to the bolded): At least once, right? I mean, at some point in your life you should be able to set aside the time to hear it. Maybe a road trip, maybe laying on the beach or in the park with headphones while sunbathing. Am I right? Am I wrong? If you feel the song deserves merit/attention but is too long to ever hear regularly, you know there's odd times where you could be multitasking that tune in. Perhaps.

Like a movie... did you walk out of the theater when you watched Titanic or Lord of the Rings because it was far over 2 hours? Do you skip chapters of good, long books to get to the better parts or the end? Music, movies, and books take time to consume. Just which tome is the question... that's where multitasking comes in..

Howard the Duck · 08-18-2012, 02:41 AM

i think you have to take into account the sub-genre

obviously, prog wouldn't be prog if it's less than 20 minutes

and i can't really take a hair metal song over 10 minutes

rostasi · 08-18-2012, 04:10 AM

Actually, Somnium is 10 seconds short of 7 hours in length, but carry on...

Paedantic Basterd · 08-18-2012, 08:10 AM

When I sit down to listen to music, I will always choose to listen to it in the album format. Whether it's an album of 55 minutes and 12 tracks, or 55 minutes and two tracks is ultimately irrelevant.

Interestingly, I do find that there is a psychological effect on me when the same amount of music is broken down into more recognizable chunks. A lengthy track seems to suggest a certain amount of repetition or dullness (which is nonsense, but I always find myself expecting an intense or droning experience when I see a 45 minute track.)

Key · 08-18-2012, 11:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by VEGANGELICA

The point in limiting yourself to the minutes or even hours of a song is to limit the time you spend listening to music while maximizing your pleasure.

I'll try to explain my viewpoint in other terms so that you might understand it better:

I view songs as being like assorted chocolates in a box. I remember that when I was a child, I used trial and error to learn which chocolates I liked. This led to a lot of discarded, half-eaten chocolates. Later, I made my selection after reading about the characteristics of the chocolates. I found I tended not to like cherry liquor fillings. (Similarly, when I read that a song is 15 minutes long, I tend not to want to listen to it.)

I don't feel I have to eat the whole box of chocolates or even a whole chocolate candy out of some sense of obligation to the chocolate-maker. If I do try a piece of chocolate that has cherry liquor (a long song), and I find that I don't like the first taste (the first 5 minutes), then I don't force myself to eat the whole thing. And even if I like the chocolate at first, I usually find that I start to get sick of it if the chocolate bar is too big (just like I can start to get tired of a long song).

My point, contrary to yours, is that we can respect a band's choice to make a song short or long, but that doesn't mean we have to listen to the whole song or even listen to the song at all.

My tendency to avoid or dislike longs songs has nothing to do with respect or lack thereof for the musicians. A song isn't the ruler of a single-party dictatorship where we are forced to give only adoration. Music is a democracy where we can express appreciation and criticism, and elect a different song when we want.

In fact, the musicians I know like constructive criticism (when solicited). Giving them my honest opinion, such as by telling them if I feel a song is too long, actually shows my respect for them.

More about this issue of respect: do you feel you have to listen to all of Robert Rich's two-and-a-half-hour song "Somnium" to show your respect for him? And, if so, given that he intended the song for people to listen to while dreaming/sleeping or while awake, do you feel have to listen to it with your full attention to show respect?

If you choose not to listen to this song in its entirety, I won't feel your choice means you lack disrespect for Robert Rich's creative process. Perhaps your choice simply means that you have other ways you want to spend your time:

Robert Rich -- Somnium (Part 1 of 4)
This song lasts over two hours. Are you going to listen to it all?

Robert Rich - Somnium Part I - 1 Of 4 (Somnium) - YouTube

To respond to the first bolded part in your response, I find pleasure in any sort of music whether it be short or long. In my experience, i've seen that if a song reaches to 10 to 12 minutes, it starts off a bit slow, but gradually gets better reaching an incredible climax. Again, just in my experience. So I disagree with you on finding pleasure in music by limiting my listening time.

Onto the second bolded point, we do agree partly on something. I get that you don't have to listen to the entire song to make a good opinion on it, but I find it beneficial to give the whole song at least a trial run just to see how it sounds the first time, regardless of the length. I don't know if you mentioned in your post but I feel like you did, do you limit yourself before listening to a song? Or do you look at the time of the song after giving the music a trial listen? I'm hoping you lean more towards the second question because any song by any artists at least (and i'm sure you can agree) deserves a fair listen. Even if you don't want to listen to the whole album, that's fine. However, not listening to a whole song strictly based on the time without even knowing what the rest of the song sounds like is a case of bad listening in my honest opinion.

If I may add, I don't find your listening style or your style of discarding music any worse than I would find my own. I don't want you to think i'm attacking your points either, it's a bit of debate if anything regardless of how it comes by. Even with your post though, I still don't get why one must limit themselves with music. As you say, it is strictly democratic and you have the free will to listen to whatever you like. However, there has to be a trial session somewhere, though I feel like you probably already know that just by the looks on how you listen to music today.

Trollheart · 08-18-2012, 11:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wisdom

I think I confused John Cage with some gravelly-voiced singer-songwriter. Although I doubt I'd like Cage.

I like much of Pink Floyd's material from The Wall to the end (although The Final Cut is mediocre). Some of those songs run slightly long and to me drag a bit, but.... I don't think Gilmour-era material was intentionally long like a psychedelic jam.

Nick Cave perhaps?

Trollheart · 08-18-2012, 11:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by VEGANGELICA

If you say it makes no difference to you whether a song lasts 1 minute, 10 minutes, 1 hour, 1 day, or 100 years, I will think you are exaggerating your indifference.

Who's exaggerating now? And please stop putting words in my mouth. I never mentioned anything further than a song of 2 hours, which, to be fair, if I enjoyed it and had the time, I would listen to. 100 years? Well, unless I'm a vampire and can live forever... er... never mind. You didn't hear that from me. What? Is that the sun on the horizon I see? Excuse me....

sopsych · 08-18-2012, 11:30 AM

Quote:

We agree yet again, wisdom.

Following up on a comment you made earlier, I also feel that lengthening a short song I like will not make me like the song more, and in fact would probably decrease my appreciation of it.

Below is an example of a very short song that I love (in a genre I think you perhaps hate) that I feel would be less appealing if longer.

I love Behemoth's cover of Morbid Angel's "Day of Suffering" because this 2'10" song sounds to me like rage and defiance feel. I would like the song much less if it were stretched out to ten minutes, because when I feel rage it is a short burst of emotion, rather than a long, drawn-out one. Hearing ten minutes of rage would get very old and tiring to me and wouldn't feel like rage as I experience it, since rage to me is a burst of seething malevolence that rushes quickly through me and then dies down quickly (as reason prevails...usually ). But for those two minutes that it lasts...it's quite a rush.

I hate that song (for the scream-singing).

But VEGANGELICA's point is one of the best I've ever seen on this forum: linking song length to natural/preferred expression of emotion. Like why rageful songs often are short bursts, while most sad songs last from maybe 3 to 6 minutes and build more slowly. Maybe happy people feel that way for long periods, but I don't (unless I just 'won' something) and extended club mixes do not reflect my emotional state and therefore feel forced and irritating (though there are things about the style that bug me). I like music for getting me safely into moods that feel real and then go away so that I can focus elsewhere. I usually don't want 'easy listening' that relaxes me, which I suppose is what some people want from long songs.

Key · 08-18-2012, 11:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wisdom

I usually don't want 'easy listening' that relaxes me, which I suppose is what some people want from long songs.

Not really. Prog is usually 15 to 20 minutes long, and I wouldn't call this:

easy listening.

However, this could be considered easy listening.

**Janszoon** · 08-18-2012, 11:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wisdom

I hate that song (for the scream-singing).

But VEGANGELICA's point is one of the best I've ever seen on this forum: linking song length to natural/preferred expression of emotion. Like why rageful songs often are short bursts, while most sad songs last from maybe 3 to 6 minutes and build more slowly. Maybe happy people feel that way for long periods, but I don't (unless I just 'won' something) and extended club mixes do not reflect my emotional state and therefore feel forced and irritating (though there are things about the style that bug me). I like music for getting me safely into moods that feel real and then go away so that I can focus elsewhere. I usually don't want 'easy listening' that relaxes me, which I suppose is what some people want from long songs.

I can't speak for everyone, but I'd say the majority of really long songs I listen to are loud, heavy music, not "relaxing" music.

08-18-2012, 04:10 AM	#93 (permalink)
rostasi . Join Date: Aug 2012 Posts: 4,007	*Actually, Somnium* is 10 seconds short of 7 hours in length, but carry on...**

08-18-2012, 08:10 AM	#94 (permalink)
Paedantic Basterd Music Addict Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 5,184	When I sit down to listen to music, I will always choose to listen to it in the album format. Whether it's an album of 55 minutes and 12 tracks, or 55 minutes and two tracks is ultimately irrelevant. Interestingly, I do find that there is a psychological effect on me when the same amount of music is broken down into more recognizable chunks. A lengthy track seems to suggest a certain amount of repetition or dullness (which is nonsense, but I always find myself expecting an intense or droning experience when I see a 45 minute track.)