This is brilliant, Damon; I love it when you apply the sharp distinctions which mind searches for to pop culture. The examples of films or novels that run on too long are probably just as prevalent as they are in music (though books have the saving grace of having to have a physical manifestation, meaning weight and shipping costs come into play, so that probably obliges at least some brakes to be applied sometime, even though--as my wife, a longtime bookseller, will rant about at length--book editing is mostly dead as well). I would only add one wrinkle to your analysis: what about the artists who are very, very fiercely curatorial in regards to particular parts of songs...but for the rest will just throw in any old riff to get to the 3 (or more) minutes the parameters of the genre demand? I'm thinking primarily of Paul McCartney here, an artist who, all the way up to his most recent releases, has shown a vicious willingness to hammer on certain chord changes or melodies, leaving all sorts of alternative versions on the cutting room floor, but then once he gets that one bit to sound like what's in his head, is content to let any kind of filler round out the song. Hence you get Egypt Station with 16 tracks, every one of which includes something brilliant, but all except a few of which really needed some more polishing before seeing the light of day.
It's definitely true that as information delivery systems of all kinds improve, the edit becomes more important since we all can't consume everything. One concerning aspect of this is how algorithms and other predictive technologies are being deployed help determine what materials are presented to us. Since these technologies work by extrapolating off of our previous choices, they tend to offer us more of what we know, leaving less space for radical departures and real breakthroughs. As a small example, I grew up as a rock fan and listened to rock music almost exclusively until I heard Dave Brubeck's "Take Five" in a bookstore and bought the record, which introduced me to jazz. That never would have happened if the algo was endlessly serving up bands that sounded like Led Zeppelin because it knew I liked that.
Great comments. Possibly the most important lesson my dissertation advisor taught me was to avoid notebook dumps: you need to curate, to figure out what's most important.
Ted Gioia points out that there are AI song companies that have produced more songs in the past few months than have been produced in the entirety of human history beforehand. If all we're looking for is quantity, we're well served by that. From human artists we need quality - and that comes from editing, not writing.
I sometimes think of the monolithic churches of Ethiopia as an artistic example: you start with a big pile of bare plain rock and then cut out everything that's not a church until all that's left is a church. You make great work through subtraction.
Ryan Adams used to be like this. He still may be, I don’t really follow him anymore. He released so many albums back in the 1999-2010 or so period it seemed to dilute the quality. Most had some great songs, some had almost all great songs (Cold Roses, a double album; or Gold, before that); but there was a lot of filler that diluted the catalog, IMO.
I also felt Radiohead’s Kid A and Amnesiac would’ve worked better as a single, longer album with just a couple songs edited out.
The space constraints of the formative rock n roll era probably had a lot more to do with the quality, pacing and overall experience of many classic albums than I probably realized at the time.
Record labels also preferred a year or more to pass between releases. This is why Prince had his dispute with Warner Bros. in the 90s. He had a famed “vault” of music and wanted to release more than one record each year (or release double/triple records), but Warner Bros. wouldn’t let him. His first non-WB album was appropriately titled Emancipation and was a triple disc. Of course, with streaming the business model has changed for the labels.
First, I think Damon should write as lengthy a piece as he damn well pleases.
Also, would any of the Springsteen fans who now are enjoying any of those hundreds of songs that didn't make the cut when he released The River, or whatever, say "Boy, I'm glad Bruce held this stuff up, instead of releasing it when it was timely?" A bit of a rhetorical question, but that's how people are. They're consumers, not art critics. Look at how something like The Beatles Chronicles -- which had almost nothing new musically, clearly nothing comparable to their great work - sold in the millions?
What is too much? Is your enjoyment of Elvis' best work diminished by the knowledge that he released so much that was deplorable? [Didn't someone put out an LP collection of awful stuff like "Do the Clam" under the title "Elvis' Greatest S**t"?] I suppose there are such discriminating people, but I would suggest they are in the minority.
What do you think is going to happen when the --purportedly huge -- Prince vaults get opened? They will be greeted with enormous enthusiasm, and not merely because he died while he was still in a creative phase. If they were his masterpieces, I suppose we would have heard them already, but sometimes, all you really want is a good hamburger. Hamburgers are still very popular.
Taylor Swift is just letting the free market take care of the problem. You be the one to tell her fans that they are getting "dumped" on. I dare you.
This is brilliant, Damon; I love it when you apply the sharp distinctions which mind searches for to pop culture. The examples of films or novels that run on too long are probably just as prevalent as they are in music (though books have the saving grace of having to have a physical manifestation, meaning weight and shipping costs come into play, so that probably obliges at least some brakes to be applied sometime, even though--as my wife, a longtime bookseller, will rant about at length--book editing is mostly dead as well). I would only add one wrinkle to your analysis: what about the artists who are very, very fiercely curatorial in regards to particular parts of songs...but for the rest will just throw in any old riff to get to the 3 (or more) minutes the parameters of the genre demand? I'm thinking primarily of Paul McCartney here, an artist who, all the way up to his most recent releases, has shown a vicious willingness to hammer on certain chord changes or melodies, leaving all sorts of alternative versions on the cutting room floor, but then once he gets that one bit to sound like what's in his head, is content to let any kind of filler round out the song. Hence you get Egypt Station with 16 tracks, every one of which includes something brilliant, but all except a few of which really needed some more polishing before seeing the light of day.
Arghhhh...!!!! Where can I hide myself from this teeny-bopper!!?
O tempora, O mores!
It's definitely true that as information delivery systems of all kinds improve, the edit becomes more important since we all can't consume everything. One concerning aspect of this is how algorithms and other predictive technologies are being deployed help determine what materials are presented to us. Since these technologies work by extrapolating off of our previous choices, they tend to offer us more of what we know, leaving less space for radical departures and real breakthroughs. As a small example, I grew up as a rock fan and listened to rock music almost exclusively until I heard Dave Brubeck's "Take Five" in a bookstore and bought the record, which introduced me to jazz. That never would have happened if the algo was endlessly serving up bands that sounded like Led Zeppelin because it knew I liked that.
Great comments. Possibly the most important lesson my dissertation advisor taught me was to avoid notebook dumps: you need to curate, to figure out what's most important.
Ted Gioia points out that there are AI song companies that have produced more songs in the past few months than have been produced in the entirety of human history beforehand. If all we're looking for is quantity, we're well served by that. From human artists we need quality - and that comes from editing, not writing.
I sometimes think of the monolithic churches of Ethiopia as an artistic example: you start with a big pile of bare plain rock and then cut out everything that's not a church until all that's left is a church. You make great work through subtraction.
Ryan Adams used to be like this. He still may be, I don’t really follow him anymore. He released so many albums back in the 1999-2010 or so period it seemed to dilute the quality. Most had some great songs, some had almost all great songs (Cold Roses, a double album; or Gold, before that); but there was a lot of filler that diluted the catalog, IMO.
I also felt Radiohead’s Kid A and Amnesiac would’ve worked better as a single, longer album with just a couple songs edited out.
The space constraints of the formative rock n roll era probably had a lot more to do with the quality, pacing and overall experience of many classic albums than I probably realized at the time.
Record labels also preferred a year or more to pass between releases. This is why Prince had his dispute with Warner Bros. in the 90s. He had a famed “vault” of music and wanted to release more than one record each year (or release double/triple records), but Warner Bros. wouldn’t let him. His first non-WB album was appropriately titled Emancipation and was a triple disc. Of course, with streaming the business model has changed for the labels.
First, I think Damon should write as lengthy a piece as he damn well pleases.
Also, would any of the Springsteen fans who now are enjoying any of those hundreds of songs that didn't make the cut when he released The River, or whatever, say "Boy, I'm glad Bruce held this stuff up, instead of releasing it when it was timely?" A bit of a rhetorical question, but that's how people are. They're consumers, not art critics. Look at how something like The Beatles Chronicles -- which had almost nothing new musically, clearly nothing comparable to their great work - sold in the millions?
What is too much? Is your enjoyment of Elvis' best work diminished by the knowledge that he released so much that was deplorable? [Didn't someone put out an LP collection of awful stuff like "Do the Clam" under the title "Elvis' Greatest S**t"?] I suppose there are such discriminating people, but I would suggest they are in the minority.
What do you think is going to happen when the --purportedly huge -- Prince vaults get opened? They will be greeted with enormous enthusiasm, and not merely because he died while he was still in a creative phase. If they were his masterpieces, I suppose we would have heard them already, but sometimes, all you really want is a good hamburger. Hamburgers are still very popular.
Taylor Swift is just letting the free market take care of the problem. You be the one to tell her fans that they are getting "dumped" on. I dare you.