Best Ever Albums

Let's see...

Amirkhosro — Sun, 18 Jun 2017 13:59:22 GMT

Author: Amirkhosro

Posted: 06/18/2017 17:59

London Calling can improve a little bit from trimming
Physical Graffiti has the potential to be a really great single album
Tony Williams Emergency! is an all-time classic but I still don't mind skipping some of the spoken word parts
Bitches Brew and Live Evil and a lot of the electric Miles stuff
Life After Death could have been a massive masterpiece if it were a single album
Persian Surgery Dervishes is a masterpiece already but the second performance is the best one
Double Nickels on the Dime is perfect the way it is, just wanted to mention this. Although I would totally go for 45 more songs
Speakerboxxx/The Love Below could have been a masterpiece as a single album

That's all I can remember right now

Re: double album that would have made a better single

RoundTheBend — Tue, 13 Jun 2017 00:09:54 GMT

Author: RoundTheBend

Posted: 06/13/2017 04:09

LordMark wrote:

I definitely agree about Reflektor. My ideal track listing is...

1. Reflektor
2. We Exist
3. Here Comes The Night Time
4. Normal Person
5. You Already Know
6. Joan of Arc
7. It's Never Over (Oh Orpheus)
8. Afterlife

This album would still be 47 minutes long.

Wow. I like reflector as is... But when you put it that way...

Re: double album that would have made a better single

Space-Dementia — Mon, 12 Jun 2017 23:33:24 GMT

Author: Space-Dementia

Posted: 06/13/2017 03:33

scoob73 wrote:

Nine Inch Nails : The Fragile

This is so true. I honestly think that if Trent Reznor took the last nine songs off The Fragile, it would easily be in my top 150. But with those last couple songs, it just gets really inconsistent.

Re: double album that would have made a better single

CA Dreamin — Mon, 12 Jun 2017 22:08:49 GMT

Author: CA Dreamin

Posted: 06/13/2017 02:08

Superunknown is usually regarded as a single album having been released on single CD in '94 clocking in at 70 minutes. Meanwhile, London Calling is usually regarded as a double album because it was released on two vinyl records in '79...yet it's five minutes shorter than Superunknown.

Superunknown would be a double album on vinyl. Take away 2-3 filler tracks and it's a better album and would fit on one vinyl record.

Kiss Me, Kiss Me, Kiss Me is another great example. I own it as one CD, but there is a song missing from it's double vinyl release, a song I don't personally like so I don't care anyway. I don't need "Hey You!" That song can go to hell. The album is better without it.

I enjoyed reading everyone's thoughts on what is, what isn't, and what could be classified as a double album. It seems with multiple musical formats over the years, the line between single and double album is blurred somewhere in the 60-75 minute range. Even so, most albums in that range could be trimmed a little bit and improve in my opinion. Anything over 75 minutes can lose a few songs and probably improve as a result.

Stadium Arcadium would be better as a single album with so many unnecessary tracks, but how many songs/minutes must be omitted before it has the single album label?

Here are a few other double albums that could lose some tracks and improve:

Physical Graffiti
Mellon Collie (however trimming that down to single album length would be tricky because so much of it is great, but two hours is still way too freaking long)
The Fragile
Exile on Main Street
The White Album
Sandinista
All Things Must Pass

Tommy and Quadrophenia are the only 75+ minute albums I can think of that are fine the way they are.

Re: double album that would have made a better single

LordMark — Mon, 12 Jun 2017 16:55:15 GMT

Author: LordMark

Posted: 06/12/2017 20:55

I definitely agree about Reflektor. My ideal track listing is...

1. Reflektor
2. We Exist
3. Here Comes The Night Time
4. Normal Person
5. You Already Know
6. Joan of Arc
7. It's Never Over (Oh Orpheus)
8. Afterlife

This album would still be 47 minutes long.

Re: double album that would have made a better single

paladisiac — Mon, 12 Jun 2017 16:04:35 GMT

Author: paladisiac

Posted: 06/12/2017 20:04

Thumbnail. Click to enlarge.

Emancipation by Prince

There was a brilliant album, and an excellent double album, in the excess.

Re: double album that would have made a better single

HoldenM — Mon, 12 Jun 2017 03:51:45 GMT

Author: HoldenM

Posted: 06/12/2017 07:51

LittleM1971 wrote:

stangetzaway wrote:

Little M your in the right ball park but during the vinyl era the industry standard for a double album was 65 minutes or over. Of that I'm pretty certain. The only anomaly was London Calling which clocked in at 64.59! Whats confusing now that is that since the comeback of vinyl albums much shorter in length are being released as doubles for no other reason I can see but to drain pockets. I think Currents was released as a double and it's barely 50 minutes long.

During the vinyl/cassette era majority of albums 45 mins or less to fit on a side of a cassette, or then over 65 minutes for the rare double album. Few albums between 45 and 65 minutes were released proportionately speaking as I have a feeling the more you squeezed on an a 33 inch disc there was some detrimental effect such as poorer sound quality but I'm not 100% sure.

On the other hand the double album Kiss Me, Kiss Me, Kiss Me lost a track so it could fit onto a single CD as the record company didn't want to issue it as a double CD. Ryan Adams wanted Gold to be a double album but the record company wanted it as a single disc due to costs but did run a limited bonus disc which should have been side 4. Ryan Adams was pretty unhappy about this apparently.

You know what, though? Almost every Ryan Adams album, even the amazing ones, are a little too long. In fact, answering the question here, I'd cut down Cold Roses down in half. Just take the best 9 or 10 songs, and you're set.

Re: double album that would have made a better single

bobbyb5 — Mon, 12 Jun 2017 01:39:45 GMT

Author: bobbyb5

Posted: 06/12/2017 05:39

bobbyb5 wrote:

sethmadsen wrote:

I think it really comes down to your personal aesthetic and what you value in your music.

I won't defend Radiohead, but for me Nirvana has a unique ability that I enjoy to be extremely emotionally explosive. I can't really think of a modern artist since The Doors to pull off that level of emotion (lyrically and musically). Maybe Jimi Hendrix did it as well. The rest just don't seem that genuine.

Yeah. Im not the kind of person who struggles to justify how much i love an album by reading "genius" or " real art" or even great talent into it. Im of the mind that its mostly LUCK thats responsible for good albums. Not that those things cant be true of an artist, they can be. But i think youre right. Its just your personal aesthetic. I judge any album simply by how pleasurable and enjoyable it is to me. Thats all. lol.

Re: double album that would have made a better single

bobbyb5 — Mon, 12 Jun 2017 01:28:35 GMT

Author: bobbyb5

Posted: 06/12/2017 05:28

sethmadsen wrote:

Re: double album that would have made a better single

RoundTheBend — Mon, 12 Jun 2017 01:07:10 GMT

Author: RoundTheBend

Posted: 06/12/2017 05:07

bobbyb5 wrote:

I know. The praise heaped upon Captain Beefheart and Frank Zappa was as baffling to me as the praise heaped upon Radiohead or Nirvana today. Its so overblown.

Re: double album that would have made a better single

bobbyb5 — Mon, 12 Jun 2017 00:55:49 GMT

Author: bobbyb5

Posted: 06/12/2017 04:55

sethmadsen wrote:

I have yet to really appreciate this as well. Maybe it'll click someday. For now I'll chock it up to, "you don't understand real art, do you?" - Andy Warhol is the only real artist.

I know. The praise heaped upon Captain Beefheart and Frank Zappa was as baffling to me as the praise heaped upon Radiohead or Nirvana today. Its so overblown.

Re: double album that would have made a better single

RoundTheBend — Mon, 12 Jun 2017 00:42:19 GMT

Author: RoundTheBend

Posted: 06/12/2017 04:42

stangetzaway wrote:

Double albums that'd make a good frisbee (or 2) Trout Mask Replica.

I have yet to really appreciate this as well. Maybe it'll click someday. For now I'll chock it up to, "you don't understand real art, do you?" - Andy Warhol is the only real artist.

Re: double album that would have made a better single

RoundTheBend — Mon, 12 Jun 2017 00:40:51 GMT

Author: RoundTheBend

Posted: 06/12/2017 04:40

All double albums should be released as a radio single.

Re: double album that would have made a better single

stangetzaway — Mon, 12 Jun 2017 00:13:56 GMT

Author: stangetzaway

Posted: 06/12/2017 04:13

Double albums that'd make a good frisbee (or 2) Trout Mask Replica.

Re: double album that would have made a better single

craola — Sun, 11 Jun 2017 23:56:33 GMT

Author: craola

Posted: 06/12/2017 03:56

double albums that would have made a better EP

the lamb lies down on bro-o-oadway

melon collie and the infinity sadface

Re: double album that would have made a better single

RoundTheBend — Sun, 11 Jun 2017 22:13:04 GMT

Author: RoundTheBend

Posted: 06/12/2017 02:13

jackbrown8786 wrote:

Every single double album ever. I don't listen to them b/c when I have enough time on my hands it's always better to just listen to 2 great single albums. Let It Bleed + Sticky Fingers > Exile On Main Street. Revolver + Abbey Road > The White Album. Dark Side Of The Moon + Wish You Were Here > The Wall. Highway 61 Revisited + The Freewheelin' Bob Dylan > Blonde On Blonde.

That being said, I wouldn't want any songs from those albums to vanish, but if there were just 2 single albums released in quick succession like The White Album pt 1 and The White Album pt 2, I'd listen to them way more often. I know I could just listen to half the album at a time but I don't like doing that.

I feel like listening to a double album is like listening to 2 regular LPs except you don't even get to choose the 2nd one, it's locked in every time. This probably sounds stupid, but really I don't think anyone can argue that it's just better to listen to Revolver and then have your choice of any album after that. Maybe you want more Beatles immediately after but also maybe you'll be in the mood for absolutely anything else.

No one else seems to have my problem. Maybe others don't have as much of a problem listening to just half an album. Or maybe others listen on digital formats and normally only listen to their fav songs anyway but I listen on a record player - there's no skipping around.

Part of me was exclaiming blasphemy and part of me was like, yeah, I totally agree.

Re: double album that would have made a better single

RoundTheBend — Sun, 11 Jun 2017 22:10:28 GMT

Author: RoundTheBend

Posted: 06/12/2017 02:10

lleon79 wrote:

Mellon Collie and the Infinite Sadness. I think there's waaaay too much filler in there. If it had been a single LP it would've been so much better in my opinion. Anyway, as it stands I like it. There are great songs here and there. But I'll never listen to it in its entirety ever again in my life.

I'd have to agree the first few times I listened to it... and then all that "filler" turned out to be more and more interesting. I was expecting Siamese Dream and the singles the whole time and turned out a whole new musical journey was waiting for me and I ignored it.

Probably still not THAT amazing. But as far as double albums go, it's a top 5 double album for me.

Re: double album that would have made a better single

jackbrown8786 — Sun, 11 Jun 2017 20:58:58 GMT

Author: jackbrown8786

Posted: 06/12/2017 00:58

Every single double album ever. I don't listen to them b/c when I have enough time on my hands it's always better to just listen to 2 great single albums. Let It Bleed + Sticky Fingers > Exile On Main Street. Revolver + Abbey Road > The White Album. Dark Side Of The Moon + Wish You Were Here > The Wall. Highway 61 Revisited + The Freewheelin' Bob Dylan > Blonde On Blonde.

That being said, I wouldn't want any songs from those albums to vanish, but if there were just 2 single albums released in quick succession like The White Album pt 1 and The White Album pt 2, I'd listen to them way more often. I know I could just listen to half the album at a time but I don't like doing that.

I feel like listening to a double album is like listening to 2 regular LPs except you don't even get to choose the 2nd one, it's locked in every time. This probably sounds stupid, but really I don't think anyone can argue that it's just better to listen to Revolver and then have your choice of any album after that. Maybe you want more Beatles immediately after but also maybe you'll be in the mood for absolutely anything else.

No one else seems to have my problem. Maybe others don't have as much of a problem listening to just half an album. Or maybe others listen on digital formats and normally only listen to their fav songs anyway but I listen on a record player - there's no skipping around.

Re: double album that would have made a better single

LittleM1971 — Sun, 11 Jun 2017 18:56:18 GMT

Author: LittleM1971

Posted: 06/11/2017 22:56

[quote="bobbyb5"]

LittleM1971 wrote:

Actually, in the 90s almost all albums were over an hour. In the vinyl era, most albums had 10 to 12 tracks. But with 90s and after CDs, this jumped to about 14 or 15 to make use of the larger capacity. People felt ripped off if an album was less than an hour. So when vinyl era albums were reissued on CD, they loaded them with bonus tracks, alternate versions, etc. to make them more desirable.

Nail on head...they were making use of a larger capacity rather than creating a traditional pre CD double album. But should we now start to view these albums over 60 minutes as doubles once again...after all they physically exist in double vinyl format so why not?

Re: double album that would have made a better single

LittleM1971 — Sun, 11 Jun 2017 17:41:32 GMT

Author: LittleM1971

Posted: 06/11/2017 21:41

stangetzaway wrote:

That's interesting, I didn't realise the standard was 65 mins and over for a double album and you're quite right mentioning London Calling as an anomaly to the rule as most doubles clock in at 70+ minutes. For sound quality you don't really want to be going over 27 minutes per side. I remember buying Blur's Modern Life Is Rubbish on vinyl and at close to 60 minutes it sounded really flat and you had to crank up the volume to get it up to normal levels for an LP. Even cheapo compilations such as 'Now that's what I call music' would tend to come in at under 30 minutes per side for this reason.

The arrival of the CD has certainly clouded what is a double and what isn't. Take The Cure's Disintegration as an example clocking in at around 71 minutes. Perfect for CD but the original single vinyl version had to lose a couple of tracks. Recent vinyl reissues of this album have correctly been issued as a double giving room for the two songs to be added so for me this album should be classed as a double LP.

On the other hand the double album Kiss Me, Kiss Me, Kiss Me lost a track so it could fit onto a single CD as the record company didn't want to issue it as a double CD. Ryan Adams wanted Gold to be a double album but the record company wanted it as a single disc due to costs but did run a limited bonus disc which should have been side 4. Ryan Adams was pretty unhappy about this apparently.

Then you have something like Spiritualized's debut Lazer Guided Melodies which was clearly imagined as a double album despite only being 61 minutes long. Even the CD was programmed so you could only flick between each side (1-4) rather than the individual tracks (1-12)

For me anything over 55 minutes in length should be issued in a double album format for sound quality purposes, but does that make it a true double album?

Anything less than 55 mins should sound fine as a single album and there really is no need for albums clocking in at less than 55 minutes to be issued as a double unless issued as a 2x45rpm pressing which can sound even better.