Best Ever Albums

Re: What counts as an 'album' nowadays?

ForegroundNoise — Wed, 23 Oct 2019 13:14:08 GMT

Author: ForegroundNoise

Posted: 10/23/2019 17:14

PurpleHazel wrote:

I've also seen members post their best song lists in the notes for a whole chart and you could do that as well -- the chart itself could just be some of the longer EPs that are in the database

This is what I'm doing at the moment; detailing everything in a listening diary is a possible alternative though not half as accessible as the charts on this website.

PurpleHazel wrote:

Hope you'll stick around regardless.

What a lovely thing to hear! I guess the internet isn't all doom and gloom...

albummaster wrote:

I'm thinking of a way that EPs could be integrated without affecting the core functioning of the site (e.g. perhaps just allow them in custom charts - which didn't exist here a few years ago)

I was going to suggest just this! That way the overall charts would remain unaffected. Let me know how doable this is, I think this might be a good compromise.

As for the concern about singles: having dedicated lists on this site that rank the highest rated tracks of each decade still provide a decent avenue for people who want to categorise their favourite songs. Non-album singles that are also people's favourites I tend to find are a bit of a rarity.

Re: What counts as an 'album' nowadays?

albummaster — Wed, 23 Oct 2019 09:22:55 GMT

Author: albummaster

Posted: 10/23/2019 13:22

PurpleHazel wrote:

One problem is there's no standardization of EPs -- some are short album length, others are extremely short -- the artists and labels can call almost anything they want to an EP.

You're far from alone about wanting EPs included. Others have definitely voiced that wish. Hope you'll stick around regardless.

I think that's the crux of the issue, but I do recognise that some people really want to include EPs here and I wouldn't want that to be the main reason people stop visiting. I'm thinking of a way that EPs could be integrated without affecting the core functioning of the site (e.g. perhaps just allow them in custom charts - which didn't exist here a few years ago), but coming back to the first sentence again, that really is the showstopper. Unless there was some kind of lower limit (track count/length etc) which would stop singles being listed, it creates a back door that could water down the essence of BEA.

Re: What counts as an 'album' nowadays?

PurpleHazel — Wed, 23 Oct 2019 05:01:21 GMT

Author: PurpleHazel

Posted: 10/23/2019 09:01

ForegroundNoise wrote:

I know this topic has gone cold for a little while but...

Nothing wrong with you finding an older thread to post in rather than creating a new redundant one.

Quote:

With the 2010s ending, I wanted to collate a list alongside my favourite albums of the decade with my favourite EPs

There is a workaround for individual songs, but it wouldn't work with most EPs: you can add albums that contain the songs you want to include to your chart and then in the notes that appear above the albums enter the song's title.

The only option for EPs I can think of is starting your own Music Diary thread in the Music Diaries subforum and just make a list of them in the first post. You could also insert images under the titles, if you were willing to devote the effort, and create your own rudimentary chart. I realize this wouldn't be completely satisfactory, but maybe better than nothing. It obviously wouldn't be "alongside" your album charts. I've also seen members post their best song lists in the notes for a whole chart and you could do that as well -- the chart itself could just be some of the longer EPs that are in the database. One member here maintains lists of best films and visual artworks in the Music Diaries subforum.

I get your point, but comparing this site to RYM isn't completely fair because on RYM you can list songs, EPs and movies.

Given the work involved and the other issues albummaster delineated, unfortunately I don't think EPs under the time/track limits will be included in the database in the near future. One problem is there's no standardization of EPs -- some are short album length, others are extremely short -- the artists and labels can call almost anything they want to an EP.

You're far from alone about wanting EPs included. Others have definitely voiced that wish. Hope you'll stick around regardless.

Re: What counts as an 'album' nowadays?

albummaster — Tue, 22 Oct 2019 14:28:13 GMT

Author: albummaster

Posted: 10/22/2019 18:28

An album is determined based on the number of tracks/length of the material. Whatever the length of a release is (and the definition varies between US and UK etc), the length is the determining factor and BEA doesn't really differentiate between EPs and albums because all releases on BEA are also long enough to be classified as 'albums' (regardless of whether an artist calls a release an 'EP' or not); so whether a shorter-length album should also be known as an 'EP' seems quite arbitrary unless there is a clear guideline that can help distinguish these.

I personally wouldn't be against adding the ability to flag up EPs if there was clear guidance, but keeping the site true to its core 'album' concept is important (to me at least) as it holds together the whole site. I accept the argument that adding EPs would be useful for a lot of people and obviously want the site to be as inclusive and as useful as possible, but to achieve this, we'd need to think of a way of combining EPs without affecting the current functioning of the site. However, if EPs were added the argument would then be why not include singles (or individual tracks) as well, and this would pose a greater problem with the way things are at the moment, and this is one of the main balancing factors when pondering this.

Re: What counts as an 'album' nowadays?

ForegroundNoise — Mon, 21 Oct 2019 04:54:27 GMT

Author: ForegroundNoise

Posted: 10/21/2019 08:54

I know this topic has gone cold for a little while but...

With the 2010s ending, I wanted to collate a list alongside my favourite albums of the decade with my favourite EPs (**I tend to differentiate these as full-length release and short release, with my cut off being 30 minutes, see the above posts for justification**).

Now I understand that this site wants to celebrate the 'album' as an art format, and I respect that decision entirely; the last thing we want to see is lists clogged with singles of songs that have already seen release on albums or compilations. But...

Since the definition of 'album' as designated by artistic intent is not one that this site follows (some EPs count as 'albums' according to BEA's rules, others not) I feel the assimilation of EPs into the site is something that it still struggles with. It's clear that this assimilation can be done; sites such as Album Of The Year and Rate Your Music have managed to do this effectively.

While there is nowhere for me to keep a record of some my favourite EPs this feels like a problem that is driving me away from the site, which is something I'd obviously like to keep as very much a last resort.

In a similar vein to the above two sites that I have mentioned, I would be happy to keep things between albums and EPs as entirely separate if albummaster thought that was necessary, with EPs getting a separate identification and existing in ranked charts that were entirely separate to the album ones. I understand that the site is going through a major overhaul at the moment, and this would entail another massive amount of data moderation so I understand if something like this wouldn't be immediately possible.

This is just my suggestion, but I am open to the suggestions of others that I have seen voiced in the above thread. At the end of the day, I don't mean to be so reductive but the sentiment "good music is good music" really does ring true on a community site like this one. We're all here (hopefully!) to share music we love with other like-minded people with the end goal of showing them something which they might otherwise not have discovered themselves. Restricting what that music entails along the lines of an arbitrary numerical cut off point seems a little rash to me. If I am in the minority in voicing these opinions I also respect that too! - maybe I am beating a dead horse and should just get used to the idea that some great music will inevitably slip through BEA's cracks.

FN xx

Re: What counts as an 'album' nowadays?

Rockdrigo — Sun, 17 Mar 2019 13:19:54 GMT

Author: Rockdrigo

Posted: 03/17/2019 17:19

Kool Keith Sweat wrote:

We're categorizing music based in gender. We're not critiquing music based on gender. Lrn 2 think critically.

I’m critiquing how you feel insulted that I consider length-managing a valid music-related topic, yet feel comfortable bringing up a totally unrelated one (gender) to a music conversation. Lrn 2 read m8.

Kool Keith Sweat wrote:

[Wouldn’t it be] the museum's folly to put such a silly frame around the Mona Lisa? According to you, the third scenario is only "half a statement." I use frame instead of canvas (or time for musicians, like you said) because you are explicitly not concerned with what musicians do with their time but rather that they fill some frame that you think is a proper size, like a 40-minute release, the rock album format.

This painting comparison is getting out of hand. There is not a format for paints with a distinguishable track record at showing the best the art form has to offer, as I believe there is for recorded music.

I do care about many other aspects, you are just supposing otherwise because one of those variables makes you uncomfortable.

Kool Keith Sweat wrote:

- It's what most people grow up listening to, so entire cultures have a bias towards the normality of a ~40 minute chunk of music.
- You're right, we're not in the '70s anymore, which is exactly why musicians aren't bound by the limits of relict physical media but only the expectations left behind (e.g. 40 minutes).
- The popular canon is almost entirely 40 minute albums because of the limitations of the LP.
- A moment of introspection on whether you're listening to music for music or whether your listening for whether music is in a culturally inculcated frame might help.

It may be hard to believe but not everybody lives like in your country. Where I come from no one listens to albums. Nobody told me to like the album format, I made the choice to explore its world because it looked fun.

Kool Keith Sweat wrote:

[Autechre's is] finally realizing the freedom of the digital age. Classical and jazz lean towards compositions, which range from seconds to years. >80% of house and techno are singles, not LPs. There are performances that are never recorded. There is music that never ends. And music that never was. Some composers and musicians bend time and space like taffy. And what are you listening for? 40 minutes?

Doesn't it occurs you that I KNOW there are many more ways to make and listen to music than albums, yet I still find albums the most compelling one? I rather not eat whatever random shit artist decide to make-up trying to stand out. I have reasons to like what I like. I gave you some of them, yet you prefer to go off tangents.

You seem to have a fixation with the 40 minutes too, when it’s just a number I used as an example. I even said I can see how a 20 minute album could feel “complete” in my very first post, if you are even reading them. Seems you are just supposing things at this point, like:

Kool Keith Sweat wrote:

Your viewpoint is still skewed towards popular music (rock)

I didn’t say that. What I did say was that artists, regardless of genre, shift towards making albums, including independent ones that don’t need to oblige to any industry’s standards (just take a look at Bandcamp, ffs). The album format just ticks most people’s boxes because (maybe, just maybe) it’s a good, rounded format.

Clearly we will not see eye to eye, since what you find restrictive I find liberating. I didn’t even shit on the EP format, just stated why I feel it’s incomplete; yet you are cool with dismissing the format you don’t like as “entry level to the real shit”. I don’t assume everybody else is just ignorant, but you act like musicians and listeners are going to come to a similar conclusion to yours because yours is right.

(This next rant is veering off-topic, but anyways…)

Kool Keith Sweat wrote:

Also, this is always used whenever there's a disagreement. No one's here to pat you on the back for your utterances. If you don't want strong discourse then don't share strong opinions.

I don’t have problems with a strong discourse, if what you want to do is have an actual discussion and not sneak low punches every few lines to feel more secure about your opinion. You didn’t even say anything until I asked you to explain yourself. If you didn’t notice, I’m calling you out on your dickness aside from giving arguments, not instead.

It’s almost a joke at this point that the forum dwellers wonder how to attract more people while shooting down opinions that go against their cannon. If a user’s first post experience was getting it shun down on a sardonic tone as “naïve”, “boxed-in” or straight-up “shit” (by a moderator, no less), I doubt he would stay around for long.

I guess is good to know that I have to “take it like a man” if I ever dare to share an incorrect opinion on how to enjoy my hobby.

Re: What counts as an 'album' nowadays?

Anonymous — Fri, 15 Mar 2019 21:29:41 GMT

Author: Anonymous

Posted: 03/16/2019 01:29

Rockdrigo wrote:

What’s the “rock album format”?

The popularity of the 33 1/3 LP rose almost concurrently with the dominance of rock in popular music. It's where this assumption

Rockdrigo wrote:

40 minutes

comes from. The popular canon is almost entirely 40 minute albums because of the limitations of the LP. It's what most people grow up listening to, so entire cultures have a bias towards the normality of a ~40 minute chunk of music. A moment of introspection on whether you're listening to music for music or whether your listening for whether music is in a culturally inculcated frame might help.

Rockdrigo wrote:

We are not in the 70s anymore; most recording musicians, regardless of genre, want to create on album format out of their own volition.

You're right, we're not in the '70s anymore, which is exactly why musicians aren't bound by the limits of relict physical media but only the expectations left behind (e.g. 40 minutes). An excellent example that comes to mind is Autechre's release schedule the last few years - they are finally realizing the freedom of the digital age. And your viewpoint is still skewed towards popular music (rock). Classical and jazz lean towards compositions, which range from seconds to years. >80% of house and techno are singles, not LPs. There are performances that are never recorded. There is music that never ends. And music that never was. Some composers and musicians bend time and space like taffy. And what are you listening for? 40 minutes?

Imagine this. The Mona Lisa. Now imagine the Mona Lisa enlarged 2x. Now imagine the frame the museum put around the Mona Lisa enlarged 2x, but it surrounds the originally-sized Mona Lisa. I imagine the second doesn't seem so silly but the third one does. Would you critique the Mona Lisa in the third scenario any differently than the first? Wasn't it the museum's folly to put such a silly frame around the Mona Lisa? According to you, the third scenario is only "half a statement." I use frame instead of canvas (or time for musicians, like you said) because you are explicitly not concerned with what musicians do with their time but rather that they fill some frame that you think is a proper size, like a 40-minute release, the rock album format.

Rockdrigo wrote:

Glad to see the forums are as outsider-friendly as ever.

Also, this is always used whenever there's a disagreement. No one's here to pat you on the back for your utterances. If you don't want strong discourse then don't share strong opinions.

baystateoftheart wrote:

I'm pretty sure everyone in that thread is celebrating the music we're posting based on its own artistic merit.

Also, this. We're categorizing music based in gender. We're not critiquing music based on gender. Lrn 2 think critically.

Re: What counts as an 'album' nowadays?

DommeDamian — Fri, 15 Mar 2019 08:13:23 GMT

Author: DommeDamian

Posted: 03/15/2019 12:13

Rockdrigo wrote:

raadfactoryxny wrote:

EP:

3-8 tracks (no more no less)
+
15-39mins

Don't you think 39 minutes is too long for an EP? Last time I checked, the standard album was 40-45 minutes long, which implies you think almost half of what people consider to be an album not an album.

Maybe 15-35mins then, but it means that Eazy-E's It's On is an album

Re: What counts as an 'album' nowadays?

baystateoftheart — Thu, 14 Mar 2019 17:07:56 GMT

Author: baystateoftheart

Posted: 03/14/2019 21:07

Rockdrigo wrote:

It’s ironic, because you commented on the “Women's History Month” thread, which actually IS about celebrating music for non-musical reasons.

I'm pretty sure everyone in that thread is celebrating the music we're posting based on its own artistic merit.

Re: What counts as an 'album' nowadays?

Rockdrigo — Thu, 14 Mar 2019 15:48:02 GMT

Author: Rockdrigo

Posted: 03/14/2019 19:48

Kool Keith Sweat wrote:

It was just aggressive.

And your right, it is your opinion, which you can have, it's just a shit opinion.

Glad to see the forums are as outsider-friendly as ever.

Kool Keith Sweat wrote:

You're critiquing art based on extra-artistic qualities…

How is length not a quality to consider when talking about music? It's the canvas on which the work exists. Music lasts for a time, as paintings occupy a space. If not using your framework correctly is not a valid criticism, what is?

It’s ironic, because you commented on the “Women's History Month” thread, which actually IS about celebrating music for non-musical reasons.

Kool Keith Sweat wrote:

…your biases and preconceptions of what music (or, in your case, the rock album as a format)

What’s the “rock album format”? We are not in the 70s anymore; most recording musicians, regardless of genre, want to create on album format out of their own volition.

Kool Keith Sweat wrote:

A quadruple album can leave a lot to be desired when exploring the possibilities of its theme or whatever…

The “too long” discussion is a whole different beast, since it’s not about not living up to your potential but about overstaying your welcome. Since this is about EPs, I rather not go there.

Kool Keith Sweat wrote:

…ten minutes can be an impactful statement, and vice versa. […] I don't have the shit opinion that time is correlated to quality.

I did not say it works like that, I’m just stating you need a bare minimum time to convert me into thinking you did your best and not just rushed it out.

You can make a lot of great things in 10 minutes, but 10 minutes of genius seem a lot less impressive when the art form pulls-out 40 minutes of genius regularly.

Re: What counts as an 'album' nowadays?

baystateoftheart — Wed, 13 Mar 2019 20:12:55 GMT

Author: baystateoftheart

Posted: 03/14/2019 00:12

I'm with Chief and KKS here philosophically.

As to the suggestion of BEA having an EP category similar to compilations, I think that's a great idea, but only if it's applied based on clear and specific presentation/marketing of a release as an EP, and not based on its length.

I like the 5 track / 20 minute rule as a starting point, but I think there should be an addendum. If a shorter release is clearly and specifically presented/marketed as an EP or as an LP, AND is comprised of more than 50% newly-released recordings that do not appear on any studio LP, it should be permitted in the database. That would add richness to the BEA database without clogging it up with redundant releases.

Re: What counts as an 'album' nowadays?

Anonymous — Wed, 13 Mar 2019 19:28:50 GMT

Author: Anonymous

Posted: 03/13/2019 23:28

Rockdrigo wrote:

Would you mind explaining why, or you'll keep passive-aggressively attacking me for having a different opinion?

It was just aggressive.

And your right, it is your opinion, which you can have, it's just a shit opinion. You're critiquing art based on extra-artistic qualities, which doesn't speak to the quality of the art, but your biases and preconceptions of what music (or, in your case, the rock album as a format) should be. A quadruple album can leave a lot to be desired when exploring the possibilities of its theme or whatever, ten minutes can be an impactful statement, and vice versa. I wouldn't know until I listened to it because I don't have the shit opinion that time is correlated to quality.

Re: What counts as an 'album' nowadays?

Rockdrigo — Wed, 13 Mar 2019 11:20:50 GMT

Author: Rockdrigo

Posted: 03/13/2019 15:20

raadfactoryxny wrote:

EP:

3-8 tracks (no more no less)
+
15-39mins

Re: What counts as an 'album' nowadays?

Rockdrigo — Wed, 13 Mar 2019 11:09:55 GMT

Author: Rockdrigo

Posted: 03/13/2019 15:09

Kool Keith Sweat wrote:

This is one of the most boxed-in, naive opinions I've read in some time. Congrats

Would you mind explaining why, or you'll keep passive-aggressively attacking me for having a different opinion?

Tha1ChiefRocka wrote:

Why would time have anything to do with something being a "statement"? That's like saying the Mona Lisa is a bad painting because it's on a small panel.

If your canvas is small enough to not allow you to develop the idea you set for expressing, you have effectively found a painting that is "too small". I don't find Mona Lisa too small, as neither I do Pink Moon, even if both are just on the verge of me considering them to be so.

For you two, I'll explain how I see it. An album is a set of musical ideas explored to the max of their ambition, and we can agree that artists should give the most of themselves with every work. At one point, if your work space got too small, I don't see how you could pull up a deep enough exploration of the themes you set up for, and I happen to think that limit is the difference between an EP and an album. I don't want to listen to a limited work when I could be listening to a fully thought out one.

Re: What counts as an 'album' nowadays?

DommeDamian — Tue, 12 Mar 2019 05:48:40 GMT

Author: DommeDamian

Posted: 03/12/2019 09:48

My definition

Single:

1-2 tracks (no more no less)
+
<15 mins

EP:

3-8 tracks (no more no less)
+
15-39mins

Album:

9 tracks
/
>40 mins

Which means all of these are EPs at the end of the day:
Skeleton Tree - Nick Cave & The Bad Seeds
A Saucerful of Secrets - Pink Floyd
All of Kanye's 2018 releases
The King of Limbs - Radiohead
On The Beach - Neil Young
etc.

A lot of albums are close to being EP's like
Laughing Stock - Talk Talk
Led Zeppelin's first 5 albums
Wish You Were Here - Pink Floyd

Re: What counts as an 'album' nowadays?

Graeme2 — Sat, 12 Jan 2019 13:34:01 GMT

Author: Graeme2

Posted: 01/12/2019 18:34

sidneyfranklyn wrote:

I wanted to start a conversation thread on what makes a release 'full-length' or just an EP now that we are in an era where often release is limited to digital, and if this affects the way you review a release.

I understand back in the age of vinyl this wasn't even a sensible question, but with Kanye's spate of 20-minute releases this year, which are all being received by music critics as 'albums' and not EPs (Anthony Fantano has released a separate list for his favourite EPs of the year, with the number 1 spot going to Aphex Twin's Collapse, which is 10 minutes longer than any of Kanye's 'albums') I thought I'd raise the question of where we draw the line between album and EP, and indeed if this matters at all.

I remember reading a comment on the internet re. Kids See Ghosts that said "it's amazing that the only difference between an album and an EP now is what the artist says it is". Certainly artistic intent is important. However, I've found separating ranking and reviews for albums along these lines completely non-sensical: Daytona is an 'album' that clocks in at 21:08; am I to review it differently to the Signals, Calls & Marches EP which is only 20 seconds shorter? The same questions stands for the Slow Riot For New Zero Kanada EP and Pink Moon. What about the Gay? EP by 12 Rods, which is 38:04; should I review it with EPs even if it's far longer than certain 'albums'? To differentiate the two by whatever the artist themselves classifies it as seems completely arbitrary and unhelpful along these lines.

Another solution would be to just review everything together, but I feel silly trying to compare a 10 minute EP by someone to a 2 hour double album, any concurrent credentials for deciding which I like better don't cover both.

Personally, my solution is to designate everything below 30-minutes as a 'Short Release', and rank it separately (my Greatest Short Release chart is coming soon), I know this is no less arbitrary but I feel at least giving these things of similar lengths a better chance of competing with each other.

Thoughts BEA?

Other than pink moon, you can add seasons in the abyss and the Ramones debut to your list. They all feel like full albums like any other to me. I also think New Zero Kanada feels like an album too. I'm not fussed either way what people want to call stuff. I've got the godspeed ep on my overall. I don't think I have any other ep on any chart. Not many anyways.

Re: What counts as an 'album' nowadays?

RoundTheBend — Sat, 12 Jan 2019 12:07:29 GMT

Author: RoundTheBend

Posted: 01/12/2019 17:07

Seems 1% strange we are equating antiquated terms for vinyl releases with digital releases. I mean I don't really care, just a thought. Some standards just stay standards. Also I feel like this mostly applies to "music industry" pop music and not really jazz or classical or whatever music doesn't fit the "norm" (oversimplifying it). Sure things have adapted over time, but you would never say, hey that single from Mozart is banging, if it's a 3 movement sonata.

Anyway: over simplified "music industry" music that I'd expect to carry on with outliers of course

1-3 tracks: Single
3-5 songs: EP
8-11 tracks: Standard Album
11-15 tracks: 90s CD (hehe)
Over 15/18 tracks: Double album

Of course there's outliers... like a 2 track double album or an EP with 120 three second tracks... but those very likely aren't "music industry" music.

I guess what I'm saying is the question of what is an album anymore really probably is addressing a growing number of "cool kids" "breaking boundaries" because they want to feel like they are doing something different but the standards have really been set and all this other stuff I find to be outliers and nothing special... I mean if 90% of artists were consistently breaking the norm, then we can really have this discussion in seriousness, which likely would mean the album as a format is dead, but I think we've established it's not and these are outliers (run on sentence anyone?)...

It'd be like asking what's a symphony in the romantic period because they were breaking norms... it's still a symphony... just because it has 5 movements instead of the traditional 4 or 2 30 minute movements or whatever...

I suppose it's exciting to think that maybe we are on the cusp of something totally revolutionary... but who knows.

Re: What counts as an 'album' nowadays?

Hayden — Sat, 12 Jan 2019 11:31:11 GMT

Author: Hayden

Posted: 01/12/2019 16:31

sidneyfranklyn wrote:

I know you also say "I'm not one to be fussy about it either" and I'm guessing it was with that sentiment that you assembled your 'Hors d'oevres' chart (one I am a massive fan of btw) since you seem to contradict this rule on that chart for the sake of including things that an artist has ostensibly designated an EP (e.g. Gay? and Slow Riot). For full disclosure I've changed my album criteria that I started this post with by lowering my album threshold to 25 minutes, and I wonder what EPs might creep into your overall chart if you were more stringent ... would Slow Riot be inducted for example since it's about the same length as your no.5 pick Pink Moon?

First, thanks 😄 I need to overhaul that chart soon... it's been awhile (definitely a handful of releases in the 80-100 range that probably shouldn't be there).

And my statement was based on what I would do if I put out a release. Over 24, album, under, EP. By no means am I going to run up to Pusha T and say "IT WAS AN EP!". Artists can do what they want. Truly, I don't find there's many EPs out there that clock in at over 30min, so it's not a big deal. Yet even ff somebody releases a 31-minute EP, I'm not going to fret 🤣 I just hope the music's good.

Being said, if you have a release clocking in a 65 minutes, it's not an EP anymore 🫢 That's pushing it.

If 2018 is anything to look back on for trends, I wouldn't be surprised with albums getting both longer and shorter. Upcoming, I feel we're going to have a lot of 20-30min albums, and a whole bunch of 90+ albums.

Re: What counts as an 'album' nowadays?

ForegroundNoise — Sat, 12 Jan 2019 04:17:44 GMT

Author: ForegroundNoise

Posted: 01/12/2019 09:17

Hayden wrote:

By personal beliefs (if I were to release something), I'd call it an EP if it was under 24 minutes (which comes from a 33 1/3 speed 10"'s max length), and an LP at anything over.

Re: What counts as an 'album' nowadays?

Tha1ChiefRocka — Thu, 3 Jan 2019 20:54:04 GMT

Author: Tha1ChiefRocka

Posted: 01/04/2019 01:54

Why would time have anything to do with something being a "statement"? That's like saying the Mona Lisa is a bad painting because it's on a small panel.