| We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Single Albums vs Double Albums; Which do you prefer? | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: May 30 2006, 10:47 PM (612 Views) | |
| Aqueronte | May 31 2006, 06:13 PM Post #16 |
|
Helen Wheels
|
It really depends on what album is to me. I enjoy listen to an album no matter if it's double or single as long as it's good. It can be just a fantastic double album, a true work of art like The Beatles or Tommy. Or anoher work of art like: The Village Green Preservation SOviety, Revolver or The Who By Numbers. |
| |
![]() |
|
| ihateguitarists | May 31 2006, 06:22 PM Post #17 |
![]()
v_v
|
Well, what really matters isn't the amount, but the quality. And how they are as a group. I mean, "The Beatles" is great and all, but (in my opinion) all 30 of those tracks couldn't amount to the 14 on "Revolver". I mean, "The Beatles" has a bunch of songs I don't really connect with, a bunch of songs that don't stand out to me, like "Wild Honey Pie", "The Continuing Story of Bungalow Bill", "Don't Pass Me By", and "Good Night" to name a few. A single album with 10 really amazing tracks is stronger than a double album with 10 really amazing tracks. EDIT: I moved this to the polls section. I didn't think it should be moved because it is a musical topic but "Who is Your Favorite Guitarist?", "Who's Your Favorite Keybaord Player?", "Great guitarists", " LED ZEPPELIN VS. CREAM", "Favorite Three-Piece Band", "Paul McCartney vs. John entwitlse", and many others were there, so I figured this fits there too. |
![]() |
|
| JeorgeMcStarkey | May 31 2006, 07:00 PM Post #18 |
![]()
-.-- -.-- --..
|
It doesn't matter anymore in our generation because we get whole discographies rather quickly, but back when albums were being released, fans wanted new material ASAP, so a double album would be superb in comparison to a single album, although you'd have to shell out the extra cash. I like the Red Hot Chili Peppers. They just released Stadium Arcadium, a double album, earlier this month. As a fan, I'm looking forward to getting it, but even as a fan, I'd still look forward to a single album. Here's another example. Say the Beatles didn't release anything from 1963 through 1969, but they still recorded all of the albums. Would you be satisfied if they released a fourteen of fifteen LP box set with all of the material in 1970, or evenly spaced out through seven years? I don't know. What I do know is that this post adds absolutely nothing to the discussion.
|
| Click? VH | |
![]() |
|
| ihateguitarists | May 31 2006, 10:34 PM Post #19 |
![]()
v_v
|
I'd rather them be released steadily over time. I wouldn't have the upfront money for a huge boxed-set! Not to mention, it'd be a lot of music to take in at once. |
![]() |
|
| beatlematt | Jun 1 2006, 05:36 AM Post #20 |
![]()
THE JANITOR
|
'ey. Where's your silly "Now playing......" notation? Take no offense, man. |
|
When she walks she moves so fine like a flamingo Crimson dress that clings so tight She's out of reach and out of sight
| |
![]() |
|
| OnlyMe | Jun 1 2006, 10:07 AM Post #21 |
|
!
|
It's the quality that counts, not the quantity. |
| http://www.last.fm/user/OnlyMe123lol | |
![]() |
|
| JeorgeMcStarkey | Jun 1 2006, 10:40 AM Post #22 |
![]()
-.-- -.-- --..
|
I don't put anything when I'm not playing anything. |
| Click? VH | |
![]() |
|
| RainInAPaperCup | Jun 6 2006, 05:50 PM Post #23 |
![]()
This Boy
|
Easy, single albums. It's less of a chore to listen to them. |
| |
![]() |
|
| PsychicEqualizer | Apr 14 2007, 10:19 PM Post #24 |
|
My Sweet Lord
|
Double Albums. You might discover great songs and you'll get it for the price of one. But the key word is might. |
| |
![]() |
|
| Woof Oink Baaa | Apr 15 2007, 04:24 PM Post #25 |
![]()
Now 100% more avant-garde than Ivan!
|
It depends! I would like to say double albums because Zeit is one and it is the greatest album of all time! But then again, you have marshmallow fluffy unicorn shit like Tommy and The Wall! Exclamation mark! |
| |
![]() |
|
| Kira | Apr 15 2007, 04:26 PM Post #26 |
![]()
Hate me, do it and do it again.
|
|
![]() The human whose name is written in this notebook shall die. | |
![]() |
|
| ZachAppleThrows | Apr 15 2007, 08:08 PM Post #27 |
|
Apple Scruffs
|
Tommy's not a double album, you silly geese. |
![]() |
|
| JeorgeMcStarkey | Apr 15 2007, 08:12 PM Post #28 |
![]()
-.-- -.-- --..
|
Wrong. |
| Click? VH | |
![]() |
|
| ZachAppleThrows | Apr 15 2007, 08:13 PM Post #29 |
|
Apple Scruffs
|
I never owned no two disc copy of Tommy. I r confused now. |
![]() |
|
| chodus | Apr 15 2007, 08:18 PM Post #30 |
![]()
Thinkin' one thing and doin' another
|
Original 1969 album was on two slabs of tar. |
![]() Running the voodoo down | |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Fear of Music · Next Topic » |















6:44 AM Jul 11