B-Sides; existance enevitable, but why?

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

I've been heavily into WEEN for a couple years now. I enjoy at least 90% of the (100s of) b-sides they put out. Beck released a short 6-track b-side collection, which i enjoy a lot also. Beck's StereoPathic Soul Manure(sp) doesn't have much of a theme:
point: If I were to release a record, I'd fill it with as much shit as I can come up with. why neglect songs? (i can understand if you're a pop artist, but other than record company pressures; why wouldn't you add it to the list?

― Nate (Nate), Saturday, 27 September 2003 21:30 (twenty-two years ago)

If I were to release a record, I'd fill it with as much shit as I can come up with.

All the various arguments about 'because CDs are so long people fill them up and that's why albums are boring now' to thread. (The corollary is that the Strokes and Weezer are geniuses for having short albums, but I find this wanting.)

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Saturday, 27 September 2003 21:35 (twenty-two years ago)

Wanting it is. Because if you have an 11-track album lasting 30 minutes and two of the songs are crap (which would be an optimistic prediction, I think, of the next albums by those two), you end up only listening to a 9-track album that lasts 25 minutes. And paying quite a bit for it. You'd just download it.

Include 20 tracks and let the listener program in their favourite 12. 'Course, if all 20 are great, that's a bonus.

― edward o (edwardo), Saturday, 27 September 2003 21:50 (twenty-two years ago)

a vote for brevity from me. In this age of gluttony I prefer to be left wanting for a change.

― Anthony Miccio (Anthony Miccio), Saturday, 27 September 2003 21:52 (twenty-two years ago)

In any event, right now I'm listening to a B-side comp CDR that just arrived in the mail covering all the Amnesiac and after singles by Radiohead (seriously! this was not planned on my part or anything). It's all about friends willing to make compilations for you.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Saturday, 27 September 2003 21:53 (twenty-two years ago)

The argument for brevity seems like a good one, but it hinges on the assumption that the people making the music actually know what to and what not to include. I don't agree with this.

― edward o (edwardo), Saturday, 27 September 2003 21:58 (twenty-two years ago)

"If I were to release a record, I'd fill it with as much shit as I can come up with"

Key work here: "shit"

― Burr (Burr), Saturday, 27 September 2003 21:58 (twenty-two years ago)

All good artists (except for Bob Pollard) know that editing is a crucial part of making a good record. Who likes to skip around on a record, anyway? Also, who really likes sitting through weak songs to get to the good ones?

― Matthew Perpetua (Matthew Perpetua), Saturday, 27 September 2003 22:08 (twenty-two years ago)

and who wants to listen to one artist for 80 minutes.

That is why the 12" format is so great; at best a piece of music can last 12 minutes a side.

― Mike Taylor (mjt), Saturday, 27 September 2003 22:12 (twenty-two years ago)

Who really sits through weak songs on CDs and doesn't program them out? If you don't, why don't you? If you're not listening to vinyl, obviously.

The artist's idea of good and yours might not be the same. Join an email list of any well-established band and you might see dozens of posts bemoaning why xxx was left off album yyy. It's clear a lot of people don't agree with their favourite artist's editing choices.

― edward o (edwardo), Saturday, 27 September 2003 22:13 (twenty-two years ago)

Another vote for brevity over here, especially in the service of a release that has an overall structure which flows and does not outstay its welcome. Reissues can be annoying insofar as they tack incomplete or rejected tracks on the end of an otherwise completely involving and satisfying record, as a commercial afterthought to entice fans. Let those rejected tracks go on a b-sides compilation.

― colin s barrow (colin s barrow), Saturday, 27 September 2003 22:15 (twenty-two years ago)

"layla" > layla and other assorted love songs >>>>>>>>>> the layla sessions

― cinniblount (James Blount), Saturday, 27 September 2003 22:21 (twenty-two years ago)

Well, yeah, I agree about that last point. I'm usually that guy saying "why did they ever abandon that?" I'm a firm believer that most bands have no idea what their best stuff is.

However, I think it's a context issue - if you're dealing with a vinyl single disc, then the album is probably not going to be over 55 minutes, which is what I'd say is the top end for a good album length. If a record is concise but still has a few weak songs, I think I and (and probably most other people) are more forgiving and will just sit through that song without making a fuss to skip ahead.

As music listening becomes increasingly focused on the fan's whims - mix tapes, burning your own cds, making playlists on yr computer, iPods - this whole discussion becomes more pointless. Unless yr seriously cash-strapped or a vinyl lifer, why get so worked up about it when you can take matters into yr own hands?

Nevertheless, I still love the idiom of the music album, and brevity and concision is that idiom's best pal more often than not.

― Matthew Perpetua (Matthew Perpetua), Saturday, 27 September 2003 22:26 (twenty-two years ago)

If fans are controlling their consumption, why not help them by making their dollar go further? Isn't this the rationale behind (possible incorrect fact alert) CD prices being dropped slightly in the States?

Okay, B-sides are a nice surprise. I do like them, really. Nothing is better than buying a single you really like and finding the B-side is just as good. It makes you wonder how good the album is, too. But you might live in a country where the full complement of singles isn't released and you might not have enough money to pay ridiculous costs to import. It's simply more equitable to release as much as possible on albums. From the consumer standpoint, which is the only standpoint I care about, that is.

― edward o (edwardo), Saturday, 27 September 2003 22:31 (twenty-two years ago)

there are very few non-double LP/non-hits albums over 45 minutes that I couldn't see trimming.

personally, if your album is chockfull of crap, I'm more likely to tape the best songs and sell it than I am if you make a 30-45 minute album that works all the way through.

― Anthony Miccio (Anthony Miccio), Saturday, 27 September 2003 22:33 (twenty-two years ago)

look homeward angel > o lost: a story of the buried life

apocalypse now > apocalypse now redux

― cinniblount (James Blount), Saturday, 27 September 2003 22:42 (twenty-two years ago)

Nobody's seriously suggesting filling the CD to capacity or including substandard material. It's just many see the concept of album-as-complete-unchangeable-unit as outdated. Colin's point about reissues is not quite the same - that's the changing of history in a sense, quite separate from putting something a little extra on the CD at its initial release rather than putting them on B-sides.

― edward o (edwardo), Saturday, 27 September 2003 22:42 (twenty-two years ago)

Also, if adding two or three extra tracks - that are probably similar in quality to the rest of the album even if slightly weaker (bearing in mind a lot of people disagree) - to your album (and it doesn't HAVE to be at the end) is enough to tip the balance between it being a good album worth keeping and being a filler-containing nightmare that deserves to be returned, chances are the album-as-unit wasn't that good to begin with.

― edward o (edwardo), Saturday, 27 September 2003 22:49 (twenty-two years ago)

Edward, don't you think there are a lot of artists today who feel as though they really NEED to fill up as much of an 80 minute cd as they can?

I know a lot of hip hop records are weaker than they need to be for this reason...

― Matthew Perpetua (Matthew Perpetua), Saturday, 27 September 2003 22:54 (twenty-two years ago)

I think there's something of a difference between the ideas of "let's fill up 80 minutes" and "we have five or six tracks left over, let's bin them or put them out as B-sides". 80 minutes really is too long for an album, but I have a few albums of 55-60 minutes I wouldn't trim one track from, and I have several CD-Rs of albums+B-sides that run to 65-70 minutes that I listen from beginning to end.

In the absence of being able to directly put out records for both sides, i.e. the short-albumers and the long-albumers, the latter is the best compromise because short-ists can trim the longise.

― edward o (edwardo), Saturday, 27 September 2003 22:58 (twenty-two years ago)

Maybe it's rockist and maybe it's outdated and all that jazz, but some of us out here like the idea of a crafted album. This song goes first, that song goes last, and these other songs are in a nice sequence in between. And maybe there's a song (or more) that didn't fit (or was redundant, etc.)

Searching out b-sides is fun. When a b-side is really great I don't sit around worrying about why it's not a full-length. I just enjoy it.

The need for b-sides has produced some worthwhile stuff in pop history. Material that may not have existed otherwise. Cover songs and things like that.

― The Man Who Loved Cat Dancing, Sunday, 28 September 2003 01:04 (twenty-two years ago)

What makes a song "b-side material" and "album worthy". I can completely understand if you're doing a concept album, and you came up with a totally unrelated song. I'm just saying, I like hearing all an artist has to offer. Even shit.
(addition to Beck and Phycopathic thought) If you've listen to this album, you can tell some don't quite fit with the "mood". On "One Foot in the Grave" there is deffinatly 2 that stick out. But, I find them "album worthy" just because they are what they are.
ps. In my opinion, singles are stupid. but may be exellant for a close-minded (poor)person, who has no intention on getting to know the artist better.

― Nate (Nate), Sunday, 28 September 2003 04:43 (twenty-two years ago)

for those more interested in 'art' than 'artists' I'll say yay to more (and not less) quality control

― cinniblount (James Blount), Sunday, 28 September 2003 06:28 (twenty-two years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.