Fewer Tracks Mean Better Albums?

TrackListI’m noticing a new trend that I find positive. It is tied in to the release of vinyl, making this new trend a good thing where music is concerned. ¬†And no, you don’t have to buy vinyl to get the value.

For years, I have bemoaned the point that CDs allow for too much space, giving bands and artists room to issue more than ten songs per album. It has always been my opinion (especially true even in the golden age of Rock and Roll) that when a band or artist intended to release a double or triple album that was not live, then that band was generally headed for trouble with their wealth of compositions. With some exceptions, a look back will find this to be true. Too many songs on a release means the cuts were less severe, and the odds were that several “filler” tracks made their way on to the album.

Now that LPs are hip in this day and age, bands and artists are paying much closer attention to which songs are being released in order to be sure they will fit on an LP. If there are extras, then they become bonus tracks that are downloadable. This pleases me to no end. It means that the albums we get are being better thought out than they were in the not too distant past.

Those of you who read TAP on a regular basis already know my list of bitches. Too many tracks on a single album, which diluted the overall quality of the set, was one of the top bitches. Hopefully, not anymore!

What do you think?