Long time ol skool D2 fan.

I have to say I really like AYNIN (song). I like the quirky keyboards and kinda heaviness of it. I really like the production of it. How the instruments and sounds are laid out is nice. This will sound great on a good sound system. Though I liked Red Carpet Massacre for what it is, I don't like some of the production. It brings down the quality of what could've been some great sounding songs. Imo.

Btw, I listened to Pop Trash over the weekend and even know it's not "classic" D2, I think it's a cool and interesting album.

Bfunkthe1 said:

Long time ol skool D2 fan.

I have to say I really like AYNIN (song). I like the quirky keyboards and kinda heaviness of it. I really like the production of it. How the instruments and sounds are laid out is nice. This will sound great on a good sound system. Though I liked Red Carpet Massacre for what it is, I don't like some of the production. It brings down the quality of what could've been some great sounding songs. Imo.

Btw, I listened to Pop Trash over the weekend and even know it's not "classic" D2, I think it's a cool and interesting album.

Pop Trash is alot better than people give it credit for. It had alot of good songs, it was more guitar driven, with warren. And DD was doing lots of promotion for it despite lack of help from the label (Hollywood) records was doing, but they were approaching the end at that point as a label so DD had no chance, also they were coming off Medazzaland which didnt do well for them overall either.

Someone on the DD Forum said Nick Rhodes mentioned "King Of Nowhere" to be up there with "Ordinary World" .

Nick715 said:

Back in the 80's, many artists had 8 to 10 tracks on an album.

These days you get 16 sometimes.

Depending on who the artist is, in most cases I will play maybe 5 or 6 cuts mostly and rarely play the others.

I play all tracks at least once or twice, but may not upload them all if they are bland.

Just a thought, artists need to go back to 8 to 10 cuts on album. In the 80's vinyle album were still being sold; the obvious limitations only allowed 5, 6, 7, 8, to 10 songs, unless an artist recordered a double album. I recall an interview with Ms. Dionne Warwick gave just as CD's were hitting the market. She said, A lot of people marvel over digital recording giving you limitless amount of songs and the length of songs on a CD'. In my opinion this can be a mix bag. I'm hearing songs already which go on too long. You only have some many minutes on a vinyle recording, it made songwrites like Bacharach write well crafted songs within 2 to 3 minutes time frame.

-----------------------------------------

[Edited 12/12/10 12:12pm]

I agree with the length thing. Songs I tend to listen to over and over are no longer than 4 mintes.

I love radio-ready type songs, as far as length I mean.

Even Duran Duran's new cut "Mediterranea" can be shortened a little as its over 5:30.

lastdecember said:

I use to be a fan of more music the better per album/cd. Now I like to religate b-sides/extra/remixes to something else like a bones disc or ep and keep an album as intended. Coldplay did a nice job of this approach with Viva album and then Prospekts March ep. But even then there were still some non-album tracks floating about.

I listened to the whole record. I definitely like it, but not sure I love it. I like Blame the Machines and Being Followed the most. The songs aren't that immediate, I guess maybe they will grow on me.

I don't think it's as good as their first two albums or even as good as RCM for me.

But then I have to admit although I like Duran Duran, I'm not a hard core super fan, more of a casual fan. I'm sure their dedicated fans will love it since it's so classic in the DD sound.

AlexdeParis said:

lastdecember said:

the only thing is that these things can be put out seperately i still feel an album loses something when its jacked up to 15 tracks, with 4-5 songs that wouldnt have been on a record but now are. Lead singer of a-ha pointed this out about the "Lifelines" album, he said it was too long, 15 tracks were tossed in and at least 4-5 were not good enough to be on a record, most of them were because there really werent bsides and things like that anymore. As he said there were great songs trapped on a bloated album. Its an interesting issue, but i have to agree that ALOT of albums pushed to the limit are not as good as shorter records. If these "other" songs are good enough to be out, then have another record ready to come out within the year.

I would agree with this, but there's no guarantee these other songs would be released. Ideally, I'd like to see short albums followed by EPs with the b-sides or alternate tracks. However, if I have to choose, I'll take bloated albums over less music.

I agree totally with what you are saying, its just a tough issue that i feel started first with cds and the "need" to do 80 minutes, that was more a RB Hip Hop issue, but here and there, since the singles demise and no need for bsides, its almost like, we got these songs what do we do with them? sometimes i just feel the urge is to just tack it on to the album causing issues like i mentioned above, now dont get me wrong, i love the "Lifelines" record, but there are a few songs that i cannot listen too at times, but then again, that album has one of their best songs ever in "Lifelines" so its a damned if you do situation.

TD3 said:

Nick715 said:

Back in the 80's, many artists had 8 to 10 tracks on an album.

These days you get 16 sometimes.

Depending on who the artist is, in most cases I will play maybe 5 or 6 cuts mostly and rarely play the others.

I play all tracks at least once or twice, but may not upload them all if they are bland.

Just a thought, artists need to go back to 8 to 10 cuts on album. In the 80's vinyle album were still being sold; the obvious limitations only allowed 5, 6, 7, 8, to 10 songs, unless an artist recordered a double album. I recall an interview with Ms. Dionne Warwick gave just as CD's were hitting the market. She said, A lot of people marvel over digital recording giving you limitless amount of songs and the length of songs on a CD'. In my opinion this can be a mix bag. I'm hearing songs already which go on too long. You only have some many minutes on a vinyle recording, it made songwrites like Bacharach write well crafted songs within 2 to 3 minutes time frame.

-----------------------------------------

[Edited 12/12/10 12:12pm]

agree 100% i know that the whole debate started back when cds were found to hold 80 minutes and people felt im paying for 80 minutes give it to me, this let to bloated albums full of interludes, moaning and skits, and no offense to the artists that did this back then, but if u want moaning, watch a porno, if u want skits go see a comedy show. With art/creative stuff like music/shows/movies, u are not owed anything but what is advertised, meaning, if Angelina Jolie is said to be in a movie and you pay to see her, then you deserve to see her, now if u like or dislike what she does in that movie thats irrelevant, you might not have liked her performance in something but others may have.

So that cd debate i feel caused the main issue, but i am seeing now a stronger effort to make more condensed packaged albums. I mean its probably more about the lenght of a record than tracks, i mean the Beatles used to 14 track albums and the albums were about 28-35 minutes long. I look at alot of the great albums i have heard lately within the last few years and almost none are longer than 45 minutes, basically 10-12 tracks the most, and now 9 in DD's case.