How many songs are you putting on your CD album?

  • Thread starter Thread starter miroslav
  • Start date Start date
miroslav

miroslav

Cosmic Cowboy
mjbphotos said:
I'm up to about 14 songs for my next album....
Click to expand...

I was going to post this in the "How much did your CD cost to make" thread which is where mjbphotos made the comment above...but I thought it would be better to give this topic its own thread.

How many songs on average are people putting on their CD albums that are intended for more public consumption and/or sale?

Back with vinyl albums...10 songs was a pretty standard average for typical Pop/Rock/Country releases.
Now days, it seems like either 1.) artists are expected to fill out every second of usable space on a CD or 2.) the artists themselves feel the need to fill it out.....so you see CDs with as many as 20+ songs sometimes.

*&^!...that's a LOT of songs to record, edit, mix, master just for one album.

The last one I did, I stuck to the 10-song format, but I will say that at least 8 of the songs were well over 5 minutes long, and a couple hit the 7 minute mark (what can I say, I got carried away with some of the guitar solos :D).

In the AM radio days....you weren't allowed to break the 3-minute barrier, and many longer songs suffered the manual fade-out by the DJ or some kind of crappy edit to make it work in the 3-minute slot.
These days, over 3 minutes is pretty common, but not by much. Anything over 4 minutes better have a really good reason for going there if you are aiming for radio-play attention in the Rock/Pop/Country styles.

Anyway, with my current batch of songs and what will end up my next CD, I've trimmed down most songs to stay under the 4 minute mark...so at 10 songs, I would have about 40 minutes of play on a CD, with still a lot of time/room left...but I don't know if I want to cram in another 6 songs or what have you, JUST to fill it out.
I might go to a 12 song album....but I don't know if I would do more than that, so I was curious what others were doing.
 
I'm working with two acoustic/folk singer songwriters at the minute.
One is aiming for 8 tracks (his previous was 6) and the other guy is aiming for 12.

Not much else to say there, Miro. :)
 
12 is my magic number. My last cd had several songs over 6 miuntes. Haven't hit the 7 minute mark yet. :)
 
Yeah....like I said, I may do 12 on this next one....but it's not so much about the actual number. I was curious if there was any view on how much content was considered enough VS a little shy....this thing that I see with some albums where they fill it all the way up with 20+ songs.

Anyone feel they need to shoot for a certain total play time, or do you just go with what feels right to you for the type of album you are doing....or is it more about the collection of songs you have rather than their total number or play time?

None of this is all that critical to the album, IMO...it's just more of a curiosity as to why/what people are going with.
 
I have 14 on my latest. 10 originals, 4 covers. I can't remember off the top of me head, but I think it came in at about 54 minutes.
 
I put a lot of thought into mastering my albums. Total running time is important. I don't want it to be too long. Not that anyone sits and listens all the way through anymore, but it's very important to me to write and put together songs that work together and flow together and not leave anyone thinking "fuck when's this thing gonna end?".
 
Yeah, me too.

Though, I do look at it maybe a little differently than some people.

If I was an "established" artist and people were buying my CD because they know what they're getting and they're fans, I'd arrange the songs differently. I'd be as artsy and creative as I wanted to be.

But, being totally un-known and hoping someone will actually sit through as many songs as possible, I just arrange my songs in order of what I think is the strongest song down to the least strong. This way, if someone only gets through 3 songs, I can say that at least they heard what I think were the best tunes. In my mind, it increases the chance of them listening to more songs. I'd hate to not put my best foot forward and then have someone stop listening after 3 songs.

I did have a bit of a pattern to my last CD, besides just arranging them strong to weak. I did Original-original-cover....original-original-cover.....etc.....
 
Yeah I have my own "mastering philosophy" that I've put together after studying many, many of my favorite albums. It's similar to your best-to-worst, but with a few wrinkles. I've posted it before, I'll try to find it....
 
I remember that conversation. Not the details, but I remember having it.
 
Found it. Fuck, searching this place is a real pain in the ass. No wonder n00bs never use the search function. I don't ever do it, but I surely will never bark at someone to use the search function. Here's my own personal song listing philosophy.....

Track 1) strong
Track 2) stronger or best song
Track 3) best song or one that rips heads off
Track 4) change it up a little
Track 5) really throw em a curveball
Track 6) getting back to normal - if this was an LP, it would be the end of side one
Track 7) strong - beginning of side two
Track 8) stronger
Track 9) curveball/weaker song
Track 10) filler/weaker song
Track 11) decent song
Track 12) rip heads off to close the album

So with that kind of plan, I need to have at least 6 or 7 songs that I'm really happy with, and three of those have to be killers in my opinion. The rest just have to be decent enough. The idea being that the first 3 or 4 songs ramp up in quality, then settle down into a little variety, ramp up again, settle, then blow your face off with the last song. I've always been fond of the last song on an album. It's usually unique and often kind of weird for the band.
 
When putting my songs in order, I went with what sounded good. I don't think anyone is going to listen to my cd's anyways, so I'm only trying to please myself.

I do 12 songs because it seems a good balance, not too short, not too long. I don't look at the total cd time, unles I have an epic 20 minute tune.

I'm trying to finish out this last cd I got going. 3/4 of the way there, but I'm traveling all the time for work now and whenever I get home, I just don't feel like pushing the red button. :(
 
Greg_L said:
Found it. Fuck, searching this place is a real pain in the ass. No wonder n00bs never use the search function. I don't ever do it, but I surely will never bark at someone to use the search function. Here's my own personal song listing philosophy.....

Track 1) strong
Track 2) stronger or best song
Track 3) best song or one that rips heads off
Track 4) change it up a little
Track 5) really throw em a curveball
Track 6) getting back to normal - if this was an LP, it would be the end of side one
Track 7) strong - beginning of side two
Track 8) stronger
Track 9) curveball/weaker song
Track 10) filler/weaker song
Track 11) decent song
Track 12) rip heads off to close the album

So with that kind of plan, I need to have at least 6 or 7 songs that I'm really happy with, and three of those have to be killers in my opinion. The rest just have to be decent enough. The idea being that the first 3 or 4 songs ramp up in quality, then settle down into a little variety, ramp up again, settle, then blow your face off with the last song. I've always been fond of the last song on an album. It's usually unique and often kind of weird for the band.
Click to expand...

thats a nice model, i like it.
 
There's a theme to my lastest cd, hence the number of songs. They may get whittled down (chop the weak sisters out) as I start working on the overall order (have it more-or-less already).
I go for the overall length, rather than number of songs ~ 60 minutes is a fair limit.

First song - should capture the attention of the listener.
2nd & 3rd songs - strongest ones.

Because I have a variety of styles on 1 album, I try not to have two very similar songs in a row - for example, 2 songs with 6-string and 12-string acoustics, or 2 songs with piano as the lead instrument. At the same time I don't want to go from a slammin' rock song to a quiet one, either.
 
If I'm doing an actual album, I feel like I'm ripping people off if it doesn't clock in at 40 minutes minimum. (I listened to a lot of Smashing Pumpkins as a kid, so 60 minutes to a 12 song CD seems normal to me.) My songs are all 2.5 minutes though, so my next proper CD is going to be... 15 songs. Plus a remix and a secret track... and some non-musical interludes. And a supplemental download bonus of 3 songs.

My last "EP" was 11 songs.

I should probably calm the eff down!
 
10,9,9. The song order was determine by the mastering engineer. His choice was very much like Greg's list. Strongest song was track 2 - and I was pretty happy with his choices.
 
I personally don't think you should add songs to an album unless they're serious quality as songs. If you're stretching just for length, I think it's kinda grasping at straws. Albums I've helped with have both been 9 songs and fairly short. My generation is probably O.K. with that since we all seem to have ADD :laughings:
 
I feel uncomfortable with a total running time of less than 40 minutes or of more than 60. My CDs usually have somewhere between 12 and 16 songs, and it depends on what's available to select from, what's ok to include, and what needs to be discarded. The average would be about 14, I guess.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top