Is there a market for longwinded songs?

So about 4 years ago I played one of my songs (about 3 minutes long) to a friend who is the drummer of a fairly successful regional act where I went to college. Anyways, he made the comment, "So you write radio songs, huh?"

That got me to thinking that maybe I should add more meat and potatoes to my music. I mean I remember writing papers in school and the teachers saying I need to elaborate. So I made the decision then and there that, since I don't really like radio-type songs, why should I write them.

Subsequently my songs have gotten longer and longer. The CD I just finished is about 75 minutes and it's only 10 songs. That's an average length of 7 and a 1/2 minutes per track. Is this the wrong thing to be doing?

Even Dylan had some pretty long ones (though he also had plenty of short ones).

I've played open mikes and gotten claps, but they may have just been being polite.

I like my songs so I know someone else out there has to. Is there a market (however small) for long songs?

I know, I know, "Post your songs here and we'll tell you." But I'm much too sensitive to hear critique of my songs. I'm critical enough of myself. I just wanted to know if anyone else had put any thought into this subject.

I think there

While I came of age in the era of longer and longer songs (an era that seemed to crush itself under its own bloated weight), you'd think I'd have a higher tolerance for longer songs. But I don't.

Maybe 'cause I've just heard so much pop and rock (and jazz and soul and reggae and folk and bluegrass and hip hop and...) but there ain't nothin' much I haven't heard over and over again.

There are precious few revelations left for me in pop music... few things that can draw out my attention over 4 minutes.

Sure, if you've really got something to say, instrumentally or verbally or both, then you have to do what you have to do.

But by the very token that a given work is potentially overstaying its normal welcome period, it had better work extra hard to keep things varied and keep the attention and emotional connection of the listener.

I can't tell you how very, very often I find myself listening to some four or five minute song that may well not have anything really wrong with it, but that I have stopped really listening to or caring about around the 3 to 3-1/2 minute range.

Unless you are really working to keep my attention, after 3-1/2 minutes I am looking at my watch. And, if I'm not listening as part of critiquing someone's work here or elsewhere, chances are I'll simply hit the skip button and not return.

There are a handful of songs that can sustain five and even ten minute lengths -- but, by and large, they are few and far between and tend to be the exceptions even for their authors.

I see what you're saying Blue, I feel my bubble slowly losing air. I think I'm gonna have to rethink a lot of what I've been doing over the past few years. Not to really chop and dice up existing songs, but to write more shorter ones to give people a rest in between long ones.

I know I'll never make a career of music I just do it for the enjoyment. But I want others to enjoy it too.

For me it really depends on the song.

There are some songs I could gladly listen to all day, and there are several LONG songs in my playlist, but then again there are a lot of long songs I can't handle - mostly "classic rock". Led was famous for long songs that (for me) went nowhere - and I'm generally a fan.

That said; I'm currently producing my first CD, and it's a project for someone else (I wanted the experience), and there are a few 4+min songs in there, and one in particular that could go well over 5min if we let it...It's a particularly unusual piece that actually runs from an ethereal opening into a fairly heavy "Depeche meets Gabriel" type body and end. The pacing and short instrumental interludes will be what make the length, if we continue in the direction we're going with it...Right now it's very listenable (to me) but I think the same pacing that will make it a "long" song, will be the element that puts it "over the top".

Looking at the current list; they go 4:42, 3:29, 4:19, 4:12, 2:48 (that one's going to be the long one), and 3:20.

...So it depends on the song...For me.

Sure, I'll take two.

As far lyrics go, maybe think of the song topic like a mission statement for a business

For me it really depends on the song. There are some songs I could gladly listen to all day, and there are several LONG songs in my playlist, but then again there are a lot of long songs I can't handle - mostly "classic rock". Led was famous for long songs that (for me) went nowhere - and I'm generally a fan. That said; I'm currently producing my first CD, and it's a project for someone else (I wanted the experience), and there are a few 4+min songs in there, and one in particular that could go well over 5min if we let it...It's a particularly unusual piece that actually runs from an ethereal opening into a fairly heavy "Depeche meets Gabriel" type body and end. The pacing and short instrumental interludes will be what make the length, if we continue in the direction we're going with it...Right now it's very listenable (to me) but I think the same pacing that will make it a "long" song, will be the element that puts it "over the top". Looking at the current list; they go 4:42, 3:29, 4:19, 4:12, 2:48 (that one's going to be the long one), and 3:20. ...So it depends on the song...For me.

Yeah, it kinds depends on the song for me too. My problem is, when I sit down to write I lose track of time. The thought, "How long is this gonna be" never crosses my mind. I just start writing and when I'm done, I'm done. May tweak it later but rarely (if ever) cut stuff out.

When I'm listening to other people's music, as long as there is substance, song length doesn't really cross my mind either. I guess I am a minority on that one though.

Sorry about the double post, I think I may have single-handedly crashed the HC server for a few minutes.

As far lyrics go, maybe think of the song topic like a mission statement for a business

Used to be, it was called the 70's

I see what you're saying Blue, I feel my bubble slowly losing air. I think I'm gonna have to rethink a lot of what I've been doing over the past few years. Not to really chop and dice up existing songs, but to write more shorter ones to give people a rest in between long ones. I know I'll never make a career of music I just do it for the enjoyment. But I want others to enjoy it too.

Well... I think you've got to take the big view and look at where your priorities -- and your own tastes -- are. Listen to what folks say -- and I imagine there is a real range of tastes. And think about what you really like. I mean, to listen to...

At one point I was making a lot of hard-edged, grindy, aggressive music.

But I realized that, increasingly, I didn't enjoy that, I wasn't seeking it out out of any sense of pleasure but more to see what other folks were doing and get a sense of trends and... at that point I started thinking, well, maybe I should try to make music I would actually enjoy listening to.

An odd revelation, but a revelation, nonetheless.

Anyhow, I'd let your own tastes and predilections guide you to some extent -- and then focus group the rest.

I actually tend to write what I like to listen to. Long songs with a lot of lyrics don't bother me one bit. Also, for some reason and I don't know why, I like songs without choruses.

Anyhow, I'd let your own tastes and predilections guide you to some extent -- and then focus group the rest.

I appreciate your encouragement, Blue. I've never been booed in front of an audience, then again, I've never played a full set...

In general I agree with 3:30.

In an album format I think you need to mix it up, though. Short and sweet might work well in front of something long....if it's strong.

The tune I'm working on now really is a minute too long so I'm working hard to add instrumentation to keep your interest when you give it a listen.

Or you could take out the instrumental parts and get it back down to fighting trim.

(Nah... I'm not that hard core. I have some favorite songs that are pretty long. "Revelator" by Gillian Welch is almost 6 and a half minutes and not a mini-suite or anything. It's pretty much a straight shoot through the song (which is a bit on the slow side, admittedly). But it's a great song. I almost said 'great little song.' It's not really a little song. )

In answer to your question, I'd say yes there is a market for long songs. It's not very big though. And the styles of music might not jive with yours. There are of course Phish-style jam bands with long solos as well as post-rock like Explosions In the Sky and Godspeed You Black Emperor who take simple musical phrases and build them up over time.

The neo-prog band Porcupine Tree recently released a song on their Fear of A Blank Planet album called Anaesthetize which is 17+ minutes - although there is a clear break in the middle where it could've been split in two. And lastly, the band MGMT, known mostly for their interesting synth and pop song hybrid (all under 5 minutes), recently put out an epic 13+ minute single called Metanoia, which seems to stitch every leftover song fragment they had into one big mass.

Most folks doing long-winded stuff lean towards the instrumental side of things to make up the length of their work. I'm not aware of current musicians doing stuff in the style of Sad-Eyed Lady of The Lowlands or Hurricane where vocals and a simple repeating song structure dominate.

Having said all that, do your songs require great length to make their point? You make it seem like the decision to "go long" was an arbitrary one based on a handful of comments and it makes me wonder if you gave it a good think before developing your style along these lines.

I have nothing against long songs. If they hold my attention that's all that matters.

Usually long songs (past 6 minutes) that keep my attention very well are ones that change drastically through the course of the song. I also find them more interesting than 3 minute long songs because they are so long they can grow and evolve better.

That was meant to mean something but I'm not sure it came out the way it was supposed to.

Hey, I see that as a glimmer of hope; it means that I'm not the only one.

It's worth noting that there's only one "Sad Eyed Lady of the Lowlands." *

(And thank heavens there's only one "Hurricane." Of course, it's really a work of agitprop -- a protest song of a sort -- intended to try to argue for justice in what many felt was a wrongful conviction. A better comparison might be something like Dylan's "Death of Emmett Till"... but I think the real issue there is comparing a Dylan song from the early 60s when he was inarguably in his prime and a work -- particularly a work designed for political purpose -- written in the late 70s, a period few would associate with Dylan's best work.)

* Well, there is "Desolation Row," actually 5 seconds longer, at 11:27. But, wacky off the wall bits and all, it is Dylan's attempt to capture his emotions following the assassination of John Kennedy. It's said that very soon after the killing, Dylan, like other prominent writers and artists, received a letter than JFK's widow, Jaqueline, asking him and others to create works commemorating JFK's life and death. Dylan, it is said, like most of us, was still numb from the shooting, and was extremely scornful of the project. But he wrote the song that would become "Desolation Row" -- and that scorn seems directly reflected in the line "I got your letter yesterday / asking how I was doing / was that some kind of joke?"

I L:love:VE Dylan's music, he's one of my biggest influences. That is an interesting story about "Desolation Row", I've never heard that before.

Ballads are typically longer and I have the same thinking you do about length, or did. I have a few that are complete stories rather than just embellished quick thoughts that are the bulk of the average pop offerings. They run into 5-7 minute lengths. The Cat's In The Cradle by Harry Chapin is the style I used to write in and the songs were stories from my rather busy, journeyed and colored life. Are they interesting enough to hold the listener's ear? Probably not. Ballads can get rather boring in the sense that they might be like listening to someone talk about themselves more than a listener really cares to. If they can be made interesting by choice of words that paint intriguing/engaging imagery or capture life's basic events familiar to a large cross section then they can be good. Usually, though, the fewer words the better.

Scarborough Faire/Canticle by Simon and Garfunkle was an engaging song due to its structure and melody. The dual lyrics of the canticle engaged me by the artistry of their layering alone. But, some of the lyrics such as "parsely, sage, rosemary and thyme" did not make any contextual sense to me at all. Were they a reference to four of something (ingredients, annual seasons...?) The paradox is it did not seem to matter because the synergy and artistry of the whole song did not draw any question from the listener about such stuff. It was that engaging.

If you are capable of interesting/engaging delivery it could be very long. Don McClean's American Pie is another example. The story is basically about the untimely death of Buddy Holly and how much Don McClean disliked Bob Dylan coming soon after displacing him in popularity. That is the day that the music died for Don McClean and his song about it is so beautifully written it engages the listener completely by its delivery and lyrics that little explanation about the message is sought.

Is today's audience looking to get cerebrally engaged with music? It doesn't seem so. I hear popularity in the monotone vocalizations of industry production, though some are genuinely engaging, but I typically don't feel the artist when growling at me regardless of lyrical content. It's too contrived. Vocal inflections that are obviously forced are contrivances of industry money-making grindings and I turn them off. Of course, we have to decide if selling a song makes it a good song.

Yeah... I've heard elaborate explications of who all is who in the cast of characters. You can make an educated guess at many if you're a student of 60s culture.

When you are in the business of making music of course you'll hear it all. It's what you've learned from it and what you think of it that's different than anyone else. There was a time when a half-ass voice, or even worse, and similar talent on an acoustic guitar would engage the masses with songs they couldn't even understand the message in. It's almost as if the notion of right place and time (chance) plays as much a role in popular music as any other aspect of it. Some of it was/is change-based popularity at a time when the audience has reached its saturation point.

The basic writing premise of knowing your audience first is easy for emulators of status quo pop. Offering up something of a departure (indy) is the harder row to hoe. He/she is writing without a known audience to write to and that is a big handicap. The OP seems to be writing for himself with some concern about the perceptions of his audience. Here is the place to get some feedback by posting those songs.

As an avocation, I won't delve into music as seriously as another who is trying to make his/her mark and money in the business. I just write as I do for the fun of it and if someone else enjoys listening that's great. Doing open mic venues is where the fun is and writing good songs doesn't seem to be as important as just being there to play for folks who can tap a toe to the tune.

Long songs may work better live....you have your audience and unless you really stink the place up they will bear with a longer tune.

When listening in private it is a different story. Get your message out quickly and boil down the instrumentals to keep your listener from jumping to the next track.

Well, I think Dylan, and perhaps a few other troubadour types who didn't fit what had been the commercial mold inspired a lot of emulation and more than a little imitation.

Some folks were inspired by Dylan's neo-literary (or perhaps post-literary, as was often suggested at the time) use of metaphor and narrative

to try to explore their own creative potentials...

... and others were inspired that a whiny voiced guy (who could not play harmonica to save his life ) could seemingly string a bunch of images and characters they didn't get and thought were pretty much random together and be idolized.

So, just like Kurt Cobain's highly abstract and intensely personal artistic language inspired armies of imitators who seemed to simply string up a bunch of colorful, meaningless phrases, many of the Dylan wannabes were hopeless, hapless poseurs who manifested that cluelessness by not seeming to miss the point of the very object of their emulation.