Discussion in 'Linkin Park Chat' started by EastGhost, Sep 6, 2013.
Ever hear Down In It? That's kind of Reznor rapping lol
Haha yeah I forgot about that song
Such a fucking great song, but so lame when I first heard it.
Another thing, please for the love of God LP put a lot more songs on this album, i'd love 16 or more, that would make me dance.
Now this is more like it. I like you now .. And yeah, I don't know if 16 is a realistic number but more than 12 EFFECTIVE songs would be great.
5, 10, 15, or 20 tracks are all fine as long as nothing is forced in terms of keeping a certain structure, length, etc.
Either five 10 minute songs or twenty 2 minute songs, write the music to make it the best that it can be and amount of songs won't matter.
Hmmm, I generally don't agree with that sentiment. I typically find that the longer the tracklist the more filler there is. Almost all of my favourite albums have 10 or less songs.
Trim the fat, keep it lean and mean.
When you consider the quality of songs left out of albums later released on demos, LP can definitely release an album with 15 songs on it with enough polishing. Primo (Better as a demo, a hybrid between the demo and the final product would have been freaking awesome), What We Don't Know could have worked with better lyrics, Across The Line, No Roads Left....
Living Things' problem however was they thought too much about a smaller amount of songs and overpolished them, added too much cheese on to the pizza so to speak, I hope they've been more relaxed for the new album.
Yeah, but demos by their very nature are at least a little unpolished. They can be worked on a little more to better effect. I agree that overpolishing is a problem, but that isn't what I was suggesting.
Just some more evidence that Chester overhypes stuff.
Rob's expression alongside says it all.
He's probably talking about demos and shit. I feel like sometimes interviews like that are misplaced in the actual timeline of the recording process. Still it's good he gets excited about anything. Could be like a lot of other artists where they just don't care and do drugs all day.
45 minutes pls.
I wasn't questioning whether they could write an album with 15 songs, I was questioning if they (or indeed most bands) could write an album of 15+ very good to great songs with no filler.
There's fat on MTM that already needs to be trimmed (GU, WID, and I'm on the fence with SOTD & BIO). WWDK wouldn't make the grade for me, ATL & NRL would. So at best you're just switching out 2 for 2.
Half of LT as it is gets left on the cutting room floor, and even then the other half isn't that great.
12 songs is not a small amount of songs. LT came out the way it did because of their mindset writing it, not because they didn't have enough songs to focus on (which is illogical, the more songs you have then the more spread out your focus is, the higher probability you'll have filler)
I have to ask, what great albums do you know of that have more than 12 songs and no filler because I can't really think of any. They're few and far between. LP certainly haven't shown they could do that.
I'll add that unless a band think they have something really special, albums should be kept under an hour.
That was from December 17. Two months ago. Maybe that number of songs has gone up, maybe it has gone down. That is enough songs (if finished) to make a double album for all we know. Not that I'm saying that they will produce a double album, but I'm anticipating more than 12 songs on the next album (or 11 songs and one instrumental).
That's not the way I look at it, Linkin Park are capable of pulling off quantity and quality.
But ATS has 9 effective songs as I can recall? BITS, WTCFM, RB, WFTE, Blackout, WAK, Iridescent, TC and TM?
Separate names with a comma.