Page 1 of 2

May 13, 2008

Posted: Tue May 13, 2008 6:47 am
by erik
So, yesterday I learned that the last round of layoffs at my work are coming up in June. I was relieved for about 9 seconds until i realized that's in like 2 weeks. Well, fuck.

Here's the question of the day: Do you have a song that's exactly 2:42?

Re: May 13, 2008

Posted: Tue May 13, 2008 7:01 am
by jimtyrrell
Roll Call: Working, and then working. Trying to get the studio up and running. I don't have any shows this week, but it's still tough to find time to get over there and work on it. Oh, I'm going to the movies tonight too. Jackie Chan and Jet Li are in a movie together, apparently, and my buddy Jim got a bunch of us to go see it with him. Fun.

QotD: Oddly enough, my cover of Cancer by 15-16 Puzzle is 2:42.

Re: May 13, 2008

Posted: Tue May 13, 2008 7:04 am
by king_arthur
QotD: and all the work I put into creating a detailed database of my songs and recordings finally pays off! Woo hoo!

I found two: one called "Goodbye, Spot" which is about pets being "put to sleep" and the whole family thing going on around that. Written in 1969 or thereabouts. The other is "The Grace Given to Me," something I did when I was writing a bunch of worship songs for our church band. Words written May 28, 1998, music probably sometime after that. We never did that one with the worship band, although I think I did it as an offertory solo one time. Neither song is available online, sorry...

Only about half of the database entries for recordings have the time info entered, so there are probably a couple more...

DRC: mom's pool class and lunch at the Mexican restaurant. The class instructor isn't going to be there, so I said I'd bring a CD with some Dean Martin on it, must remember to burn that. Nur Ein title sometime in the morning, and the afternoon set aside for getting started on that, with tomorrow being the day I have available to do most of the recording. If I survive, of course. Tuseday is one of our fave TV nights; NCIS, Idol, etc.

Obfdrunk: we went to BevMo yesterday and stocked up on stuff and then went to Trader Joe's and stocked up on wine. We are ready for a long, hot summer...

Charles (KA)

Re: May 13, 2008

Posted: Tue May 13, 2008 8:01 am
by roymond
I only have 3 songs under 3 minutes. That's really short form for me. I see Frankie and Obs both have a 2:42 song, though.

Re: May 13, 2008

Posted: Tue May 13, 2008 8:32 am
by Spud
Our I Can See You, at 2:42, does nothing to help prove this theory.

Our Floating Bridge is a better song at 2:40. One of our best songs, Skyline, is also one of our shortest at 1:44, almost a full minute less than the recommended time. I guess the less Octothorpe, the better.

SPUD

Re: May 13, 2008

Posted: Tue May 13, 2008 8:34 am
by Hoblit
jimtyrrell wrote:Roll Call: Working, and then working. Trying to get the studio up and running. I don't have any shows this week, but it's still tough to find time to get over there and work on it. Oh, I'm going to the movies tonight too. Jackie Chan and Jet Li are in a movie together, apparently, and my buddy Jim got a bunch of us to go see it with him. Fun.

QotD: Oddly enough, my cover of Cancer by 15-16 Puzzle is 2:42.
Jim, I accidentally saw that movie on Sunday. IT SUCKS.

Re: May 13, 2008

Posted: Tue May 13, 2008 8:38 am
by jimtyrrell
Hehe, thanks for the warning. As it turns out, my buddy Jim has cancelled due to illness. By the time he's well enough to go out, maybe there'll be something better to see.

Re: May 13, 2008

Posted: Tue May 13, 2008 9:11 am
by roymond
I hadn't read the post before I responded. I find his reasoning entirely wrong. It's bullshit to proclaim a perfect song length. Each song has its perfect length. It may have been produced too long, so it should be shortened, or have too many verses/breaks/chorus/etc. but once that's worked out, it's perfect. But it ain't the same length as any other song due to some asshole's self importance rant about how too busy he is to listen to music.

You can't rush a groove, baby.

Re: May 13, 2008

Posted: Tue May 13, 2008 9:14 am
by erik
It's funny.

Re: May 13, 2008

Posted: Tue May 13, 2008 9:19 am
by Spud
roymond wrote:I hadn't read the post before I responded. I find his reasoning entirely wrong. It's bullshit to proclaim a perfect song length. Each song has its perfect length. It may have been produced too long, so it should be shortened, or have too many verses/breaks/chorus/etc. but once that's worked out, it's perfect. But it ain't the same length as any other song due to some asshole's self importance rant about how too busy he is to listen to music.

You can't rush a groove, baby.
calm down, roy. TATJ (these are the jokes). It's obviously humor.

Re: May 13, 2008

Posted: Tue May 13, 2008 9:45 am
by roymond
Spud wrote:
roymond wrote:You can't rush a groove, baby.
calm down, roy. TATJ (these are the jokes). It's obviously humor.
What? I'm not contributing? But you're right. If I had a red button I'd push it. Gotta not save the valium just for the night.

Re: May 13, 2008

Posted: Tue May 13, 2008 10:25 am
by drë
erik wrote:It's funny.
very funny, thanks for the link erik.

I challenge myself or anyone to do an album a day (or just an album) where all the songs are 2:42 in length, and titled it 2:42.

QOTD: my crappy Brother in law is 2:42...

Re: May 13, 2008

Posted: Tue May 13, 2008 10:42 am
by HeuristicsInc
Yeah! The highest-voted song I've worked on at SF, The Creeping Foam's "For the Time Being" is 2:42. Maybe there is something to his theory after all...
-bill

Re: May 13, 2008

Posted: Tue May 13, 2008 10:58 am
by Billy's Little Trip
I'm always pushing myself to cut my music down. My Sleep Walking song was almost 5 minutes and I knew that had to be shortened for the type of song and being a contest song to boot. It's always painful for me to chop out things I love. But I managed to get it down to 3:46. I couldn't mess with the intro, because that's what sets the mood and make one want to continue to listen. I couldn't drop the outro, because that's what leaves you with a good taste in your mouth. It would be much easier for someone else to chop it down, and truth is, probably no one would know the difference, except me. Places I could have still cut it down would be where it comes back into the verses from the choruses. But I had such drastic changes, that it would have been uncomfortable to the ears if I didn't have a little space between the choruses and verses.

2:42? Is that just Internet brain washing, or is there any "real" evidence to back this claim. I only believe in things that fit my lifestyle. :lol:

Anyway, I have a yearning to go listen to some Boston right now.

Re: May 13, 2008

Posted: Tue May 13, 2008 11:01 am
by No Horse Town
2:42!? That's too long for the "perfect song length"! I'd say a minute and a half. Wait, forgot to take my ritalin..! (j/k)
Nah, but I do prefer shorter songs. I don't think there's any perfect song length, tho, that sounds like a load of hooey.

My song "Meet Micky" is 2:46, and whaddaya know, there's almost exactly 2 seconds of silence at the beginning and end. Does that count?

Re: May 13, 2008

Posted: Tue May 13, 2008 12:48 pm
by Paco Del Stinko
I'm sure I have many songs at 2:42, but I can't think of one that I remember at that length. I have a 90 minute cassette tape of 4-tracks songs I did 'back in the day', and there are 61 songs on it. I think in that case, 2:42 would feel epic.

I got my new drivers license today. Man, I'm an ugly bastard! Any cop pulling me over and looking at it will probably let me go out of sympathy.

Re: May 13, 2008

Posted: Tue May 13, 2008 1:14 pm
by Albatross
Paco Del Stinko wrote:Man, I'm an ugly bastard! Any cop pulling me over and looking at it will probably let me go out of sympathy.
As someone who recently got three speeding tickets in a ten-month stretch, I only wish that worked.

QotD: At first glance, it looks like I have no songs at that length. My Cake cover comes closest at 2:39.

I can't help but think of Wesley Willis. He made it a point to make his songs at or around 2:30, for maximum radio-friendliness. In fact, his second greatest hits CD has 22 tracks, and clocks in at exactly 55 minutes.

Re: May 13, 2008

Posted: Tue May 13, 2008 2:34 pm
by Märk
qotd: nope. Closest I have are 2:39 and 2:45. I will now make it my goal in life to make a song exactly 2:42. It has to happen by chance, though, with no willful editing.

Re: May 13, 2008

Posted: Tue May 13, 2008 4:54 pm
by Reist
qotd: I might check this later.

I like short songs, if they've got something really catchy that fulfills my hope for the song. Or a really fast tempo.

I like long songs, but only if they're epic or really atmospheric.

Re: May 13, 2008

Posted: Tue May 13, 2008 5:10 pm
by Caravan Ray
Spud wrote:Our I Can See You, at 2:42, does nothing to help prove this theory.

Our Floating Bridge is a better song at 2:40. One of our best songs, Skyline, is also one of our shortest at 1:44, almost a full minute less than the recommended time. I guess the less Octothorpe, the better.

SPUD
According to my iTunes - Octothorpes "Kickstart" is also 2:42. (my own "Kickstart" comes in at 2:40)

As is Frankie Big Face's "The Thing Most Easily Forgotton", "Gouge Away" by The Pixies and "Morningtown Ride" by The Seekers.

I have no songs that are 2:42 - but I do have 4 that are exactly 2:40, 1 that is 2:41 and 1 that is 2:44

So - I have no problems with the idea that 2:42 is the perfect song length. That is probably about right.

Re: May 13, 2008

Posted: Tue May 13, 2008 7:08 pm
by Spud
Caravan Ray wrote: According to my iTunes - Octothorpes "Kickstart" is also 2:42.
Good catch. I only looked at Songfight! entries, not sidefights.

Re: May 13, 2008

Posted: Tue May 13, 2008 10:15 pm
by Billy's Little Trip
Sure glad that Bohemian Rhapsody wasn't 2:42. The world would have been deprived a great song.