> Songs are also getting longer. The top ten hits on Billboard actually increased twenty seconds in duration last year. Five top ten hits ran for more than five minutes.
Wanted to comment on this specifically, because I know something about this.
The "acceptable length" of song is interesting because it's always been cyclical. for instance, in the 1950's and 60s, 3 minutes was the outside hard limit of how long a song could be and be considered commercially viable (in other words, if your song was longer than that, it wouldn't get airplay because people would change the station they're listening to).
Then the tide shifted in the 70s, arguably marked by the surprise hit of Bohemian Rhapsody. That only got airplay in the first place because of a particular DJ who defiantly played it despite its length.
Then song lengths started growing and routinely got even longer -- a few very popular prog rock ones (such as Jethro Tull's Thick as a Brick) even lasting over 40 minutes.
But the cycle started reversing in the 80s. This appears to be a regular cycle, and if so, then we're due for songs getting longer again. TFA indicates that this may, indeed, be happening.
I think the cycle is because there are different benefits to long vs short songs. Short songs are low-commitment, easy to digest and move on with your day, perfect for radio and radio-like formats. Long songs allow for a deeper exploration of musical ideas, for the song to be able to take its time developing without rushing, to have increased complexity, can tell a more detailed story with a larger emotional arc, etc.
It's much like the difference between a short story and a novel.
Wanted to comment on this specifically, because I know something about this.
The "acceptable length" of song is interesting because it's always been cyclical. for instance, in the 1950's and 60s, 3 minutes was the outside hard limit of how long a song could be and be considered commercially viable (in other words, if your song was longer than that, it wouldn't get airplay because people would change the station they're listening to).
Then the tide shifted in the 70s, arguably marked by the surprise hit of Bohemian Rhapsody. That only got airplay in the first place because of a particular DJ who defiantly played it despite its length.
Then song lengths started growing and routinely got even longer -- a few very popular prog rock ones (such as Jethro Tull's Thick as a Brick) even lasting over 40 minutes.
But the cycle started reversing in the 80s. This appears to be a regular cycle, and if so, then we're due for songs getting longer again. TFA indicates that this may, indeed, be happening.
I think the cycle is because there are different benefits to long vs short songs. Short songs are low-commitment, easy to digest and move on with your day, perfect for radio and radio-like formats. Long songs allow for a deeper exploration of musical ideas, for the song to be able to take its time developing without rushing, to have increased complexity, can tell a more detailed story with a larger emotional arc, etc.
It's much like the difference between a short story and a novel.