The DU Lounge
Related: Culture Forums, Support ForumsNew Radio format: Your Favorite Songs, Abridged
Just heard this on NPR this afternoon, a radio station in Canada has decided to edit songs down to a two minute format because kids get bored with a three and a half minute song. I am officially too old to go on much longer.
When they say "twice the music," though, they actually mean half the song. That is, this station plays songs that have been heavily edited: long opening riffs, instrumental breaks, even a chorus or two might disappear. The goal, the station's representatives say, is to keep listeners from getting bored.
Station if you want to listen: http://streema.com/radios/Amp_Radio_Calgary_CFUL (I don't know enough top forty to know the difference)
BlueJazz
(25,348 posts)csziggy
(34,136 posts)They will just play the same ones over and over, now more often.
csziggy
(34,136 posts)I like the long version of songs. But then I'm old.
I once complained to a radio station that claimed they were playing the "full" Ina-gadda-da-vida. When they made the announcement before the song began, I was stoked - I had about a twenty minute drive home and was all set to listen to the music all the way. They played the abridged 5 minute version. The COMPLETE song is 17 minutes!
The DJ was great - he asked me to call the next night when I headed home and he did play the full version. It was great.
I pity kids that don't have the attention span to listen to a masterpiece like that. They are missing so much.
Throd
(7,208 posts)People these days...the patience of a gnat.
Ron Obvious
(6,261 posts)I hate Reader's Digest.
I heard the same NPR story you did, and my reaction was much the same as yours.
pinboy3niner
(53,339 posts)And I can't explain the reasoning for this either.
gvstn
(2,805 posts)Only 5 minutes or so for those with short attention spans and available at the NPR link I originally posted.
I really think the interview is worth a listen.
The interviewer did cover all the bases about artists being upset that something might be lost in editing etc. but the guy from the radio station just seemed to have no clue about music in general. All he could say is that 3½ minutes was arbitrary, not that musicians actually worked within those parameters to make a song work and include everything they could to make us feel good. I know that even these days, where I can count the number of actual books I read in a year on one hand, I still love hearing a particular song on the radio and 3½ minutes of it is just too short.
His bit about kids starting a song on an Ipod and then moving to the next one 90 seconds later just sounds dumb. I've done that forever even on LPs when I thought a particular song was what I wanted to hear and then decided, "No that is not it", I want something else. I never wanted an abbreviated version of a song that made me feel good!
Orrex
(63,203 posts)I liked the bit where they featured NPR's own "abridged" music sampler, effectively showing how preposterous this is.
Of course, I suppose this means that we'll start seeing syndicated TV shows edited down to digestible 5-minute chunks...
cemaphonic
(4,138 posts)The Commercial Album is an album of 40 songs, each exactly one minute long. Since it's The Residents, they sound like this:
MH1
(17,600 posts)Almost every popular new song I've heard sucks really really bad to my older ears, and actually listening to a full 3-4 minutes of that suckage would be unbearable. I've gotten very good at tuning out the suckage when I have to be in a place where it is playing.
gvstn
(2,805 posts)Everyone's voice sounds the same. I really think musical "artists" are now picked by how they can be packaged and how much non-musical merchandise can be sold. I can't remember the last time I turned on the radio and heard a song and thought, "Cool, so and so has a new song". No one's voice stands out like that to me anymore.