Conference cookie::notes$archive:cd_v1

    Digital Audio now publishes a list if under-35 minute CDs each month.
    It is hardly an exhaustive list, however.
    				Steve

    23 minutes?  That certainly says something about Lovin' Spoonful.
    FWIW, the first few Beatles CDs clocked in at a mere 34-36 minutes.
    That's not a lot for the money, either.
    
    With regards to this issue, I've purchased a few CDs only because
    I *thought* that 1) its something I want and 2) it might be a double
    album for a single CD price.  Often, they don't seem to say so if
    I'm not intimately aware of the original.  Bob Marley's BABYLON
    BY BUS is such an example.  It has about 12 songs listed on the
    back.  Knowing a good bit about Marley, I though an average of 3
    to an album side seems about right and I was.
    
    Dan
    

    DA lists "The Artful Balance Collection, Vol. 1" at a mere 22:01!
    Their list is on page 117 of the November issue, and you can use
    the reader service card to nominate your own entries.
    
    				Steve

    re:.0
    
    It seems to me that I mentioned the Lovin' Spoonful CD before.
    I bought it *used* and I thought it was a rip.
    
    THE BEST OF THE LOVIN' SPOONFUL is a reasonably good buy, though.
    
    --- jerry

    Re: .0, .5
    Jerry's correct.  To sum up this thing on the Lovin' Spoonful; there
    are TWO discs of greatest hits out.  Jerry referred to THE BEST
    OF THE LOVIN' SPOONFUL which is out on their original label (Buddah,
    I think) and has 14 of their best, (including all their early singles).
    This IS a good value.  The other is a rip-off imposter of their
    greatest hits.  When I saw it in the store I couldn't believe someone
    could get away with putting about 8 songs on the disc and calling
    it a greatest hits compilation.  The verdict: stay away from this
    one and look specifically for THE BEST OF THE LOVIN' SPOONFUL;
    $10.99 at Strawberries, by the way.
    
        Marty
    

    	I guess the length depends on your musical perspective. 
    	In my opinion (for what it's worth), 23.20 minutes is more than
    enough time to listen to the Lovin' Spoonfuls!  :^))
    
    ---Long Hair Music listener

    Mentioned in another note, but worth repeating here:
    
    Chicago II is on 2 discs but could easily have fit on 1, with several
    minutes to spare.  The discs are something like 36 and 33 minutes each. 

Perhaps I'm going off on a tangent, but many double-albums are being released 
as single CD's with missing tracks.  These are good buys, but it's a shame that 
one can't buy true CD equivalents of the albums.

Elton John's "Blue Moves" CD has four tracks removed.  Three were rather 
experimental and unfinished sounding, but the fourth was very finished sounding
and I can't figure out why it was chosen.  Not one of my favourites, but 
certainly worth repeat listenings.

Jerry mentioned earlier that Motown is taking a similar approach with their 
doubled-up reissues, although they're doing it by using shorter mixes.

Apparantly, though, this note is about CD equivalents of albums that were 
short to begin with, so perhaps another note should be started for CD's that 
are not equivalent to their vinyl counterparts.


				Mark

RE: Note 925.3 
    QUARK::LIONEL "We all live in a yellow subroutine"    
    
   >> DA lists "The Artful Balance Collection, Vol. 1" at a mere 22:01!
   >> Their list is on page 117 of the November issue, and you can use
   >> the reader service card to nominate your own entries.
   >>
   >>			Steve
    
    I happen to own this CD and checked it this weekend.  It's short,
    but not *that* bad - 33:17.  And, the music is good!
    
    Vivianne Majewski

    Fleetwood Mac's TUSK on CD has one cut (SARAH) which is 4 minutes
    shorter on the CD than on the album.  The Album version is 10 mins.
    long.
    
    Of course, this abbreviation is marked by a miniscule asterisk next
    to the Title on the back of the CD.
    
                                    Bob Walsh

    re:.10
    
    Try checking your copies again. Since I'm home right now, I have
    access to mine. Your numbers are wrong. The LP version of "Sara"
    is 6:26, not 10 minutes, and the CD version is 4:37, not 4 minutes
    shorter than the LP version. And there is no "miniscule asterisk"
    on the back of the CD, but the notation "(EDIT)" after the title.
    
    I agree, though, that it sucks that this isn't mentioned on the
    back of the outer packaging.
    
    --- jerry

>    I agree, though, that it sucks that this isn't mentioned on the
>    back of the outer packaging.
    
     i think it sucks period...especially when they leave songs off
     altogether...

     tlr (who's missing out on some great music)

    re:.12
    
    Well, in the case of TUSK, the album was just a *tad* too long
    to fit on one disc. I'd rather have one shortened song than a
    whole second disc at twice the price. I only wish they picked
    a different song, as "Sara" is one of my favorites from the
    album.
    
    As it is, "Sara" had to have been remixed, because the cutting
    is unnoticible (there's a lot of repetition of the chorus, and
    this was what was probably cut). I suspect that they used the
    "hit single" version, though since I never bought the single,
    I can't compare the times to say for sure.
    
    --- jerry

Re: .6

Allow another person to express a "longhair" preference, in the context of 
"classical" music.  Yeah, I like rock, too, at least some of it, but it's 
not really where my head is.

So.  Having said that, I'll open the same time deficiency can of worms in 
the classical genre.  The Antal Dorati/Detroit Symphony CD of Stravinsky's 
Rite of Spring (London 414 141-2) is all of about 33 minutes long.  Now 
that isn't so much of a bitch as it might be, if you really like that 
particular recording, which I do, but it grates against the cockles of my 
soul every time I walk past the London Jubilee LP display and see the same 
recording coupled with Dorati's version of Petrushka, which is also the 
best part of 33 minutes long.  And priced at $4.99!  A 60+ LP and a
33-minute CD?  Give me a *break*!

- Dick

    Eventually the time-deficient classical CD's will probably be pushed
    out of the market because there's more competition than in rock.
    If you really want one of those short rock CD's, you're not going
    to get it anywhere else unless the record company repackages it.
    But in classical music, there are usually so many competitive
    performances that it seems the short ones will fall by the wayside
    soon.
    
    Unless you have great loyalty to a single performance, why buy Rite
    of Spring alone when there are CD's that couple it with Petroushka?
    Why buy Alexander Nevsky alone when 1/2 the CD's couple it with
    Lt. Kije?  Why buy Dvorak's 9th alone when you can get it coupled
    with 3 other short pieces?  Just three examples.
    
    The exception is in unusual classical repertoire, like in contemporary
    music, where there is just a single recording.  New World and Nonesuch
    CD's have been stingy in the past, though Nonesuch seems to be getting
    better.  The New World Zwilich orchestral CD is under 40 minutes,
    for example.
    
    Michael