Enough already! Or the most self-indulgent song ever.

Bingo. I can never understand this idea that some critics have that anything long is automatically “self indulgent”. What is “self indulgent” is criticising someone else’s art, that some people like, because it doesn’t indulge the attention-span-of-a-gnat preferences of said critic.

Of course some long tracks suck, but that’s because they suck. Which sounds like the problem the OP is referring to.

I don’t understand what this has to do with the OP, but anyway, don’t you mean that they were lucky to hook up with him? Daltrey, Entwistle and Moon were/are good, but if you swapped them for other competent musos nothing crucial would change. Not so, absent Pete T.

I suppose I was trying to say that the catalog was a huge example of self indulgence. From original inception to finished product, most of the band’s output was the result of one man’s vision. A collaborative effort brought the music to fruition, but the songs were Pete’s brainchildren, if I may coin a phrase. Pretty flippin’ indulgent. (And he would undoubtedly agree.)

Didn’t Mountain do a live album where Nantucket Sleighride stretched over two sides? I never found it but I did read about it somewhere.

Manfred Mann–how does someone get from some kid’s summer on the Jersey Boardwalk to “Chopsticks” without blaming it on the drugs?

You have to give Bruce at least partial credit for that one.

That was so you could stack sides two and four on your record player, and not have to kick your bong over trying to get up.

No, sorry, the most self-indulgent song ever is Kelly Clarkson’s “Because of You”. Sung from so high up on her cross that my *kid *said, “Geez, Mom - when is she going to take some personal responsibility?” when he first heard it. :rolleyes:

I mean, nice voice and all, but the 16 year old angst lyrics just didn’t sit well with me coming from the second (third?) album of a commercially and critically successful 22 year old woman.

If we’re using WhyNot’s definition of “self-indulgent song” (the OP’s seemed to be more limited), this old thread of mine has my answer.

The OP can’t listen to too much jazz :slight_smile:

For example - any of the later works of John Coltrane, or heaven forfend, his old lady Alice Coltrane or heaven even further forfend, his/her collaborator Pharoah Saunders are self indulgent wankitude beyond comprehension.

Or you could just call it Jazz. Self-indulgent would be John Lennon doing “Revolution 9”

If you want good examples of self-indulgence, a fine source is 70s so-called progressive rock. I submit ‘Tales From Topographic Oceans’ by Yes. (Okay, not a ‘song’ as such, as requested in the OP, but I hope it’s not too sinful a hijack). I am too old to care what anyone thinks of my good or bad taste, and I am happy to declare myself a huge fan of prog rock, including the work of ‘Yes’. But even I, as a fan of the stuff, can recognise that ‘TFTO’ is pompous self-indulgence taken to the limit. In fact, we can be grateful that the old vinyl albums could only hold 20-25 minutes’ music per side, or else each of the four sides of ‘TFTO’ would probably have been even longer. There’s some good music, fine ideas and admirable ambition on the double album, but any sane edit would probably get it down to one quarter of its length without losing anything worthwhile.

I know what you’re saying, but albums that were designed to play like that had the sides set up differently. Tommy, for instance, had sides one and three on one disk and two and four on the the other. That way, you could play the four sides but only have to turn the record over once.

Eat a Peach had “Mountain Jam” on sides two and four. Though you could certainly put them onto your record changer so the entire thing plays, the sequence was designed so you’d listen to the first half, then to a few songs, then to the second half.

As far as long songs are concerned, I do have to mention Soft Machine’s album Third. Originally it was four songs on two records. It makes it the biggest bargain on iTunes: $3.97 for about an hour and ten minutes of music.

Yes, that would be the Twin Peaks (live) album.

How can you mention the 22 minute “Get Ready” and not mention the 17+minute “Ma” from the Ma album. “Ma” was also a Temptations song. Guess the boys had a penchant for Motown jammed out covers. In fact the whole Ma album was Motown covers.

Dazed and Confused. - Any live version, though the one on ‘The Song Remains the Same’ is particularly grotesque.

Moby Dick - For God’s sake who needs a twenty-minute drum solo?

The End - Come to think of it, anything by the Doors.

A Day in the Life - pretentious stoner twaddle. War’s version is even worse (And even longer. And has Eric Burdon struggling with the vocal)

Speaking of War, their version of Paint it Black is pretty grim, too.

Sometimes the DJ is constipated and he needs the time people.

I love that one, it’s one of my favorites.

I also love the Grateful Dead and usually in concert they did an outstanding job. But I remember one concert where they went on so long, and got into such intricate little noodling details, that I think I would have fallen asleep if I hadn’t been tripping. By the end of the song I couldn’t even remember what song they’d started with, and I don’t think the band could, either.

Oh god. Which reminds me of that Sheryl Fucking Crow song “Strong Enough.” I heard that song once and will never have the tiniest shred of respect for anyone who would sing it. Awful, horrific, self-satisfied bs.

When I think of musical self-indulgence, the first thing that comes to mind is Bruce Willis’ musical ventures in his “Bruno” persona. This may, in fact, cross the line from self-indulgence into masturbation.

In terms of humorous self-indulgence, Avril Lavigne’s Sk8r Boi had me in fits of uncontrollable laughter at the sheer ridiculousness of the story the first few times I heard it. Perhaps the only song where I’ve had such a reaction.