With no real quantitative way of nailing exactly what “too damned short” is, (heh - or “great”), hopefully this obviously subjective approach can bulldoze and smudge an eventual, crude consensus on songs, compositions, whatevs in any genres of music/film/theatre that feel like they ‘basically coulda gone on longer’.
“Immigrant Song” - one of the greatest segues into a next song, but still could’ve used maybe another verse, that had, I dunno - a second, soaring, steel guitar track, backing Bob, who’s going on about more sailing and pillaging?
Hm - actually steel conveys the blues, which might not be very Viking-y.
Third movement in Beethoven’s 7th Symphony - while it technically might not be short for time-length for most movements, for some reason it always zips past me way more quickly than I expect it to.
Damnit it’s killing me I can’t fricking re-word that - starting to really bug the -oh forget it.
All eight numbers in the side B medley from Abbey Road. Might’ve made for an interesting double album counterpart to the White Album if they’d fleshed out those numbers a bit more? Some of those songs, possibly, were good at they length they were.
Elvis Costello’s “From A Whisper to a Scream”. Almost three minutes, but still…
(There could be a couple of numbers of his one could say that of)
I’m sure if I thought about it I could come up with a ton of songs. But the first one that popped into my mind was “Escape” by Journey.
By the time the album Escape was released, Journey was fully in the throes of chasing superstardom, and there was barely a trace left of their original prog & fusion sound. IMO, the album is rather meh - except for “Escape,” which I think is great. However, the song has always felt rushed to me, as if it’s been condensed down - like I’m listening to the “trailer” of a much longer song. I’ve always wondered if, had they written “Escape” a few years earlier, it would have been that epic song I’ve always felt was hinted at.
Exhibit One, Two, and Three: Try a Little Tenderness, Otis Redding. One of the most magnificent slow burns ever for the first 2:50, and then Otis just loses it–but it fades out soon after. Don’t leave us Otis!
I dunno, I’m speaking as a Rush fan, here, but there’s a LOT to be said for being able to get into a song, say what you want, and get out.
Credence Clearwater Revival, for example. John Fogerty was REALLY good writing good, punchy, hook-filled songs that also didn’t overstay their welcome.
Proud Mary: 3:09
Bad Moon Rising: 2:18
Born on the Bayou: 3:50
That’s economical and efficient.
But you’re certainly right that, when the song supports it, more length is just fine. Anyone who disagrees with me can listen to the radio edit of ‘Bohemian Rhapsody’ the record company tried to push at first when being worried that a song at 5:55 would not get radio airplay.
Radio stations loved playing those CCR songs. The DJ’s could get right back to what the stations were all about: playing commercials. Their version of “Suzie Q” (8:37) didn’t get much play at least on AM.
And I can’t think of any (not counting radio edits of songs that genuinely are longer in their proper form). Which is why I subscribed to this thread: to see if anyone else came up with any examples that I agreed with.
I don’t deny the theoretical possibility of a song being too short, or incomplete. But I can’t think of examples that I think fit that category. I would much rather a song leave me wanting more than wear out its welcome. After all, if I want more, I can just play the song again.
And I strenuously disagree with the OP about the Abbey Road songs. I am totally down with short songs or song fragments used as part of a larger structure, like a medley, suite, or album. A song that doesn’t really work on its own, out of its proper context, is not the same thing as a song that is “too short.”
Yep, agree - almost all the short songs I can think of are long enough.
It’s far more common for a song to be overly long and belabour the point. I remember John Peel saying something to the effect that way back in the day, when a band had two minutes and fifteen, maybe two minutes and thirty to say what they had to say - maybe all they would ever have to say - the records tended to be better
After a piece of headscratching I could think of only one (slightly obscure) song that I think is too short - there is so little of it, that I wonder what it could have become. And it is a teensy, weensy gem, which just intensifies my curiosity.
Chameleon by Cockney Rebel. Go on, waste 49 seconds of your time.*
j
Well, listed at 49 seconds, but I reckon 8 of those are the fade out.
Still, McCartney was known for writing half songs and then making medleys out of them. I’m not sure there are full songs in most of the half songs included in the Abbey Road medley.
