Best numbers of tracks???
 

How many tracks do you all think would be the optimum amount? It's 12~14 for me and i haven't heard any 'long' albums that i qualify as outstanding. An ablum too long would make it too boring at times and a short one like MM would not be enough. Seriously, i think Ayu should stop after INSPIRE for MS cause it flowed so well. Things was like =X after INSPIRE.

i say 14-16 like RAINBOW.

I say 14. Optimum. Or if the artist is a good one, then 12. The more the tracks, the higher the risk of error. And the worse it is to listen to the whole album in one go.

I'd say the more the better. better value for your money :)

I'm the same, I'd rather have a few extra so-so tracks than only the best ones.

Though, the best album by Ayu is imo Memorial address, I don't think the songs are better than her other, but the whole album just scream quality at you and I like that it's short.

I say, put any amount of tracks on the album, be it few or a lot, as long as it's the artist that choose to put them there. It's what the artist choose to give me that matters to me, not what I want the artist to give me.

Quality over quantity is usually a big thing for me...but hey, some "long" albums could have the best songs too ;) I guess I can go either way.

Definitely no, as that has nothing to do with the quality of the music, just the quantity. I'd rather hear 20 minutes of good music than 40 minutes of mediocre music.

As for my favourite format, I prefer CDs of about 40 minutes, with 60 minutes being what I usually consider max. How many songs an artists will fit into that, I don't care; it's the overall length that's important. Of course, I don't mind different formats occassionally; shorter (EPs) or longer (Merzbow's Houjoue, for example, which is slightly over 5 hours).

i say 12 to 14 tracks excluding instrumentals or interludes

the more the better I say!

I'm not a big fan of albums with only 10 or so tracks (excluding intros/interludes/instrumentals) -- seriously, these artists produce a stackload of tracks (some say up to 40+) - surely there's enough to at least have 12+ good album-worthy tracks?!

EDIT: typo

I think 17.. For some reason. Oo;;

well...I prefer a good 10 song cd hehe

12

and no album should be more than 45 minutes.

That's ideal

:)

i say 10-12, like Duty

14-16 tracks.

as many as possible. i'm very hesitant to buy an album with 10 or 11 songs on it. i think there should be at least 12 songs and the album should be at least 6o minutes long. otherwise...why spend the money on it?

12 or 16

i agree with you there :yes it's not the matter of how long the album is, if the songs itself is good, then that is what makes an album.

I agree with you , but surely everybody would prefer an album with as much of quality content as possible.

but I'm not the type who listens to full albums anyways. I always just listen to a couple of tracks & then change the album. I like making my own compilation albums & play several CD's on suffle on my player. maybe this is way no album can be "too long" for me because I so rarely listen thru a full album completely.

i like when every minute is filled because i can always reburn it with the tracks i dont like, but i am sick of good bsides not ending up on a cd, especially when the final result is 10 songs half of which i usuaully hate,.