Poll: How long should they expect your boner to last?
Poll Options
View poll results: How long should they expect your boner to last?
~1 year or less
36 24%
~2 years
96 63%
~3 years
11 7%
I'm a retard and I like waiting 4+ years for new music
9 6%
Voters: 152.
Page 1 of 2
#1
Simple question. What do you think the ideal length of time for a band to wait between releasing albums should be/is? Some bands put out an album every year, while some other bands (Wintersun >.> like to give you a great earjob and then make you wait 8 years for another one.


I think 2 years is probably the best. It gives the album time to sink in and resonate with the audience, but doesn't give them enough time to get really bored with it, nor does it give them too much too fast so that they can't digest it.
Check out my band Disturbed
#3
Depends on how many tracks/lenght of previous album. But over a year - two years seems reasonable.
sometimes I see us in a cymbal splash or in the sound of a car crash
#4
I think it depends on the artist and their capacity to write the music too.
Guitars & Gear:
Parker Nitefly M
Sumer Metal Driver
Ibanez RGD2120Z
AMT SS-11B
Two Notes Torpedo CAB
#5
Only The Beatles could pull off shorter time between albums. If it's between short and crappy or longer times and well-done then go for the latter...
████████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
█████████████████████████
██████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
#7
Quote by Kensai
Only The Beatles could pull off shorter time between albums. If it's between short and crappy or longer times and well-done then go for the latter...


John Frusciante released 6 albums in 6 months. They were all quite fantastic in their own way I'd say.

Quite a few musicians can basically throw out anything and it will be good nonetheless.
sometimes I see us in a cymbal splash or in the sound of a car crash
#8
Quote by Kensai
Only The Beatles could pull off shorter time between albums. If it's between short and crappy or longer times and well-done then go for the latter...



A lot of punk bands put out an album a year.
Check out my band Disturbed
#10
Quote by Kensai
If it's between short and crappy or longer times and well-done then go for the latter...


/thread
We've survived before, we'll do it agian. Play up Pompey.
#11
Tool is the only band that can get away with that shit.

I'd say 2-3 years, gives enough time to write and record, and/or tour.
~don't finkdinkle when ur supposed to be dimpdickin~
#13
Quote by JohnnyGenzale
John Frusciante released 6 albums in 6 months. They were all quite fantastic in their own way I'd say.

Quite a few musicians can basically throw out anything and it will be good nonetheless.


Haven't heard them, but the way you describe them sounds like a mother talking about her son's odd tendencies

Quote by StewieSwan
A lot of punk bands put out an album a year.


Yeah but I mean good albums.
████████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
█████████████████████████
██████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
#15
Short as possible preferably. I can choose when to listen to albums without having to be forced to wait. Also, considering most music i listen to is from people who are dead or bands that have ended i tend to download loads of albums in one go anyway.
#16
Quote by Kensai
Haven't heard them, but the way you describe them sounds like a mother talking about her son's odd tendencies



You weren't aware? Yet you have him as your avatar. I'm disappointed.
sometimes I see us in a cymbal splash or in the sound of a car crash
#17
Quote by JohnnyGenzale
You weren't aware? Yet you have him as your avatar. I'm disappointed.

Well, sorry mom

I still think his first albums were the best. The ones he made for drug money.
████████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
█████████████████████████
██████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
#18
Quote by Kensai
Yeah but I mean good albums.



Well obviously, I'm just sayin'
Check out my band Disturbed
#19
Quote by Kensai
Haven't heard them, but the way you describe them sounds like a mother talking about her son's odd tendencies


Yeah but I mean good albums.

this post is good
Quote by korinaflyingv
On the come up we were listening to Grateful Dead and the music started passing through my bowel and out my arsehole as this violet stream of light. I shat music. It was beautiful.
#20
However long it takes them to write a decent album that's not going to suck.
Quote by SlackerBabbath
My ideal woman would be a grossly overweight woman who would happy go jogging, come home all sweaty and let me put my dick under her armpit while she shuffles a pack of cards.

Stay classy, pit.
#23
Every year and a half of so is good for me. More than that and I feel like it decreases the importance of each album as a statement in the band's career. Less, and I don't think they're working hard enough. Staleness and built up expectations can kill a band.
language
jazyk
kieli
язык
العربية


My Tumblr: Lots of artist recommendations, album reviews, and ideas about music (as well as some film and bike stuff).

Go Sharks! Go Wings! Go Flyers! Go Kings!
#24
Quote by Kensai
Well, sorry mom

I still think his first albums were the best. The ones he made for drug money.


Not Curtains? I find Curtains to be his diamond without a doubt. Such a fantastic and solid album. Not a single weak spot and in general just an amazing album. The Will To Death And Shadows Collide are amazing too.
sometimes I see us in a cymbal splash or in the sound of a car crash
#25
Seems to depend on the band. Iron Maiden's best stuff (Number of the Beast through Powerslave) came when they put an album out every year, on top of 9 months touring.

I don't really mind though. If it takes Wintersun 8 years to make an album they're happy with so be it.
Up The Boro!
#26
It really depends on the band, but I would say about 2 years. One year sound like a little too quick and I think that 4 or more years is a little long. The only exception to that is when the band is making a comeback.

The thing that I still don't understand is how Offspring takes like 5 years to make an album. It's not like it is very complex music, but then you have bands like Megadeth or Devin Townsend who bust out albums every 2 years or so.
Quote by strat0blaster
This is terrible advice. Even worse than the useless dry, sarcastic comment I made.

Quote by Cathbard
I'm too old for the Jim Morrison look now. When I was gigging I had a fine arse.
#27
8 months
¤´¨留話 請留話 請在我說完後
¸.•´¸.•´¨¸.•¤¨哭泣我不在這裡 我不在那裡請在嗶一聲之後留
(¸.•´ (¸.•´ .•´(´¸.•¤´`¤下自己的秘密請在嗶一聲之後對話筒沾自喜請在嗶一聲之後對空氣唉聲嘆氣


我不在這裡 我人在哪裡 我想到哪裡¤

請在嗶一聲之後留下有聲的話題¤

請在嗶一聲之後分擔感情的問題¤


¤¤¤

#28
Offspring have about six thousand albums. It must be hard for them to come up with something even remotely different. Plus, they're getting pretty old now
We've survived before, we'll do it agian. Play up Pompey.
#29
My favorite band has always released at least 1 thing per year for 35+ years and never stopped. Imo the quality has never suffered either, they're jsut that good >_>
People in the pit take my post way too seriously.

MyAnimeList
7-String Legion

If you have a question PM me and I will always get back to you.
#31
I figure somewhere around 3 years is ideal. The shorter time between albums, the less time the band has to go out and tour.
#32
18+ years, just like I like my women (legally speaking).


Really though 2 years is good. Gives the band plenty of time to tour and stuff on their current material.
Warning: The above post may contain lethal levels of radiation, sharp objects and sexiness.
Proceed with extreme caution!
#33
Every year would be ideal, but 2 years is pretty reasonable.
Quote by Diamond Dave

Things that restored my faith in humanity this year: 26
Things that removed all faith in humanity this year: 1,563,745,234 (estimated)

so that's a result of -1,563,745,208 faith points in humanity lost, which is actually up from last year!
#34
Between 6 months and 2 years
Please call me Rainer, was 16 and empty minded when I made my profile.

Sometimes I talk to myself too...but never on the internet.
#35
Quote by stonyman65
The thing that I still don't understand is how Offspring takes like 5 years to make an album. It's not like it is very complex music, but then you have bands like Megadeth or Devin Townsend who bust out albums every 2 years or so.

The Offspring are old now, and have other shit to do, although their last two albums have been pretty weak, despite the wait. From 1989 to 2003 they put out 7 albums; that's fairly consistent.
I'd say 2-3 years between albums is alright generally, although if it's an awesome album I wouldn't care how long it took to make.
"People like Coldplay and voted for the Nazis; you can't trust people."
#36
A year to 2 years would be fine. As long as the artist/band releases something of quality, if not, 2 to 3 years it is.

GRAY RAINBOW

#38
Quote by Minkaro
The Buckethead method of releasing five awesome albums a year is the best one.



That only works if you're Buckethead or Frank Zappa.
Save a trip to the RT!
Quote by blake1221
If there's anything to take away from this thread, anything at all, it's to always cup the balls.


Top trolling abilities.

Quote by caeser1156
God dammit you had me 10/10
#39
Back to back for the first two, then 2 year breaks between each.
Quote by progdude93
my fetish is dudes with dicks small enough to pee on their own sacks.
#40
Quote by JohnnyGenzale
Not Curtains? I find Curtains to be his diamond without a doubt. Such a fantastic and solid album. Not a single weak spot and in general just an amazing album. The Will To Death And Shadows Collide are amazing too.

Good albums for sure, but none of them can live up to such masterpieces as "Your Pussy Is Glued To A Building On Fire" or " Untitled".
Page 1 of 2