Side 2

Do you guys remember flipping the record over? Do you remember taking the cassette out of the machine flipping it over and putting it back in (if you didn't have to do a little rewinding first)? These little "intermissions" are no longer necessary. But have us music listeners lost something?
I remember I had a friend that would play side 2 of Master of Puppets continuously, after months and months of playing side one. That got me thinking how the digital age really began in 1990-91, when compact discs proliferated. If you look at Metal Archives almost all albums before that time period had two (or four) sides listed.
It seems to me that songwriting has changed due to the digital age, and an unintended consequence has happened by abandoning the analog format. Albums like Piece of Mind,2112, and even Master of Puppets were written with a more ebb and flow. Side two's opening song was almost always a strong one, to really capture and solidify the album's concept and purpose. The end of side one was a time to take a bathroom break, have a sandwich, roll a joint, or just contemplate what you just heard.
Maybe the artificial break was an arbitrary one, and a relic of a simpler age. I can't help but think in our race to be technologically advanced we lost some subtleties in the process. Before cds maybe due to laziness, I used to devour albums start to finish. At least all songs got an equal chance, and not subject to the skip button. Albums have lost that specialness-and that's one of the reasons I suspect vinyl is becoming a niche industry. Albums in that format seem to be more "special" a unified work, and not just a collection of songs with artwork like you get digitally.
What is your opinion? Do you miss "Side Two" or even realize it's absence and how that has changed how albums are made? Do you think bands write for the vinyl in mind ? Or is "side two" an artificial construct that deserved to be relegated to the dust bins of history?

Great post, John. I remember about 20 or so years ago I was in college in NH and a local Radio Station used to play Classic Album sides (as I am sure a lot of them did. I don't mean to sound age centric but if you didn't experience this when it first occurred (like you and many others here did) it may not be possible to capture that feeling. Side two's opening song was always a strong one - absolutely correct - like the opening possession of the second half of the game. I firmly believe we have lost something in the digital age - packaging and presentation. Many of us (probably you too) bought music based on how the band looked or how the cover looked, but that is gone now.

Speaking of flipping a cassette over, I played my original Badlands S/T so many times it started to wrinkle the tape during Dreams in the Dark and when I listen to that song in a different format I still hear the wrinkle in my mind. Ha.

John Madden wrote:

Do you guys remember flipping the record over? Do you remember taking the cassette out of the machine flipping it over and putting it back in (if you didn't have to do a little rewinding first)? These little "intermissions" are no longer necessary. But have us music listeners lost something?
 I remember I had a friend that would play side 2 of Master of Puppets continuously, after months and months of playing side one. That got me thinking how the digital age really began in 1990-91, when compact discs proliferated. If you look at Metal Archives almost all albums before that time period had two (or four) sides listed.
 It seems to me that songwriting has changed due to the digital age, and an unintended consequence has happened by abandoning the analog format. Albums like Piece of Mind,2112, and even Master of Puppets were written with a more ebb and flow. Side two's opening song was almost always a strong one, to really capture and solidify the album's concept and purpose. The end of side one was a time to take a bathroom break, have a sandwich, roll a joint, or just contemplate what you just heard.
Maybe the artificial break was an arbitrary one, and a relic of a simpler age. I can't help but think in our race to be technologically  advanced we lost some subtleties in the process. Before cds maybe due to laziness, I used to devour albums start to finish. At least all songs got an equal chance, and not subject to the skip button. Albums have lost that specialness-and that's one of the reasons I suspect vinyl is becoming a niche industry. Albums in that format seem to be more "special" a unified work, and not just a collection of songs with artwork like you get digitally.
 What is your opinion? Do you miss "Side Two" or even realize it's absence and how that has changed how albums are made? Do you think bands write for the vinyl in mind ? Or is "side two" an artificial construct that deserved to be relegated to the dust bins of history?

I was never a buyer of vinyl, due to the fact that I grew up in the cassette generation. Granted, vinyl was still a major player in the 80's, but a young kid couldn't afford all the accoutrements to enjoy the music they liked along with the physical product. My father had a stereo in the living room of our house with a turntable, but a young kid wants to listen to his music within their own space. I doubt my parents would have been happy to hear much of the music I was listening to. Hence, I had a small stereo with a dual cassette deck with a small set of speakers, which set on top of my dresser. This changed around my junior year, when we moved. I had a bigger room, so I upped the anti, with a stereo that had everything including the aforementioned and a turntable built in, along with tower speakers. I think it was some crap from Sanyo? Having said that, it was a vast improvement.

Now to your question. At least in my case, cassette's were really the only option available and the cassette's themselves were dirt cheap. The idea of flipping a cassette is just another thing which harkens back to a very beautiful period of my life. So, there's that fit of nostalgia when I think about that kind of stuff, I.E the recording, the high speed dubbing, etc.. It joins the era of the a touch tone phone with a chord, a "13" color or maybe black and white T.V with six channels, video games and video game systems which were interesting, but didn't necessarily keep you in the house all day and a ton of other things which have gone by the way side. If you were an avid cassette/turntable individual one would know the natural break between songs and where the flip came into play. Even though I look back at that fondly, I was happy when C.D's became the major player and the cassette became something obsolete fairly quickly. Vinyl on the other hand still remains cool. Though I don't have a vinyl collection, I would love to someday...

I really loved vinyl as a kid, I would not only flip the songs over and give it equal time, but I would read the songwriting credits, the production and engineering credits, the thank you, if it came with a lyric sheet would follow the lyrics, and if it came with liner notes I would re-read them often .

When the CD age came, I held on as long as I could but finally gave in when most new releases where not available on vinyl and frankly I liked the sound of a CD better then I ever did with vinyl.

That being said, I still usually listen to an album from back to front, but I do not spend much time reading the liner notes or scanning the album production credits as I did a kid

I definitely think something has been lost with the loss of a 'side 2'. Most albums that were released during cassette and vinyl days definitely had strong second side openers. It kinda felt like each side, at least on the good albums, were constructed to be 5- or 6- song mini albums, strong opener and strong closer. And a lot of that groove got lost too when those pre-CD albums were put on CD.

I just happened to be listening to Appetite for Destruction as I read this post, and that is a great example. On tape or vinyl, side 1 closes out with a bang with "Paradise City" and side 2 kicks in with the little build up to "My Michelle" before letting loose and of course blowing it all out with "Rocket Queen." Very deliberate.

Another example is The Stooges' Funhouse. Side 1 of the vinyl ends with the 7-minute slower groove of "Dirt" and then side 2 re-kicks into gear with the stomp of "1970". On the CD, "Dirt" just sounds like it's boringly thrown in the middle to slow down the momentum, instead of wind down the first side.

When I was in college, I took public transportation to and from school, so I lots of time to listen to my Sony Walkman and a backpack full of tapes.

That was over 20 years ago and yet still to this day, there are certain albums that I listen to and can remember "Oh, this is the last song on Side 1. Time to flip the tape over". Or remembering where there was a crinkle or warp in the tape and still expect to hear the imperfection on my cd.

Somehow I managed to get more stuff done back when I had to change tapes or records than now with an Ipod or PHD hooked up to the stereo system. My theory is I remained focused on what was chosen to be played and not having the problem of knowing there were 1000's of other songs a fingertip away to be distracted by.

My relaxation time involves either polishing chrome on my Cross Bones while listening to records in the shop or vinyl/headphones/book in the den. I suppose if my past didn't involve playing a lot of records and there were Ipods back then, the dynamic of how I prefer to listen to music would be quite different. The convenience of portable music libraries is really cool but to me it seems to have taken importance and personal attachment away from the musical experience.

Quote :

My relaxation time involves either polishing chrome

I rarely listen to music when I'm polishing my chrome.

MetalGuy71 wrote:

Quote :

My relaxation time involves either polishing chrome

I rarely listen to music when I'm polishing my chrome.

That's because you have the volume on the laptop turned off.

The CD age caused several bad things:

1) Many bands can't sequence an album to save their lives. Often, songs are thrown randomly on a CD and that kills any flow the album would have. This is probably my biggest complaint about albums nowadays - the sequencing sucks.

2) Albums are much too long. The 40 minute or so limitation of vinyl forced bands to be more disciplined on what would make it on an album. Weaker songs were farmed out for b-sides, etc... I really don't want to hear your 17 songs, 6 of which suck. Give me 10 or 11 excellent cuts please.

3) Not having sides eliminated the idea of having "heavy sides" and "soft sides" or studio material on one side and live on another. There were many cool ways to play with this format and sequencing was helped greatly by the pause while you flipped sides.

4) The CD encourages you to skip tracks you don't initially like, therefore you don't listen to songs that might grow on you over time. With vinyl and cassettes, I generally listened to all of the songs because it was a pain in the ass to skip a track. The CD made it difficult to find those songs that are "growers."

5) CD artwork was generally terrible in the 90s. In addition to being physically smaller, the 90s ushered in the era of horrid computer generated artwork. It was a dark time for album art.

Obviously, all of my complaints are easily rectified, but with the digital age they probably won't be.

Witchfinder wrote:

2) Albums are much too long. The 40 minute or so limitation of vinyl forced bands to be more disciplined on what would make it on an album. Weaker songs were farmed out for b-sides, etc... I really don't want to hear your 17 songs, 6 of which suck. Give me 10 or 11 excellent cuts please.

That one seems to be making a come back with some bands as of late. Whether it's artistic reasons or financial ones (less studio time to pay for), it's nice to get a solid 40 minute/9 song album than a 16 track/ 72 minute snore-fest.

Still hate 20 minute eps, but that's more of a personal bug of mine.

EDIT:

Quote :

11 track album has a total running time of 92 minutes, it is IRON MAIDEN’s first ever double studio album

Apparently Iron Maiden didn't get that memo

I'm fine without having to change sides to continue an album, and I love listening to vinyl and cassettes. I like to leave music playing while I'm working on something else. I haven't actively used MP3 players in several years.

Witchfinder wrote:

The CD age caused several bad things:

1)  Many bands can't sequence an album to save their lives.  Often, songs are thrown randomly on a CD and that kills any flow the album would have.  This is probably my biggest complaint about albums nowadays - the sequencing sucks.

2) Albums are much too long.  The 40 minute or so limitation of vinyl forced bands to be more disciplined on what would make it on an album. Weaker songs were farmed out for b-sides, etc...  I really don't want to hear your 17 songs, 6 of which suck.  Give me 10 or 11 excellent cuts please.

3) Not having sides eliminated the idea of having "heavy sides" and "soft sides" or studio material on one side and live on another.  There were many cool ways to play with this format and sequencing was helped greatly by the pause while you flipped sides.  

4)  The CD encourages you to skip tracks you don't initially like, therefore you don't listen to songs that might grow on you over time. With vinyl and cassettes, I generally listened to all of the songs because it was a pain in the ass to skip a track.  The CD made it difficult to find those songs that are "growers."

5)  CD artwork was generally terrible in the 90s.  In addition to being physically smaller, the 90s ushered in the era of horrid computer generated artwork.  It was a dark time for album art.

Obviously, all of my complaints are easily rectified, but with the digital age they probably won't be.

Excellent points, WF, especially number 4. I think that's where a lot of "Fan Favorites" come from that were not singles or big hits.

I think it comes down to people no longer understanding you can take a break in between listening to tracks on an album.

If I have a new album, I usually just listen to maybe 3 songs at a time. Then stop. Then either play the same songs again, or just re-play one of the songs, before choosing to continue.

If you have an hour, you don't have to play the whole 60 minute album. You can play a quarter of it 4 times. For instance. And then next time, you switch "the side", and go to the next quarter.

I just follow my feeling at the time. Let the music lead you. I rarely play the same song back-to-back because that's too redundant, but after maybe another couple of tracks, I do feel like going back already. Rushing through it just makes the whole experience flat.

I still think of albums in the context of side one and side two and albums from the CD era I would always make a decision of "this is where the end of side one would be".

As for which albums benefit the most from the "20 minutes per side" limitation of vinyl it kind of depends. If you're a straight ahead rock, pop or metal band then a 40 to 45 minute album is probably good enough, especially if many of your songs are kind of similar. And I think a 50 minute maximum time is probably sufficient for most bands and won't completely tire out the listener.

If the music you write is more long form, instrumental, progressive, jazz, classical, etc. then not having to deal with the limitations of a 20 minute side can be a plus. In those cases the medium can interrupt the flow of what you were trying to create (example: Thick As A Brick is a 40 minute song split in two only because of the album side limitations).

My main experience of "sides" as a tangible memory was making mix tapes from my parents' record and CD collection to take on my walkman to and from school. I know people who had constructing those things down to an art, but I was really slapdash about it. I was good about not having songs overlap or too abruptly start up, but I never really paid attention to when I was running out of tape. I just kept it going. As a result, there are plenty of songs I only ever heard the first 1:20 of before they fizzed out into the run-out tape. I thought it was a neat touch and remember it fondly now even if it kind of defeated the purpose. It also meant I had at least one song to use as a "seed" for my next mix since I obviously needed a tape with the complete version on it.

The limitations of vinyl were a perfect storm for encouraging innovation when you get straight down to it. I mean, 20 minutes per side with record labels really gun-shy about double LPs meant you had to cobble down your best material. Inner groove distortion meant you had to end each side with a strong number that wasn't too sonically amped or busy or it'd sound like ass. That created this sense of Side A - Intermission - Side B - Closing. It gave it the flow of a stage show or something like that and was excellent stuff.

I'm with S.D. in that it's cool to not be FORCED to observe the limitations of vinyl if it doesn't suit your compositional style, but there's also a lot to be said for the wise words of Dr. Ian Malcolm: "You were so preoccuped with whether or not you could, you didn't stop to think whether or not you should."

I think we can all learn a lesson from that.

I used to leave a tape recording The MetalZone on Saturday nights back in the late eighties early nineties and I remember the tape running out about 30 seconds into a really cool song that I have never been able to find! All I remember was this happening in 1988 and a the opening lines. Ha. Talk about limitations.