Avalanche Songs

[rmak]

who here also thinks matt was trying to extend a lot of these tracks for as long as he could? go for a record like in a godda divida or something.

 

 

 

having said that, best album ever.

Edited January 10, 2005 by rmak

[saturnine]

the longer, the better.

[pvnc]

The only ones that I think he really did that with are "Avalanche," "While We Were Hunting Rabbits," and "Near Fantastica." Witness the fact that "Near Fantastica" was cut down a lot for use as a single. The one song that I kinda wished was longer was "21st Century Living."

 

I do recall that "Avalanche" was extended even further when played live. That ruled.

 

Anyway, I don't think he was trying to pull an Iron Butterfly or anything. I mean, he didn't have any songs over ten minutes, and none of the songs were tracked together to form larger compositions. I would be interested to see what the result would be like if he tried something like that.

[rmak]

weapon, in a world called catastrophe, house of smoke and mirrors, pledge of allegiance all six minutes long

 

avalanche seven and a half minutes and near fantastica, wwwhr both eight minutes

 

over half of his album is longer than what he typically does (3-5)

Edited January 10, 2005 by rmak

[derek.]

i dont find the songs to be too long at all. the way the songs were written, they need the length to develop and say what they need to say. if anyone heres written a song, you'll know that the song just pretty much decides how long its going to be. you can feel when its done.

Edited January 10, 2005 by derek.

[Princess]

Longer songs just mean more to enjoy. This is my favourite album.

[here is no why]

As long as he isn't doing it to drag the song on, just for the fact that he can make them longer. If there is a purpose for the length and he just isn't wasting time.... than how could he go wrong? Avalanche was an amazing record, one of Matt's best to date. But sometimes, if you can cut a track down by 3 minutes, just because its useless noise, than it's far better.

[Dan #2]

live, in fredericton, he played Blue Skies OverBadlands, and it hit a solid 14 minutes, a little over. Not kidding, but it was amazing... the lights were so cool and the music got really ambient

[THE MAN]

Long is fine as long as it feels when its over it didnt seem like it was that long. Kind of like a really good Kyuss song

[mrs jesus]

the longer, the better.

amen, brother

[pvnc]

live, in fredericton, he played Blue Skies OverBadlands, and it hit a solid 14 minutes, a little over. Not kidding, but it was amazing... the lights were so cool and the music got really ambient

Man, when I heard that here in Toronto (yeah, I was at that show), I thought it was absolutely incredible. It just got into this sort of almost space-rock vibe, and kind of reminded me of pre-Dark Side of the Moon Pink Floyd, with its experimental feel. It was beautiful.

[Matt]

"Near Fantastica" single version is the original version of the song, it wasn't cut down. What happened is Matthew Good had some more studio time, so he worked on an extended version for the single, and recorded it and what not. When all was said and done, people liked the extended better so it made it to the CD instead.

[pvnc]

Really? Now that you mention it, I guess that kinda makes sense. I know I liked the longer version. The only part of it that didn't work as well, I think, was the extended intro.

 

Anyway, some of the expanded live renditions of some songs (like Blue Skies or Giant) have made me wonder what it would be like if that desire for lengthy works carries over into the next album.

[Maverick]

What's with WWWHR anyways.....

 

the ending is just a whole bunch of whistling....

 

and I love it....

 

the random whistling and the violins.... beautiful

[OceanusBlue]

When I listened to Avalanche for the first time, I thought "Avalanche", "21st Century Living" and "While We Were Hunting Rabbits" was all the same song, with different movements. It flowed all soo nicely.

 

Hayley

[Biggie]

I found the album overproduced.

[pvnc]

If you mean the fact that there is orchestration or string accompaniment of some sort on most of the songs, then I think I agree. It's become a trend these days for rock groups to add strings (most often unneccessarily) to their songs, and that was the one thing that I didn't really like about Avalanche, and is why it's not one of my favorites (I still think it's a good album, but not the best). That's why I love WLRRR so much - very stripped-down production, especially compared to Avalanche.

[Matt]

"The Hives" are pretty good at keeping orchestration out of their music, I think I've only heard one song of theirs with strings in it. The music is still pretty good too.

[rmak]

i didnt mean the songs were too long, i was wondering if he was intentionally going for longer songs

 

its my fav album and avalanche is my fav song

Edited January 11, 2005 by rmak

[ze0ro]

I never thought them the same song, but I do agree. The flow is excellent.

 

This was meant in response to OceanusBlue...the quote messed up on me. ;)

Edited January 11, 2005 by ze0ro

[MadeleineSix]

I love the ending of WWWHR...so beautiful. I love it when musicians blend their music with more classical stuff, it lends it a depth, a sense that it's going to be around in ten years. I dunno.. I really enjoy it

[cavalier_eternal]

avalanche would be my favourite album, i'd say.

 

it's not long for the sake of being long.

 

it's great.

[NA4Life]

The long classical outros and intros make the songs fall into the "epic" category.

 

Orchestral accompanyment is always welcome and as said before, its adds depth.

[saturnine]

avalanche isn't long enough

[Ravenous Yam]

Long is fine as long as it feels when its over it didnt seem like it was that long. Kind of like a really good Kyuss song

Yeah thats how i feel too. As long as its good, it doesnt matter how long it is.

And, as always, agreed on the Kyuss.