Tracklist revealed

[fakfak]

I see...

(don't mind me, I'm a Little Slow.)

[a2iel]

for the first time i am exited about tomorrow being a monday and the beginning of a new week!

[Eh Steve!]

i want it to be true but i dont know if i can believe it

[devzors]

9 songs of quality greatly surpasses 14 songs of mediocrity. I'm dying of impatience.

[Bonus_mosher]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kmm1482;2286228
There was a little band that had a low profile album come out not too long ago. Radiohead's In Rainbows only had 10 songs. Ever hear of it?

---

that didn't make any sense at all considering I said "I couldn't think of an album that had less that 10 songs"

[fakfak]

Stereophonics' Road to Rouen has nine songs and is considered by some critics to be one of the finest records of the last several years.

[Major_Minus_42]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fakfak;2287173
Stereophonics' Road to Rouen has nine songs and is considered by some critics to be one of the finest records of the last several years.

---

That would be Supergrass you mean

[kmm1482]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Age Six Racer;2286933
that didn't make any sense at all considering I said "I couldn't think of an album that had less that 10 songs"

---

it makes perfect sense! An album doesn't have to have 20 songs on it for it to be considered good! Why don't you consider it an album?

[fakfak]

"That would be Supergrass you mean"

My mistake...:embarassed:

[Bonus_mosher]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kmm1482;2287247
it makes perfect sense! An album doesn't have to have 20 songs on it for it to be considered good! Why don't you consider it an album?

---

haha look one of us is clearly getting confused here,
the way I see it is.

I SAID: I can't think of an album with less than 10 tracks.

then YOU SAID in reply: Radiohead's has 10 tracks.

how does that make sense? I was saying I couldn't think of one with LESS than 10 tracks.

lol.

and I would consider an album to be at least 10 tracks.

It just seem's to me a bit lacklustre to have less.

But that could be because I've never owned an album with less

[RunForTheHills]

Well guys, I have an album called Now Here Is Nowhere by the Secret Machines, and that has 'only' 9 tracks, and its 50 minutes long. But it also has two songs that clock in at just under 9 minutes, so there's plenty to listen to. And it's one of my favourite albums. Their second album has even less - 8 tracks stretched over 46 minutes - but its still a great album. Dark Side Of The Moon, Wish You Were Here by Pink Floyd? Both considered masterpieces, both about 42 minutes, both less than 10 tracks (Wish has 5 tracks).

And if we're talking about the album only being 42 minutes here, just flicking through some tracklistings I can see another great album called Room On Fire by The Strokes which has 11 tracks and only clocks in at 33min 5sec. And its one of my favourites as well (IMO). Revolver also comes to mind, being only 35 minutes. I could go on, but I think you know what I'm getting at.

[ApproximatelyInfinite]

^room on fire is only 33 mins?! how have i never noticed that before? wow, i think it just feels longer to me because i love it so much.

yes, as i said in some other thread recently, i don't care how many tracks there are, as long as it's more than like 3. i'm more interested in getting new music from the guys rather than being particular about how much and putting out my own stipulations about what's acceptable. yeah, we've been waiting a while, but who's to say that these 9 tracks won't be the best 9 tracks that they've ever put out? besides, i'm hoping for a decent number of b-sides as well, so when you put it in that light, we'll probably be getting around 60 mins or so of music by the time 2009 rolls around. they know what they're doing.

[kmm1482]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Age Six Racer;2287322
haha look one of us is clearly getting confused here,
the way I see it is.

I SAID: I can't think of an album with less than 10 tracks.

then YOU SAID in reply: Radiohead's has 10 tracks.

how does that make sense? I was saying I couldn't think of one with LESS than 10 tracks.

lol.

and I would consider an album to be at least 10 tracks.

It just seem's to me a bit lacklustre to have less.

But that could be because I've never owned an album with less

---

Oh wow!! you've heard the album!!? How is it?

[busybeeburns]

What may be the tracklisting for Coldplay’s forthcoming fourth album, ‘Viva La Vida Or Death And All His Friends’, has surfaced on an online Dutch retailer's website, containing nine songs set for a June 16 release.

As previously reported, the album’s title appeared on the band’s official website last week, after Chris Martin revealed the work of Mexican artist Frida Kahlo inspired the name.

But the Netherlands' largest online retailer, ‘Bon.com’, has now posted a tracklisting, slotted for a June 18 release, which means June 16 in the UK. However, this tracklisting has not been confirmed by the band or their label and may relate to a feature from Rolling Stone online in which the magazine take a first look at a handful of the tracks.

The possible tracklisting is as follows -

'Violet Hill'
'42'
'Yes'
'Death And All His Friends'
'Cemeteries Of London'
'Life In Technicolor'
'Chinese Sleep Chant'
'Srawberry Swing'
'Reign Of Love'
Meanwhile, Rolling Stone also recently reported that the record's possible opening track, ‘Violet Hill’, could be given away as a special promotion in the coming weeks.

http://www.xfmmanchester.co.uk/Article.asp?id=638242

[BigFatNoises]

^lol it's bol.com instead of bon.com