Is Illmatic Overrated because of how short it is?

[classthe_king]

Don't get me wrong, Illmatic is great and a classic but it only had rapping songs on it. If somebody released an album with only 9 songs on it nowadays they would get torn apart. Plus, you could take any good album and if you picked the best 9 songs from it then it could be classic material because you're only picking a small number of the best songs.

Imagine the Eminem Show if this was it's track list

1. White America
2. Cleanin' Out My Closet
3. Square Dance
4. Soldier
5. Say Goodbye to Hollywood
6. Without Me
7. Sing For The Moment
8. Till I Collapse
9. My Dad's Gone Crazy

There's almost no flaws.

Thoughts?

[classthe_king]

Yeah what I guess I'm trying to say is, if the album had the normal 14-15 songs would it still be considered the best album ever? Those extra songs would have most certainly been worse than the songs that were already on there and would have probably been mostly filler. Would this have brought down the album grew over time?

[SliK]

You make an interesting point. Illmatic was ahead of its time in terms of style. Nas' rhyme schemes are part of what makes it a true classic. "Classic" is thrown around a lot, but Illmatic had a big impact because of Nas' style. I know you know this already, I just mean it wasn't just that every song was good, but the album as a whole meant something more.

[Blu]

You make an interesting point. Illmatic was ahead of its time in terms of style. Nas' rhyme schemes are part of what makes it a true classic. "Classic" is thrown around a lot, but Illmatic had a big impact because of Nas' style. I know you know this already, I just mean it wasn't just that every song was good, but the album as a whole meant something more.

Yeah, the album defined the East Coast hip hop scene at the time. Even though its short track listing may have contributed to its success, a large part of that success comes from what Nas set up with the album.

[CrashBand]

Yes I agree with you. Illmatic is overrated in other aspects as well by pseudo-hip hop heads.

Anyway, on topic, it's a very interesting point and a good debate - how the size of an album affects how good the album is.

What if we went even further and cut down TES to five tracks
1. White America
2. Cleanin' Out My Closet
3. Say Goodbye to Hollywood
4. Sing For The Moment
5. Till I Collapse

Is that now better than Illmatic - by the same reasoning people say Illmatic may be better than a complete TES? - less 'filler'.

[classthe_king]

I think that would be considered just an EP so people would put it in a different category.

[classthe_king]

Oh no don't tell me that

[Manly Moose]

You got look at the context of this situation, for most of music having more than 9 tracks wasnt very common unless most songs were 2-3 minutes long. The thing is ~ 40 minutes was the standard for album times and was always the standard until 90's when they started to creep up to 60 minutes which has now transformed into a horrifying 70+ minutes, just look at Beatles albums, Beach Boys albums, Prince, anything from before the 90s. The reason its a classic is because every single minute is well spent on classic material. This isnt cheating at all because you SHOULDNT have more than 40 minutes on an album unless you more than 40 minutes of classic material (Most likely not the case). Past artists used to cut everything but the very best and as a result they have cohesive albums of perfect material that can reasonably be listened to IN ONE SITTING. Yet making 40 minutes of cohesive, completely classic material is still something that doesnt happen very often. Now these past artists cut down the time because Vinyl wouldnt allow for more, but they greatly benefited from the quality control forced upon them.

I wish more artists would do this nowadays, since out of all the albums that come out 60+ minutes I can think of about 7 that WOULDNT greatly benefit from tossing 3 or 4 songs. Arcade Fire is an example of a recent artist that made a 45 minute album and they got themselves a classic. Now there are obviously certain albums that need more time, but no artist is consistently pumping those out. Look at Tech n9ne, his albums are always 78 minutes and theres always a metric ass-ton of filler. Also think about it, if artists made less songs album prices would drop down again to the usual $10 instead of the $16-$20 I see being charged for new artists nowadays. If this happened then more people would be willing to buy albums and album sales would go up again. Also, who wants to buy an album where more than half the songs suck or just arent worth the time, which is usually the case. People nowadays are more tolerant of the filler because of the ability to use Kinsky or iTunes to only play standouts but an album is in no way a classic if people have to force themselves to listen all the way through because of boredom or because of awful songs. Anyways, wouldnt you like it if all your favorite artists cut out the pointless songs you never listen to?


EDIT: I wouldnt use Eminem Show as an example in the first post, thats an album that has enough great material to warrant its long running time. All 6's and 7's would be a good example, and with all the EP's hes been releasing I think that hes starting to see my point, even though not even those consist of entirely classic material, which goes to show how hard it can be to make a truely classic album.

[classthe_king]

Yeah I definitely agree with you. Artists should cut back on their filler tracks and have a shorter, yet more complete album. I think macklemore's latest album is a perfect example.

[EminemBase]

Well, I do think Illmatic is overrated and the length may be to do with it, as it leaves less room for error. And actually, the second point you bring up, or rather imply as many critics have, is Em being guilty of making his albums too long, and I think he has been.

I think The Eminem Show is an amazing classic, but yeah... it could probably be even better if just a bit shorter, if he was just a little more brutal with editing himself.

[cheeseburger]

Well, I do think Illmatic is overrated and the length may be to do with it, as it leaves less room for error. And actually, the second point you bring up, or rather imply as many critics have, is Em being guilty of making his albums too long, and I think he has been.

I think The Eminem Show is an amazing classic, but yeah... it could probably be even better if just a bit shorter, if he was just a little more brutal with editing himself.

But he makes it up for having a long period between each release , no?

[EminemBase]

Well, I do think Illmatic is overrated and the length may be to do with it, as it leaves less room for error. And actually, the second point you bring up, or rather imply as many critics have, is Em being guilty of making his albums too long, and I think he has been.

I think The Eminem Show is an amazing classic, but yeah... it could probably be even better if just a bit shorter, if he was just a little more brutal with editing himself.

But he makes it up for having a long period between each release , no?

Well... I wouldn't say he has a long period, it's about average.

The Marshall Mathers LP came out just over a year after The Slim Shady LP. And The Eminem Show came out just two years after, and Encore two years again...

But he doesn't do a ton of mixtapes and is quite picky (apart from recently where he's a lot more open to collaborations with everyone), so he certainly makes people wait and thirst for material. Which is one of the reasons each album sells through the roof. He doesn't spread himself too thin.

[TheGentlePlayer]

It was written>>>Illmatic

[cheeseburger]

Well, I do think Illmatic is overrated and the length may be to do with it, as it leaves less room for error. And actually, the second point you bring up, or rather imply as many critics have, is Em being guilty of making his albums too long, and I think he has been.

I think The Eminem Show is an amazing classic, but yeah... it could probably be even better if just a bit shorter, if he was just a little more brutal with editing himself.

But he makes it up for having a long period between each release , no?

Well... I wouldn't say he has a long period, it's about average.

The Marshall Mathers LP came out just over a year after The Slim Shady LP. And The Eminem Show came out just two years after, and Encore two years again...

But he doesn't do a ton of mixtapes and is quite picky (apart from recently where he's a lot more open to collaborations with everyone), so he certainly makes people wait and thirst for material. Which is one of the reasons each album sells through the roof. He doesn't spread himself too thin.

Yeah, I wonder whats the best way. Selling average numbers but lots of material, or selling loads of lesser material. In the long run, maybe the first example is better. Much material can aply to a wider audience, while less material is more difficult to stick maybe. But then again, if you are eminem you seem to come up with gold all the time and it sticks with everyone anyway. Exept for these latest collabs, but noone will remember them in one year anyway.

[Cube23]

I don't think so.

Illmatic was intended to be longer, but bootleg copies were available in an abundance, so it was released as is. There's no doubt in my mind that it would have been consistent no matter the tracklist's length.