quote:

I totally agree. And as an engineer I would bet money that the people that sat down at the table and designed a record, and determined what size and physical capabilities they were going to allow with it, first considered what was marketable and most desirable to society. And that turned out to be about an hour of music.

I'm not sure if you guys are trying discredit my point, but if you are, my rebuttal:

Why do you think they determined an hour of music was the most marketable and most desirable to society? Because it's derived from the symphony. Why was the symphony usually around an hour in length? Because that was derived from the even older model: mass cycles. And since Catholic mass usually lasts about an hour, that became the sort of, shall we say, "standard" length for long-playing music.

This music history lesson brought to you by Crob.

quote:

Originally posted by crob3888:

quote:

I totally agree. And as an engineer I would bet money that the people that sat down at the table and designed a record, and determined what size and physical capabilities they were going to allow with it, first considered what was marketable and most desirable to society. And that turned out to be about an hour of music.

I'm not sure if you guys are trying discredit my point, but if you are, my rebuttal:

Why do you think they determined an hour of music was the most marketable and most desirable to society? Because it's derived from the symphony. Why was the symphony usually around an hour in length? Because that was derived from the even older model: mass cycles. And since Catholic mass usually lasts about an hour, that became the sort of, shall we say, "standard" length for long-playing music.

This music history lesson brought to you by Crob.

Just to add some cognitive learning theory to Crob's usual erudition: a psychologist friend of mine once told me that 45 mins is about the max time an average person's brain can, if they want to, concentrate properly on any one piece of material without a break for recharging. So allowing for a little tuning in and tuning out time of 15 mins, 1 hour sounds about right for the limits of our monkey brain's to handle.

I have also heard that 2 cycles of 45 mins is the furthest section of time before serious concentration loss is involved - makes sense in terms of average movie lengths etc.

However, if we can concentrate on one thing for 45 minutes, and then concentrate on the next thing for 45 minutes, and then concentrate on another thing for 45 minutes. How come that cycle, and even any necesary breaks in between, can all be designed and presented within the same larger work. In this context what I'm saying is, why can't an artist make a 4 hour long album that has varrieing styles and a continuity while still providing the listener with highpoints, low points, and relaxation points.

I'm not sure if there are really sides to this discussion, but I think it's really an interesting concept and topic.

I would like to point out that if there are sides to the discussion I think it's that Crob came in to say that albums are about an hour long because God made them that way a long time ago, and then Mel came on to counter that it was really the evolution of the monkey's brain.

quote:

Just to add some cognitive learning theory to Crob's usual erudition: a psychologist friend of mine once told me that 45 mins is about the max time an average person's brain can, if they want to, concentrate properly on any one piece of material without a break for recharging. So allowing for a little tuning in and tuning out time of 15 mins, 1 hour sounds about right for the limits of our monkey brain's to handle.

I have also heard that 2 cycles of 45 mins is the furthest section of time before serious concentration loss is involved - makes sense in terms of average movie lengths etc.

Does that mean in, say, exam conditions, that the best results will be found when the length of the exam is reduced to fit a time limit of 45 minutes?