If a song is longer than three and a half minutes, it'll need something to keep you entertained.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
You kind of have to celebrate the moment that you get to create something that you love that falls into the parameters of a 3-minute-and-20-second song, to try to be creative inside of those parameters.
I admire pop songs that are perfect at three minutes.
The art of the three-minute song is more like journalism than writing a big 400-page book. You want to be brief, you want to make sense right yen and there. And sometimes that takes a bit of work.
I write songs very quickly, so the 20 minutes of joy I get out of writing a song doesn't compare to the two months of joy I get engaging with the people who like my music.
Let's say music is needed for only 43 seconds of film. You have to score it so it is an entity, so it won't bother anyone when it ends so quickly. Or if a song runs 2 minutes and 45 seconds, but the titles run a minute longer, you have to arrange that song so it doesn't get repetitious.
Most of the time, songs that I write end up being finished in 30 minutes or less.
I like it when songs develop in some way. Four minutes usually isn't enough time for something to develop musically.
If I like a song, I'll just keep playing it, and it never gets old.
Most people think a song is a song - three minutes, and you're done. I don't think this way. Songs are my wings. They're what I use to fly. It's very important for me to put everything in the right place.
I don't have time to stand around and listen to an 11-minute song.
No opposing quotes found.