As a songwriter, it's very easy to fall in love with your own chord progressions and melodies, which sometimes results in songs that end up being much longer than they need to be. Here are nine classic songs that should be shorter.
1. The Doors - "Light My Fire" (1967)
I have to admit that I enjoy the poetic, freeform side of the Doors more than its pop side, which is why two of my favorite Doors songs are "The End" and "When The Music's Over," which come in at over ten minutes each. However, one lengthy Doors song that could have easily been cut down was the band's second single "Light My Fire." I love the gothic atmosphere that Ray Manzarek's organ brings to the band, but it's not the kind of instrument I want to hear soloing for two minutes straight.
2. The Beatles - "Hey Jude" (1968)
I understand that the extended coda at the end of "Hey Jude" is pretty much the point of the song, and gives it a sense of grandeur that it might not have otherwise, but does it honestly have to be seven whole minutes? After about five minutes I get the point, and at most I'd give it six to drive it home, but then it just keeps going.
3. King Crimson - "Moonchild" (1969)
King Crimson's "Moonchild" is somehow the longest and shortest song on In the Court of the Crimson King. The actual song itself is only about 2:20, but then the track extended for an absurd ten minutes afterwards with an ambient, free jazz improvisation. Five minutes of this would have been better, and then they would have had time to include another song on the album.
4. Bob Marley & The Wailers - "Stir It Up" (1973)
I'm always excited whenever Bob Marley's "Stir It Up" starts, because it hooks me in immediately with that awesome bassline and great chorus. But by the end of the song, I find myself dozing off. There's simply not enough going on to justify its 5:35 running time, and it's almost too laidback for its own good. I much prefer the 3:39 version found on the Legend compilation.
5 & 6. Dio - "Holy Diver"/Danzig - "Dirty Black Summer (1983/1992)
I've grouped these two songs together because they're both way too long for the same exact reason: an extended, ambient intro that pushes the song past five minutes. When I listen to a Dio or Danzig song, I expect to hear a short Italian-American man with a powerful voice singing over distorted metal riffs, not Brian Eno.
7. The Smiths - "How Soon is Now?" (1984)
Some songs justify their excessive length with progressive structures or a great number of lyrics, but the Smiths' "How Soon is Now?" has neither. The song simply alternates between verses and choruses with an unremarkable total of 121 words, and yet still manages to run nearly seven minutes. There are a few stretches in the song where nothing at all happens, so I think I know where the cuts can be made.
8. Echo & the Bunnymen - "The Killing Moon" (1984)
Echo & the Bunnymen singer Ian McCulloch has been quoted as saying that no band has ever written a song as good as "The Killing Moon," and while it's certainly a classic, it's not the best ever written. For one thing, it runs nearly six minutes, when it really has no business being longer than four. Like "Hey Jude," the song's closing minutes are what we would hear if a song didn't fade out when it was supposed to.
9. Gorillaz - "Clint Eastwood" (2001)
For me, Gorillaz's debut single "Clint Eastwood" is a nearly perfect hip-hop song. It has creepy production, a great hook, a killer beat, and some incredible verses from Del Tha Funkee Homosapien. However, it's only "nearly perfect" because the last ninety seconds of the song are totally unnecessary, just a repetition of the beat without any rapping or singing over it. This is the rare care where I prefer the single edit to the album version.
