What Constitutes Filler
 

Just wanna get some opinions on this subject. I make the stupidest topics. But yeah I've never really been so clear on the rules of what makes filler.

Mediocre songs that sound the same.

Songs that dont do it for you. Simple as.

I deleted it - because I realized quickly that I was wrong. Heh.

The "I make stupid topics" Comment was just about this thread. . .not about how he posts like I thought. I'm an ass.

Then I'll do the same. =P

The fact that the topic was in general music should have been my first clue. The second should have been his post count. I have no excuses for my stupidity.

Confused...

Well I hear people call tracks filler sometimes that really could be considered useful tracks. I think it's more of an opinionated case, unless the song is just as bland as can be. I'd think the album would probably follow suit though really.

I would define filler as tracks which feel contrived for the purpose of filling an album. Note that this doesn't mean that all bad tracks are filler tracks.

Of course this is a very subjective matter. Some people feel that skits and other irregularly short tracks (think Tool) are always filler - I don't.

Yeah, mc chris has some skits on the album that are hilarious and contribute to the somewhat concept of the album (SPOILER ALERT Chris is a zombie). But I do think it's all based on opinion, unless in said cases that it feels contrived or is just bland (which is probably because of the contrivedness).

You know its filler because its pretty blatant. Filler is a song that does not add (and usually takes away) from the experience of the overall album.

It's not a bridging track between one song to the next, it doesn't conclude nor introduce a track or its redundant to the theme of the album.

If Faaip De Oiad and Viginti Trees aren't filler I don't know what is. Tool are pretty notorious about trying to fill out albums with worthless songs; they structured Lateralus to fill up the CD completely.

Filler is songs that do not contribute to the message or mood the album is trying to convey in any sort of constructive way whatsoever. With this in mind, albums that lack a message or mood are all filler and no killer

I'd say every Animal Collective album is at least 30% filler.

^ even strawberry jam?

If there is an exception to that statement SJ would be it, but it's not completely innocent.

I'm pretty much with Roygbiv. When I describe a filler, I mean a mediocre song that may be safely skipped when you listen to an album. Most likely, it adds nothing new. It's not bad (then I'd call it that), but it would be better if there was a really good song in it's place, so overall they are usually not good on an album unless most of the other songs are even worse.

Filler is any song on an album that does not go with the general flow or is just bad. Or both. So as a result many popular artist's albums are full of filler seeing as how the most prominent musical statement is now the single. And since it's pretty hard a have an album that is 1 hit single after another something has to fill in the blanks...

I agree, I would like this band so much more if this wasn't true.

To add to the topic, I agree with what has been said. For me, filler can also be a song on an album that doesn't really take a risk, or it just seems safe. Generic sounding and uninteresting usually means filler to me.

The quinessential filler song in two parts:

At least when talking about prog rock it seems like most people call songs "filler" when they're experimental and/or very different.

So in that case I'd say that "filler is experimental songs/segments that the band really digs and decided to include on the album, even though they realize it's different and might not appeal to most listeners". I like that kind of "filler" though, since they show more of the song-writer's personal preferences. :)

who knows?

maybe all of our favorite songs are filler, and all the ones we hate are supposed to be the focus.

but probably not.

The last part of the Moonchild track off King Crimson's debut ..

Nah, if I remember correctly even the band themselves disowned that one. It's filler because it's so bland and just takes up space without contributing to the album.

Well, my defintion of filler is "random audio collages thrown into an album to break songs up." but hell, what do I know?

i argue that cuckoo cuckoo from SJ is filler. It kills the flow of the album and isn't a good song, either. but you're right about the rest of their albums, especially all the ones that came before Feels. My goodnes where those tough to listen to, and even feels is full of filler.

My definition of filler is the songs you find yourself skipping after you've heard the album 3 or 4 times.

Filler is $$$$...anything that was put togther to "fill" an album.....Because there was so much on there contract it makes the talent disappear. It's sad because so many good bands go bad because of Record labels

That's a pretty good way of looking at it.

Filler within a track? That could cause a time warp.

Yea, although I respect the albums that came before Feels for the sheer creativity. They keep making their albums more and more accessible, it's like they're taking a step backwards in a way.

I'd probably have a better time listening to Merriweather than Sung Tongs though.

you use the ff >> fast-forward button as opposed to the play >> button
to listen to filler