lördag 7 Apr 2007, 3:39

So, today I decided I should look up at the bands I listen too. I started to look… Iron Maiden, Ayreon, etc.

"Where's Neal Morse? I've been listening to it a lot lately"

After I did a better search and find I only have 29 plays, I realize that songs from Neal Morse last about 20 minutes each. And my favorite (The Door) lasts over 29 minutes.

I don't really care about having more or less tracks played… after all, I hadn't seen until today the fact I beat 20k tracks some time ago. What I care about is that a great artist as Neal Morse will not get the recognition he deserves.

I think that's actually a big problem. Some artists, like Neal Morse and Opeth, might have been heard way more than they are recognized. Much more time, but that won't notice as much as it should.

I can't complain. Last.fm is already giving a pretty good service for free (although they do have some ways of making money, but one has to eat), but I still wish there was a system to prevent this lack of recognition.

Neal Morse has 210,433 tracks played. Average song is about 20 minutes (I don't have all albums so I can't really check… I can't find them all). That would mean 4,208,660 minutes played.

The Who have 5,857,388 tracks played, with an average of more or less, 4 minutes per song (I have plenty of their songs and that's the result). That would stand for a little over 23.5 million minutes played. I know that this band is way more popular than Neal Morse. I know they have been heard a lot more. But the difference that was 5,857,388 over 210,433, compared to the now 23.5 million to 4.2 million looks much smaller.