Double Albums/CDs, curse or blessing?


For no good reason, I have been thinking about the worth of double albums or cds that bands release. The only two that I can come up that make sense are the Who's Tommy and Pink Floyd's The Wall. These are obviously rock opera type albums that hang together. Excluding Greatest Hits which might make sense, are there others doubles that people think of highly?

Most other double albums (double cds more so) I am familiar with would have been much better if only the best material had made it onto a single disc. Examples in my view would be Red Hot Chili Peppers Stadium Arcadium, Guns N Roses Use Your Illusion I & II (at least they are sold separately).

While it may make the bands more money to issue doubles, I think that it generally cheapens the brand.

What do fellow agoners think?
dokosan
truth be told, most good double lps would be great edited down to a single. my short list of genuinely great double lps would include (in no particular order):
exile on main st.
blonde on blonde
layla
white album
bitches brew
warehouse songs and stories (husker du)
velvet underground 1970
fillmore east (allmans)
london calling
I think there are lots of examples (especially lp), how about:
Smashing Pumpkins Meloncollie
Zepplin Physical Graffetti
U2 Joshua Tree
Who Quadraphenia
All of us have different preference's.The main thing to me is
getting a high quality recording.If you get a lot of enjoyment
out of it,I think it's worth it.Same goes for our audio gear.
I forgot to mention,how many single albums have we bought that
has just that one song we wanted.Then we get it home to listen
to it only to find out the engineer did a bad job,and the rest
of the songs are lousy.That to me is a real ripoff.It happens
way more than a double album.A single or double that is done
right is a good deal.