Objectivity in rating albums

It’s fine. As I had posted not too long before, I was posting while not particularly sober (never a good idea). I know what I meant, but reading it in the cold light of the morning it doesn’t say it well at all.

I am well aware that hunting for significance is a abuse. I put the inverted commas around the wrong part of the sentence, and I meant to have them around “researchers”. Which is to say, that people come to PA expecting it to be an objective list, when it is not. They are hunting for significance (which is the wrong way to do it, as Pedro so often tells us in no uncertain terms), and therefore they find it, and then (inadvertently or otherwise) replicate it.

This is also what I meant by a misleading impression of objectivity. Again, horribly worded, so I can see why you’ve misunderstood my intention. By misleading, I again meant to the “researchers” who come to PA. While the PA 100 might not convey any impression of objectivity to you (and nor should it, because it’s not), it misleads those who know no better, and/or those who conflate intersubjectivity with objectivity.

It was a poor analogy, and even more poorly worded, for which I apologise, but I think it does still hold true. Popularity is self-sustaining and self-perpetuating. Just because one band and/or album has managed to get on to that fractal spiral, doesn’t mean that there aren’t others just as worthy, but simply weren’t picked up on. And even if they are eventually recognised, they have a very long way to go before they can catch up and “compete” with those who have already been riding the popularity bandwagon.

All I really was saying was that attempting to find objectivity in PA is a fool’s errand. It ain’t going to happen - and as far as I’m concerned, nor should it.

Don't disagree with this, but an album review based solely on objective assessments would be rather devoid of interest.

"Joe Schmingelhuebl here gives us his interpretation of Chopin's Etudes Op. 10 & 25. He plays a 1963 Bosendorfer grand piano. The album was recorded by Ted Plotz at Dingus Studios in Butt, Texas using a pair of Moosephlegm model 103 cardioid microphones. Schmingelhuebl plays the compositions without technical errors. His version of Op. 10 is taken faster than Von Turpentine's (1963) but more slowly than Erik Drob's (1992). The recording is available on compact disc or 180gm vinyl."

We want the subjective stuff!

If there were such a thing as an 'objective' view of music, what consequence would we see from that? If a recording were considered 'objectively' better than another, what effects would we be able to observe in the world relating to that objective measure?

I suppose you would see that in all cases, that recording would rank higher than its lower-ranked counterpart, since we are talking about ratings.

But even albums that can almost be considered "objectively" better due to their notoriety / influence / etc., like those at the top of the top album list, have ratings from 1 to 5 stars. So that "objective" better-ness is doing nothing.

Perhaps we could argue that the percentage of ratings at certain levels creates a statistically objective view of an album, and weight that via the number of submissions? And if we did, what impact would that 'objective' rating of an album have?

It obviously wouldn't mean anything to any subjective experience of the album, because the 1 star, 5 star, and other opinions would still exist.

And there isn't really any other impact to the existence of said recording, is there?

Even among individuals, there is no objective experience - I love music I encountered years ago I couldn't imagine falling in love with today. Heck, I've rated albums as 2 stars on this website that now, ten years later, I've listened to more than albums I rated at 5 stars at that time, because my subjective experience of them has changed over time, and that subjective rating was even really just my opinion in that moment.

Without any observable outcome of objectivity, how can we validate it exists, that we've chosen the right definition?

As I said at the start of the post, the only truly objective thing is the sound wave itself...the rest is all subjective. And how do you rate a sound wave, if not from your subjective experience?

After all, to us, a bird song may be beautiful in the afternoon, or annoying in the morning when it wakes us up.To the bird it may be a welcome mating call, and to a predator it may drive them to the bird.

In what way is music any different? It is all tied to the subjective response to the sound wave and the information it conveys, at the moment it is received by the subjective listener and what they can take from it in that moment, which may be driven as much by what it sounds like to them in that moment, what they are doing, and any previous attachment that they had formed with that music (or may be in the process of forming).

Ah yes, my thoughts precisely. There is no such thing as "good" music or "bad" music, just music that fits the circumstance or doesn't. 

"The Chicken Dance" is popular at wedding receptions.

Well, different folks different strokes. I must say that I don't find very subjective reviews particularly interesting. 

Can you provide evidence of an album review that is not subjective? I don’t think I’ve ever seen an objective album review in my life. Every album review will have some objective criteria mentioned, even if it’s just the number of musicians or the instruments they play - but the vast majority of every album review will be subjective, because it’s virtually the only way to write a review. A music review, by definition is a critical appraisal/assessment of a work that seeks to judge the worth/value/importance of it, as heard by the listener. By its very nature, it’s subjective. I sincerely doubt there has ever been a purely objective review written for an album, and furthermore doubt that it would even be possible,

As usual in your posts and comments, you make plenty of observations, but provide very little evidence to back them up. When questioned as to what exactly you mean, you tend to either completely ignore the questions (as I expect you will do in this case, given you have expressed elsewhere your dislike of me), or get overly defensive and suggest that people are not reading your OP and/or not understanding what you mean. The thing is, we have all read your OP, and while we ask for elucidation of what you mean, you stubbornly resist answering on the basis that we don’t understand, rather than trying to help us understand.

Fair comment. 

After second thought, I can't really imagine that the definition used in the music art is different from the philosophical one, even it can get some specifical meaning when applicated.

You have, but that’s not how a forum works. Rather than ask me to stay away, instead feel welcome to ignore my posts, even if ultimately you sometimes agree with them (as per your post above where you eventually realise that the definition of objectivity in music reviews is not different from the philosophical one).

It’s not as if I’m being impolite or disrespectful with my posts. I’m simply saying things you don’t agree with. That’s the nature of a forum, just as subjectivity is the nature of music reviews. Life isn’t always the way we would want it, and sometimes there are people in it that we don’t get along with. But unless those people are breaking boundaries (whether that be guidelines, rules, laws or mores), then you need to learn to ignore, not engage, or perhaps take onboard where they are coming from. I make no personal attacks, when I argue against your observations. In fact, on more than one occasion I have attempted to give you the benefit of the doubt, and ask for evidence of what you espouse. (And, I should note, I’m far from the only one to ask you to back up the claims you make.)

A good forum (and yes, that is my subjective opinion) is not an echo chamber, and allows for (even encourages) dissenting views. Disagreement can often be the first step towards further learning, and even empathy. Perhaps you should not ask in your OP for people’s opinions on a subject, if you’re not willing to take onboard those that differ from your own? (Though even doing that, will not - and should not - stop people from doing just that.)