Objectivity in rating albums
Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Progressive Music Lounges
Forum Name: Prog Music Lounge
Forum Description: General progressive music discussions
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=128618
Printed Date: November 26 2024 at 20:48
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Objectivity in rating albums
Posted By: David_D
Subject: Objectivity in rating albums
Date Posted: March 13 2022 at 10:39
|
But which criteria can be said to have at least some degree of objectivity, and why?  Edit: I define "objective" as "having existence outside the mind", which is the common philosophical definition according to Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary of Current English, Oxford University Press 1974.
------------- quality over quantity, and all kind of PopcoRn almost beyond |
Replies:
Posted By: Grumpyprogfan
Date Posted: March 13 2022 at 10:44
| Maybe the complexity, or not, of the composition. |
Posted By: chopper
Date Posted: March 13 2022 at 10:51
|
There are some things that could be measured objectively but I don't see how they would affect the rating of an album - number of different chords, number of instruments played etc. Music rating is inherently subjective imo, for every album someone loves there will be someone who hates it. There are some albums however that you can't really argue with. Let's take Close To The Edge as an example, there will be people who don't like it but you can't really argue that it is one of the most important and highly regarded prog albums and is therefore deserving of a reasonable rating. Can you?
|
Posted By: Psychedelic Paul
Date Posted: March 13 2022 at 11:11
I'm totally subjective when rating albums. 
|
Posted By: David_D
Date Posted: March 13 2022 at 11:14
That's interesting to know, Paul.  ------------- quality over quantity, and all kind of PopcoRn almost beyond |
Psychedelic Paul wrote:Posted By: Nogbad_The_Bad
Date Posted: March 13 2022 at 11:44
|
Quality of production is a out the only objective piece. ------------- Ian Host of the Post-Avant Jazzcore Happy Hour on Progrock.com https://podcasts.progrock.com/post-avant-jazzcore-happy-hour/ |
Posted By: Hrychu
Date Posted: March 13 2022 at 12:01
|
I always rate albums purely subjectively. ------------- “On the day of my creation, I fell in love with education. And overcoming all frustration, a teacher I became.” — Ernest Vong |
Posted By: nick_h_nz
Date Posted: March 13 2022 at 12:29
|
There are no meaningful objective criteria (if any at all) when it comes to reviewing an album. As Chopper says, you could come up with some criteria that are as close to being objective as possible, but they would add nothing to the review. My favourite reviewers on this site, and elsewhere, are those who review in a completely subjective manner. It tells me far more than any objective review could. [EDIT] I’d add that even Ian’s suggestion that quality of production might be the only objective criterium is one which could still be meaningless without subjective opinion of it. Dark Side of the Moon is pretty much universally lauded for its production, but that is of no interest to me when I’m reading a review, so much as how people experience it subjectively. ------------- https://tinyurl.com/nickhnz-tpa" rel="nofollow - Reviewer for The Progressive Aspect |
Posted By: JD
Date Posted: March 13 2022 at 12:53
|
I guess the real question is of what possible use would an objective only rating be within a music rating? It's like rating paintings by how much magenta is used. Without the subjectivity a rating wouldn't really tell you anything relevant about the music. Other than say meter, amplitude, frequency and wave form. ------------- Thank you for supporting independently produced music |
Posted By: chopper
Date Posted: March 13 2022 at 12:59
Nursery Cryme is one album that is generally noted for its bad production, particularly in the drum sound, but for me it's still a 5 star album all the way.
|
Posted By: JD
Date Posted: March 13 2022 at 13:11
------------- Thank you for supporting independently produced music |
Posted By: I prophesy disaster
Date Posted: March 13 2022 at 13:22
|
As I see it, popularity is the only objective measure of quality. But to account for the widely different tastes in music, the popularity should be from the fans of the particular types of music. Thus, the quality of prog should be assessed by the popularity among prog fans, the quality of metal should be assessed by the popularity among metal fans, the quality of jazz should be assessed by the popularity among jazz fans, etc. And if one is a fan of avant-prog rather than symphonic prog, the quality of avant-prog should be assessed by the popularity among avant-prog fans rather than symphonic prog fans. ------------- No, I know how to behave in the restaurant now, I don't tear at the meat with my hands. If I've become a man of the world somehow, that's not necessarily to say I'm a worldly man. |
Posted By: nick_h_nz
Date Posted: March 13 2022 at 13:52
Only if it effects my enjoyment of the album, but even then I think I a, likely only to comment on it, rather than let it affect my rating. As Chopper points out, one of the most beloved Genesis albums has notoriously poor production. It rarely is a consideration for people reviewing the album. They might comment on it, but very few rate the album lower because of it. Conversely, as per my example, the great production of Dark Side of the Moon is rarely a consideration for people reviewing that. Again, they might comment on it, but very few rate the album higher because of it. There are some albums that the production does effect my enjoy enjoyment, where they are, eg, brickwalled obscenely, or perhaps where they are muffled and muddy. But I can’t recall ever adjusting my rating because of the production. I might mention it, but I don’t let it effect how I rate an album. So, in that respect, it is never a consideration for me when reviewing an album. The only exception I can think of, and it’s not actually one I’ve ever encountered myself (yet?) is when reviewing a new release that is markedly different, where I might be comparing the production from the original to the new. So, eg, Rush’s “Vapor Trails” could be a chore to listen to because of how brickwalled it was. The new version is easier to listen to, but loses some of the vitality and oomph. There are fans of both releases, and neither would agree which is the better mix - showing just how subjective even a supposedly objective measure can be. ------------- https://tinyurl.com/nickhnz-tpa" rel="nofollow - Reviewer for The Progressive Aspect |
Posted By: David_D
Date Posted: March 13 2022 at 13:54
So would you say, JD, that the criteria, I know that you use in your rating, are purely subjective, and you might as well not use them at all? Production Song Writing Originality Performance ------------- quality over quantity, and all kind of PopcoRn almost beyond |
Posted By: David_D
Date Posted: March 13 2022 at 14:02
|
And guys, read my OP carefully. I'm not asking about the degree of subjectivity, but about a possible degree of objectivity. ------------- quality over quantity, and all kind of PopcoRn almost beyond |
Posted By: Progosopher
Date Posted: March 13 2022 at 14:06
|
Objectivity requires measurement, but how can you measure art? You can look at all the technical elements - complexity of composition, virtuosity of performance, production standards, and the like, but none of these can create a good album themselves. Any element can be taken to an extreme, but none of those necessarily equal quality. Yet, a good rating, that is one that is worthy of examining even if one disagrees with it on the surface, must include these technicalities. A rating that requires exclusively on them is a rating from a technician. Now, a technician can also appreciate artistry, but by doing so goes beyond the technicalities. Objecitivity also requires clear standards. The Archives here provides a list of characteristics common to Progressive Rock and those are the best we have for this. The more knowledgeable about music a reviewer is the more objective that person can be. But this still will not remove any subjectivity. For me, the best reviews combine knowledge with informed subjectivity. ------------- The world of sound is certainly capable of infinite variety and, were our sense developed, of infinite extensions. -- George Santayana, "The Sense of Beauty" |
Posted By: Psychedelic Paul
Date Posted: March 13 2022 at 14:07
Then again, you could use my Max Factor 10 rating system, where you rank each of the following album factors out of ten to give an overall percentage, although I've never used the system myself, as I'm far too subjective.  * Emotional Appeal * Originality * Power and Passion * Production & Arrangement * Replayability * Songwriting Technique * Technical Ability * Versatility * Vocal Ability * That Indefinable 'X' Factor |
Posted By: David_D
Date Posted: March 13 2022 at 14:23
But you're actually saying, Progosopher, that "a good rating" possess a certain degree of objectivity? That's what my OP is asking about.
------------- quality over quantity, and all kind of PopcoRn almost beyond |
Posted By: David_D
Date Posted: March 13 2022 at 14:27
Would that make the rating more objective, and if so why? ------------- quality over quantity, and all kind of PopcoRn almost beyond |
Posted By: JD
Date Posted: March 13 2022 at 14:54
I'm a huge keyboard fan, so if I hear some nice Hammond licks it plays favourably for me. Someone else might be more of a guitar person so the organ doesn't really influence what they thinks vs the guitar sounds or parts. And as you pointed out, I believe that Production Values should be a rate-able portion of a musical release since it affects the end product.
------------- Thank you for supporting independently produced music |
Posted By: David_D
Date Posted: March 13 2022 at 15:12
And where come those criteria from? ------------- quality over quantity, and all kind of PopcoRn almost beyond |
Posted By: Psychedelic Paul
Date Posted: March 13 2022 at 15:25
They came from inside my own head. I didn't copy & paste the ratings criteria from another website, as Cristi might have you believe.
|
Posted By: David_D
Date Posted: March 13 2022 at 15:40
I'm surely impressed by that, Paul, and I was quite certain that you had found them somewhere - and that without Cristi's comment. It was certainly creative to invent them, and I find them very fine as basis for rating, if somebody would do that.
------------- quality over quantity, and all kind of PopcoRn almost beyond |
Posted By: Cristi
Date Posted: March 13 2022 at 15:44
Hey!!!!!!!!!!! I didn't say anything, quit mentioning me all over the place, out of the blue. I didn't even want to post in this thread. You know what i meant about you copy and pasting exactly. I know you didn't copy paste that criteria list.
|
Posted By: Psychedelic Paul
Date Posted: March 13 2022 at 15:48
It took me all of 20 minutes to compile that list of ratings criteria, so it's really not that impressive, but thanks for the compliment anyway.
 |
Posted By: nick_h_nz
Date Posted: March 13 2022 at 15:59
I think you’ll find we have, but you’re not liking the answers. You’re not asking about the degree of subjectivity, but about a possible degree of objectivity. As per the majority of answers here, there is no possible degree of objectivity that is meaningful. There may well be a possible degree of objectivity, but most of recognise that subjective reviews are far more useful. Furthermore, you’ve proved time and time again to not really understand objectivity in your previous posts (eg attempting to definite prog, and attempting to list a top 100), and whenever anyone gives an answer that is not in agreement (however constructive the criticism might be), you tend to either ignore it, or declare it a personal attack. As much as you might like your posts to be an echo chamber, this forum will not provide that for you, and you will encounter views that are different from your own. The sooner you can understand and respect that, the less frustrated you will get when people don’t answer as you expect. It is not because we have not read your OP carefully. It is simply because we don’t agree with your opinions. That doesn’t make us right, nor you wrong. It simply means we see things differently. I’ll toddle off back to my cave now. Good night! ------------- https://tinyurl.com/nickhnz-tpa" rel="nofollow - Reviewer for The Progressive Aspect |
Posted By: Lewian
Date Posted: March 13 2022 at 16:39
(Humberto Maturana)
|
Posted By: Cristi
Date Posted: March 13 2022 at 16:40
I like that!
|
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: March 13 2022 at 16:57
|
Ratings and reviews are mostly subjective. The trick is finding a reviewer that shares your subjective thinking, or is somewhat close, and to pay attention to what they say and/or rate. So, forget about objectivity in ratings as it's virtually useless.
------------- This message was brought to you by a proud supporter of the Deep State. |
Posted By: Sacro_Porgo
Date Posted: March 13 2022 at 17:18
|
There are definitely a variety of quantifiable traits about any piece of music that can be objectively stated: tempo, length, key, etc. How you feel about any of those is not at all objective. You can make objective comparisons to other pieces of music (these two songs have the same tempo, these two songs do a similar key change, etc.), and you can also make subjective comparisons to other pieces of music (these two songs both make me feel like I'm at the beach, these two songs don't share the same vibes at all, etc.). Generally music reviews and people who read them are much more interested in hearing all the subjective stuff, because we do share many opinions with each other. Like, if I were to say that Rush's New World Man is a less proggy song than King Crimson's Starless, most if not all of you would probably agree with me, because many of us do share similar concepts of what it means to be proggy. Similarly, there are a lot of technically subjective opinions about music we often take for granted as agreed upon by most everyone, just based on how we are taught to hear them and their most common uses. The obvious example: there's nothing objectively happy about a major chord and nothing objectively sad about a minor chord, but many of us who listen to western music are taught very early on that major chords are considered happier and minor chords are considered sadder. Row row row your boat is in major, and it's a very happy song. The Sound Of Silence starts out in a minor key, and it's a very sad song. Or at least, that's how the majority of people tend to interpret those two songs. The fact is that, aside from those very exactly objective qualities about any piece of music I gave some examples of at the top, everything is up for debate. If your mother used to sing you The Sound Of Silence as a lullaby, the song might have sounded very happy to you at the time, and perhaps turned sadder as the years wore on and that early stage of your life passed further and further out of view. If you were picked on by other kids on the playground and not allowed to join in a round of singing row row row your boat, the song might have made you very upset as a child, but may have turned happy again as the pain of that childhood memory faded away and perhaps you had kids of your own to teach nursery rhymes to. Everything becomes subjective past a certain point, so I would say to anyone who's concerned that there's not enough "objectivity" in a review of an album or a song or any piece of art... the only objective facts about any piece of art tend to be boring. "The Mona Lisa has greenish background" simply isn't worth writing in a review of that painting. "Mona Lisa isn't actually smiling" is a much more interesting statement to make, specifically because it could be disagreed with. ------------- Porg for short. My love of music doesn't end with prog! Feel free to discuss all sorts of music with me. Odds are I'll give it a chance if I haven't already! :) |
Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: March 13 2022 at 17:19
|
Why would anyone want to read an objective review? I mean it would read something like "This recording involves four players with various instruments who appear to be taking part in a variation of a jazz-related form of music." Yeah, no thanks. Give me strong, provocative, and subjective opinions every time. ------------- "Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought." -- John F. Kennedy |
Posted By: Sacro_Porgo
Date Posted: March 13 2022 at 17:25
See, I disagree. Not with the idea that CTTE is one of the most important and highly regarded prog albums, but of which could be pretty consistently measured with some decent criteria, though they may not be objective per say. I disagree with the idea that that must make it deserving of a reasonable rating. Personally, I love CTTE, and I'd give it 5/5 stars easily. But someone who doesn't enjoy it at all, even recognizing it's towering impact on the genre and popularity among prog fans to this day, may not be compelled to rate it based on any criteria but their own personal enjoyment of it, and if they don't enjoy it, there would be much reason to give it more than 1 star! Rating is subjective, criticism is subjective. The objective qualities about music don't tell us how many stars to give it. The Ramones and The Chainsmokers both tend to write 2-3 minute songs based around 3-4 chords. I love those of the former and detest those of the latter. The numbers involved have little to nothing to do with my opinions on that. ------------- Porg for short. My love of music doesn't end with prog! Feel free to discuss all sorts of music with me. Odds are I'll give it a chance if I haven't already! :) |
Posted By: Sacro_Porgo
Date Posted: March 13 2022 at 17:30
Gonna disagree with this too. How do you define good production. Is A Night At The Opera better produced than Moving Pictures? I find they have two very different approaches to production, and both are impeccable, but certainly someone else may find that one of them is good and the other bad, or they're both bad, or their both average, and so on and so forth. I've read one EDM fan complain about the lack of bass in rock music, I think because they were so used to the bass in EDM being at a certain lower frequency range and often placed more prominently in the mix. What's good production for a dubstep record might sound atrocious if a jazz fusion record were mixed the same way. And then maybe someone would think its cool as heck! I think production is definitely subjective, it's just that many of us agree on the meaning of words like "clarity" and "balance" and also agree that they're good qualities for a record to have. ------------- Porg for short. My love of music doesn't end with prog! Feel free to discuss all sorts of music with me. Odds are I'll give it a chance if I haven't already! :) |
Posted By: Sacro_Porgo
Date Posted: March 13 2022 at 17:36
Man I disagree here as well. I don't think popularity and quality are related more than tangentially. Many things of impeccable quality (pick any set of standards you like to measure that) fall through the cracks. Meanwhile many things of massive popularity (by whichever measure using whichever group of fans you prefer) could be said by any number of people to be low quality. I'm in a band with someone who's all about efficiency in music, and he would probably scoff at the idea that Animals is one of the best albums of all time., what with those extended length runtimes and long passages of moody atmospherics. He simply has a different barometer. Sure he's not a prog fan, but his opinion isn't invalid, it just might mean less to someone who is a prog fan. Popularity is not an objective measurement of anything other than how many people like something. ------------- Porg for short. My love of music doesn't end with prog! Feel free to discuss all sorts of music with me. Odds are I'll give it a chance if I haven't already! :) |
Posted By: David_D
Date Posted: March 13 2022 at 18:45
I guess, no need to become so serious, Lewian. This is not supposed to be a discussion of different epistemological theories. - But a point of view certainly good to consider for a statistician.
------------- quality over quantity, and all kind of PopcoRn almost beyond |
Posted By: Hugh Manatee
Date Posted: March 13 2022 at 20:06
The more exposure a piece of music gets, the more likely it is to become "popular". The more "popular" a piece of music gets, the more likely it is to get exposure. There is one of many variables that determine how to access this loop, that being commercial considerations, and I would argue that this is the only objective aspect of the equation. ------------- I should have been a pair of ragged claws Scuttling across the floors of uncertain seas |
Posted By: Sacro_Porgo
Date Posted: March 13 2022 at 20:51
I dunno, can you quantify the level of commercial consideration an artist puts into their work? I mean, what Taylor Swift might think is very experimental, Radiohead might scoff at for sounding like, well, Taylor Swift. ------------- Porg for short. My love of music doesn't end with prog! Feel free to discuss all sorts of music with me. Odds are I'll give it a chance if I haven't already! :) |
Posted By: kenethlevine
Date Posted: March 13 2022 at 22:01
|
I think reviews will often have some information that might be considered quasi objective, such as the general style, the instruments of note, and the musicians, as well as the general length of tracks and how vocal heavy they are, though even these would have some subjectivity, For instance, one reviewer begins most reviews by saying where the album fits in the group's discography and where a song fits on the album, while another indicates what happens at a particular time in a song. But by and large, I want to read reviews that are mostly subjective, even if I disagree with the reviewer. If they make a coherent case for their point of view, hats off. And when I write reviews, I limit the objective stuff to setting the stage. may take a certain position but it doesn't mean I couldn't take another position if in a different frame of mind, or at least be able to see the contrary point of view. |
Posted By: Dellinger
Date Posted: March 14 2022 at 00:46
| I think we should mostly rate the music subjectively. Objectivity will come from the collective ratings, even if they are subjective. |
Posted By: David_D
Date Posted: March 14 2022 at 01:54
But that could sound like possibility for "objective" qualities intersubjectively speaking? Or would you still say that we only agree about some "good qualities" if we all have learned to value those qualities positively?
------------- quality over quantity, and all kind of PopcoRn almost beyond |
Posted By: Guldbamsen
Date Posted: March 14 2022 at 02:16
|
There’s no objectivity when it comes down to ratings, how could there ever be? We all have ears and tastebuds that are uniquely our own. Even having someone with a deep academic knowledge of music tell me X album trumps Y…is nonsensical to me because I’ve only ever experienced music through me. Objective facts such as mentioning what instruments are in use, time signatures, year of production and so forth can have some merit in a review - especially if the reviewer has some ideas or opinions on the subject…yet again the really interesting bits, to me, are the ones that are subjectively based. Rating music or art is meaningless anyway. I find it absurd tbh. ------------- “The Guide says there is an art to flying or rather a knack. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss.” - Douglas Adams |
Posted By: nick_h_nz
Date Posted: March 14 2022 at 02:29
⬆️⬆️⬆️⬆️⬆️THIS!🔼🔼🔼🔼🔼 Absolutely this. The only reason I give a rating with my reviews on PA is because I have to. If I could make just one change to PA, it would be to remove the ratings completely. ------------- https://tinyurl.com/nickhnz-tpa" rel="nofollow - Reviewer for The Progressive Aspect |
Posted By: octopus-4
Date Posted: March 14 2022 at 02:31
I rate only because it's mandatory. ------------- I stand with Roger Waters, I stand with Joan Baez, I stand with Victor Jara, I stand with Woody Guthrie. Music is revolution |
Posted By: Guldbamsen
Date Posted: March 14 2022 at 02:32
|
I’d like that very much as well Nick Back when I wrote reviews I absolutely hated having to come up with a rating. ------------- “The Guide says there is an art to flying or rather a knack. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss.” - Douglas Adams |
Posted By: David_D
Date Posted: March 14 2022 at 03:03
|
If to define "objective" as "having existence outside the mind", should rating criteria like production, song writing, originality and perfomance not be considered then as objective? ------------- quality over quantity, and all kind of PopcoRn almost beyond |
Posted By: nick_h_nz
Date Posted: March 14 2022 at 03:08
And how would you propose to rate any of those objectively? The only one of those criteria that could potentially be considered objective is the production - and even taken objectively, it is near impossible to avoid subjectivity over production. The remainder of your criteria listed above are entirely subjective. Even if you consider that there might be objective criteria, this thread has shown overwhelmingly that people are not interested in that when it comes to reviewing and rating an album. Objective criteria can be mentioned, and often are, in a review - but very rarely are they taken into account when rating an album. ------------- https://tinyurl.com/nickhnz-tpa" rel="nofollow - Reviewer for The Progressive Aspect |
Posted By: Guldbamsen
Date Posted: March 14 2022 at 03:18
|
How on earth does one go about objectively quantifying songwriting, originality and performance? Who decides the criterias? What if the rest of us don’t agree? I can make an argument that Mozart is better music than Hansi Hinterseer..sure..but that doesn’t change the fact that my grandmother gets goosebumps to Hansi and wouldn’t bat an eyelid at Amadeus. The same dilemma applies to folks discussing Haydn and Sibelius…perhaps who the better lyricist is between Bob Dylan, GZA and Jandek. All something like this ever ends up as is a highly bureacratic scoring system which underlines the idea that art is a quantifiable thing…which it isn’t. ------------- “The Guide says there is an art to flying or rather a knack. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss.” - Douglas Adams |
Posted By: progaardvark
Date Posted: March 14 2022 at 04:19
|
Take the number of nouns in the music and divide by the number of pipperpipperpops in the music. ------------- ---------- i'm shopping for a new oil-cured sinus bag that's a happy bag of lettuce this car smells like cartilage nothing beats a good video about fractions |
Posted By: chopper
Date Posted: March 14 2022 at 04:36
I get your point, it's interesting. The 5 star rating in PA is for "a masterpiece of progressive rock music". Now I would say that there are a number of prog albums generally regarded as "masterpieces" and CTTE is one of them. So if you don't like the album would you really give it 1 or 2 stars which means it's for collectors and completionists only? Could it really be said that CTTE is for completionists only? I would also argue that Relayer is a masterpiece but there is at least one person here who prefers The Quest, so should he give Relayer 1 or 2 stars?
|
Posted By: David_D
Date Posted: March 14 2022 at 05:24
|
thank you very much for all the contributions so far, and not least yours, Sacro Porgo ------------- quality over quantity, and all kind of PopcoRn almost beyond |
Posted By: Psychedelic Paul
Date Posted: March 14 2022 at 06:01
The one person here who prefers The Quest over Close to the Edge has given the Relayer album a totally subjective 4-star rating.
 |
Posted By: chopper
Date Posted: March 14 2022 at 06:06
That's actually interesting because I thought you didn't like Relayer, so did you rate it on that basis or did you give it 4 stars due to it's status as a "masterpiece"?
|
Posted By: David_D
Date Posted: March 14 2022 at 06:27
I can tell about my own point of view that I distinguish between these criteria mentioned here themselves and a raters evaluation of them. The criteria themselves are at least to a certain degree objective, as defined here, but a rater's evalution of them/rating wil always be to a certain degree/mostly? subjective. However, a number of raters may agree about a certain evaluation/rating, and if so, this rating can be said to have a certain degree of "objectivity", if understood as intersubjectivity. With a larger number of raters who agree about a certain rating, then bigger "objectivity". - The second part of it of course only if presuming an agreement about using certain criteria.
------------- quality over quantity, and all kind of PopcoRn almost beyond |
Posted By: Psychedelic Paul
Date Posted: March 14 2022 at 06:39
You're right. I didn't like the Relayer album at all when I first heard it back in the mid-70's, but I've since listened to the album again recently and now grown to appreciate it more. My current Top 7 YES albums:- 1. The Quest 2. The Ladder 3. Talk 4. Going for the One 5. Close to the Edge 6. The Yes Album 7. 90125
|
Posted By: Grumpyprogfan
Date Posted: March 14 2022 at 07:43
|
To me, production and engineering are separate things. Most producers don't engineer and most engineers don't produce. If we discuss the sound, that involves engineering. Producers generally make sure timelines are met, offer suggestions on arrangements, and are usually not recording, mixing, or mastering. I wish more reviews would mention sound and I believe the rating should reflect this. For example, I initially gave Dream Theater's "Distance Over Time" a four star rating. After, listening to the CD several times, it sounds awful to my ears, and I can no longer listen to it. So, my rating would now be three stars. My point, engineering, while also somewhat subjective, should play a part in rating an album. Same with all remastered or remixed albums. The sound of album is part of the final product and should be discussed and factored into the final rating. |
Posted By: Guldbamsen
Date Posted: March 14 2022 at 08:12
|
^I can dig it. Hell I absolutely adore the music on King Crimson’s Earthbound, but the actual recording sounds like it was caught by an underwater mic from the bottom of a brewski. As it is I can’t stand listening to it exactly because of the horrendous sound quality. …but that is very rare indeed. On the other side of the fence are modern releases that sound like they were recorded in a vacuum by peeps with latex gloves on playing to a click. As much as this approach is boring to me, it’s still an easier listen than the above mentioned trashcan recording. Btw how can an album you can’t listen to end up with 3 stars  3 stars are for good albums. ------------- “The Guide says there is an art to flying or rather a knack. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss.” - Douglas Adams |
Posted By: moshkito
Date Posted: March 14 2022 at 08:13
Hi, And ... the PA folks ... come and go (and post again!!!!) ... thinking of Michelangelo! Some things never change when someone can not make up his/her mind and rely on something else! If you have to rely on a "rating" or "ranking" to enjoy CTTE, you are not listening to music at all! You are listening to music by numbers!!!!!! ------------- Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told! www.pedrosena.com |
Posted By: Grumpyprogfan
Date Posted: March 14 2022 at 08:42
 Yeah, my ratings are different from those on PA. I rate similar to school grades given in the states. A = Excellent (5 stars); B = Above Average (4 stars); C = Average (3 stars); D = Below Average (2 stars); F = Fail (1 star). I wouldn't call any album "essential".
|
Posted By: JD
Date Posted: March 14 2022 at 09:05
------------- Thank you for supporting independently produced music |
Posted By: Logan
Date Posted: March 14 2022 at 09:14
|
Appreciation is, of course subjective, but if one agrees to or adheres to certain standards or set criteria, then some efforts can be considered objectively more successful then others. An example of this for me would be a replication challenge. We have three performers asked to read and play Ligeti's Devil's Staircase (Etude 13) and are asked not to improvise, but to play it accurately. Performer one is Keyboard Cat. The cat's human servant (one does not own the cat, the cat owns you) sprinkles dry cat food across the keyboard cum catwalk. The cat walk back and forth and it sounds nothing like the Ligeti piece. The second performer is an acclaimed concert pianist who plays all the right notes in the right order and at the right time. The fourth is a three year old beginner (first time trying to play the piano) who lacks the experience to play the piece. The fifth is a very drunk concert pianist who fumbles over the keys and then vomits all over the piano. The mother of the three year old might well enjoy her child's performance the most, but it wouldn't be the "best" according to the criterion of replication (playing a piece). The drunk's regurgitation might ultimately be declared great performance and visual art, but it would not be considered the most successful according to the challenge. The keyboard cat's performance may be the most successful on youtube, going viral (I know I like cat videos), but again it wouldn't be the most accurate performance. Now we have those same people record an album\s worth each of Liszt at the same level of proficiency, and we can judge it at the level of performance. Another way is to consider success is the intent, if someone sets out to make the greatest modal jazz album and the consensus finds that it ended up sounding like a messed up version of Crunkcore, then maybe it doesn't deserve a five star rating as a modal jazz album. As a messed up Crunkcore album it may be a masterpiece however. The albums may even be hailed as up there with Borkencyde! But not up there with Charles Mingus or Miles Davis and Gil Evans probably. One of my favourite albums is The Shagg's Philosophy of the World, which is hailed as a bad album (they were amateurs), but many love it. Based on my subjective appreciation, I would rate it much higher than any Dream Theater, Spock's Beard or The Flower Kings album I know. But it's apples and oranges... While I too would rather be able to review without rating, I actually have liked ratings a s reflection of an individual's taste (I will look at peoples reviewer pages) more so than as a conglomerate or aggregate at PA. I do use RYM's album ratings charts to discover albums (I like the fact that I can search while using multiple tags for the album unlike here where all of a band's discography fall under one category, and not even multiple categories. I do find that to be a useful research guide for checking things out (I have discovered quite a few acts and albums that I love that way). I also like to search reddit for music similar to whatever it is I am most into at the time but I digress. I wish that ProgArchives ratings descriptors did not appeal to a sense of objectivity due to the subjective nature of evaluation. To each his or her own tastes. My scale would be more like ( I would want a wider spectrum and there is overlap in the descriptors, have done better ones before): 5. I love this! 4. I really liked this! 3. I like this. 2. Unsatisfying to me. 1. I really disliked/ loathed this. I like that that scale is explicitly subjective. I do think there are various objective measures to evaluate the success of songs and albums, such as if you know what the goal of the song or album was, such as if it is lyrically trying to convey something that it actually gets wrong, like something historical nd not all music is performed as proficiently (I have heard DIY music that sounds terrible both in production and performance, and I do believe that if the artist was more skilled it would have made for a better album). That said I love the Shagg's and that amateur aspect is a big part of the charm (I'd rate it a five as one of its ilk). ------------- https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLXcp9fYc6K4IKuxIZkenfvukL_Y8VBqzK" rel="nofollow - Duos for fave acts |
Posted By: jamesbaldwin
Date Posted: March 14 2022 at 10:04
I would put: "Hmmm..." between 2 and 3. ------------- Amos Goldberg (professor of Genocide Studies at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem): Yes, it's genocide. It's so difficult and painful to admit it, but we can no longer avoid this conclusion. |
Posted By: Logan
Date Posted: March 14 2022 at 10:13
|
^That would be a good addition. By the way, I wrote this first thing after waking up(excuses, excuses) and see that I messed up with the numbers of performers. Sometimes the brain has not caught up with the typing and vice versa. It should have been: "We have [four] performers asked to read and play Ligeti's Devil's Staircase (Etude 13) and are asked not to improvise, but to play it accurately. Performer one is Keyboard Cat. The cat's human servant (one does not own the cat, the cat owns you) sprinkles dry cat food across the keyboard cum catwalk. The cat walks back and forth and it sounds nothing like the Ligeti piece. The second performer is an acclaimed concert pianist who plays all the right notes in the right order and at the right time. The third is a three year old beginner (first time trying to play the piano) who lacks the experience to play the piece. The fourth is a very drunk concert pianist who fumbles over the keys and then vomits all over the piano." ------------- https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLXcp9fYc6K4IKuxIZkenfvukL_Y8VBqzK" rel="nofollow - Duos for fave acts |
Posted By: Greenmist
Date Posted: March 14 2022 at 10:14
|
Its quite hard to think of objective criteria, as ranking songs and albums is mainly on ones own opinion. I would say variety is the closest factor i can name to an objective criteria. I personally think that albums that have more variety on are better albums than ones that just follow the same type of song style. Like if an album is nothing but soft mellow songs *cough* The Division Bell *cough*. Or if the songs just sound too similar to each other.
|
Posted By: jamesbaldwin
Date Posted: March 14 2022 at 11:07
|
As i tried to explain in another thread I opened, in my opinion, an artwork must be judged according to aesthetic criteria, that is to say: beatiful or ugly. Alternatively, it can be judged from the point of view of its historical importance. If we want to talk about objective criteria, the historical importance could be quite objective as a criterion, but beauty is largely subjective. Otherwise every literary or music or film critic, etc. would assign the same judgment to an artwork. In that thread, I tried to make a ranking mainly according to beauty of the albums - and in part of the historical importance. How can the beauty of a music album be determined? There are some factors in which we can divide a song: 1) Composition (melody and harmony) 2) Ability to the musical instrument 3) Ability to sing 4) Arrangement 5) Experimentation 6) Sound (production) 7) lyrics Then we must consider 8) the overall effect, that is, how the sequence of the songs composes a whole that is more pleasant than the beauty of the individual pieces. It is clear that, however, as Robin Willams explains in Dead Poets Society, any attempt to mathematize the judgment on an artwork is "excrement". A song can be as simple and short as Yesterday and be considered much more beautiful than a 20-minute prog suite with experimental sounds (at least I think so). What matters, as a result, is the pathos that the music produces in the listener, the emotions, at least for me. If then the pathos is accompanied by a singing with some thick lyrics, the result can become exceptional. For example, in my opinion, the VdGG's music of the triad The Least / From H / Pawn Hearts has them all, and reaches a dramatic pathos that is amplified by the exceptional singing of Hammill, who sings lyrics of an existential anguish that are difficult to find in the lyrics of the prog bands of that time (and which in my opinion have aged very well). Often the complexity of the composition and the virtuosic technique on the musical instrument remove pathos from the songs, provoking more intellectual pleasure than real emotion. This difference in approach distinguishes for example "pure" prog listeners from pure "heartland rock" listeners. ------------- Amos Goldberg (professor of Genocide Studies at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem): Yes, it's genocide. It's so difficult and painful to admit it, but we can no longer avoid this conclusion. |
Posted By: Sacro_Porgo
Date Posted: March 14 2022 at 11:30
Yeah, that's the problem I kinda have with this site's rating system in general. There are absolutely essential albums that you're going to like less than non-essential ones, and qualifying star ratings in terms of essential-ness rather than goodness makes it confusing to decide how to rate something. If I absolutely love Tormato, to the point I prefer it to many Yes classics, I'd want to give it 5 stars. But if I already know the community at large doesn't agree with this take, and I already know it's not historically a very important album, it makes it seem like giving it 5 stars would be building it up to be something it isn't, even if I love it as much as a more collectively agreed upon 5 star album. For the record, I don't actually think this about Tormato, though I do think it's quite good. ------------- Porg for short. My love of music doesn't end with prog! Feel free to discuss all sorts of music with me. Odds are I'll give it a chance if I haven't already! :) |
Posted By: Sacro_Porgo
Date Posted: March 14 2022 at 11:34
Thanks. I suppose it's all a matter of opinion anyway. If you believe there are objectively measurable qualities about music which are interesting to put in a review, I doubt that's going to do anyone any harm. ------------- Porg for short. My love of music doesn't end with prog! Feel free to discuss all sorts of music with me. Odds are I'll give it a chance if I haven't already! :) |
Posted By: Lewian
Date Posted: March 14 2022 at 12:12
|
@Lorenzo: I suspect the word "pathos" is used slightly differently in English from Italian (and in fact German): https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pathos" rel="nofollow - https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pathos
|
Posted By: I prophesy disaster
Date Posted: March 14 2022 at 12:49
By what criteria are the many things of "impeccable quality" that fall through the cracks being assessed? You say "pick any set of standards you like to measure that", but I've actually picked popularity to measure that. That's the point. I do get that things might not be popular for identifiable reasons other than quality, but in a ratings system such as on PA, one gets to see not only the overall ratings, but also the number of ratings, which provides an indication of the level of exposure.
I don't get the point you're trying to make here. No one is suggesting that a massively popular album will be liked by everyone, or that an unpopular album will be liked by no one. The point of popularity is that it is a measure over many individuals, and even though each individual assessment is subjective and highly variable, the overall assessment by many individuals is objective and reliable.
And that is exactly why popularity is an objective measure of quality. The crucial point is that the only determinant of quality is that people like it. If one person likes it, that is subjective. But if many people like it, then that is objective. As for other objective measures of music such as complexity, these are not measures of quality. And the ones we tend to associate with quality correlate with popularity anyway. ------------- No, I know how to behave in the restaurant now, I don't tear at the meat with my hands. If I've become a man of the world somehow, that's not necessarily to say I'm a worldly man. |
Posted By: moshkito
Date Posted: March 14 2022 at 12:55
Hi, If I had stated that it would have been considered bad, and totally out of order and context. The idea of some folks listening with a wider/larger intent to all music, not just prog or rock at all, is quite different from the "hardland rock" (intentional spelling!) ... and as I have stated, when you have as much music as I did, and so many different countries and languages, the thought and idea of which of the albums is my "favorite" is completely ridiculous and bizarre ... because my listening is not based on something I like, and the fact I don't listen to anything else. And that's the problem ... I listen to too much "else" and I do so on purpose, because I don't want to be someone putting up charts and polls about ridiculous competitions between this and that ... which supposedly is fun. It isn't for me, because it brings down one of the pieces. I don't choose between Wagner or Verdi, they are both excellent in their own way, although it is easier to hear a Verdi and Puccini, than it is a lot of others ... their melodic styles are quite useful and common in rock music of all kinds, but that alone, is not enough for me, since I know that music has so much more on the score sheet than just 3 instruments doing the same thing. I once did a "film" version of Tosca (Act 2) for a class by Peter Mark (emeritus from the Virginia Opera), and his comment? I cleaned up all the problems with performing an opera, including not being able to see a lot ... but my favorite part was in the aria, where in the score there is a violin all alone, and it is playing single notes ... plucking them sort of ... and going down a note at a time, during the aria ... and for me the visual was immediate ... the VIOLIN WAS ABOUT HIS TEARS ... and that is what I put in the "film" script ... which had everyone going ... far out ... and it was what I was about when directing ... it wasn't about a "concept" or an "idea" ... it was all about how you can bring out the total beauty and the best from the work ... and to me, that is what "music" is about, but I am not sure that you or anyone else can hear that violin in the background of the aria ... but it is on the score, and I visualized it. There is nothing subjective or objective in that ... it is all right there ... and to me ... that is the PURE element of music that we have lost the ability to see and hear, because we are stuck on the lyrics, not necessarily on the content of the music itself ... which in rock music is the worst representative of what an "art form" is or is supposed to be! ------------- Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told! www.pedrosena.com |
Posted By: nick_h_nz
Date Posted: March 14 2022 at 13:31
I disagree, as popularity is often based/biased upon a self-perpetuating fractal model. The more something appears highly rated, the more exposure it gets for others to notice it and experience it, and rate it highly themselves. But that in itself is meaningless, and certainly not objective. As Pedro is so fond of saying (albeit not in the most constructive of manners), it misses the point entirely. That’s not to say those hugely popular albums are not the great quality works people find them to be - but rather that people find them because their popularity is a self-perpetuating echo chamber of sorts. There are plenty of albums as great as those that top the list, but they will never be as popular simply because they have too far to catch up with the resounding echoes of popularity. The top 100 in PA realistically is a measure of exposure, rather than quality. Again, that’s not to say the albums in the 100 are not of great quality, but that they are not necessarily greater “objectively” than many more not in the list. The quality of the albums in the 100 is due to correlation, rather than causation, to be awfully simplistic. (Also, apologies for the numerous spelling and grammatical errors that are no doubt in this post, as I have made it in a somewhat less than sober state…) ------------- https://tinyurl.com/nickhnz-tpa" rel="nofollow - Reviewer for The Progressive Aspect |
Posted By: David_D
Date Posted: March 14 2022 at 14:14
I've seen in this thread, and previously as well, that the definition of "objective" commonly used in the music art seems to be another one than the common one used in philosophy (and which I used here). Can you tell me maybe how "objective" is commonly defined in the music art? ------------- quality over quantity, and all kind of PopcoRn almost beyond |
Posted By: nick_h_nz
Date Posted: March 14 2022 at 14:24
Or rather, tell us how you define it. Objective as commonly defined in this thread is as it is commonly defined everywhere in the world I have lived. Objectivity is a lack of influence by personal feelings or opinions. It is a concept of truth independent of those personal feelings or opinions. This is really not at all different from the idea of objectivity in philosophy (or at least as I remember it from my studies at university all those years ago): Something can be considered to be objective when the conditions surrounding its truth are met without bias caused by an individual. Not one of the criteria you have suggested as being objective is possible to rate objectively. The closest, as several people have said, is production - but the other criteria you suggested can never be anything other than subjective. It doesn’t appear to be us who have the problem with the definition of objectivity, but you. 🤷🏻♂️ ------------- https://tinyurl.com/nickhnz-tpa" rel="nofollow - Reviewer for The Progressive Aspect |
Posted By: I prophesy disaster
Date Posted: March 14 2022 at 14:32
But how do you know that? What criteria are you using to assess these other albums as great? If it's just your opinion, then one can dismiss it as just your opinion. Otherwise, why do you think the criteria you are using is an assessment of greatness? Or are you somehow using popularity anyway? Even if the ratings system is flawed, it is still a measure of quality even if it is somewhat inaccurate. This topic is about objectivity not accuracy. Thus, we are talking about measures of quality in principle, even if they are found wanting in practice. ------------- No, I know how to behave in the restaurant now, I don't tear at the meat with my hands. If I've become a man of the world somehow, that's not necessarily to say I'm a worldly man. |
Posted By: nick_h_nz
Date Posted: March 14 2022 at 14:53
The top 100 is effectively based upon a frequentist conception of evidence, which attempts to avoid explicitly subjective elements, but like most frequentist conceptions of evidence does so at the price of a misleading impression of objectivity. Humour me here, and imagine PA is a scientific study. The PA ratings are our p values, so let’s say we classify 1 and 2 star ratings as non-significant, 3 and 4 stars as significant and 5 star ratings as highly significant. Not only are these labels obviously arbitrary, they also promote publication bias. The highly significant albums get thrown to the top of the PA 100 list, because they continue to be seen, and newly discovered, and rated again and again as highly significant. Why? Because researchers tend to “hunt for significance” when they come to PA. That doesn’t mean that the albums are not highly significant, but it would be ignorant to assume that they are the only highly significant results, just because they were the ones found in the study. That’s the inherent problem with any frequentist conception of evidence. That’s why in science there is rarely only one study. Because one study may easily miss something highly significant, or give the appearance that something is more significant than it actually is. (Which is not to say it’s not significant, so much as there could be other data out there equally significant, but as yet undiscovered or untested.) Popularity has never been, and never can be, a measure of objectivity. It can only ever give the illusion of objectivity. ------------- https://tinyurl.com/nickhnz-tpa" rel="nofollow - Reviewer for The Progressive Aspect |
Posted By: Lewian
Date Posted: March 14 2022 at 16:21
|
Sorry Nick, I usually appreciate your postings a lot, but...
I don't think it conveys any impression of objectivity and as such cannot be misleading. Otherwise, I know a thing or two about frequentism and p-values, and your comparison makes no sense whatsoever. (For starters, a proper frequentist will know that hunting for significance is abuse and does not work according to proper frequentist logic. I leave it at that because this is not the place for that discussion.) |
Posted By: Hugh Manatee
Date Posted: March 14 2022 at 16:38
As I so clumsily tried to explain previously, the dollar value given to this popularity can be objectively measured on a balance sheet. ------------- I should have been a pair of ragged claws Scuttling across the floors of uncertain seas |
Posted By: I prophesy disaster
Date Posted: March 14 2022 at 16:43
I think you're missing the point of what I'm saying. It seems to me that all you're saying is that popularity is difficult to measure. That is a practical problem which could be alleviated by a redesign. What I'm saying is that the objective quality of music is determined by the proportion of a particular fanbase who like the music. It specifically rejects the notion that the quality of music is determined by some aspect of the music other than its ability to evoke people to like it. It is also saying that the proportion of a particular fanbase who like the music is an objective notion even though the liking of the music by any individual is itself subjective.
------------- No, I know how to behave in the restaurant now, I don't tear at the meat with my hands. If I've become a man of the world somehow, that's not necessarily to say I'm a worldly man. |
Posted By: Sacro_Porgo
Date Posted: March 14 2022 at 16:55
I’ll concede a little on your first point. Using popularity as your criteria for measuring quality necessarily nullifies my argument there. Do if that’s how you personally judge how good something is, then have fun. On the other hand, if it’s at all possible to prefer something less popular to something more popular, it’s entirely reasonable to believe that popularity does not determine what you believe the quality of something to be. And if it’s reasonable to believe something less popular is of greater quality than something more popular, it would seem no longer possible to assert that popularity is an objective measure of quality. It signifies how many people share the same subjective opinion of something’s quality, but even a great sun of subjective opinions do not suddenly become objective because most people agree on them. Otherwise you could argue that God must be real only because a majority of people believe He is, totally ignoring any other evidence to support or negate that conclusion. Popularity doesn’t prove any objective fact other than the number of people who like something. ------------- Porg for short. My love of music doesn't end with prog! Feel free to discuss all sorts of music with me. Odds are I'll give it a chance if I haven't already! :) |
Posted By: jamesbaldwin
Date Posted: March 14 2022 at 18:05
|
With Pathos I mean: 1. Technical term of Greek rhetoric (of peripatetic origin) which indicates the ensemble of passion, excitement, greatness typical of tragedy. 2. In modern use, the ability that a artwork, even musical or figurative (or an expression, a moment of the work), has to arouse, with the power contained in it, intense affective emotion and emotion aesthetics (see drama, of which it is often synon.). By extension, impetus, warmth, emotional intensity: a peroration full of pathos. (From Treccani Encyclopedia) Thanks to Lewian
------------- Amos Goldberg (professor of Genocide Studies at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem): Yes, it's genocide. It's so difficult and painful to admit it, but we can no longer avoid this conclusion. |
Posted By: BrufordFreak
Date Posted: March 14 2022 at 19:27
|
As much as I've pondered this question--and even experimented with metric breakdowns of numerous categories, I've come to the conclusion that objectivity is impossible: the subject is always skewed (and mired) by her or his own biases. Even the choice of which albums to select for rating comes down to subjective choices--some of which are beyond our control. The best I've been able to accomplish is understanding that there is a difference between "best" and "favorite". ------------- Drew Fisher https://progisaliveandwell.blogspot.com/ |
Posted By: Sacro_Porgo
Date Posted: March 14 2022 at 20:07
I sorta get the best/favorite thing, but even then I wonder to myself, "if it's my favorite, why wouldn't I also think it's their best?" Most of the time I do! In certain cases I do concede that what I love so much about a particular album or song has more to do with my own memories associated with it than with the music contained therein, which has a lot to do with chance and timing. But even then, I may still argue that I think something is the best even though I know I'm very biased towards it because of memories! People are stubborn, and subjective. ------------- Porg for short. My love of music doesn't end with prog! Feel free to discuss all sorts of music with me. Odds are I'll give it a chance if I haven't already! :) |
Posted By: nick_h_nz
Date Posted: March 15 2022 at 01:26
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. ------------- https://tinyurl.com/nickhnz-tpa" rel="nofollow - Reviewer for The Progressive Aspect |
Posted By: nick_h_nz
Date Posted: March 15 2022 at 05:24
I often find that what is my favourite release from a band or artist is not what I think is their best, but even then I recognise that what I think is their best is still only my opinion. But so often my favourite release from any band or artist tends to be the first I heard from them. Once I have listened to and acquired more of their discography, I can recognise that it is probably not what I think is their best - but it remains my favourite, probably mostly because it was my first. So while best and favourite do sometimes align for me, more often they don’t - but neither are objective, but simply my opinions. 🤷🏻♂️ ------------- https://tinyurl.com/nickhnz-tpa" rel="nofollow - Reviewer for The Progressive Aspect |
Posted By: Mascodagama
Date Posted: March 15 2022 at 06:11
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! ------------- Soldato of the Pan Head Mafia. We'll make you an offer you can't listen to. http://bandcamp.com/jpillbox" rel="nofollow - Bandcamp Profile |
Posted By: Sean Trane
Date Posted: March 15 2022 at 06:46
am I going and  , but this seems to make sense...Though obviously, given PP's ratings, it's obviously not working out for him... ------------- let's just stay above the moral melee prefer the sink to the gutter keep our sand-castle virtues content to be a doer as well as a thinker, prefer lifting our pen rather than un-sheath our sword |
Posted By: JD
Date Posted: March 15 2022 at 07:50
------------- Thank you for supporting independently produced music |
Posted By: Lewian
Date Posted: March 15 2022 at 09:30
|
@Nick: Fair enough, I agree with pretty much all in your later posting, still I don't think it has much to do with frequentism and p-values, not even as some kind of analogy. |
Posted By: TheGazzardian
Date Posted: March 15 2022 at 11:08
|
I think the only thing truly objective about a musical recording is the shape of the sound wave... 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).
|
Posted By: Progosopher
Date Posted: March 15 2022 at 11:14
Yes, that is what I am saying, which is my own response to the OP. A certain degree is not 100%, so there must necessarily be subjectivity as well. Some objectivity will allow the review to go beyond merely saying, "I liked it." The degree of objectivity is up to the reviewer. My main point is that a good review is a combination of both objectivity and subjectivity. By good here, I specifically mean one that indicates the music is worth listening to. It may be well or poorly written, which is another standard. I can enjoy a well written review, even if I do not like the artist in question. Objectivity provides a factual basis, which I find important. Subjectivity provides personal meaning which invites the reader to share in the enjoyment. ------------- The world of sound is certainly capable of infinite variety and, were our sense developed, of infinite extensions. -- George Santayana, "The Sense of Beauty" |
Posted By: Hugh Manatee
Date Posted: March 15 2022 at 16:40
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. ------------- I should have been a pair of ragged claws Scuttling across the floors of uncertain seas |
Posted By: David_D
Date Posted: March 15 2022 at 17:31
I find this criterion very good to mention, James B., even I don't consider it to be specifically objective. ------------- quality over quantity, and all kind of PopcoRn almost beyond |
Posted By: David_D
Date Posted: March 15 2022 at 18:01
Well, different folks different strokes. I must say that I don't find very subjective reviews particularly interesting. ------------- quality over quantity, and all kind of PopcoRn almost beyond |
Posted By: Lewian
Date Posted: March 15 2022 at 18:20
So what then in your view gives a review objective qualities?
|
Posted By: nick_h_nz
Date Posted: March 16 2022 at 01:28
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. ------------- https://tinyurl.com/nickhnz-tpa" rel="nofollow - Reviewer for The Progressive Aspect |
Posted By: Guldbamsen
Date Posted: March 16 2022 at 01:35
|
Gotta agree. I don’t think I’ve ever come across a clearly objective review…and really do not imagine such as an interesting read. Tell me how the music sounds and how it makes you feel and think. That’s all I need ------------- “The Guide says there is an art to flying or rather a knack. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss.” - Douglas Adams |
Posted By: Psychedelic Paul
Date Posted: March 16 2022 at 02:17
Fair comment.
|
Posted By: Psychedelic Paul
Date Posted: March 16 2022 at 02:19
Well said!
|
Posted By: David_D
Date Posted: March 16 2022 at 02:26
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. ------------- quality over quantity, and all kind of PopcoRn almost beyond |
Posted By: David_D
Date Posted: March 16 2022 at 02:42
|
I've asked you to stay away from me, Nick. ------------- quality over quantity, and all kind of PopcoRn almost beyond |
Posted By: nick_h_nz
Date Posted: March 16 2022 at 03:06
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.) ------------- https://tinyurl.com/nickhnz-tpa" rel="nofollow - Reviewer for The Progressive Aspect |