4 and a 1/2 Stars?

I would like to be able to rate it whatever you want, half, 1 1/2, and so on.

The 5 star rating is a clean and simple methodology used by PA to determine an albums progressiveness.

However, I use half ratings on my ipod (wish they had a 1-10 star option) as I like to rate how much I like tracks and sometimes need a rating between 3-4 and 4-5. But that is for my own personal consumption. If you are keen to rate albums this way then I might suggest that you mosy over to Progfreak.

Me I like both but sometimes have to remind myself of the PA scoring system which has been an invaluable guide to bands and albums that I was not familiar with.

No because the site won't do it anyway so we should stop talking about it.

SentimentalMercenary wrote: Epignosis wrote: Test of time?  Hell, I might not be alive in three years. I rated The Decemberist's The Hazards of Love five stars not because it has stood any "test of time" (whatever that means) but because I believe it will stand the test of time (again, whatever that means- I take it to mean I will be heartily enjoying it in ten years as much as I do now.  And if I don't?  Eh, it's still a solid five for many other reasons). But is it not the fact that people give 5 stars to just any album they feel is great at the moment, wihtout due consideration to its actual influence, context and durability, that makes almost trivial the 5 stars rating? I mean, we all had those moments where we felt that a given new album is outstanding and that our feelings about it would not change, whereas after some time, we may still like it but no longer think it is a masterpiece...  Any thoughts?

Yeah, you have made a valid point and despite the dismissive tenor of the Ted Heath Band who posited the original idea, I do think it has some merit if applied to new releases of new material. I remember actually being positive about ELP's Love Beach when it came out but having reviewed same after a 30 year errand called 'growing up', now realise it is but a pile of pooh. I guess you are thinking of some sort of 'holding pen' for 5 star ratings of brand new albums ?

Dick Heath wrote: Why piss about with halves, simply go  0 to 10  (OR even 0 to 100), but 10 is awarded only after an album has been out for at least 3 years - so we can incorporate 'the test of time' evalution and allow some reviewers to grow up...................................

 

Dick Heath wrote: Why piss about with halves, simply go  0 to 10  (OR even 0 to 100), but 10 is awarded only after an album has been out for at least 3 years - so we can incorporate 'the test of time' evalution and allow some reviewers to grow up...................................

No reviews from my uncrafty hand have appeared yet, but the first 4.5 star I'll round up to 5 and most others will be rounded down to 4, and it should the freedom of the reviewer to round up or down. But to make a 4.5 star rating possible while a 1.5, a 2.5 or a 3.5 should be rounded to an entire number makes no sense to me.

Edited by someone_else - August 23 2009 at 09:25

PinkPangolin wrote: ExittheLemming wrote: SentimentalMercenary wrote: I'm late here, sorry about it.   The problem at hand is that too many people think that giving 4 stars is harsh for an album that they like, so they go and give 5 stars. This is an attitude that needs to be changed rather than the ranking system.   Personnaly, I will give 3 stars to many albums that I really enjoy. I will keep my 4 stars ratings only for exceptional albums that I love listening again and again without skipping any tracks, and which I feel are close to being or becoming a classic of the genre. I will award 5 stars strictly to established classics, true masterpieces that have influenced several other artists, or to the very few albums that simply moved me way beyond 99% of the rest.   Thus it's the attitude towards the 3 and 4 stars ratings which should be changed. Once we start to see them as good ratings rather than harsh or poor, it mostly fixes the system.   I also think that this problem is especially present within the tech metal genres, where 4 and 5 stars ratings are commonly awarded to just any commonplace tech metal album...  Industrial strength praise for the above. Well said sir. I too have long believed that the rating system ain't broke but the raters clearly are. To wit, a positive review of a so-called classic prog album (3 stars) is perceived as a disrespectful slander of a sacred cow. You only need to try to reconcile the body text of reviews with the ratings to see that e.g. "this track's a bit boring and some of the shorter songs are just ok but a prog masterpiece 5 stars" Enough already.... All the comments from Tin of Hurri Curri (did I get that right?) have been superb - good stuff -thanks I have never before really appreciated that "3" is a specially good rating.   Does 3 out of 5 equate to 6 out of 10?  For a footballer on his Saturday's performance to be given 6 out of 10 would be considered "satisfactory" - he did his job but no more.  Clearly in this website it means more than that - maybe it's more that the definitions ought to be altered. Maybe the mark in reality is out of 3.   Then you get 3* and 3** for the "4" and "5" ratings.  "3" is great, "3*" is extra-great, and "3**" is super-dooper unbelievably great.... Does this fit with what you're saying?

^^Nope!

It can be a relative 5 stars... Like... Jon Anderson - Olias Of Sunhillow (which I gave a 5), although its only prog related, I'd say its a masterpiece.

I mean... I never thought of the example you gave
But, if you think its worth 5 stars as an album, then I'd say give it a five...

Sorry, I'm not sure how to elaborate on my feelings much more than that


-Joel

At the end of the day,

ExittheLemming wrote: Just this really:3 stars = Good, but non-essential4 stars = Excellent addition to any prog rock music collection (and it needn't necessarily be a prog album)5 stars = Essential: a masterpiece of progressive rock music**perhaps the 5 star definition is a tad blurry methinks i.e could you give a non-prog album 5 stars ? (I've never really understood this but I guess if it's listed on PA there ain't nowt stopping you landing 5 big wet smackers on that critter's forehead ?)

I'll give you an example of what I do for four/five star albums.

YES - 90125.

I love that album, and I think it's perfect, but let's face it... Its only about 10% prog. As much as I'd love to give it 5, it's not a masterpiece of progressive music, rather pop/rock, and thats why a gave it a 4.