too heavily weighted ratings ? its outrageous

 

Depends in how you look at it, I believe that's not a Morrison era album, that's a label compilation for no other purpose than making bucks.

 

There are already enough Doors compilations, if people want the real deal get the studio albums.

 

Maybe too low, but I wouldn't give more than 2, maybe  3 stars to that attemp of sacking our pockets.

 

Iván

 

Read my reviews, except a couple, I always rate compilations very low, I believe the music must be listened in the way the artist recorded it.

 

I never buy remasters or SACD, not even new copies of DVD's, if I already have something I don't waste my money, there's too much new stuff to be listened.

 

I even refuse to buy BluRay, being that most of the concerts I buy are not recorded in great quality.

 

I have already most of Doors albums and 4 compilations, why buy more?.

 

Iván

 

Rating :

< id=irate =..hRatue.value=.value;checkFiveStars; = value=5 name=irate> Essential: a masterpiece of progressive music

< id=irate =..hRatue.value=.value; = value=4 name=irate> Excellent addition to any prog music collection

< id=irate =..hRatue.value=.value; = value=3 name=irate> Good, but non-essential

< id=irate =..hRatue.value=.value; = value=2 name=irate> Collectors/fans only

< id=irate =..hRatue.value=.value; = value=1 name=irate> Poor. Only for completionists

 

At least in my mind this is not necessarily a straight 1 to 5 ranking with 1 being worst and 5 being best.  It is meant to hopefully fit into a prog fans mindset.  Of course this isn't entirely fair either since us prog fans are all over the map from extreme prog metal to RIO/Avant to Zeuhl to Electronic to Crossover fans.  So taken within the context of a genre or a particular band a 5 star rating would make sense for a band's very best album or albums.  Even within a prog sub genre this might make sense.  Not only is an album the band's best, it is also a masterpiece within its subgenre.  Where the problem comes in is when you then take in prog music as a whole.  Is an album not only the band's best, and a masterpiece of its genre, but is it also a masterpiece of prog.  Is it an album that is going to appeal to the wide spectrum of prog fans?  I honestly feel that in the grand scheme of things there are very few of those that would fit that bill. But look at that you now have level 4 star which is an album that is not a masterpiece, but it is essential for any prog collection.  Hmmmm.  How big of a difference is there between a 4 star and a 5 star?  How can an album be essential but not be a masterpiece?  Then you get to 3 star which is good but not essential.  In my opinion most prog albums fall within this category.  Which makes sense from both an averaging standpoint as well as the fact that if everything were essential then the meaning of essential would be extremely diluted and thus rendered worthless.  The two star rating is meant to apply to collectors/fans only.  For me this is where compilations come in to play, and where it also gets quite tricky and you can kind of see from my reviews of compilations what I mean by this.  The music itself might be 4 or 5 star material especially to someone who is new to a band.  On the other hand, to someone who already has all of a bands albums, a compilation album is really only for a fan/collector who must have everything ever released by that particular band.  Thus the 2-star might be deemed as an insult, and maybe in a way it is, but it is also truly a fair rating because once you have all of a band's albums is it really necessary to have a new compilation album.  This same 2-star discussion also applies to 1 star reviews.  Poor.  Only for completionists.  Whereas a good compiliation might generate a 2 star, or even at best a 3 star ranking, a bad compilation should almost always receive a 1 star ranking.  Truly only a completionist would want it.  For me at least this also gets tricky within what I might consider to be a band's worst albums.  If I personally don't like an album and I am a fan of the band, then maybe that deserves a 1 star rating.  If I am not a fan of the band and I don't like the music is it fair for me to give it a 1 star?  Should I really be giving it a 2 star which says that it is for collectors/fans only?  What is the difference between a collector and a completionist?  I know that the ratings are based on personal feelings, but how can I say that an album is poor and only for completionists when the band's fans are giving the album 4 or 5 stars.  If this is the case, then the album will most likely get a 2 star rating from me, which means that it is for fans of the band.  This 2 star might seem like an insult and I suppose again it might even be one, but it essentially is my way of saying that I don't like the album but if you are a fan of the band you might/will like it.  And one last thing which really grinds me with this sites reviews.  A prog-related or proto-prog band's album should absolutely never ever receive a 5 star review.  How in the hell can a non-prog album be a masterpiece of prog?  It is impossible.  If it is a masterpiece of prog than that band had better damn well be moved from proto-prog or prog-related to a full prog genre.

 

What was the point of this lengthy rant.  The point was that the ratings don't mean anything.  For 1, very few seem to follow the guidelines anyways.  For 2, there really aren't too many bright lines between the various star rankings.  Masterpiece vs essential.  Collectors vs completionists.  The star ranking really means nothing without the substance of the review which explains what the star ranking means to that individual reviewer. 

 

As far as the collabs and reviewers rankings getting higher weightings than non-collabs and reviewers this has been explained already by others but essentially the main idea behind it is as has been said generally collabs and reviewers have "earned" these titles by helping out on the site and hopefully writing reviews that are essentially unbiased and thus useful to the reader of the review.  This isn't to say that there aren't poorly written reviews by reviewers and collabs and excellently written reviews by noncollabs and nonreviewers.  Some people and reviewers fall through the cracks or aren't highly visible within the forum setting but I think that generally those nonreviewers/collabs who write a number of good reviews will be noticed by the admins or collabs or reviewers and they will get promoted to the reviewer and collab level.  As has been said this is a volunteer site and those that show the most willingness to volunteer and help out are almost always accepted with open arms to continue the volunteering and helping out. 

 

Cheers

 

Scott