Raters who suck

I don't like the insane number of five star ratings that come out of the woodwork in the week following new releases.  Really?

Doing away with one star ratings is a bad idea.  It's just a value on a scale.  Get rid of it, and then the two becomes the new one, and the five the new four.  Whatever.

Also, I think star ratings are only really useful if you're looking at an average rating from 100+ different people.  If I'm new to Marillion, for example, and I go to the Marillion page, I might first look to see which album has the highest average rating, to get a recommendation of where to start, keeping in mind that averages with a small sample size are less representative of a broad range of opinion, and therefore less reliable.  Since most of the Marillion albums have received a lot of ratings from a variety of people, I figure that any one person's careless/abusive "1" rating isn't going to affect the average.  One person's ranking from 1-5 is only going to sway me if I know and trust that individual's point of view.  The review (if present) is really where the meat is.

Edited by HolyMoly - September 18 2012 at 18:32

Epignosis wrote: I don't like the insane number of five star ratings that come out of the woodwork in the week following new releases.  Really?

People enjoyed the album - why should that bother you?

Epignosis wrote: Doing away with one star ratings is a bad idea.  It's just a value on a scale.  Get rid of it, and then the two becomes the new one, and the five the new four.  Whatever.

I don't think anyone is suggesting to get rid of them - I think their suggesting ways to stop people who are giving them out just to try to manipulate the scale, and one of the ways being suggested is to force people to justify their 1 star ratings.

maybe some reviewers are precognative to music and know that albums is 5 star even a half year before the relesase??

Edited by aginor - September 19 2012 at 06:55

He's referring to the overuse of 5* due to people's hype of the album. 

Epignosis wrote: dtguitarfan wrote: Andy Webb wrote: dtguitarfan wrote: Epignosis wrote: I don't like the insane number of five star ratings that come out of the woodwork in the week following new releases.  Really? People enjoyed the album - why should that bother you? Because the album probably hasn't been released yet and won't be for another month... (can be applied to almost every new album release) He said "in the week following new releases" - this means the album has been released and thus people have had the opportunity to listen to it.... Enjoying an album is not enough to give it five stars. Most of the albums I enjoy are not 5 stars.

Sorry, but that's crap.  The only measurement anyone can truly give of an album is their own personal enjoyment.  It's art - you can't objectively say "this is better than that because...", you can only say "I enjoyed it sooooo much, so I'm giving it this many stars."  That's the only truthful way to go about it, the way I see it.  Now, it may be that you are a very technical person, and so your enjoyment comes from paying attention and hearing technical things going on and thus you can say "I enjoyed this so much because I heard them doing this and that" but it's still just a measure of your own personal enjoyment.  You can't pretend to tell people that your measurement of an album's greatness is the only true measurement.

Snow Dog wrote: dtguitarfan wrote: Epignosis wrote: dtguitarfan wrote: Andy Webb wrote: dtguitarfan wrote: Epignosis wrote: I don't like the insane number of five star ratings that come out of the woodwork in the week following new releases.  Really? People enjoyed the album - why should that bother you? Because the album probably hasn't been released yet and won't be for another month... (can be applied to almost every new album release) He said "in the week following new releases" - this means the album has been released and thus people have had the opportunity to listen to it.... Enjoying an album is not enough to give it five stars. Most of the albums I enjoy are not 5 stars. Sorry, but that's crap.  The only measurement anyone can truly give of an album is their own personal enjoyment.  It's art - you can't objectively say "this is better than that because...", you can only say "I enjoyed it sooooo much, so I'm giving it this many stars."  That's the only truthful way to go about it, the way I see it.  Now, it may be that you are a very technical person, and so your enjoyment comes from paying attention and hearing technical things going on and thus you can say "I enjoyed this so much because I heard them doing this and that" but it's still just a measure of your own personal enjoyment.  You can't pretend to tell people that your measurement of an album's greatness is the only true measurement. A review  comes with a certain responsibility. Just because you enjoy an album that hardly makes it worthy of 5 stars. As Rob said. There are many, many albums I enjoy  without  a 5 star rating. There are albums I enjoy that I would rate 2 or 3 stars for this site.

Sure, there is responsibility to analyze WHY you enjoyed that album, but in the end that's all you can do.  The only thing a reviewer can really, honestly do is say "this is 5 stars because I enjoyed it so much, and this is why."  You simply can't say "this is 5 stars because it's factually the best."  That's impossible to back up and a load of crap.

Now, YES, it is possible that the reason a certain reviewer loves music is because he is analyzing musical factors that are present or not present and enjoys the music that has the more difficult, more unusual things present.  But it's still just a measure of your enjoyment.  When I use the Prog Archives' guidelines and say "this is an album that every prog lover should own", the ONLY thing I (or anyone) can back this statement up with is the measure of my own enjoyment.

thellama73 wrote: Bear in mind that the ratings system is not "how much did you enjoy this album on a scale of one to five?" Each star value has a statement to go along with it. So I could massively enjoy an album and still not think it is a quintessential masterpiece of progressive music. A lot of the albums I enjoy most I would only recommend for die hard fans, and as such would rate as either two or three stars.

But think about that - just because you say an album is a necessary addition to every prog lover's collection doesn't mean people agree with you.  So what are you backing that statement up with?  To me, it seems the only sensible way to back up this statement is just to be honest and say "well, I really really enjoyed this and that's why" because I think that's the only measurement I can truly provide.

thellama73 wrote: dtguitarfan wrote: thellama73 wrote: Bear in mind that the ratings system is not "how much did you enjoy this album on a scale of one to five?" Each star value has a statement to go along with it. So I could massively enjoy an album and still not think it is a quintessential masterpiece of progressive music. A lot of the albums I enjoy most I would only recommend for die hard fans, and as such would rate as either two or three stars. But think about that - just because you say an album is a necessary addition to every prog lover's collection doesn't mean people agree with you.  So what are you backing that statement up with?  To me, it seems the only sensible way to back up this statement is just to be honest and say "well, I really really enjoyed this and that's why" because I think that's the only measurement I can truly provide. Let me give an example. One of my favorite albums ever is the Million Dollar Quartet sessions with Elvis Presley, Jerry Lee Lewis, Carl Perkins and (allegedly) Johnny Cash. It's not on this site, but if it were, I could not in good conscience give it five stars because it's not progressive and you have to be a fan of rockabilly, gospel and country to like it, as well as someone who doesn't mind the looseness of the live in studio, improvisatory format. It would be wrong to call such a record an essential masterpiece of progressive music, becasue it's not.

Aha but think about that!  What are you really doing there?  You're guessing at what other people's enjoyment will be based on the assumption that what they are looking for is certain musical factors...so it's still just a measure of (assumed) enjoyment....

I do know what you're talking about.  The Beardfish review I just wrote, I did not post up on the Metal Music Archives, because the whole review is about why I gave it 5 stars and I don't feel right giving the album 5 stars on MMA.  But as I said, it's because I'm assuming on what other people's enjoyment will or will not be based on certain assumptions that those who are on the site are seeking certain musical factors.

thellama73 wrote: They are not assumptions, they are explicit statements in the review guidelines.

I'm saying that when you rate an album that is one of your favorites lower than a 5 based on the guidelines, that what you are essentially doing is making assumptions on what other people's enjoyment will be based on certain musical factors you are analyzing.