Forum Home Forum Home > Site News, Newbies, Help and Improvements > Help us improve the site
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Raters who suck
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedRaters who suck

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345 6>
Author
Message
thellama73 View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: May 29 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 8368
Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 20 2012 at 08:01
Originally posted by dtguitarfan dtguitarfan wrote:

Originally posted by thellama73 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.


I don't agree with you, because the star rating is not just about enjoyment. A three star rating is not a signal that "you will will not enjoy this that much" it is saying "this album is good and you may absolutely love it, but it is not essential."

Essentiality and enjoyment are not the same thing, and the former can be based on somewhat more objective criteria than the latter.
Back to Top
dtguitarfan View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: June 24 2011
Location: Chattanooga, TN
Status: Offline
Points: 1708
Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 20 2012 at 08:15
Originally posted by thellama73 thellama73 wrote:


Originally posted by dtguitarfan dtguitarfan wrote:


Originally posted by thellama73 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.
I don't agree with you, because the star rating is not just about enjoyment. A three star rating is not a signal that "you will will not enjoy this that much" it is saying "this album is good and you may absolutely love it, but it is not essential."Essentiality and enjoyment are not the same thing, and the former can be based on somewhat more objective criteria than the latter.

How do you know what's essential to me or anyone else but yourself?
Back to Top
thellama73 View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: May 29 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 8368
Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 20 2012 at 08:22
Originally posted by dtguitarfan dtguitarfan wrote:

Originally posted by thellama73 thellama73 wrote:


Originally posted by dtguitarfan dtguitarfan wrote:


Originally posted by thellama73 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.
I don't agree with you, because the star rating is not just about enjoyment. A three star rating is not a signal that "you will will not enjoy this that much" it is saying "this album is good and you may absolutely love it, but it is not essential."Essentiality and enjoyment are not the same thing, and the former can be based on somewhat more objective criteria than the latter.

How do you know what's essential to me or anyone else but yourself?


The quality of being essential implies a few things:

1. That the album is generally considered to be good.
2. That it fits stylistically into the relevant genre (i.e. in order to be essential to progressive music collection, it must be progressive)
3. That it is historically important in that it covered new territory or was influential to other bands.

Granted, all of these are somewhat subjective, but they consist of more than simple enjoyment.
Back to Top
dtguitarfan View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: June 24 2011
Location: Chattanooga, TN
Status: Offline
Points: 1708
Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 20 2012 at 08:33
Originally posted by thellama73 thellama73 wrote:


The quality of being essential implies a few things:
1. That the album is generally considered to be good.

AHA! AHA!!!!!! So you admit that you are assuming what other's enjoyment is/will be!!!!!! FOR THE WIN!!!


Originally posted by thellama73 thellama73 wrote:


3. That it is historically important in that it covered new territory or was influential to other bands.Granted, all of these are somewhat subjective, but they consist of more than simple enjoyment.

Soooo...you can't ever give anything 5 stars unless it's at least 10 years old? I think that's ridiculous, myself. Or, maybe you are trying to predict the future historical significance, which is impossible.
Back to Top
dtguitarfan View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: June 24 2011
Location: Chattanooga, TN
Status: Offline
Points: 1708
Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 20 2012 at 08:34
Also, as to thellama73's #2 point, everyone around here (and everywhere) seems to disagree on what is and is not progressive anyways....
Back to Top
thellama73 View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: May 29 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 8368
Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 20 2012 at 08:40
Originally posted by dtguitarfan dtguitarfan wrote:

Originally posted by thellama73 thellama73 wrote:


The quality of being essential implies a few things:
1. That the album is generally considered to be good.

AHA! AHA!!!!!! So you admit that you are assuming what other's enjoyment is/will be!!!!!! FOR THE WIN!!!


No, that's not what I said. I was referring to general consensus that the album has quality. This assumes nothing about the individual enjoyment of the person reading the review.

Originally posted by thellama73 thellama73 wrote:


3. That it is historically important in that it covered new territory or was influential to other bands.Granted, all of these are somewhat subjective, but they consist of more than simple enjoyment.

Soooo...you can't ever give anything 5 stars unless it's at least 10 years old? I think that's ridiculous, myself. Or, maybe you are trying to predict the future historical significance, which is impossible.


No, you'll note that I also included "groundbreaking" as a criterion, which has nothing to do with age. There is such a thing as a modern classic.

I should note that I also think an album can be essential without being very good (although it wouldn't be a masterpiece and therefore not worthy of five stars) Dream Theater's albums are certainly essential to a prog metal collection because of their importance to the genre, just as the Ramones are essential to a punk collection. The fact that I do not particularly enjoy either band does not make them less essential.
Back to Top
thellama73 View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: May 29 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 8368
Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 20 2012 at 08:42
Originally posted by dtguitarfan dtguitarfan wrote:

Also, as to thellama73's #2 point, everyone around here (and everywhere) seems to disagree on what is and is not progressive anyways....


To a degree, yes, but there is broad agreement that, for example, Yes is progressive and Johnny Cash is not. In any case, that's what the review is for, asserting one's opinion on this and other factors.
Back to Top
dtguitarfan View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: June 24 2011
Location: Chattanooga, TN
Status: Offline
Points: 1708
Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 20 2012 at 08:51
To reply to all that thellama73 just said - I think I've made my point already, but just think about your replies.  How do you know what the general consensus of quality is?  Are you saying you can't ever give out a 5 star unless you've seen 100 other people give a 5 star to the album?  EDIT: And if so, that's not very fair to new albums - what happens when you're specifically asked to review an album that hasn't even been release to the public?  Are you going to say that there's no way you could ever go higher than...oh, say a 3? 
 
And how do you know what "groundbreaking" is?  What you think is groundbreaking may not be considered groundbreaking by others, and what they consider groundbreaking may not be considered groundbreaking to you....
 
Believe me, I've thought about this, and concluded that in the end the only truly honest thing I can do is say "I enjoyed this/I did not enjoy this, and think others will too and that's why I'm giving this rating out."  And back to the review I did not post on MMA, I did not do this for that very reason, because I'm assuming that the average metal lover will not give the Beardfish album 5 stars and because my review specifically was written to support my conclusion of 5 stars, it makes no sense to put that one up on MMA and would need some slight rewriting of some sort.  But that's an assumption!  20 years down the road, I could possibly hear people calling that album one of the masterpieces of metal, I don't know!  All I can do is state my own enjoyment and what my assumption of other's enjoyment will be and rate accordingly.


Edited by dtguitarfan - September 20 2012 at 08:56
Back to Top
thellama73 View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: May 29 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 8368
Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 20 2012 at 09:06
Originally posted by dtguitarfan dtguitarfan wrote:

To reply to all that thellama73 just said - I think I've made my point already, but just think about your replies.  How do you know what the general consensus of quality is?  Are you saying you can't ever give out a 5 star unless you've seen 100 other people give a 5 star to the album?  EDIT: And if so, that's not very fair to new albums - what happens when you're specifically asked to review an album that hasn't even been release to the public?  Are you going to say that there's no way you could ever go higher than...oh, say a 3? 
 
And how do you know what "groundbreaking" is?  What you think is groundbreaking may not be considered groundbreaking by others, and what they consider groundbreaking may not be considered groundbreaking to you....
 


You keep complaining that my criteria (which are not hard and fast by any means) are subjective, but I never claimed otherwise. Of course they are subjective, that's why we have reviews and not scientific reports on an album's quality. But that doesn't mean that it all boils down to enjoyment either.

If you believe a new album is so effective, so innovative and so technically excellent as to qualify as a an essential masterpiece of progressive music, then by all means rate it five stars. I did with Sleepytime Gorilla Museum's "Of Natural History" and I stand by that rating. But don't haphazardly award five star ratings to every new album by a band you like.
Back to Top
dtguitarfan View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: June 24 2011
Location: Chattanooga, TN
Status: Offline
Points: 1708
Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 20 2012 at 09:23
Originally posted by thellama73 thellama73 wrote:


You keep complaining that my criteria (which are not hard and fast by any means) are subjective, but I never claimed otherwise. Of course they are subjective, that's why we have reviews and not scientific reports on an album's quality. But that doesn't mean that it all boils down to enjoyment either.

If you believe a new album is so effective, so innovative and so technically excellent as to qualify as a an essential masterpiece of progressive music, then by all means rate it five stars. I did with Sleepytime Gorilla Museum's "Of Natural History" and I stand by that rating. But don't haphazardly award five star ratings to every new album by a band you like.
I'm not complaining, I'm saying that in my opinion all reviewers can really do is measure their own enjoyment and guess what other people's enjoyment will be.  And I think that if reviewers were more honest about that, there would be less hurt feelings.  Because it hurts less to say "well, I really didn't enjoy this but it's ok if you do" than to say "this is utter rubbish and anyone who does not agree is stupid."
Back to Top
thellama73 View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: May 29 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 8368
Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 20 2012 at 09:28
Originally posted by dtguitarfan dtguitarfan wrote:

I'm saying that in my opinion all reviewers can really do is measure their own enjoyment and guess what other people's enjoyment will be.


So you don't think the word "essential" has any meaning distinct from "enjoyable?"
Back to Top
dtguitarfan View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: June 24 2011
Location: Chattanooga, TN
Status: Offline
Points: 1708
Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 20 2012 at 09:30
Originally posted by thellama73 thellama73 wrote:

Originally posted by dtguitarfan dtguitarfan wrote:

I'm saying that in my opinion all reviewers can really do is measure their own enjoyment and guess what other people's enjoyment will be.


So you don't think the word "essential" has any meaning distinct from "enjoyable?"
I don't think I, or anyone else for that matter, can truly decide if an album is essential.  I can only guess at it, and the only way I think that I can make that call is to measure my own enjoyment and guess at what other people's enjoyment will be.
Back to Top
HolyMoly View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin

Joined: April 01 2009
Location: Atlanta
Status: Offline
Points: 26138
Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 20 2012 at 09:38
I think everyone has their own variation on a generally accepted ratings system (i.e. 1 = bad, 5 = great), and I think both of you are good, reasonable guys whose ratings I would trust.  I think the problem lies with much more extreme examples of people who gratuitously and repeatedly dole out extreme scores without any apparent reason.  The "apparent" part is what's subjective here.
My other avatar is a Porsche

It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle if it is lightly greased.

-Kehlog Albran
Back to Top
dtguitarfan View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: June 24 2011
Location: Chattanooga, TN
Status: Offline
Points: 1708
Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 20 2012 at 09:47
Originally posted by HolyMoly HolyMoly wrote:

I think everyone has their own variation on a generally accepted ratings system (i.e. 1 = bad, 5 = great), and I think both of you are good, reasonable guys whose ratings I would trust.  I think the problem lies with much more extreme examples of people who gratuitously and repeatedly dole out extreme scores without any apparent reason.  The "apparent" part is what's subjective here.
 
Exactly.  And this is why I love the idea of making people write a review to back up a 1 star.  Because there are 1 star spammers and 5 star spammers, and while I don't have as much of a problem with someone 5 star spamming (why should it bother me of someone loves something I don't?), I do have a problem with someone making something I love look bad.  But if you can't give a 1 star without at least writing something to back it up, that will surely cut down the 1 star spamming a bit.  And then of course, you'll have 1 star spammers who copy the same review a thousand times, and then of course it'll be more noticeable, and will be deleted faster.
Back to Top
HolyMoly View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin

Joined: April 01 2009
Location: Atlanta
Status: Offline
Points: 26138
Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 20 2012 at 10:00
Originally posted by dtguitarfan dtguitarfan wrote:

Originally posted by HolyMoly HolyMoly wrote:

I think everyone has their own variation on a generally accepted ratings system (i.e. 1 = bad, 5 = great), and I think both of you are good, reasonable guys whose ratings I would trust.  I think the problem lies with much more extreme examples of people who gratuitously and repeatedly dole out extreme scores without any apparent reason.  The "apparent" part is what's subjective here.
 
Exactly.  And this is why I love the idea of making people write a review to back up a 1 star.  Because there are 1 star spammers and 5 star spammers, and while I don't have as much of a problem with someone 5 star spamming (why should it bother me of someone loves something I don't?), I do have a problem with someone making something I love look bad.  But if you can't give a 1 star without at least writing something to back it up, that will surely cut down the 1 star spamming a bit.  And then of course, you'll have 1 star spammers who copy the same review a thousand times, and then of course it'll be more noticeable, and will be deleted faster.
I guess we agree on the problem, but not the solution.  My view is that spammers will always comprise a portion of the overall ratings system.  With active participation from more serious contributors, those spammy entries will be naturally marginalized and not really affect the overall score.  The exception of course comes with lesser-known bands who don't have a lot of ratings.  In that case, I suggest two things: discount the average rating as an unreliable indicator due to small sample size, and go ahead and rate/review it yourself to help the rating get where you feel it should be.  Encourage others to do the same.  The database is only as good as we make it, seize the opportunity, the moment, the NOW, the... ok I'm overdoing it.
My other avatar is a Porsche

It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle if it is lightly greased.

-Kehlog Albran
Back to Top
dreadpirateroberts View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: May 27 2011
Location: AU
Status: Offline
Points: 952
Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 20 2012 at 10:09
Originally posted by dtguitarfan dtguitarfan wrote:

Originally posted by thellama73 thellama73 wrote:

Originally posted by dtguitarfan dtguitarfan wrote:

I'm saying that in my opinion all reviewers can really do is measure their own enjoyment and guess what other people's enjoyment will be.


So you don't think the word "essential" has any meaning distinct from "enjoyable?"
I don't think I, or anyone else for that matter, can truly decide if an album is essential.  I can only guess at it, and the only way I think that I can make that call is to measure my own enjoyment and guess at what other people's enjoyment will be.


'Essential' and 'enjoyable' are different indeed, I like drawing a distinction there.


To help understand the development of a genre, and contextualise an album in the history of that genre/of music, then a reviewer will give an opinion on whether an album is 'Essential.'

However, I can still certainly 'enjoy' listening to non-essential albums in a genre, in addition, to echo what's already been said, I can also fail to love an album that I consider 'Essential' to a given genre - that doesn't stop me still recognising that it has value re: it's place in genre, and suggesting that a listener who's interested in music or whatever genre ought to know the album.

A quick example would be that a Black Sabbath album would be essential to understanding metal, and thus a few of their albums are probably essential, even if I wouldn't enjoy each album 5 stars worth etc
We are men of action. Lies do not become us.
JazzMusicArchives.
Back to Top
dtguitarfan View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: June 24 2011
Location: Chattanooga, TN
Status: Offline
Points: 1708
Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 20 2012 at 10:14
Originally posted by dreadpirateroberts dreadpirateroberts wrote:

Originally posted by dtguitarfan dtguitarfan wrote:

Originally posted by thellama73 thellama73 wrote:

Originally posted by dtguitarfan dtguitarfan wrote:

I'm saying that in my opinion all reviewers can really do is measure their own enjoyment and guess what other people's enjoyment will be.


So you don't think the word "essential" has any meaning distinct from "enjoyable?"
I don't think I, or anyone else for that matter, can truly decide if an album is essential.  I can only guess at it, and the only way I think that I can make that call is to measure my own enjoyment and guess at what other people's enjoyment will be.


'Essential' and 'enjoyable' are different indeed, I like drawing a distinction there.


To help understand the development of a genre, and contextualise an album in the history of that genre/of music, then a reviewer will give an opinion on whether an album is 'Essential.'

However, I can still certainly 'enjoy' listening to non-essential albums in a genre, in addition, to echo what's already been said, I can also fail to love an album that I consider 'Essential' to a given genre - that doesn't stop me still recognising that it has value re: it's place in genre, and suggesting that a listener who's interested in music or whatever genre ought to know the album.

A quick example would be that a Black Sabbath album would be essential to understanding metal, and thus a few of their albums are probably essential, even if I wouldn't enjoy each album 5 stars worth etc
Once again I ask: what if you are asked to review an album that has not even been released to the public?  Is it fair to say "well, since, by my logic, there is no possible way to assess whether this is essential, I can't possibly, no matter how much I enjoy it or think it is good, give this anything more than 3 stars?"
Back to Top
thellama73 View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: May 29 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 8368
Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 20 2012 at 10:16
^ I already answered that question twice, so I'll let Roberts take a crack at it.
Back to Top
timothy leary View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: December 29 2005
Location: Lilliwaup, Wa.
Status: Offline
Points: 5319
Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 20 2012 at 10:19
^ still going strongSmile
Back to Top
dreadpirateroberts View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: May 27 2011
Location: AU
Status: Offline
Points: 952
Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 20 2012 at 10:20
I'd say that if a pre-release is so good that I felt it was Essential, I'd say so based on my knowledge of the genre and its history. 

In fact, I could say the same even if I didn't like it as much as 5 stars, I'd still argue that it had value in its role of "reinventing the genre" perhaps or "doing the genre proud and matching the classics" or some such
We are men of action. Lies do not become us.
JazzMusicArchives.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345 6>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.159 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.