Reviews discussion

Then delete all reviews and just rate albums.

Iván

Iván - you've got your 20 times weighting - that is recognition enough that your review is 20 times better than a rating only. How you justify the rating you give is completely irrelevant - the review is not about the rating, the review is about the music and your impression of it and not an explanation of how you asign the mark. Someone who just rates an album could have exactly the same view as you, they could have heard the album and made the same conculsion you did - because they didn't write 500 words we will never know that for sure, just as we will never know for sure that he never heard the album. I get it. Trust me, I get it.

 

Yes, I proposed that a lot of times and several members agree, a rating without review is like a guess, you don't know if the guy heard the album or what are his reasons to give a 5 or 1 star rating.

In a review you may agree or not, but at least you have a support for the rating.

Iván

I don't think that's very possible, and efficient. It would just be a bit weird to have bot a rating average and a review average. That's why I think we should get rid of ratings altogether, the average of ratings compared to reviews might be drastically different (might be I don't know). Also, encouraging people to write reviews instead of just clicking a button will definitely make this site more filled with discussion. A rating (especially when you have the insta-rate thingy) is more a wave of spontaneous thought, than actually a well thought-out review stating why you like or dislike the album. The problem is that even if a rating is well thought-out, you can't really know. So I think that deleting the rating system could help a lot with evening reviews out (When you think about, how many gave a 5 or the other way around, a 1 star rating to something like "Dark Side Of The Moon" or "Close To The Edge",  just because they're very much a classic progressive rock record.). If someone would have to review, he might weigh his thought differently and review differently, and rate differently, less from the gut, more from the mind (total cliche I know I know) 

 

 

a case in point, I did this for XXV last night by Pallas, I read all the reviews and it sounded wonderful. there wer emany 2 or 3 star ratings but it still drew me in because the content of the reviews made it apeal to me, the type of music I actually like. So even the 2 star ratings were enough for me to have an interest in the album. But this lead me to The Sentinel, a classic Pallas album that i had been avoiding. it took me an hour to plough thru all the reviews. Once again some 2 stars but a stack of 4 stars so I downloaded it and yes, it was worthwhile!

 

The site is awesome for finding about unknown albums.

 

One more, there were no reviews a year or so ago for the 'new' Devin Townsend so i had to take note of the ratings. It was all over the place so I waited til reviews came in. As soon as they did the reviewers informed me that the album would appeal as Devin was quieter and no death growls (one of my hates too, Ivan!).

 

On that note I can put up with death growls if they are an enhancement to the music. Haken's Aquarius, James Labries new solo SI, and Still Life by Opeth. However a whole album of them - no review will convince me to listen to that (aka Death).

 

After all is said and done the reviews with a rating attached are the lifeblood of the site - ratings only are nothing more than a nuisance - what do they achieve? Just a quick fix for lazy people who cant be bothered reviewing.