Raters who suck
Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Site News, Newbies, Help and Improvements
Forum Name: Help us improve the site
Forum Description: Help us improve the forums, and the site as a whole
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=89656
Printed Date: March 02 2025 at 11:02
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Raters who suck
Posted By: timothy leary
Subject: Raters who suck
Date Posted: September 18 2012 at 12:25
| First off.....I realize there is nothing that can be done. There is a type of rater who I can't stand. They like an album and award it a 5 star rating.......this is fine, but then they take it to the next level by rating any competing albums with a one star rating. Grow up and be serious about what you are doing. The site does not exist to be your little playground. Go ahead and rate your favorites with 5 stars and call it a day. After all if you feel so strongly that an album is only worth 1 star review it and tell us all why. I personally think there should be no 1 star ratings......in other words if you award an album with one star you must review it and tell us why. |
Replies:
Posted By: thellama73
Date Posted: September 18 2012 at 12:38
Yes it does. ------------- 
|
timothy leary wrote:Posted By: timothy leary
Date Posted: September 18 2012 at 12:47
| Trolling much? |
Posted By: thellama73
Date Posted: September 18 2012 at 12:49
Not very much. -------------
|
Posted By: timothy leary
Date Posted: September 18 2012 at 12:51
| why not contribute in a meaningful way |
Posted By: thellama73
Date Posted: September 18 2012 at 12:53
Because I've seen a million posts complaining about ratings and raters before, and I don't think it's useful to gripe about it. There is a "report abuse" thread for that purpose. Personally, I don't like the ratings system at all and think it should be strictly reviews, but since reviews can only be in English the site owners don't want to lock people out simply because they don't speak the language. I think that is understandable. I don't really care whether someone rates an album I like with one star. It's not important to me. -------------
|
Posted By: timothy leary
Date Posted: September 18 2012 at 12:55
| it must be important enough for you to be having this conversation |
Posted By: Sagichim
Date Posted: September 18 2012 at 13:06
| Yes the rating abuse sucks big time. But I don't see anything changing about it, there were a lot of discussions about it. |
Posted By: thellama73
Date Posted: September 18 2012 at 13:07
Nope. -------------
|
Posted By: Logan
Date Posted: September 18 2012 at 13:11
|
I'm interested in ideas, and sharing my own thoughts, even when the concern does not concern me that much. I rated a lot when M@X brought in that quick rating feature, but part of me still wants ratings to be done away with period. The places I learn about music the most have no ratings, but instead I look to the professed qualities of the album. Even though i'm not that interested in PA's album database, of course I do agree that it's quite crappy when people try to manipulate the rankings/ ratings by rating one 5 stars, then one it's competing with on the list lowly. A lot of such manipulation is caught and dealt with. It's common for such people to create multiple accounts. I, also, would like one star ratings to require a review. I find it exceptionally rare to hear an album that I would consider one star, and I strongly suspect that a great many of those one star raters (rating only) have never listened to the album.. |
Posted By: thellama73
Date Posted: September 18 2012 at 13:19
|
Any review system is inherently problematic though, because it is biased in favor of positive reviews and extreme reviews. It is biased in favor of positive reviews because if I hear one album by a band and I like it, I will seek out the other albums and review all of them. On the other hand, if I don't like it I will not bother to listen to the rest of the discography and so there will be more positive than negative reviews. We also get more extreme reviews because in general people are only motivated to talk about things they either really like or really dislike. I might want to rave about how great In The Court of the Crimson King is or complain about how ripped off I feel by the Sigur Ros album I bought, but I am less likely to make the effort to review something like Rain Dances by Camel because it is fine, but not outstandingly good or bad. Since all review systems are biased anyway, I don't think we should worry too much about a few people who don't take the process seriously. -------------
|
Posted By: dtguitarfan
Date Posted: September 18 2012 at 13:44
That's an AWESOME idea! 
I've seen people mention the wish for a tool that deletes ratings where a user rates every single album an artist has made with one star, and this is a great idea too. Shouldn't be to hard to program - as a programmer I am thinking the sql code wouldn't be too difficult (if the database uses sql - I have no idea). ------------- http://tinyurl.com/cy43zzh" rel="nofollow - My 2012 List 
|
Posted By: Logan
Date Posted: September 18 2012 at 13:47
|
Yeah. it's going to be biased towards the extreme by many. A good review, of course, doesn't just tell you if that person likes the album, it describes the music, and relates it to similar music. If the reader is knowledgeable enough to understand what a really illustrative review is saying, then that reviewer should be able to see beyond the biases to see if it's the kind of music that person will like. I've never, that I can recall, been steered wrong by a review in a blog. As for one star ratings without reviews, I would posit that the majority of said ratings are based on insufficient listening to the album. Maybe because I only listen to the prog archives type material that I decided to get/ search for, I almost never hear an album I don't really like. I've heard lots of samples of music I don't like, but not full albums (although I've had some disappointments, none of those were one star worthy). To me a one star album is one that one really feels has strong analytical case for being objectively poor compared to others of its ilk. It kind of bugs me when people bash music who seem to clearly not "get" the idiom. I love some music that I know is very amateurish, such as by The Shaggs. What's really terrible is when people rate albums lowly due to a devious modus operandi which does not represent any analysis of the actual music, but is merely to prop up others. |
Posted By: Logan
Date Posted: September 18 2012 at 13:50
Thanks. I think it's sql based (or at least I thought so before). That tool would be a great addition |
Posted By: thellama73
Date Posted: September 18 2012 at 13:54
|
There are only three reasons I will give an album one star: 1. It utterly fails to achieve its objective. 2. Severe defects in sound quality or other technical aspects to the point of being unlistenable. 3. Complete misrepresentation of the content in order to deceive people into buying it. -------------
|
Posted By: Guldbamsen
Date Posted: September 18 2012 at 13:58
Apart from the fact that the computer stuff you guys are discussing is total gibberish to me, I strongly echo the notion of 1 star ratings having to be attached to a review. I don't review too may 1 star albums, and that's because they are uninteresting - life's too short and all that jazz. The ones I manage to write about are the ones that've let me down big time - or where they have an interesting concept to them that just doesn't get to shine through. ------------- “The Guide says there is an art to flying or rather a knack. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss.” - Douglas Adams |
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: September 18 2012 at 13:59
4. It is a Dream Theater album. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow"> 
|
Posted By: Logan
Date Posted: September 18 2012 at 13:59
Those would be very good ratings guidelines (first two particularly) to have as a warning before someone rates an album one star. It wouldn't stop most people, but.... I'd like to see the star descriptions changed. |
Posted By: thellama73
Date Posted: September 18 2012 at 14:04
 -------------
|
Posted By: HolyMoly
Date Posted: September 18 2012 at 14:35
|
I just wrote a post detailing yet another idea to solve the inherent problems of the ratings system. Then I immediately started a new paragraph which spelled out all the pitfalls of my own plan. Realizing I'd just negated my own point, the post had to be dumped. Just goes to show that as frustrating as the current system is, many potential solutions have repercussions that are even worse.
------------- 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 |
Posted By: timothy leary
Date Posted: September 18 2012 at 16:57
| Thanks for all the responses to a tired subject. I believe doing away with one star ratings is a good idea. This is the "help us improve the site " thread and I think it would help rating manipulations to be curbed. |
Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: September 18 2012 at 18:05
|
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. ------------- https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays |
Posted By: menawati
Date Posted: September 18 2012 at 18:19
Only problem with ratings system is it isn't fine grained enough imo. Assuming you only give 5's to absolute classics there are a lot of deserving 4.5's out there that get 4 from a lot of people who practise restraint (and I automatically assume that most people on here are restrained and thoughtful as they are prog rock fans  ).
|
Posted By: HolyMoly
Date Posted: September 18 2012 at 18:31
|
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. So although there's potential for abuse, and it is a valid concern, it's really all in how you choose to use the numbers.
------------- 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 |
Posted By: dreadpirateroberts
Date Posted: September 19 2012 at 02:55
|
I do like the 1 star = review, mostly because I like to read more detailed opinions and those are what I base my judgements on. Of course, I think it's important to let folks contribute who are not English speaking. ------------- We are men of action. Lies do not become us. http://www.jazzmusicarchives.com/" rel="nofollow - JazzMusicArchives. |
Posted By: dtguitarfan
Date Posted: September 19 2012 at 05:46
People enjoyed the album - why should that bother you?
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. ------------- http://tinyurl.com/cy43zzh" rel="nofollow - My 2012 List
|
Posted By: Andy Webb
Date Posted: September 19 2012 at 06:41
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) ------------- http://ow.ly/8ymqg" rel="nofollow">  
|
Posted By: Icarium
Date Posted: September 19 2012 at 06:55
|
maybe some reviewers are precognative to music and know that albums is 5 star even a half year before the relesase??
-------------  
|
Posted By: dtguitarfan
Date Posted: September 19 2012 at 07:56
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.... ------------- http://tinyurl.com/cy43zzh" rel="nofollow - My 2012 List
|
Posted By: Horizons
Date Posted: September 19 2012 at 15:09
|
He's referring to the overuse of 5* due to people's hype of the album. ------------- Crushed like a rose in the riverflow. |
Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: September 19 2012 at 17:37
Enjoying an album is not enough to give it five stars. Most of the albums I enjoy are not 5 stars. ------------- https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays |
Posted By: dtguitarfan
Date Posted: September 20 2012 at 06:49
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. ------------- http://tinyurl.com/cy43zzh" rel="nofollow - My 2012 List
|
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: September 20 2012 at 07:00
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. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: dtguitarfan
Date Posted: September 20 2012 at 07:05
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. ------------- http://tinyurl.com/cy43zzh" rel="nofollow - My 2012 List
|
Posted By: thellama73
Date Posted: September 20 2012 at 07:24
|
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. -------------
|
Posted By: dtguitarfan
Date Posted: September 20 2012 at 07:31
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. ------------- http://tinyurl.com/cy43zzh" rel="nofollow - My 2012 List
|
Posted By: thellama73
Date Posted: September 20 2012 at 07:38
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. -------------
|
Posted By: dtguitarfan
Date Posted: September 20 2012 at 07:43
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. ------------- http://tinyurl.com/cy43zzh" rel="nofollow - My 2012 List
|
Posted By: thellama73
Date Posted: September 20 2012 at 07:46
|
They are not assumptions, they are explicit statements in the review guidelines.
-------------
|
Posted By: dtguitarfan
Date Posted: September 20 2012 at 07:56
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. ------------- http://tinyurl.com/cy43zzh" rel="nofollow - My 2012 List
|
Posted By: thellama73
Date Posted: September 20 2012 at 08:01
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. -------------
|
Posted By: dtguitarfan
Date Posted: September 20 2012 at 08:15
How do you know what's essential to me or anyone else but yourself? ------------- http://tinyurl.com/cy43zzh" rel="nofollow - My 2012 List
|
Posted By: thellama73
Date Posted: September 20 2012 at 08:22
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. -------------
|
Posted By: dtguitarfan
Date Posted: September 20 2012 at 08:33
AHA! AHA!!!!!! So you admit that you are assuming what other's enjoyment is/will be!!!!!! FOR THE WIN!!! 
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. ------------- http://tinyurl.com/cy43zzh" rel="nofollow - My 2012 List
|
Posted By: dtguitarfan
Date 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.... ------------- http://tinyurl.com/cy43zzh" rel="nofollow - My 2012 List
|
Posted By: thellama73
Date Posted: September 20 2012 at 08:40
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. -------------
|
Posted By: thellama73
Date Posted: September 20 2012 at 08:42
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. -------------
|
Posted By: dtguitarfan
Date 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. ------------- http://tinyurl.com/cy43zzh" rel="nofollow - My 2012 List
|
Posted By: thellama73
Date Posted: September 20 2012 at 09:06
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. -------------
|
Posted By: dtguitarfan
Date Posted: September 20 2012 at 09:23
------------- http://tinyurl.com/cy43zzh" rel="nofollow - My 2012 List
|
Posted By: thellama73
Date Posted: September 20 2012 at 09:28
So you don't think the word "essential" has any meaning distinct from "enjoyable?" -------------
|
Posted By: dtguitarfan
Date Posted: September 20 2012 at 09:30
------------- http://tinyurl.com/cy43zzh" rel="nofollow - My 2012 List
|
Posted By: HolyMoly
Date 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 |
Posted By: dtguitarfan
Date Posted: September 20 2012 at 09:47
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. ------------- http://tinyurl.com/cy43zzh" rel="nofollow - My 2012 List
|
Posted By: HolyMoly
Date Posted: September 20 2012 at 10:00
------------- 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 |
Posted By: dreadpirateroberts
Date Posted: September 20 2012 at 10:09
'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. http://www.jazzmusicarchives.com/" rel="nofollow - JazzMusicArchives. |
Posted By: dtguitarfan
Date Posted: September 20 2012 at 10:14
------------- http://tinyurl.com/cy43zzh" rel="nofollow - My 2012 List
|
Posted By: thellama73
Date Posted: September 20 2012 at 10:16
|
^ I already answered that question twice, so I'll let Roberts take a crack at it.
-------------
|
Posted By: timothy leary
Date Posted: September 20 2012 at 10:19
^ still going strong
|
Posted By: dreadpirateroberts
Date 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. http://www.jazzmusicarchives.com/" rel="nofollow - JazzMusicArchives. |
Posted By: dtguitarfan
Date Posted: September 20 2012 at 10:26
That's fine. So you are measuring an album's goodness based on either historical perspective, or what you think its historical perspective will be. But I may hear an album and think that it completely reinvents the genre....but it sounds absolutely awful to my ears and I really don't want to ever listen to it again, and so I really, REALLY don't want to give it a high rating. So I throw that logic out and give it a lower rating. Have you ever done this? What I'm saying is that I feel the only way to be truly honest is to just come out and say "yup, I'm just telling you how much I enjoyed the album and think other people will enjoy it, that's all I feel I can do." ------------- http://tinyurl.com/cy43zzh" rel="nofollow - My 2012 List
|
Posted By: dreadpirateroberts
Date Posted: September 20 2012 at 10:37
|
Yeah, for sure. One way I get around that sort of problem, in terms of really, truly disliking something that I think is still historically significant in some way, is to either 1) not review the album or 2) admit in the review that I couldn't enjoy it for reasons X, Y, & Z but suggest that due to its other values, it's got something for fans of the genre/the curious etc I like honesty in reviews too, though stylistically I won't preface each review with a disclaimer like "this is only my opinion etc etc" but think it's implied if my reviews are successful. I suppose what it boils down to for me, is the review itself. Our ratings we give are of course, snapshots, the why is in the text itself and more important I reckon (well, it's in the good reviews anyway )------------- We are men of action. Lies do not become us. http://www.jazzmusicarchives.com/" rel="nofollow - JazzMusicArchives. |
Posted By: dtguitarfan
Date Posted: September 20 2012 at 11:16
I think you hit the nail on the head with the reviews explaining why for the ratings. One thing I've been striving for in my reviews is to sound complimentary even when I wasn't crazy about an album. Not that I'm being sincere, but a lot of times I just "kind of like" and album, but could see why other people might like it more and so I try to highlight that in my review. I can only imagine I've been successful in that because a few times after writing a 3.5 star (which, to me, says "I kind of liked that, but wasn't crazy about it") review I've been asked if I'd like to interview the band, and I wouldn't guess that I'd be asked to do that if they were offended by my review. ------------- http://tinyurl.com/cy43zzh" rel="nofollow - My 2012 List
|
Posted By: digdug
Date Posted: September 20 2012 at 11:27
|
people should be able to rate 1 star without a review a review is a serious thing around here I basically gave up trying to write them, because my reviews kept on getting deleted and switched to ratings only there needs to be a middle ground where you can write three quick sentences that explain your rating without having to write a novel about the album so it can be called a review ------------- Prog On! |
Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: September 20 2012 at 16:43
What's crap? That most of the albums I enjoy are not 5 stars? Or that merely enjoying an album is not enough to warrant five stars? I stand by my comment because I think you misunderstood it (at least I hope you did). The way you seem to take it is that an album is either 1 star (disliked it) or 5 star (liked it). That is not how our system is set up. We have a range (from 1 to 5). I never said anything about personal enjoyment not being the measure of the album. I enjoy Tormato and Close to the Edge. Should I give them both five stars? ------------- https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays |
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: September 20 2012 at 16:48
^Yep
No...not really.  ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: September 20 2012 at 17:36
Oh come on now, that cannot be the reason. The limit is only one hundred words. That is not War and Peace, it is not even a page of writing; it is the briefest of summaries. In all seriousness, if you cannot manage to scribble 100 words on an album that you feel motivated enough about to summon up the energy to locate its album page in the PA and click a mouse on its rating button then I personally do not care to read what few words you do manage to write about it. That is one hundred words. ------------- What? |
Posted By: Sagichim
Date Posted: September 20 2012 at 17:38
You don't have to write a novel, just a 100 words, which is about 6 or 7 sentences. That's really ok. |
Posted By: lmaorofllollmao
Date Posted: September 20 2012 at 20:11
Today, i had to write a 7 paragraph essay on the "definition of heroism", from the godforsaken springboard book. It was easy, and took only 20-40 minutes of my time away. And YOU are whining about typing 100 words based around music, a subject you most likely love? PLEASE! ------------- EATTTT YOUURRR BEEEEEETTTSSSSS!!!!! 
|
Posted By: Gallifrey
Date Posted: September 20 2012 at 21:57
|
Well, I've never given an album 1 star. Ever. And I don't think I ever will. If I don't like it, I normally put it down to being "not my genre" rather than bad music. But anyway, the ratings barely effect the overall score, especially with the popular albums. I only use ratings so I can remember which ones I liked (I listen to a lot of music). People have commented on albums getting very good reviews/ratings when they are first released. I admit that it's very annoying, but it will almost always correct with time. It's only around now that the 2011 best album list is actually accurate. ------------- http://thedarkthird.bandcamp.com/ |
Posted By: digdug
Date Posted: September 21 2012 at 07:56
|
[/QUOTE] Oh come on now, that cannot be the reason. The limit is only one hundred words. That is not War and Peace, it is not even a page of writing; it is the briefest of summaries. In all seriousness, if you cannot manage to scribble 100 words on an album that you feel motivated enough about to summon up the energy to locate its album page in the PA and click a mouse on its rating button then I personally do not care to read what few words you do manage to write about it. That is one hundred words. [/QUOTE]
I wrote reviews that were 100 words ..... and got told the review said nothing of substance..... and then they were deleted this happened more than once it's pretty frustrating to write 8 or 9 reviews and then see 2 of them deleted for no good reason (IMO) eventually I stopped..... this was at least 2 years ago now. the main reason I was given.... is that my reviews did not look professional.... and they made the site look bad
personally I prefer short and sweet reviews like the ones Sean Trane did originally. all of his old reviews are probably less than 100 words, but they are better reviews than the ones you see now (at least in my opinion) anyways all that I am saying is .... not everyone is cut out to write good reviews by the standards of this site.... but that does not mean that these people's voice should be totally ignored. removing the ability to rate certain values without a review would not be fair in my opinion ------------- Prog On! |
Posted By: HolyMoly
Date Posted: September 21 2012 at 08:05
|
Not to mention it would discriminate against people without a strong grasp of English. I'm with you dig.
------------- 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 |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: September 21 2012 at 08:44
|
..Then why is it that many of the people who complain about the 100 word limit have English as their first language? The ability to have an opinion on a piece of music is not restricted by the language you speak, the emotions and feelings you get can be expressed in any language. Translating that into another language is not an issue of word-count or vocabulary. If you feel that a particular section of music or a musician’s ability affects you in a certain way then putting that into words is what a review is. This is one hundred words. ------------- What? |
Posted By: HolyMoly
Date Posted: September 21 2012 at 09:10
|
I forgot about online translators, I guess a lot of people use those? I was referring to the English-only rule as applied to someone who doesn't speak English at all -- which is one of the core reasons why we don't require a written review in order to rate an album. ------------- 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 |
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: September 21 2012 at 09:21
|
I just wrote a review, just over 100 words. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: dreadpirateroberts
Date Posted: September 21 2012 at 09:25
|
^ great review, makes me want to hear the b-side
------------- We are men of action. Lies do not become us. http://www.jazzmusicarchives.com/" rel="nofollow - JazzMusicArchives. |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: September 21 2012 at 09:32
|
I wonder why that didn't get a "First Review of this Album" tag? Does that not apply to singles?
Anyway, 119 words for two tracks ... not bad...  ------------- What? |
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: September 21 2012 at 09:32
|
^ I think it may be a bonus track on the last remaster. If so i should add it to the album info.
Yes it is on the remaster http://www.amazon.co.uk/Defector-Steve-Hackett/dp/B000AM1THQ/ref=sr_1_1?s=music&ie=UTF8&qid=1348238177&sr=1-1" rel="nofollow - http://www.amazon.co.uk/Defector-Steve-Hackett/dp/B000AM1THQ/ref=sr_1_1?s=music&ie=UTF8&qid=1348238177&sr=1-1
------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: September 21 2012 at 09:34
I did waffle a bit. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: September 21 2012 at 09:52
Who doesn't. It's when that waffle is the only component of a review (regardless of length) I would question whether it qualifies as a review or not. If the waffle is setting the scene and providing some background then that adds to the review and makes it more interesting to read perhaps, but at the end of the day if you hadn't mentioned the tracks themselves then it would not have been much of a review of a two track single. A music review is a piece of creative writing, waffle and all. This post is also one hundred words. ------------- What? |
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: September 21 2012 at 10:01
Yes, all good points. I wanted to show my personal connection with the single and reading it again I am not entirely happy with it. I think some editing and rewriting is required. Incidentally I have updated the Defector album and it now shows all the bonus tracks available. I really must get some practise in on my reviews though, which was partly my point in reviewing The Show. This post is not quite one hundred words. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: September 21 2012 at 10:10
And it is a damn fine reason too. I am in awe of anyone here whose second language is English, some of our best reviewers are not writing in their mother tongue and their eloquence and skill puts me to shame. We rarely criticise anyone’s use of grammar and spelling here but we seldom give praise were it is due either, and that is sad. We do pick up on reviews that lack content, those that do not meet some unwritten requirement of what a review is, and for a review site that is not unfair. One hundred words again. ------------- What? |
Posted By: digdug
Date Posted: September 21 2012 at 10:17
Yes but if your 100 words are not deemed good enough by the powers that be .... your 100 words are deleted I have no idea what I wrote back in 2008..... but I am pretty sure it did not deserve to be deleted. Here is an e-mail I dug up from 2008
------------- Prog On! |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: September 21 2012 at 10:41
I cannot comment on specific cases because I wasn’t specifically involved (I can make an educated guess who was). It seems to me that rather than take those comments on-board you decided to take umbrage instead, and that is a perfectly acceptable reaction, but not one to complain about four years later perhaps. Without the actual review it is impossible to judge whether that Admin was being reasonable or not, looking at your other reviews from that time I don’t see anything wrong with them so must assume that the one in question was not up to your same standard. ------------- What? |
Posted By: digdug
Date Posted: September 21 2012 at 10:56
|
I took umbrage after many reviews were deleted.... I could never predict ahead of time which would be allowed to stay and which would be deleted. I didn't complain then.... I just stopped writing reviews the only reason I am mentioning it now..... is not to complain per ce but to show that writing acceptable reviews is not as easy as you guys are making it out to be there really should be some sort of middle ground between a rating with no text and a full blown review ------------- Prog On! |
Posted By: dtguitarfan
Date Posted: September 21 2012 at 11:04
I know I've taken a while to address this, but let me ask you this: if you take away all the history, and opinions of other people, how would YOU rate each of these albums? If your honest answer to that question is 5 stars for each, then give them each 5 stars, man! Because think about this - if you are taking stars away from one of these albums because of history and other people's opinions, then what do you do when you're given an album that hasn't been released to the public yet and asked to review it? ------------- http://tinyurl.com/cy43zzh" rel="nofollow - My 2012 List
|
Posted By: Ambient Hurricanes
Date Posted: September 21 2012 at 15:23
I think you guys are both mostly in agreement, you're just misunderstanding each other. You both think reviews/ratings are subjective, and if I'm interpreting you right, you would both base your rating on the degree of enjoyment. For Geoff, that means a lot of 5-stars because he tends to have an overwhelmingly positive attitude towards the music he enjoys, and for Rob, that means more 4's and 3's because he's more critical in the way he reviews. (I hope I'm not putting words into your mouths, just wanting to help you understand each other better). No one should get uptight about this issue. True, we have rating guidelines on this site, but the key word is "guidelines;" there's no absolute standard of how to review and rate albums as long as you don't blatantly abuse the system. Some try to review objectively, some subjectively; some rate based on "progressiveness" while others do so based on the quality of the music regardless of this style; some use more 1's and 5's and some use less. Some of these differences can be irritating (I hate to see an album I like assigned less stars because it isn't "progressive" enough) but in the end we have to realize that everyone has a different way of evaluating music, and we have to respect each others' ways of doing that. I'm all for discussion about the matter, because I think that there are better and worse ways of reviewing, but I don't think it's a big enough deal that anyone should be angry or frustrated about it. ------------- I love dogs, I've always loved dogs |
Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: September 21 2012 at 15:50
It's impossible for me to divest myself of the context in which I hear albums. I do not know what you mean by "history," but I can assure that other people's opinions do not drive my reviews. It's a tad...I don't want to say offensive, but that's how it feels... that someone would suggest that I'm being somehow manipulated in the course of rating albums. I think you may still be missing my point: Enjoying an album is not all it takes for an album to five stars. The question of enjoyment ventures beyond "yes or no." I love hot dogs and I love filet Mignon. But in the span of my tastes, I would give a hot dog 3 stars and the filet Mignon 5 stars. Similarly, I like both Tormato and Close to the Edge, but I like the latter far more than the former. Hence three and five stars respectively. What I don't like are a) People who use 5 and 1 star exclusively and b) The gaggle of people that bombard this site with five star reviews for an album that just came out. Both of these strike me as disingenuous. ------------- https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays |
Posted By: timothy leary
Date Posted: September 21 2012 at 15:53
| I don't have to respect people who use deceit to rate albums. Refer back to my original post. Raters who use ratings to manipulate, even in a small way, are not deserving of respect. They obviously do not respect this site, the artists whose creative endeavor they are rating, and the rest of the members of this site. |
Posted By: thellama73
Date Posted: September 21 2012 at 19:29
|
I always just look at the average rating and give a rating as close to that number as possible. I don't want to ruffle any feathers by advancing a controversial opinion.
-------------
|
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: September 22 2012 at 07:08
The review is longer now. Is it better? 188 words ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: September 22 2012 at 07:15
|
^ I think this needs moving to another thread. Reading it again though. My style seems jerky and uncomfortable ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: September 22 2012 at 07:38
I guess at this juncture I should really just shut up. I stopped writing reviews because I found them difficult even though I am seldom lost for something to say on any subject. No one ever said it was easy. When I was an Admin I did not moderate reviews, I never deleted a review unless the reviewer asked me to but that does not prevent me from having an opinion on them. One hundred words is not a novel, but one hundred words that say nothing of the music the review is supposed to be of isn't a review. ------------- What? |
Posted By: dtguitarfan
Date Posted: September 22 2012 at 07:43
But don't think of it in such general terms of hot dogs and filet mignon. Think of it as if you were rating restaurants, and rating them according to what they are. For example - say I was rating restaurants, and I went to this hot dog place that really made the best hot dogs I've ever had in my life! 5 stars! Yeah, it's not filet mignon. I never thought it would be. And it wouldn't be fair for me to say "well, I can't give this restaurant a good rating because...well, it's not filet mignon." For me, when I rate an album one of the thoughts that crosses my mind is "how often do I think I will listen to this album?" And the answer to that doesn't always accurately define what rating I will give the album, but hopefully you get where I'm going. ------------- http://tinyurl.com/cy43zzh" rel="nofollow - My 2012 List
|
Posted By: Sagichim
Date Posted: September 22 2012 at 09:56
You got me curious about it and I'm trying to track it down now, so I guess your review was successful enough. |
Posted By: AEProgman
Date Posted: September 22 2012 at 22:00
Being a Newbie come Groupie of a couple of months, I have been enjoying the hades out of myself reviewing some of my old favorites from the years gone past, but I found it a struggle to eventually give an album a 5 and have pulled back on a few. I really have not delved into stuff, yet, that I did not like much, but I am sure I would struggle to give something a 1 as usually there is a little something I would like or identify with. I also think I need to keep in mind that to give an album a 3 is not a bad thing but really a complement based on this site's rating system. I do find it troubling that an album gets a 5 only after an hour of being released. I would like to see a 1 month waiting period for rating new albums, with the exception of the Collaborators. I do like the parable of going to a Hot Dog joint and getting a 5 star hot dog...although I prefer Kielbasa.  ------------- 
|
Posted By: thellama73
Date Posted: September 22 2012 at 23:43
That's an inappropriate analogy for this situation. If Rob was saying that he wouldn't give a punk album five stars because the musicianship is not up to the level of other genres, then it would be an apt comparison. But comparing a Yes album to another Yes album is better described the way Rob has done. -------------
|
Posted By: rogerthat
Date Posted: September 23 2012 at 00:35
That's not what Rob is saying. Should or shouldn't you have the ability to discriminate between two restaurants, two albums, two movies, two novels and so on and so forth? So much overwhelming positivity sounds nice on paper but it's also not very helpful or reliable for a reader. If two restaurants are good but one is decidedly better than the other, my friends would expect me to say that, especially if they also call for varying budgets. Please bear in mind that your reviews are also for the consumption of users of the website and not just the product of your self indulgence. I don't mean you specifically here, but just a figurative you. If I wanted to rave about a favourite artist, I would find a friend I know who shares my preferences and rave to him or simply use my blog. A review is by nature an empathetic endeavour and not a self centred one. You use the prism of your experience to attempt to describe and grade an album in a way that others might be able to relate to. I do make an exception for this rule when it comes to albums that divide opinion: if I really like it, I will just go ahead with my rating and if I don't, I will usually avoid rating or reviewing it. But you do have to put yourself in the shoes of other listeners, it is not such a laughably presumptuous exercise as you make it out to be. It is something we regularly do in life - attempting to understand the other person's feelings. I cannot claim to completely understand what music is best for somebody else but I have to make an effort to relate to it when I review an album. A review that is only concerned with what I, I and more capital I think about an album does not need to be shared with a larger audience for reading. |
Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: September 23 2012 at 07:05
|
I would also like to add this: I don't know how this works for other people, but for me, a 5 star album is one that goes beyond enjoyment. It changes me. It moves me in a poignant and ineffable way. It may change the way I think about music. It may change the way I think about life. It is, as an album, a premium and rare experience that moves me. And here's another thing: My mind can conjure up almost any passage from any album I have awarded five stars. That is why I can never give a 5 star review after one or two listens. The experience of amazement must not just repeat itself- it must grow in magnitude. A 4 star album may have some of these qualities, but the impact is less profound (or less consistent). "Turn of the Century" and "Awaken" do the above for me, but "Going for the One," "Wonderous Stories," and "Parallels" do not. Hence, 4 stars. A 3 star album is simply an album I enjoy. It's good, but not excellent. It is the bread before the meal- tasty, but not really satisfying. And no album is without hope! Well, mostly no album. A few may remember that I had a 1 star review of Kate Bush's The Hounds of Love here for a while. But it had a catchy nature that compelled me to revisit it, and I did- many times. I asked Dean to delete the review, and he graciously (and perhaps quite happily) did so. I am now prepared to write a fresh review of the album, this time with a much higher rating. I hope this clarifies how I personally review a little. ------------- https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays |
Posted By: HolyMoly
Date Posted: September 23 2012 at 07:17
Spot on, well said. ------------- 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 |