Best Ever Albums

Re: Definition of a 'Recognised Chart'

albummaster — Tue, 20 Nov 2012 07:34:58 GMT

Author: albummaster

Posted: 11/20/2012 12:34

We're approaching the time of year when end of years lists start to crop up across the internet, and since the thread was started, we now have the possibility of combining those lists into the 2012 chart here.

The proposed method of submitting these lists is via custom charts. If a custom chart is a copy from a recognised source (defined earlier in this thread), and it is an overall, year, or decade chart, you can apply to get this chart seen as 'recognised' and it will then count towards the overall rankings. To do this, visit the admin page for a chart, and submit a data correction. We could also back-fill previous years via this method.

Charts from recognised sources must not themselves be aggregate lists. Any chart that is promoted, will no longer appear as being from your account, but will be credited as being from the original source.

Re: Definition of a 'Recognised Chart'

albummaster — Thu, 22 Dec 2011 04:32:44 GMT

Author: albummaster

Posted: 12/22/2011 09:32

monosyllables wrote:

This seems to be a thread with some inconsistent updating, but since I came across it, I was wondering if there are any plans to incorporate popular decade lists, like P4k's, now that we have the mechanics for BEA members to create them?

in the new year, once things settle down a bit, we can definitely look at adding some of these charts but I think we need to be fairly strict about which charts are included, as potentially there are lots of sources, and I don't want to flood the site with too many as not all of them will add the same value.

Re: Definition of a 'Recognised Chart'

monosyllables — Wed, 21 Dec 2011 12:53:26 GMT

Author: monosyllables

Posted: 12/21/2011 17:53

This seems to be a thread with some inconsistent updating, but since I came across it, I was wondering if there are any plans to incorporate popular decade lists, like P4k's, now that we have the mechanics for BEA members to create them?

Re: Definition of a 'Recognised Chart'

quizking — Fri, 2 Dec 2011 18:32:55 GMT

Author: quizking

Posted: 12/02/2011 23:32

Thanks to admin for getting back to me - back in a few weeks, possibly with some interest from a couple of (mainly) british sites if that's ok, not that it will swerve the overall chart too much if at all. And maybe i'll throw in my own updated chart with just one album per artist (except for tom waits - can't see how "one from the heart" counts as a solo tom waits album, some mistake surely?). In the meanwhile, despite the bias towards the '60s and '70s in my current chart, am only in my mid-40s - but still wouldn't mind some free viagra if any of your promo scammers slip through the net, never know when it might be useful.

cheers!

steve

Re: Definition of a 'Recognised Chart'

albummaster — Thu, 1 Dec 2011 02:25:29 GMT

Author: albummaster

Posted: 12/01/2011 07:25

quizking wrote:

Just tried to post a link to a top 500 chart that may qualify as a "recognised" chart and is of some interest, but the system doesn't think i count as someone who has posted enough or been here long enough.

Apologies, there's a ten post threshold on posting links which is an anti-spam measure. I realise it sometimes adversely affects people, but it helps to stop BEA from being flooded with viagra adverts.

quizking wrote:

If admin would like to mail me directly then great - i have a couple of other ideas that might generate more interest for your site next year too

will do...

Re: Definition of a 'Recognised Chart'

quizking — Wed, 30 Nov 2011 21:06:08 GMT

Author: quizking

Posted: 12/01/2011 02:06

Hello again, not been here for a while, and not having any luck posting at all, Just tried to post a link to a top 500 chart that may qualify as a "recognised" chart and is of some interest, but the system doesn't think i count as someone who has posted enough or been here long enough. If admin would like to mail me directly then great - i have a couple of other ideas that might generate more interest for your site next year too - but otherwise i'm yet again a bit annoyed at having spent a fair while typing links out and then the message gets rejected.

Otherwise, thanks to those who commented on my own chart - a different version coming soon with just one album per artist perhaps.

Re: Definition of a 'Recognised Chart'

FlashRah — Mon, 17 Oct 2011 02:32:45 GMT

Author: FlashRah

Posted: 10/17/2011 06:32

Awesome, I like to think I meet those criteria

Re: Definition of a 'Recognised Chart'

I miss 8-tracks — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 19:19:57 GMT

Author: I miss 8-tracks

Posted: 09/22/2009 23:19

Or at least make a chart lazybones

Re: Definition of a 'Recognised Chart'

joannajewsom — Sun, 20 Sep 2009 17:23:29 GMT

Author: joannajewsom

Posted: 09/20/2009 21:23

I know you're new, but this is clearly not the appropriate thread in which to talk about this. Go back to the albums section of the forum and start a new thread if you wish.

Re: Jimi in 23rd place?

brohio — Sun, 20 Sep 2009 16:36:54 GMT

Author: brohio

Posted: 09/20/2009 20:36

Mr. Shankly wrote:

brohio wrote:

Just signed up here cause I know music. Jimi in 23rd place? Hey what the?? I'm not sure how much time I'll spend in here teaching all of you about music but for the time being here I am. What do you want to know? And don't start confusing the issue by including rap and hip hop artists in this list either. Give them a seperate category where poetry counts since actual musicality almost never exists. With a few exceptions. Let the games begin.

Oh, good. I was hoping someone would teach me about music.

What would you like to know grasshopper?

Re: Jimi in 23rd place?

Mr. Shankly — Sun, 20 Sep 2009 14:56:38 GMT

Author: Mr. Shankly

Posted: 09/20/2009 18:56

brohio wrote:

Oh, good. I was hoping someone would teach me about music.

Re: Jimi in 23rd place?

joannajewsom — Sun, 20 Sep 2009 13:02:58 GMT

Author: joannajewsom

Posted: 09/20/2009 17:02

brohio wrote:

Jimi in 23rd place?

brohio — Sun, 20 Sep 2009 12:29:21 GMT

Author: brohio

Posted: 09/20/2009 16:29

Just signed up here cause I know music. Jimi in 23rd place? Hey what the?? I'm not sure how much time I'll spend in here teaching all of you about music but for the time being here I am. What do you want to know? And don't start confusing the issue by including rap and hip hop artists in this list either. Give them a seperate category where poetry counts since actual musicality almost never exists. With a few exceptions. Let the games begin.

Re: Definition of a 'Recognised Chart'

albummaster — Sat, 4 Jul 2009 16:35:11 GMT

Author: albummaster

Posted: 07/04/2009 20:35

I fully respect acclaimedmusic.net as a site, I think they do a great job and I like their list.

However, since they are themselves an aggregator of third-party lists (and therefore not an original publisher), I don't think we should add them as a separate source. In addition, I agree with RFNAPLES that the chart criteria are not aligned with those set down on this site.

Re: Definition of a 'Recognised Chart'

RFNAPLES — Sat, 4 Jul 2009 15:56:44 GMT

Author: RFNAPLES

Posted: 07/04/2009 19:56

Under exceptional circumstances!

Re: Definition of a 'Recognised Chart'

GlennJolson — Sat, 4 Jul 2009 15:44:04 GMT

Author: GlennJolson

Posted: 07/04/2009 19:44

There is no rule without an exception.

Re: Definition of a 'Recognised Chart'

RFNAPLES — Sat, 4 Jul 2009 15:32:52 GMT

Author: RFNAPLES

Posted: 07/04/2009 19:32

GlennJolson wrote:

Acclaimed Music’s chart is from a well-regarded and widely recognized source and that it might include data from
1. Charts limited to a particular period,
2. Charts limited to a particular music genre,
3. Charts limited to bands from a particular country or region has very little influence on the overall outcome because of the huge amount of information used.

I am glad you agree with my analysis of Acclaimed Music but that unfortunately puts it at odds with the definition of a recognized chart used by the moderator and site administrator of BestEverAlbums:

albummaster wrote:

A chart is classified as 'recognised' on this site if it meets the following criteria:

1. The chart is from a well-regarded or widely-recognised source.
2. The chart is not limited to a particular time period (end of year polls do not count and nor do polls that limit themselves to the last x number of years.)
3. The chart is not limited to a particular music genre.
4. The chart is not limited to bands from a particular country or region.

So I repeat, BestEverAlbums should not include the rankings of Acclaimed Music since it fails on 3 of 4 elements of a recognized chart.

Re: Definition of a 'Recognised Chart'

GlennJolson — Sat, 4 Jul 2009 15:04:59 GMT

Author: GlennJolson

Posted: 07/04/2009 19:04

The Acclaimed Music chart fits because it is a good composite chart similar to Best Ever Albums. As other recognised charts, it does not include member/subscriber lists/charts (there is no such thing on Rolling Stone magazine's RS 500 Greatest Albums of All Time or on the National Association of Recording Merchandisers' Definitive 200) and not all the recognised charts use the same algorithm for ranking.

Because Administrator Henrik Franzon, a statistician, includes on Acclaimed Music almost all best of year lists and best-of-all-times lists from critics, artists and music industry people from all over the world it is a good representative list, which fits to include into Best Ever Albums. A good thing that they omit Personal critics’ lists with the exception of lists published in books and special essays in magazines, like Elvis Costello's in Vanity Fair. Another plus is that genre-specific best of lists are only included if they are from a magazine specialized in this genre. As in other recognised charts listed here, they omit Readers’ lists of all kinds. I support that they exclude all compilation "greatest hits" and "best of" albums because how often do we want to rate the same number 1 hit song in these "greatest hits" and "best of" albums.

Acclaimed Music’s chart is from a well-regarded and widely recognized source and that it might include data from
1. Charts limited to a particular period,
2. Charts limited to a particular music genre,
3. Charts limited to bands from a particular country or region has very little influence on the overall outcome because of the huge amount of information used.

Therefore, I do think that its rankings should be included as a recognized chart on this site.

Re: Definition of a 'Recognised Chart'

RFNAPLES — Sat, 4 Jul 2009 09:49:56 GMT

Author: RFNAPLES

Posted: 07/04/2009 13:49

Acclaimed Music chart is a good composite chart similar to BestEverAlbums. It however does not include member/subscriber lists/charts (there is no such thing on Acclaimed Music) and uses a different algorithm for ranking.

Administrator Henrik Franzon, a statistician, includes on Acclaimed Music almost all best-of-year lists and best-of-all-times lists from critics, artists and music industry people all over the world. Personal critics’ lists are omitted with the exception of lists published in books and special essays in magazines, like Elvis Costello's in Vanity Fair. Genre-specific best-of-lists are only included if they are from a magazine specialized in this genre. Readers’ lists of all kinds are omitted. All compilation "greatest hits" and "best of" albums are excluded.

While Acclaimed Music’s chart is from a well-regarded or widely-recognized source, it includes data from:
1. Charts limited to a particular time period,
2. Charts limited to a particular music genre,
3. Charts limited to bands from a particular country or region.

Therefore I don’t think its rankings should be included as a recognized chart on this site.

Re: Definition of a 'Recognised Chart'

GlennJolson — Sat, 4 Jul 2009 08:56:59 GMT

Author: GlennJolson

Posted: 07/04/2009 12:56

I propose to include The All Time Top 3000 Albums from Acclaimed Music as a recognised chart to Best Ever Albums. The chart meets the criteria stated in the definition of a 'recognised chart'.

The chart receives regular updates, lately each year, the list exists since 06-09-2001, the current version dates 30-11-2008, for the update history.

Due to regular updates the chart lists about the same amount of albums for each year, right now until 2007, 2008 is in development Here and the definitive list will enter the overall top 3000 chart by end of the year. The All Time Top 3000 exists also as an Excel file with the changes from the last three years.

You can ask to include the Best Ever Albums list into their list at the bottom of the page Here, (henrik.franzon[a]gmail.com).

Disclaimer: I am not a registered member of Acclaimed Music, nor do I have any relation be it financial or personal to any of the owners or people that run the site.