|
View previous topic :: View next topic
|
|
| Author |
Message |
Richie Hunt
Gender: Male
Age: 110
|
- #21
- Posted: 09/13/2009 03:56
- Post subject:
|
Norman Bates wrote:
| Quote: | | I compare the number of great songs in an album to the total number of songs. Any album featuring only great songs will get a 5 I guess (say Portishead's "Dummy" for example), which doesn't happen so often. And from there, it's downhill starwise as the proportion of songs I don't particularly enjoy goes up. |
I dont agree with that method, because averages do not take into account that one album which has 8 great songs in a list of 10 gets the same score as an album with 16 great songs out of 20. Surely the album with 16 great songs is superior?
I dont think an album should be punished for having a few filler tracks as long as there is plenty of good stuff on that album - thats where averages fall down.
theharrisonfords wrote:
| Quote: | | In response to Hunt's input, I couldn't rate an album using that criteria. When I think of good songs in relation to the entire album, I think of the dilemma with the White Album. I think it would be safe to say that some of the tracks on the White Album are among some of the Beatles finest work, but there are some tracks that ruin it for me (glass onion, the 'pie' songs...), and it just cannot be justified to appoint it a top album. There are some exceptions, but if you are skipping through seven tracks just to listen to ten great ones, something is wrong there. Essential album? Sure. Greatest of all time? Hardly. But convincing you is not my objective, and I digress. |
Yea my method of rating isnt perfect, but i'm pretty happy with the outcome. And its strange that the average of my ratings differ by only ~1.5/100 to RYM ratings - not that that rating is the be all and end all but its a pretty good benchmark (RYM is out of 5 but if you times that by 20 you get a comparable score out of 100).
With the White Album, if you consider bad tracks to devalue the album you could deduct some sort of score from the rating for each poor track - i'd chose not to because i think only good tracks should impact a rating, filler is irrelevant, the band didnt have to put the tracks on there in the first place.
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
CellarDoor
Shoe-Punk Loner
Gender: Male
Age: 38
Location: Marseille
|
- #22
- Posted: 09/13/2009 12:59
- Post subject:
|
1) I rate the albums in their genre.
2) I will more likely deliver the "perfect-100/100-album" to a well-crafted concept album.
"Electro-Shock Blues" isn't "Revolver", but it's a perfect album in it's conception. Same for "69 Love Songs". If I rated each song individually, I don't think I would get to 100, but the overall album is a song-writing tour de force.
3) Allmusic have been harsh with 2000s albums, but I understand that giving the 5/5 is difficult. As good as many of the albums are, none have contributed in anyway to a radical change in music style, like some albums of the 90s did.
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
maxperenchio
Location: Chicago
|
- #23
- Posted: 09/13/2009 23:15
- Post subject:
|
|
Right- allmusic doesnt rate too many 2000 albums as 5 star, but keep in mind that will probably change as time goes on. They always reevaluate older albums. "Siamese Dream" for instance was a 4.5 for a long time, and was recently bumped up to a 5. I'm sure it will do the same for 2000 albums if they remain relevant. [/quote]
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
Norman Bates
Gender: Male
Age: 51
Location: Paris, France
|
- #24
- Posted: 09/14/2009 08:37
- Post subject:
|
| Quote: | | averages do not take into account that one album which has 8 great songs in a list of 10 gets the same score as an album with 16 great songs out of 20. Surely the album with 16 great songs is superior? |
I don't see why.
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
joannajewsom
Location: Philadelphia
|
- #25
- Posted: 09/14/2009 11:23
- Post subject:
|
| Norman Bates wrote: | | Quote: | | averages do not take into account that one album which has 8 great songs in a list of 10 gets the same score as an album with 16 great songs out of 20. Surely the album with 16 great songs is superior? |
I don't see why. |
I think I see what he's saying. By your proportional system, they are equal, right? But the latter gives you twice as many great songs, twice as much to enjoy. Unless I misunderstand your system.
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
Norman Bates
Gender: Male
Age: 51
Location: Paris, France
|
- #26
- Posted: 09/14/2009 14:07
- Post subject:
|
| Quote: | | But the latter gives you twice as many great songs, twice as much to enjoy. |
I got as much. But does that imply that a "perfect" 14-songs album is better than a "perfect" 10-songs one ? Not to me. They're both "perfect".
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
Richie Hunt
Gender: Male
Age: 110
|
- #27
- Posted: 09/15/2009 13:48
- Post subject:
|
|
Oh, oops, ok now i see what you are saying Norman. I dont know what i was thinking before, silly me. What you are saying is that basically my method is better than yours. I totally agree with you.
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
Norman Bates
Gender: Male
Age: 51
Location: Paris, France
|
- #28
- Posted: 09/15/2009 15:35
- Post subject:
|
| Quote: | | What you are saying is that basically my method is better than yours |
.
.
Exactly 
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
SamTheMan
Location: nowhere
|
- #29
- Posted: 11/01/2009 00:37
- Post subject:
|
is this it by the strokes was 5 stars last time i checked...
_________________
(insert great song lyric/witty remark/or other here)
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
RFNAPLES
Level 8
Gender: Male
Age: 75
Location: Durham, NC, USA
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
