Best Ever Albums

Re: Aren't you satisfied with a Top 100?

paladisiac — Wed, 30 Mar 2016 10:17:09 GMT

Author: paladisiac

Posted: 03/30/2016 14:17

i'd like it adjustable. I'm almost at a top 2000 tallied across 21 charts (incl. my overall top 100 chart).

Re: Aren't you satisfied with a Top 100?

craola — Tue, 29 Mar 2016 23:36:13 GMT

Author: craola

Posted: 03/30/2016 03:36

honestly, i'm not satisfied with anything.

Re: Aren't you satisfied with a Top 100?

bcmandude — Tue, 29 Mar 2016 23:24:27 GMT

Author: bcmandude

Posted: 03/30/2016 03:24

BEA should have more freedom regarding the lists in general, but allowing users to have a top 200 would certainly be a good start.

Re: Aren't you satisfied with a Top 100?

jhuik — Mon, 28 Mar 2016 09:34:24 GMT

Author: jhuik

Posted: 03/28/2016 13:34

Toto456 wrote:

I Need a top 200 at least, isn't enough for me, i listen so much music and a top 100 for me is nothing.

What do you think?

No, that's why there are decade charts. Take advantage of those.

Re: Aren't you satisfied with a Top 100?

dihansse — Mon, 28 Mar 2016 07:29:42 GMT

Author: dihansse

Posted: 03/28/2016 11:29

I think a top 100 is sufficient because it urges you to focus.

Re: Aren't you satisfied with a Top 100?

kevinweed7 — Mon, 28 Mar 2016 04:02:25 GMT

Author: kevinweed7

Posted: 03/28/2016 08:02

I would enjoy making a 200.

Re: Aren't you satisfied with a Top 100?

Jimmy Dread — Mon, 21 Dec 2015 18:01:04 GMT

Author: Jimmy Dread

Posted: 12/21/2015 23:01

Personally I don't think it matters one iota how big or small your overall chart is; it's how it reflects your tastes and more crucially your persona that makes it relevant and a worthwhile read for others. I agree with those who say 'I'll look at their Top 20 and decide whether or not to persevere' as in terms of gleaning recs you're looking for that subtle mix of a few albums you've heard of (and hopefully adore) intertwined with a few that are new to you (or at the very least some entertaining - albeit pithy - commentary along the way) to persuade you to delve deeper. That said in a couple of cases (Bruno, Abby) I'd love their overall chart to go on for pages and pages. For me at least a chart full of the obvious is just as dull as that which is jam-packed with completely leftfield curios regardless of its size, regardless of length.

Squish is bang on the money about the custom charts - I've got a 101-200 which fluctuates all over the shop and is a much better reflection of my current tastes than my 100, which has been pretty much static bar a handful of revelations (mostly from the BEAutiful people, aside from The Free Design and The Garlands) for the last 4 years. Albums flit between the two from time-to-time but rarely, and I would be just as happy being restricted to 20 albums than expanding it beyond 100.

Re: Aren't you satisfied with a Top 100?

Anti — Mon, 21 Dec 2015 17:39:58 GMT

Author: Anti

Posted: 12/21/2015 22:39

100 is perfect. However, I did see someone use the bottom 10 of their top 100 as kind of like a "this is what I'm listening to now" bin that constantly changes (and if I remembered/could find the user who does that, I would give credit) and I thought that could be a cool idea. There are a few albums that aren't on my top 100 but I have been listening to them a lot recently for a few songs I like.

Re: Aren't you satisfied with a Top 100?

Mercury — Mon, 21 Dec 2015 16:54:46 GMT

Author: Mercury

Posted: 12/21/2015 21:54

all for keeping it at 100. 'tis a good found number. For every album on my overall I love and love so much it's worthy of my chart there is probably 1 or 2 which I feel the same about. One of my solutions for this is the 1 album per artist rule. But still becomes very tough to decide which go on my chart. I would guess I absolutely adore idk 500 albums. So, knocking it to 1 per artist whittles it to maybe 300. And from there I do like nech touched on and decide which "look right" on this chart. And that changes month to month so I change my chart a lot. Kinda.

Re: Aren't you satisfied with a Top 100?

Decurso — Mon, 21 Dec 2015 15:54:43 GMT

Author: Decurso

Posted: 12/21/2015 20:54

100 is perfect. 1.It gives the chart more meaning, as you are forced to really think about your choices. 2.I have several hundred favourite albums, but absolutely zero desire to invest the effort in ranking them all. 3.I have even less desire to read someone else's top 200. With decade and year charts I rarely scroll past the top 20.

Re: Aren't you satisfied with a Top 100?

Lowkey — Mon, 21 Dec 2015 15:25:16 GMT

Author: Lowkey

Posted: 12/21/2015 20:25

i wouldn't mind the chart size taking viagra, but i'm cool with 100.

Re: Aren't you satisfied with a Top 100?

alelsupreme — Mon, 21 Dec 2015 15:07:28 GMT

Author: alelsupreme

Posted: 12/21/2015 20:07

This has just made me realise my "favs" (including my "just outside top 100" list) comprise a sixth of all the albums I've ever heard 🫢

Re: Aren't you satisfied with a Top 100?

CA Dreamin — Mon, 21 Dec 2015 14:45:20 GMT

Author: CA Dreamin

Posted: 12/21/2015 19:45

I can understand the users who've listened to thousands of albums wanting to stretch their overall chart to 200 or 250. But like Puncture says, that is a lot for another user to scroll through, and custom lists solve that dilemma. And getting the necessary points shouldn't be a problem. If you've listened to and rated that many albums, getting to 5,000 points should be easy.

I think 100 is cool for overall, decade, and custom lists. However, I think it's too many for year lists.

Re: Aren't you satisfied with a Top 100?

Necharsian — Mon, 21 Dec 2015 12:41:46 GMT

Author: Necharsian

Posted: 12/21/2015 17:41

I kind of agree with Puncture, though I think for a bit different reasons.

I'm in the glacier-slow process of making my chart, and I will be whittling it down to 50. Not because I can't make it 100 (I definitely have 100 albums that I love), but just because I prefer it to be more condensed. I like the look of a smaller overall chart, and I think it's really made me think a lot more of what I want to put on it. Leaving albums off is difficult but necessary. I've been deleting and adding the same albums for months in an effort to figure out if they really should be there.

The ranking of albums on my chart is fairly loose, and in honesty I think I just move albums around based on how that page of 10 looks to me. Rather than "album 43 is a smidge better than 44" it's more like "this looks right at 43".

And yeah I wouldn't want charts to be over 100. As Dave said, custom and decade charts help this in a less daunting way.

Re: Aren't you satisfied with a Top 100?

craola — Mon, 21 Dec 2015 12:28:25 GMT

Author: craola

Posted: 12/21/2015 17:28

i think 100 is perfect. it's a nice, rounded-off sort of number.

Re: Aren't you satisfied with a Top 100?

Anonymous — Mon, 21 Dec 2015 12:14:54 GMT

Author: Anonymous

Posted: 12/21/2015 17:14

Honestly I'm of the opinion 100 is too many, as least for most people, including me. I've currently rated just over 1,000 albums, so my top 100 represents about a 10th of all the music I've heard - that's high. Can I really say 10% of all the albums I've heard I believe should be in a list of my absolute favourites? For those who have heard even fewer albums, that percentage is even higher.

A number of people here have heard maybe five times the number of albums I have, and even then can you have 100 favourites? A chart like the Rolling Stones top 500 I feel is justified because it represents a body of people, not just one person. A chart should be something that's really quite personal and selected, it shouldn't start listing your 7/10 albums three quarters of the way down. There's a large number of charts here that have given up writing notes on their albums maybe half-way down because they're not passionate enough to find the time.

Also I'm willing to bet so few people actually look down someone's entire chart, especially considering the number of charts on the site. Everyone is far more interested in the top ten, top twenty choices of a user, and then maybe if they're interest is piqued they might start going further. Someone would really have to admire a user's opinion to begin scrolling down a list of 300 albums, noting each one.

And that's what a chart is for the most part - a public announcement of your favourite albums. As soon as you start listing beyond that, I feel like it becomes a personal mission rather than something you're expecting the world to find the time and read. So if it is for personal reasons, I can't relate to someone who would want to deliberate over the quality of their 314th and their 313th album, which when you're that far down a list, seems pretty arbitrary.

Re: Aren't you satisfied with a Top 100?

19loveless91 — Mon, 21 Dec 2015 08:54:46 GMT

Author: 19loveless91

Posted: 12/21/2015 13:54

SquishypuffDave wrote:

Custom charts solve this fine for me. I also like being forced to be selective. Makes the chart feel like a showcase rather than just a personal database. Art is the frame, so they say.

I like this post

Re: Aren't you satisfied with a Top 100?

Applerill — Mon, 21 Dec 2015 07:37:01 GMT

Author: Applerill

Posted: 12/21/2015 12:37

SquishypuffDave wrote:

Custom charts solve this fine for me. I also like being forced to be selective. Makes the chart feel like a showcase rather than just a personal database. Art is the frame, so they say.

Re: Aren't you satisfied with a Top 100?

SquishypuffDave — Mon, 21 Dec 2015 01:13:35 GMT

Author: SquishypuffDave

Posted: 12/21/2015 06:13

Custom charts solve this fine for me. I also like being forced to be selective. Makes the chart feel like a showcase rather than just a personal database. Art is the frame, so they say.

Aren't you satisfied with a Top 100?

Anonymous — Mon, 21 Dec 2015 00:43:35 GMT

Author: Anonymous

Posted: 12/21/2015 05:43

I Need a top 200 at least, isn't enough for me, i listen so much music and a top 100 for me is nothing.

What do you think?