Best Ever Albums

Re: Ratings out of five

albummaster — Thu, 30 Jun 2011 02:53:23 GMT

Author: albummaster

Posted: 06/30/2011 06:53

Jhereko wrote:

I still maintain that we should have words come up when you hover over ratings (i.e. "Excellent"> "Okay">"Shite">"Green Day") that way we have a relative comparison and the ratings overall are more quantifiable than they are now with people rating things from 50 and above (WTF?).

Someone else mentioned early on that they want the freedom to use their own scale and don't want to be dictated to by BEA and labels take away that freedom. Even if a few of us reached a consensus on what those labels might be, I'm not sure everyone else would buy into it.

19loveless91, interesting about converting between RYM and BEA. I thought in my head that a 10 point scale would probably be enough.

I personally feel something isn't quite right, but if people want it left the same, then maybe it's best left as it is for now.

Re: Ratings out of five

19loveless91 — Thu, 30 Jun 2011 02:30:59 GMT

Author: 19loveless91

Posted: 06/30/2011 06:30

albummaster wrote:

I agree with you, but I think the system could be improved and maybe simplifed a bit to make it easier for people to use.

It's far easier to quantify something on a smaller scale (e.g. awarding something on Amazon out of 5 stars is very simple).

Maybe a 20 point scale is just too much and a ten point scale might be less confusing (and just as effective) in terms of positioning something?

I know it's a point of difference with other sites at the moment, but is it worth it? Does anyone really find a 20 point sliding scale useful? A lot of people just multiply their five/ten point scales up to fit in with BEA or mentally convert back to a scale they are more familiar with.

There are people who will always rate with "thumbs up/down" method... But there are some who have a rating system and those would probably like to see as big of a scale as possible..

I understand what your reasons are, I mean I don't rate charts or bands because I wouldn't know how to - it would probably be easier rating those on a smaller scale. It's just that when you start rating a whole bunch of albums you adopt a system (well I did at least) and then it's easier to have a bigger scale... I mean I actually find it annoying converting the BEA rating to the 10 point scale of RYM because there are too many albums I rate the same even if I don't like them the same at all

Re: Ratings out of five

Anonymous — Thu, 30 Jun 2011 01:51:09 GMT

Author: Anonymous

Posted: 06/30/2011 05:51

RFNAPLES wrote:

In the USA, an academic grade of 70 to 79 is often labeled C or average.

whereas in Australia, at least at university level, is labelled as a distinction which is a very good grade indeed.

RFNAPLES wrote:

This is the problem: Everybody has their own idea of what a rating is

It is a problem which is why I still maintain that we should have words come up when you hover over ratings (i.e. "Excellent"> "Okay">"Shite">"Green Day") that way we have a relative comparison and the ratings overall are more quantifiable than they are now with people rating things from 50 and above (WTF?). But that would be my preference. Also I definitely and absolutely think ratings should stay out of 100 as to how many increments within the 100 I don't mind.

Re: Ratings out of five

RFNAPLES — Thu, 30 Jun 2011 00:41:09 GMT

Author: RFNAPLES

Posted: 06/30/2011 04:41

This is the problem: Everybody has their own idea of what a rating is or means. In the USA, an academic grade of 70 to 79 is often labeled C or average.

Re: Ratings out of five

Necharsian — Thu, 30 Jun 2011 00:21:54 GMT

Author: Necharsian

Posted: 06/30/2011 04:21

I think I like the idea of ratings out of 5 rather than out of 100. Either 10 or 20 point scale is fine with me.

But I don't think making 50 the stat for bad albums should be used, mostly for what Bork already said. I tend to think of 50 as mediocre rather than atrocious. Taking away the bottom half makes it confusing on what a mediocre rank would be. I guess the median would turn into a 75 rank, which in my system is pretty good album, not just average.

Re: Ratings out of five

RFNAPLES — Wed, 29 Jun 2011 21:17:55 GMT

Author: RFNAPLES

Posted: 06/30/2011 01:17

albummaster wrote:

I can't comment on that album as I'm not familiar with it, but it does highlight the issue with assigning ratings here.

In any other media, be it film, games, or books, you can assess the technical merit of a piece of work and award at least some marks e.g. in literature, you might look at the structure of the work, the quality of prose etc.

In games, you might award marks based on the graphics, how smooth the gameplay is, immersiveness etc.

In films, the quality of the scrpt, what the acting is like, how good the cinematography is, special effects etc, and then based on all of these factors, award a mark based on what they have produced.

Music seems to be a bit different, and it's just an observation really, I'm not sure if anything should (or needs to) be done. It just means if somebody doesn't like something, they award nothing rather than using the rating scale.

Maybe BEA should treat all scores below a certain threshold as the same value (e.g. anything below 50 should be treated as 50) to try and smooth out this effect.

In USA academia, interim grades are averaged but the final grade is often categorized. For example, an F (fail) might be any grade between 0 and 59. For the final grade, a 0 or 59 are just as bad, you fail. The passing grades may also be categorized or subcategorized. An A might be 90-100 or A- 90-92, A 93-97 and A+ 98-100. These categories are often just stated as a grade point average (GPA) 1.0-4.0 in tenths, needing 2.0 to graduate. Not all schools use the same system.

No matter which system you use you are going to see people giving the lowest possible score to an album for whatever reason, hopefully justified but probably not rational.

Re: Ratings out of five

CellarDoor — Wed, 29 Jun 2011 18:54:30 GMT

Author: CellarDoor

Posted: 06/29/2011 22:54

I use a similar Bork scale : < 50/100 # bad.

Re: Ratings out of five

albummaster — Wed, 29 Jun 2011 16:12:58 GMT

Author: albummaster

Posted: 06/29/2011 20:12

I agree with you, but I think the system could be improved and maybe simplifed a bit to make it easier for people to use.

It's far easier to quantify something on a smaller scale (e.g. awarding something on Amazon out of 5 stars is very simple).

Maybe a 20 point scale is just too much and a ten point scale might be less confusing (and just as effective) in terms of positioning something?

I know it's a point of difference with other sites at the moment, but is it worth it? Does anyone really find a 20 point sliding scale useful? A lot of people just multiply their five/ten point scales up to fit in with BEA or mentally convert back to a scale they are more familiar with.

Re: Ratings out of five

Bork — Wed, 29 Jun 2011 15:44:17 GMT

Author: Bork

Posted: 06/29/2011 19:44

I don't know if that's a great idea. What you are proposing is to treat all "bad" albums as "pretty good". There seem to be a large group of people whose rating is 0 or 1 as Naples said. On the scale used here that translates to 0=don't like, 100=like, and of course that kills the usefulness of the scale. Sadly there probably isn't any way around the problem but those who stick around the site for a while are aware of it and can navigate around it by looking a bit more in depth at how various people have assigned their ratings.

Re: Ratings out of five

albummaster — Wed, 29 Jun 2011 15:32:19 GMT

Author: albummaster

Posted: 06/29/2011 19:32

I can't comment on that album as I'm not familiar with it, but it does highlight the issue with assigning ratings here.

In any other media, be it film, games, or books, you can assess the technical merit of a piece of work and award at least some marks e.g. in literature, you might look at the structure of the work, the quality of prose etc.

In games, you might award marks based on the graphics, how smooth the gameplay is, immersiveness etc.

In films, the quality of the scrpt, what the acting is like, how good the cinematography is, special effects etc, and then based on all of these factors, award a mark based on what they have produced.

Music seems to be a bit different, and it's just an observation really, I'm not sure if anything should (or needs to) be done. It just means if somebody doesn't like something, they award nothing rather than using the rating scale.

Maybe BEA should treat all scores below a certain threshold as the same value (e.g. anything below 50 should be treated as 50) to try and smooth out this effect.

Re: Ratings out of five

ShaneSpear — Wed, 29 Jun 2011 14:33:49 GMT

Author: ShaneSpear

Posted: 06/29/2011 18:33

albummaster wrote:

Even the worst album in the world would deserve better than that.

You should look up Kevin Federline's album some time.

Re: Ratings out of five

Anonymous — Tue, 28 Jun 2011 11:56:35 GMT

Author: Anonymous

Posted: 06/28/2011 15:56

albummaster wrote:

One of my pet peeves is seeing a great album rated 0 out of 100 and I'm seeing it a lot today 🤡

Even the worst album in the world would deserve better than that.

So can you make 5 the lowest?

Also If you're still open to it I'd like to make a case for having words come up for bracketed scores when you hover over a rating.

Re: Ratings out of five

GARY — Tue, 28 Jun 2011 10:10:24 GMT

Author: GARY

Posted: 06/28/2011 14:10

RFNAPLES wrote:

I agree, but some people live in a black or white world or a digital world of 0 or 1. Maybe the aliens can abduct them soon.

Is someone stirring the pot once again 🤔

.

Re: Ratings out of five

RFNAPLES — Tue, 28 Jun 2011 09:38:24 GMT

Author: RFNAPLES

Posted: 06/28/2011 13:38

I agree, but some people live in a black or white world or a digital world of 0 or 1. Maybe the aliens can abduct them soon.

Re: Ratings out of five

albummaster — Tue, 28 Jun 2011 05:40:04 GMT

Author: albummaster

Posted: 06/28/2011 09:40

One of my pet peeves is seeing a great album rated 0 out of 100 and I'm seeing it a lot today 🤡

Even the worst album in the world would deserve better than that.

Re: Ratings out of five

Hayden — Mon, 20 Jun 2011 19:49:54 GMT

Author: Hayden

Posted: 06/20/2011 23:49

Naaah.

Keep it as it is 😄 , i think it's great.

Re: Ratings out of five

albummaster — Mon, 20 Jun 2011 19:18:46 GMT

Author: albummaster

Posted: 06/20/2011 23:18

OK, points well made (thank you), so that idea won't be happening.

I still like the earlier idea of flagging/highlighting more obviously the albums with statistically high average ratings in a similar way that track-picks are already as I think something is missing to indicate more clearly how good an average rating is relative to other albums. I think that's something that could happen.

Re: Ratings out of five

RFNAPLES — Mon, 20 Jun 2011 17:23:17 GMT

Author: RFNAPLES

Posted: 06/20/2011 21:23

I have done 737 album ratings with an average album rating of 92/100. I don't rate or own albums that are less than 80/100. Sorry if I have skewed the results but as Thumper said in Bambi in 1942: “If you can't say something nice... don't say nothing at all.”

Re: Ratings out of five

GARY — Mon, 20 Jun 2011 13:44:26 GMT

Author: GARY

Posted: 06/20/2011 17:44

19loveless91 wrote:

I'm not sure about this guide thingy.. Each person uses a different system and I don't think that telling them what their system should be would change their decisions.. I mean some people reserve their 100 rating only for their very favourites (overall 10-15 albums) while others use it much more frequently. Likewise the number of low ratings probably won't decrease.. I mean there's a guy here that literally votes either 100 or a 0 (most of the time), and I guess there are many people here that just don't bother thinking about how much they like a certain album (just whether they do or don't)...

As for me - I have a pretty high average rating for albums (80/100), but the reason is, that I don't bother listening to albums I know I'll probably hate (Lady Gaga, Brokencyde, stuff like that).. I mean there are some albums that I expect to like and I don't, but so far the lowest score I've given was a 55/100..
And the thing is, the albums here are supposed to be "the best ever", so they are mostly acclaimed, popular, etc. + there are some really horrible albums, mostly added for a joke; but there aren't many albums that are generaly considered "pretty bad" or "below average" - or at the very least, they're so low on the charts that most people don't see them and don't rate them.. Which might contribute to the way ratings are spread....

sorry for the long post, I can't help myself :oops:

I've rated about 800 albums with an average rating of 63.

It doesn't matter to me how it gets sliced such as a 3.15 or 6.3 etc.

So do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law

Re: Ratings out of five

19loveless91 — Mon, 20 Jun 2011 13:27:09 GMT

Author: 19loveless91

Posted: 06/20/2011 17:27

I'm not sure about this guide thingy.. Each person uses a different system and I don't think that telling them what their system should be would change their decisions.. I mean some people reserve their 100 rating only for their very favourites (overall 10-15 albums) while others use it much more frequently. Likewise the number of low ratings probably won't decrease.. I mean there's a guy here that literally votes either 100 or a 0 (most of the time), and I guess there are many people here that just don't bother thinking about how much they like a certain album (just whether they do or don't)...

As for me - I have a pretty high average rating for albums (80/100), but the reason is, that I don't bother listening to albums I know I'll probably hate (Lady Gaga, Brokencyde, stuff like that).. I mean there are some albums that I expect to like and I don't, but so far the lowest score I've given was a 55/100..
And the thing is, the albums here are supposed to be "the best ever", so they are mostly acclaimed, popular, etc. + there are some really horrible albums, mostly added for a joke; but there aren't many albums that are generaly considered "pretty bad" or "below average" - or at the very least, they're so low on the charts that most people don't see them and don't rate them.. Which might contribute to the way ratings are spread....

sorry for the long post, I can't help myself 🫢