|
View previous topic :: View next topic
|
|
| Author |
Message |
videoheadcleaner
formerly Harkan
Gender: Male
Age: 40
- #1
- Posted: 12/14/2011 09:17
- Post subject: Year charts
|
A while off I know but two queries I have:
1) How many albums would someone be able to have on a year chart? I feel that 100 might be excessive and the site would be flooded with obscure albums that one person out of 100,000 might have listened to.
2) Some albums release dates have varied from country to country; do we take country of origin release as the main year? Recent example is Kimbra's Vows. Released here in NZ and AUS in 2011 but is due to be released officially overseas next year.
|
|
|
|
|
|
albummaster
Janitor
Gender: Male
Location: Spain
Site Admin
- #2
- Posted: 12/16/2011 11:01
- Post subject: Re: Year charts
|
apologies, somehow missed this post:
| harkan wrote: | A while off I know but two queries I have:
1) How many albums would someone be able to have on a year chart? I feel that 100 might be excessive and the site would be flooded with obscure albums that one person out of 100,000 might have listened to. |
I hear what you are saying, but just because there's 100 entries doesn't mean people have to use them all. The average size of decade charts is around 40 at the moment (& 30 for 'overall' charts).
| harkan wrote: | | 2) Some albums release dates have varied from country to country; do we take country of origin release as the main year? Recent example is Kimbra's Vows. Released here in NZ and AUS in 2011 but is due to be released officially overseas next year. |
yes, the rule has been that BEA uses the original year of release, wherever that may be, so in your example it would be 2011.
|
|
|
|
albummaster
Janitor
Gender: Male
Location: Spain
Site Admin
- #3
- Posted: 03/26/2012 08:42
- Post subject:
|
|
Just as a heads up. 'year charts' should be ready for testing in the next week or so. The scoring system will be as per this post - http://besteveralbums.com/phpBB2/viewto...7333#67333 but I think the number of albums in a year chart might be capped at 20 because I'm a bit concerned about flooding the database with less than decent albums (I've come around to harkan's way of thinking).
|
|
|
|
videoheadcleaner
formerly Harkan
Gender: Male
Age: 40
- #4
- Posted: 03/26/2012 08:58
- Post subject:
|
| albummaster wrote: | | Just as a heads up. 'year charts' should be ready for testing in the next week or so. The scoring system will be as per this post - http://besteveralbums.com/phpBB2/viewto...7333#67333 but I think the number of albums in a year chart might be capped at 20 because I'm a bit concerned about flooding the database with less than decent albums (I've come around to harkan's way of thinking). |
I believe a mid range number like 50 might be okay. Some may say that 20 is a bit too small. Either this adds to more decision making on the parts of users rather than an influx of obscure indie pop from 2011 Australia. Granted I add a number of albums on the site but even I think 100 albums from 2011 is a bit excessive. The option is for users to choose how many they want.
The other reason I say 50 might be good is end of year lists usually have a top 50 so users may want to emulate that.
Currently I have 107 titles from 2011 in my music library. I don't think I want to add The Lonely Island's Turtleneck and Chain at number 98 on my chart. Better left to the side.
Can't wait for year charts. More time making lists and procrastinating.
|
|
|
|
albummaster
Janitor
Gender: Male
Location: Spain
Site Admin
- #5
- Posted: 03/26/2012 11:09
- Post subject:
|
Nothing is set in stone at this stage, but the reason I was thinking 20 was that you are allowed a max of 100 albums in a decade chart. A year is a tenth of a decade (obviously), so you might expect a chart size of ten in a year chart to keep the ratio intact, so a chart size of twenty is comparatively generous.
If people think that will be too limiting, I'll reconsider, but the essence of the site is to highlight the best albums, and if an album can't make it to the top 20 in a given year, is it really worth including? 
|
|
|
|
|
|
videoheadcleaner
formerly Harkan
Gender: Male
Age: 40
- #6
- Posted: 03/26/2012 11:32
- Post subject:
|
| albummaster wrote: | Nothing is set in stone at this stage, but the reason I was thinking 20 was that you are allowed a max of 100 albums in a decade chart. A year is a tenth of a decade (obviously), so you might expect a chart size of ten in a year chart to keep the ratio intact, so a chart size of twenty is comparatively generous.
If people think that will be too limiting, I'll reconsider, but the essence of the site is to highlight the best albums, and if an album can't make it to the top 20 in a given year, is it really worth including? |
Duly noted.
|
|
|
|
- #7
- Posted: 03/26/2012 21:31
- Post subject:
|
I think 20 is good as a limit, Albummaster.... otherwise it just becomes a list of all the albums released in a given year!
I would be ok to limiting it to 10 as well to keep it inline with the decade charts!
|
|
|
|
Hayden
Location: Vietnam 
- #8
- Posted: 03/26/2012 22:39
- Post subject:
|
I actually think a limit at 20 is even a bit high.
I think 10 would suffice. It'd also make a bit of a challenge for the users  , and then the lazy people only have 1 page to go through when rating.
Also, I doubt this matters, but I'm anti-year-charts  We really don't need them.
_________________
Doubles & Conch
|
|
|
|
- #9
- Posted: 03/26/2012 22:41
- Post subject:
|
|
20 is the magic number for me
|
|
|
|
RFNAPLES
Level 8
Gender: Male
Age: 76
Location: Durham, NC, USA 
|
|
|
|
