Your Rating Criteria

[videoheadcleaner]

Okay, my chart is probably very 2000s heavy comapred to a lot of people but these are the albums I love. And some may say, how can you rate one person's opinion over anothers?

My question to you all is how do you decide what chart is a dud and what is a classic list. Mine is rather simple and goes on the lines of albums that I own that are represented in other charts. For example, if a top 50 chart has 20 albums that I own and rate highly, then that chart would get 85+. If a top 50 chart has less than 5 albums, I generally give 50 / 100 depending on the other artists/albums in the chart.

Longwinded but the question remains: How do you rate user charts?

[joannajewsom]

It is strange rating someone's taste. Because of that, I started out just rating a user list the same way that I would rate a critic's list-- how would I rate this list if I saw it in a magazine? But I guess that's not really fair, since most user lists aren't as biased, we'll call it, as a list you'll find in a magazine. So now I pretty much rank on diversity and quality of albums. For example, a chart with majority 2000s or majority metal would get a low score, even though I may not have heard all of the albums. I rarely, if ever, come across a chart without at least 2 or 3 albums that I have heard. That helps me put the rest of their list into perspective. I think it's pretty arrogant to give a chart a low score just b/c you haven't heard the albums. So whenever I give a low score to a chart where I haven't heard most of them, it's based on lack of diversity.

What else...
A chart with five Beatles albums, three in the top 20 or something like that, would also get a low score due to lack of diversity and the fact that I've heard everything post-Help and they just aren't that great to me. Ridiculously overrating the Beatles-- or anyone, though it happens too often with them-- is a deal breaker.

Sometimes a chart will be pretty good for the first few pages, then I'll come across an album that's so bad that I just give a low score based on my belief that an album this bad should never be anywhere near a best ever list.

I also give low scores for obvious appeals to authority or popularity. If a user is clearly attempting to be some faux-rock historian, regurgitating what RS says and showing a self-loathing disregard for his/her own personal taste, then I'll give a low score.

Charts that have a lot of albums that I have heard and like, get high scores. Charts that show some diversity and some original thought get high scores.

[AngryAchilles]

what joannajewsom said.

[AngryAchilles]

except for that bit about the Beatles. Most of my favorite lists have 13+ Beatles albums in the top ten. Give or take a few.

[RFNAPLES]

I am opposed to quotas. If a band/artist has the greatest albums they should be in the chart as often as competition/space dictates. I am opposed to charts that exclude certain decades or include only one style because great music has appeared in most decades and in many styles. I am opposed to diversity for diversity sake since these are supposed to be lists of greatest albums not samplers. Therefore I rank charts based upon how many great albums they contain with less emphasis on the individual album rankings. You will find many of the same albums in the top 100 on most greatest hits charts and that is how it should be. If it weren't that way, might the oddballs be questionable or perhaps not so great?
_________________
Top 100 Greatest Music Albums by RFNAPLES
Bubbling Under The Top 100 Greatest Mus...y RFNAPLES

[Mr. Shankly]

But one of the purposes of this site is to take the official critics lists into question and well, to question them. We then say, "OK, I agree with that one, but why is that one rated so high? And why is that one so low? And how did they forget about that album? And are the Beatles really that great?" Then begins the fun of making our own individual statement of albums we hold in high regard. Of course, the big question is, is it possible to be objective about these lists or is rating albums always subjective? I do think people like us who have listened to hours and hours of music over the years develop our own criteria for greatness (see thread about greatness), but isn't it always based on personal taste in the end?

In case you're wondering, my criteria for rating is similar to Joanna's but I'd be lying if I said personal taste doesn't influence me. Another thing that influences me to rate a list higher though is original selections that expresses that person's unique taste. I'm getting sick of seeing miniaturizations of RS's top 500 list. That just makes me wonder if that person thinks outside the box at all when it comes to music.

One other thing: Seeing a list heavy in compilations makes me think this person is a casual music fan and doesn't really get the point of this site. I rate those low.

[RFNAPLES]

When only one person says an album is great it may only be their favorite. When a lot of people have the same faorite it probably is great. When most people have the same favorite, it is great, even if some disagree.

I am not sure if the purpose of this site is to rate charts. Perhaps it is to rank albums!
_________________
Top 100 Greatest Music Albums by RFNAPLES
Bubbling Under The Top 100 Greatest Mus...y RFNAPLES

[joannajewsom]

[RFNAPLES]

Yes, I think many people think more like me than you--seriously! Perhaps the reason albums you list don't show up so often is that they are NOT great but only your personal favorites! Popularity is a factor of greatness. But we have had that argument before as I hope you recall.

That Presley album peaked at #31 on the Billboard Top Pop Albums chart, and is considered to be one of the most successful and influential compilation albums of all time. The title was itself a reference to the 1927 hit song, "Fifty Million Frenchmen Can't Be Wrong" by Raskin, Rose, and Fisher, performed by Sophie Tucker. It was also supposed to be an estimate of the number of records that Presley sold worldwide by late 1959.

Subtitled Elvis' Gold Records Vol. 2, it comprises all ten tracks of five Top Five '58 & '59 singles, both a-sides and b-sides; the b-sides all charted in the Top 40 independently of the hit sides. In 1959, Elvis was considered great! Some still hold him as great (even if a little less so today). But popularity is not the sole determinant of greatness.

Society's view of greatness changes over time. Many Germans once thought that Hitler was great.
_________________
Top 100 Greatest Music Albums by RFNAPLES
Bubbling Under The Top 100 Greatest Mus...y RFNAPLES

[RFNAPLES]

BTW, this is the first album I bought:



Released in 1958, it may be the first greatest hits album in rock and roll history. It included such #1 hit singles as Heartbreak Hotel-1956, Hound Dog-1956, Don't Be Cruel-1956, Jailhouse Rock-1957, All Shook Up-1957, Love Me Tender-1956, Too Much-1957, (Let Me Be Your) Teddy Bear-1957 and I Want You, I Need You, I Love You-1956. It peaked at #3 on the Billboard Top Pop Albums chart.

I never owned 50,000,000 Elvis Fans Can't Be Wrong: Elvis' Gold Records Volume 2. It only had two #1 hits, Don't-1958 and A Big Hunk O' Love-1959.
_________________
Top 100 Greatest Music Albums by RFNAPLES
Bubbling Under The Top 100 Greatest Mus...y RFNAPLES