Album Rating: 3.5

I’m just saying some people seem to have lower expectations, or aren’t as fussy. The ‘rules’ thing was just an in-joke, usually seen in metal threads.

This rules m/

Album Rating: 3.0

artsy fartsy music that doof doesn't like, i bet this rulez (< 3 u, doof)

Album Rating: 3.5

yeah after that opener idk if i can do this

Album Rating: 4.0

This album is def long and weird/trippy as hell but it rules.

Album Rating: 4.5

being 'fussy' doesn't make you able to appreciate anything any more, if anything it's a barrier to actually enjoying music

Album Rating: 3.5

People need to moderate their ratings to take into consideration how good music can be, it's not that hard a concept to understand. When I say 'fussy' it's just knowing that although I'm enjoying something to an extent, it may not be comparable to other 'superior' music, superior being subjective of course.

I must not be explaining myself very well, so here's another angle... it's a common occurrence for negative or fairly neutral comments on this site to accompanied by a 3.5 rating, to me that's a bizarre & dare I say 'incorrect' rating system. Now it isn't for me to be telling anyone how to rate things, that's their prerogative, but it does end up making a few of us (like myself) look like we're being contrary for the sake of it.

I swear half my comments these days are discussing the rating system & defending my own ratings, haha.

Album Rating: 4.0

I don't see why Demon's point is so hard to see. I am guilty of overrating stuff as well, though.

Album Rating: 4.5

comparing a piece of art to another piece of art where each piece has little overlap is incredibly dumb, rate based off of enjoyment and emotional response. the only time comparisons become noteworthy are when comparing between releases by the same artist or when that piece of art is very obviously borrowing from or is heavily influenced by another, and even then enjoyment and emotional response trump this metric. what you seem to be saying is a 5 for a lady gaga album, based solely off how fun and enjoyable it is, seems dumb when more complex and technical and impactful music is out there. it doesnt have to be that because one piece of music, judged by oneself to be superior (as you say, incredibly subjectively) is any more worthwhile than another when both are enjoyable based on their own merits



if thats not really what you're saying apologies, but you need to work on communicating your ideas better if as you say you spend half your comments defending your personal rating system

Album Rating: 4.0

Isn't the whole point just that all ratings are a bit inflated? Therefore making a 2.5 seems like a "bad"/"terrible" album when, really, it is an average rating?

Album Rating: 3.5

'what you seem to be saying is a 5 for a lady gaga album, based solely off how fun and enjoyable it is, seems dumb when more complex and technical and impactful music is out there.'

This is definitely NOT what I'm saying, if a Lady Gaga album represents an intensely enjoyable listening experience, or is super-meaningful to the individual then 5/5 it by all means. By saying that shouldn't be allowed I'd be implying that music is somehow objective, which as we all know, it isn't (please let's not start this debate though).

Marehelm's comment is more accurate, I just believe the averages are inflated. I'm happy just to leave it at that before this gets confused (again).

Album Rating: 4.0

I agree with Demon in the sense that the attitude towards ratings has gradually relaxed over the years, which has resulted in some higher averages for albums that may not have garnered numbers quite so high in 2012, 2010, 2008, etc. I'm probably one of the worst offenders in that sense because I've allowed myself to become less critical & objective whilst rating albums based on "how they make me feel", and using personal anecdotes as justification.



A lot of it boils down to how you see the rating system. I play up to metacritic and I'll admit it - I rate on a 1-100 scale knowing that if something should receive high acclaim it needs at least a 4.5 aka 90/100. That's technically wrong by site standards though, because you should be adhering to the average/good/great descriptions. This means that most albums probably shouldn't exceed a 3.5/5 if you're being literal, but I think there's less fun in that and people feel the need to hype albums that they've discovered and/or put a lot of effort into reviewing in order to bring recognition to a piece of music.



Honestly, if I were starting a brand new account from scratch I'd be a lot more keen on objectivity. But it's just gotten to the point that with so many reviews out there that not only exist but are cited on review average sites such as metacritic, album of the year, etc....there's just little point in trying to backtrack. I could never edit all my "5" reviews that I regret and even if I did, these other sites would still reflect that score so what's the point (not to mention it'd muck up how the review reads if I wrote it as a 5 and then edited the score to a 3.5 or 4).



In short, ratings should matter more than they do, but with something as subjective as music that is vulnerable to how one feels on a whim/during a precise moment, they simply are subject to too much change. It's a variable, not a constant.

To me it's a mix of emotional response and objectivity. There are plenty of albums I've given a 3.5 or 4 because I believe they are good on a technical level, but maybe don't interest me enough to revisit more than once or twice.

The first track on this album is really spectacular but a lot of the ideas that come afterwards don’t really land. Moments of brilliance, miles of filler

Album Rating: 4.5

yea i used to do that too... being impressed whether by how interesting or original the music was trying to be or by how well performed it was. I stopped doing that, tho.



Now i just go with how much i enjoyed it subjectively, rest is extra.

Album Rating: 2.0 | Sound Off

'I rate on a 1-100'



I've started doing the same using the website AOTY that makes it easy - primarily because I'm still trying to find 100 albums from every year I rate 3.5 or higher (or 66/100 and higher...) and the way the site is set up makes it easy to bring up your top albums for each year in a nice visual medium.



It's a good dumping ground for soundoffs/reviews too but the community there is non existent.



It was a fun project while I was sulking after being banned here :D

If one is going to make any kind of serious effort at ranking music, I think you have to take into account both the objective and subjective aspects. There’s been time periods here and on RYM where one approach favored over the other but you have to incorporate both.

Album Rating: 3.5

Good points Sowing, don't disagree with anything you've written.

'To me it's a mix of emotional response and objectivity. There are plenty of albums I've given a 3.5 or 4 because I believe they are good on a technical level, but maybe don't interest me enough to revisit more than once or twice. '

I've seen this before & honestly it's not something I'd ever do, my process is to first decide on a rating completely dependant on how much enjoyment I get out of the listening experience & THEN I often try & justify my rating with individual praise/criticism in the comments section, often in ways that appear objective, when in reality they aren't. I never give an album a higher score simply because the musicians are talented, or whatever other seemingly objective reasoning you could think of.

Album Rating: 4.5

god this album fucking slays

Album Rating: 2.0 | Sound Off

'If one is going to make any kind of serious effort at ranking music, I think you have to take into account both the objective and subjective aspects. There’s been time periods here and on RYM where one approach favored over the other but you have to incorporate both.'



Becomes increasingly important as you get older as nostalgia/association becomes more of a factor - and also so much stuff isn't all that unique but can still have something 'special' about it you can't put your finger on that makes it worthwhile, while other stuff you can't help but find generic and worthless when you've been round the musical block a load of times (however professionally it's written/recored).