/mu/ - Music (Temp full images)

however much you like an album

use a relative scale for maximum differentiation between albums

eeenjoy

>>52478489
>I'm just giving all my favorite albums 4-5 stars and it just doesn't feel right.

why doesn't it feel right? Are you afraid you're inflating your ratings, or do you think you need to involve "objective" assessments outside of your enjoyment?

step 1: rate moar
step 2: try and weigh each one against another, whether your feelings about them are in line with the relative numerical score
step 3: adjust until it feels right

>>52478489
Start listening to more artists and catalogue their entire discographies, you're bound to find albums that disappoint you.

>>52478537
Both actually.

>>52478596
LOL no dont do this

seeking out good music is always ht best way to go about it. no reason to seek out music you wont like.

>RYM account has over 50 0.5 ratings

>it's all canon bad music like Crazy Frog/Brokencyde/BOTDF and random top 40 pop songs

>>52478618
hate that so much

do whatever you want

I mostly only review albums I like or am genuinely interested in, which is why my most common rating is 4 or 3.5. If I were to indiscriminately review albums I'm sure 2.5 or lower would be the average, but then I'd waste a lot of time listening to records of music I know I don't like, and that would be silly. A huge waste of time. A painful, unpleasant activity.

But if you want to conjure up some weird, scaled down rating system or waste tons of time on music you hate just so that your RYM account looks better, be my guest. It appears to be the patrician thing to do.

>>52478674
>waste tons of time on music you hate just so that your RYM account looks better, be my guest. It appears to be the patrician thing to do.
or just take an hour out of your uneventful life to rerate your albums so that they're rated relatively to each other. A 2.0 from me is still a good album. It's just not as good as my 2.5-5s.

is it a bad idea to rate albums based on how you rate the individual tracks?

>>52478801
Yes, an album is more than simply the sum of its parts.

There was moment where I found myself looking for music that I would enjoy just enough to give them average ratings. I told myself to cut that shit out.

>>52478704
So if a 2.0 is already a good record for you, where do you put the bad and truly awful records?

>>52478845
>where do you put the bad and truly awful records?

a lot of people don't like spending time pondering exactly how much they didn't like an album, so they'll put everything they didn't like in the same category. It's understandable since you're not likely to revisit any of them anyway, so all you need to know is that you didn't like them.

https://rateyourmusic.com/~ArtanisXp
>There are people who don't hate music here
shig mah dig

>>52478845
How do I add the text on the numbers?

Like 0.5, 1, 1.5

>>52478877
That's actually a pretty solid way to do it.

>>52478921
On your profile page you click on account. Underneath the title Account Settings you'll see different tabs. Click on the Rating System one.

>tfw shitty curve
https://rateyourmusic.com/~Rori

>wow, someone gave an obscure album that I really like a 4.0. They must have really interesting favorites
>click on profile and look at 5.0s
>ABBA, AC/DC, The Beatles, etc

>>52479354
>wow, someone gave an obscure album that I really like a 4.0.
>click on their profile and look at ratings
>most of the ratings are either 5.0s, 4.5s or 4.0s

10=best album ever
9=rock masterpiece
8=buy it now
7=buy it eventually
6=buy it if you are a fan

>>52478610
i like to hear my favorite artist's bad albums too
they become more human to me

>>52479403
Every time

>>52479403
this is the worst, i'll concur

How did you go about rating albums when you first made your account? I've heard a lot of albums, it feels like a ton of work to just go through tracking down every album I've ever heard, and I'll obviously only get to the ones I really enjoyed.

>>52480059
sometimes it's easier just to look at some people's ratings and go "oh i heard that" as you go through them and rate them in that way, then hard search for everything
you don't have to do it all at once, obv.

>>52480059
No matter what you do, the first time rating is always a chore. What I did was open up my music folder and rated everything that I heard from A to Z

https://rateyourmusic.com/~thehuntingparty

:)

>>52480059
I vowed to relisten to everything I've already heard once before rating, so I just started rating in order of what I listened to from that point on.

https://rateyourmusic.com/~weeabooscum

>>52478674
>I mostly only review albums I like or am genuinely interested in, which is why my most common rating is 4 or 3.5. If I were to indiscriminately review albums I'm sure 2.5 or lower would be the average, but then I'd waste a lot of time listening to records of music I know I don't like, and that would be silly. A huge waste of time. A painful, unpleasant activity.
>But if you want to conjure up some weird, scaled down rating system or waste tons of time on music you hate just so that your RYM account looks better, be my guest. It appears to be the patrician thing to do.

>>52478704
>A 2.0 from me is still a good album. It's just not as good as my 2.5-5s.

That's the problem with Rate Your Music if you know how to find music you like, have a broad taste and honestly enjoy most of what you listen to. You'll either look like a plebeian, feel like you have to force yourself to listen to stuff you don't like so you can give more bad ratings, or use a harsh rating scale that might be misinterpreted because most other people use a different one.

If you only have good ratings to give, my advice would be to skip rating altogether and just write reviews. Be concise unless you have a lot to say.

who are some up-and-coming avant teens

>>52479432
>rock masterpiece
>rock
>Limiting yourself to a single genre

>>52480510
the fad is over
people have learned that younglings are, without exception, useless in matters of taste

What if I don't give a shit about ratings and just want to keep track of the music I've listened to? Is RYM useful for that?

I think my problem is I try too hard to farm a sort of Bell Curve. But just rate how you want m8, don't feel the need to live up to any "standard"

>>52480591
Use last.fm

just rate it however you want to relative to your own personal rating scale. it's all about you subjectively cataloging music anyway.

>>52480591
discogs is probably more useful for you
in general, unless you are totally invested in the rym community idea, discogs is the better choice for everyone

>>52478489
I rate songs with 0.5 to 5
then I average then taking into account their lenght
up to half minute (songs with less than 0.5 minutes are considered 30 seconds)

>>52480497
>If you only have good ratings to give, my advice would be to skip rating altogether and just write reviews. Be concise unless you have a lot to say.

tfw you wanted to do that but suck at writing reviews

>>52480510
/mu/ created the term out of insecurity
most of the people there are just interested in niche genres, the few actual "avant-teens" are easily identifiable

>>52478489
OP do this
1- go here http://rateyourmusic.com/misc/random
2-try to find the album, then download and try it.
2.1-If you can't easily find it just randomize a new album
3-go back to 2.
THIS HAS MANY POSITIVE POINTS
1- Its like you knew every sing album in the unverse (well at least the ones at rym). So your musical discovery will not have prejudice against time needed to research albums

2-You dont have prejudice against situations, as some example you dont need to be on /mu/ to know some album made by mutants as long the album is there you will know it

3-Some guys as some example think dubstep is the genre skrillex do, and will not research skrillex (most of skrillex songs are brostep), if those guys would like dubstep, they will not listen to it since they will not try it. This kind of prejudice will not apply to you.

4-This also reduce the time spend with research, you just roll a random album and try to find it to download.


The only problem with it is that you will download some bad albums, because your taste is just one and artist need to make albums to fit all other tastes, and since you are downloading stuff at random you will not filter this list.

This last part will not be a problem to you since you want to have some low scores on your profile

>>52480719
Yeah, writing reviews isn't easy. I'm not that good at it either, but I still do it for albums that have no reviews and only a few ratings, when I feel like I have something to say about them.

A common trap I fell into at first is to try too hard to write "in-depth" or "well-written" reviews. Most of the time, simple is better. And funny or overly personal reviews can work, they're likely to get you +1 votes, but they're often just cop-outs — all style and little substance.

>>52478704
If your life is that uneventful, I'd recommend finding a more productive activity than combing over your own RYM ratings

R8 and suggest how to make it better?

dont insult me we're all autistic here

>>52481025
Stop assigning intrinsic values to numbers and rate relatively to other albums you dolt

>>52481073
>rate relatively to other albums
I do

and all albums are going to have a higher or lower personal value to them because of that