Developing a new way to rate music

[soundave]

I'm frustrated by the fact that there isn't really a good way to rate and determine whether or not you will like music. Yeah, I can ask for recommendations, but how does anyone know what I really like? I might have different criteria. For example, NFU has in the past made some really excellent recommendations. Any n00bs who doubt this only need dig up the 70's prog thread to verify my assertion. He has extensive knowledge. But his criteria for deciding whether or not music is any good may be different than yours or mine. That's fine. I can handle that.

The conflict has come up when NFU (or anyone else, for that matter...I don't mean this as an attack in ANY way) doesn't qualify his opinions. Why should he have to? It's not his job. But it leaves those of us who are trying to figure out new stuff to listen to in a bind.

I figure out what new music to get in a few different ways. I subscribe to a metal podcast (the entropy league, which I highly recommend, btw), I subscribe to eMusic and use their tools, amazon.com, opening bands at shows, and I rely on suggestions from members on this forum (incidentally, iTunes is USELESS for discovering new music--has anyone else found this to be the case?). The bottom line is that I keep it legal. I'm not going to illegally download shit to try it out. That just doesn't mesh with my ethics. The only people I actually know who like metal are my former high school students, who I actually recommended music to more often than they did to me. So that isn't an option.

So, this is why when I see claims that a band sucks without any rationale, I get frustrated. Because, honestly, there are MANY ways to suck. Does it have to do with the musicianship? The songwriting? The production? The lyrics? All of it? Are they too commercial for your tastes? Not trendy enough? What makes them suck? Sucking isn't enough to keep me away, frankly, because I don't trust that I'll agree with you.

So, I wonder if there could be a way of rating bands that would take a number of criteria into account? If so, what criteria would you include? What's important to you in determining whether or not you'll like a band? This could eventually form a matrix, and people could sort it. You could search for which bands rate highest in musicianship, for example, songwriting be damned. "Oh look, it's Yngwie...", you know?

So, what categories should a rating system like this have? Should each category go from 1 to 5? 0 to 10?

What do you think?

 

[CAIRATH]

It's an interesting idea but I think it's a futile endeavour in the end. It's all so subjective that it's impossible to come up with some kind of discrete and objective rating system for it. Personally I just don't really try to take anyone else's word for it and just download stuff and judge for myself. Though when someone that I consider to generally have similar taste to mine says that something sucks I guess I'm more likely to bump it down on my list of stuff I need to check out.

This is also why I don't really lend much credence to album reviews in general. I'm not really too interested in what some random person that I don't know at all thinks about an album. Their opinion is just meaningless to me, even if it's backed up by arguments. I am still going to want to listen to it and judge for myself. And luckily nowadays with the internet and filesharing that is mostly not too hard anymore.

 

[Kenneth R.]

finally a thread worth thinking about!

I find out about music from friends and their recommendations, from opening bands of course, from a short list of review/news sites (DPRP comes to mind, as well as the store section of Lasercd.com, whose owner writes excellent summaries, at least from my listening perspective).

I think some 'categories' would have to be ammended, since people have different perspectives on what constitutes good songwriting. does it have lots of solos oh it must be good! etc... this can be a problem.

I disregard ANY opinion stated about an album if it has no justification of why I should support this belief. It's just bad logic. Johnny says Opeth suck, so they must suck. I think Opeth sucks. That's a terrible way to go about things.

I want to know why you have an opinion that you do, and when I then check it out regardless of your opinion, I will compare my experience with yours to see if I agree with you or not. That is how I do things. When I recommend an album, I try to give as much info as to what about it really stands out, and when I bash an album, I try to give a reason why I think it is forgettable.

So, I think that a rating system that takes into account more factors would be a useful thing, but we would have to try and objectify it. I am sure most people don't even have the attention span to bother using whatever we come up with.

I would suggest:
Lyrics (as in, are they well thought out? or are they cliche? do they fit the music?)
Technical Proficiency (and which instruments exhibit it.)
Song Structure (do they make sense, does it flow?)
Production Quality (is it crisp, can you hear all the instruments?)
Originality (is this a good buy for people who are fans of a genre, or is it something new?)
Diversity (do all the songs sound the same?)
---------
and finally, but perhaps the most important one:
Bias (are you rating this as a long time fan or a new listener?)

and then, based on these you can create an average score.

 

[The Poona of Peshwa]

Transylvanian Hunger has weak lyrics, when they're in english, poor musicianship, terrible production, and no diversity. Best album ever.
In conclusion atmosphere should also be considered.

 

[soundave]

I can totally buy that. Something must make you like it, though. What?

 

[The Poona of Peshwa]

Black metal and to a lesser extent Doom metal for me is all about atmosphere, sets a mood like a horror movie from the silent era or something. . .

 

[MasterOLightning]

This is the reason that people fight about genre descriptions so much and try to come up with stupidly elaborate genres. They want to be able to describe the music in a capacity beyond a number. I find a genre description and some comparisons to similar bands sufficiently work in a review.

 

[Kenneth R.]

add Atmosphere to my list of assessments... it is important.

For me I just see if the reviewer thinks like I do, if so I will probably agree with their opinion, such as the lasercd dude. Otherwise, I need more convincing. Most reviewers write really badly uninformative writeups.

 

[soundave]

@ MOL: True. I think metal may have more subgenres than any other type of music.

 

[Braighs]

I would add: if you like band x or x you might like this band.
It may be a slow way of broadening your collection. But it is relatively safe.

 

[Kenneth R.]

honestly last.fm is pretty good about this kind of thing

 

[prowlergrig]

a good way of getting to know new music is last.fm radio - you can listen to music similar to a certain band, or to what your 'neighbours' (ppl with similar taste to yours) listen to. ..and it's legal

 

[prowlergrig]

haha ss you were quicker than me

 

[Braighs]

^cool!

 

[illidurit]

personal recommendation from a trustworthy source is better than any other way

 

[Kenneth R.]

haha ss you were quicker than me

skillz. while we're on the subject:
me @ last.fm

 

[Braighs]

^cool. I was looking into some Mostly Autumn.

 

[soundave]

Also, Pandora is pretty cool. They have a seriously flawed view of who Opeth is, though, based on Damnation.

Incidentally, I wasn't thinking of this system as a way of further splintering music into genres. Rather the opposite. Maybe if, for example, you're into virtuoso guitar you could discover John Williams, Al DiMeola, or John McLaughlin. Maybe you then decide, simply instrumental virtuosity is what you're after... maybe that takes you into new territory you haven't ever explored. New genres. I'm thinking in terms of finding those cross-genre categories so you can get out of a listening rut and discover truly new music. Not just hear a bunch of stuff that sounds like other stuff. Know what I mean?

Yeah, the whole RIYL thing is great, CMJ used to do that, and I find it helpful. But sometimes it's really off (or I'm really off. It's how I found Nile, and everything and everyone thinks I ought to like them. For some reason no one can understand, even myself, I don't!). Word of mouth is cool, but like I've said, I'm a bit isolated by being a stay at home dad whose friends all think that Maroon Five has some heavy moments. Reviews are okay, but you have to know where to look, who to trust, and that doesn't always work. And amazon is sometimes ridiculous in the "customers who bought x also bought y". Who knows why anyone buys what they do. Maybe they were gifts for multiple people...Deicide for Bobby, Backstreet for Cindy.... My mother-in-law gets Opeth based recommendations all the time now because she bought me Still Life! Let's just say that the Stones were too heavy for her in her day...

 

[derbeder]

Maybe if, for example, you're into virtuoso guitar you could discover John Williams, Al DiMeola, or John McLaughlin.

And you could discover Al Di Meola and John MacLaughlin together with Paco De Lucia in one concert: Friday Night in San Franscisco. Mixing fusion and flamenco in a fiery live setting in an unparalleled manner. Frankly I am not too knowledgeable in this area, but I would highly recommend people here to check this out.

 

[Kenneth R.]

For those of you with Winamp 5.1+, you can use the "musicmagix" or whatever its' called button to see a list of songs that are similar in style to the one you are playing. I think it analyzes this by waveform rather than genre tags, because as we all know people have differing opinion on what constitutes power metal etc. Rather interesting way to see what in your collection is similar to what else, unfortunately the discovery is limited to the scope of your library.