You can like an entire album more than another one with stronger songs. SiT has some of the highest ranking songs in the discography, but I rank it at #7 on my list.Oops, I thought I liked No Prayer For The Dying more than this album, but I guess I was wrong. I'm going to have to confess my sin in the blasphemy thread.
Unless there are odd spoken word or intro-only tracks throwing things off, the average song rating should have quite a bit to do with the album's overall rating. There will always be emotional factors at play, but what's the point of rating things if you're going to ignore what it tells you?The average song rating has absolutely nothing to do with the album rating. People really should start to understand that.
Exactly what I was going to say, I have a track listing problem with DoD for exampleAlbum ratings should be treating less as song averages and more like one treats rating the songs. Sometimes an album just has a bunch of strong songs, but the tracklisting and assortment are off, or it doesn’t have that ‘special’ quality.
As you know, LooseCannon is currently revising the older song threads on the Commentary Boards, and now we all can rate the individual songs. I thought it would be cool to turn these individual ratings (only the ones which were posted) into album ratings.
Cheers Khan, and Invader.
Everyone his own thoughts of course, but personally, I think that the average of all songs may present a reliable representation of an album.
Invader, see this as one out of many methods to do this. I don't say it's the only or the best method, but I find it an interesting one and not such an unrealistic alternative.
Apart from comparing with ratings by other members, now we can also compare our judgement with our own thoughts we always had about these albums, and we can put it next to other methods and topics.
(quoting Invader, see original post)
This means that your votes for individual songs (the average) does not correspond with your overall feeling for the album (according to yourself). It's your own information leading to your grade, and it provokes you to compare, and think about it. Nothing wrong with that, I hope!
Now a bit more philosophy about this method. The thing is: when people rank songs, it's possible to define the average song ranking of an album. If people don't want to name that "album judgement", that's fine. But it surely is an indicator to see how someone judges a total album, without skipping any tracks, or without playing the best song another two times.
It's some kind of automatical reflection, rid of anything else. Let me explain. The following is not per se truth, just an idea I have.
When I listen to an album with 9 songs, I can have different feelings about each song, but in the end it's the total picture that matters. Some people tend to make the lesser songs less important, so that they'll be "surprised" to find out that the total album was so bad (via this method). Others might overemphasize bad songs, and will make better songs less important. They don't talk about these, perhaps they don't even want to listen to them. They'll be surprised that the total result is not as negative as they thought.
(quoting LooseCannon, see original post)
I have the feeling that this occurs more than once with Maiden albums from the nineties, especially the first two. More than just a couple of people keep on talking about the negative tracks, and hardly want to pay attention to the better ones, which they also have stained with the bad image.
I hope this topic serves an alternative view, where every song has the same amount of weight. If I am wrong, no problem. Then it's cold mathematics, which I like as well