Forum Home Forum Home > Progressive Music Lounges > Prog Music Lounge
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Objectivity in rating albums
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Objectivity in rating albums
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 910111213 15>
Author
Message
  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
Archisorcerus View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: February 02 2022
Location: Izmir
Status: Offline
Points: 2493 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Archisorcerus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 20 2022 at 10:49
^ I meant to address to you both. Should I use this one for that? ^^ Cool
Back to Top
suitkees View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: July 19 2020
Location: France
Status: Offline
Points: 8762 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote suitkees Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 20 2022 at 10:55
^ Ah, you could, but it's conventional, you know... Tongue

The razamataz is a pain in the bum
Back to Top
Lewian View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: August 09 2015
Location: Italy
Status: Offline
Points: 14124 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote Lewian Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 20 2022 at 11:09
Originally posted by nick_h_nz nick_h_nz wrote:


JD, I would think the majority of people commenting understand what objectivity is.

I believe that the definition of objectivity is in a totally messy state. The issue with most definitions of objectivity (and I know a good deal of literature about it) is not so much that according to these definitions objectivity couldn't exist, but rather that no human being could ever get into the state to reliably secure or check the objectivity of anything. In order to repair that, there are a good number of definitions that loosen some key requirements, and then one can have endless debates about whether it still deserves to be called objectivity without those requirements. Also any two such definitions are usually in disagreement with each other. Intersubjectivity is one of them; note also that in principle one needs to specify how far intersubjectivity is required to reach, as for any supposedly objective fact you always find an outcast who disagrees with it. I'm not sure whether anyone understands what objectivity is, let alone a "majority", and avoiding the term completely will for sure not make the world a worse place. And I'm not just taking about music rating!
Back to Top
progaardvark View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Crossover/Symphonic/RPI Teams

Joined: June 14 2007
Location: Sea of Peas
Status: Offline
Points: 48831 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote progaardvark Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 20 2022 at 11:38
Originally posted by progaardvark progaardvark wrote:

Take the number of nouns in the music and divide by the number of pipperpipperpops in the music.

This inevitably leads to division by zero. Once you synergize your channels and integrate it with wearable users while leveraging with robust bandwidth we can then expedite targeted dynamic vortals amidst seamless relationships on a disintermediate front-end. It's cloudy in a valley of hot dogs.
----------
i'm shopping for a new oil-cured sinus bag
that's a happy bag of lettuce
this car smells like cartilage
nothing beats a good video about fractions
Back to Top
nick_h_nz View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Prog Metal / Heavy Prog Team

Joined: March 01 2013
Location: Suffolk, UK
Status: Offline
Points: 6737 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote nick_h_nz Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 20 2022 at 11:50
Originally posted by Lewian Lewian wrote:

Originally posted by nick_h_nz nick_h_nz wrote:


JD, I would think the majority of people commenting understand what objectivity is.

I believe that the definition of objectivity is in a totally messy state. The issue with most definitions of objectivity (and I know a good deal of literature about it) is not so much that according to these definitions objectivity couldn't exist, but rather that no human being could ever get into the state to reliably secure or check the objectivity of anything. In order to repair that, there are a good number of definitions that loosen some key requirements, and then one can have endless debates about whether it still deserves to be called objectivity without those requirements. Also any two such definitions are usually in disagreement with each other. Intersubjectivity is one of them; note also that in principle one needs to specify how far intersubjectivity is required to reach, as for any supposedly objective fact you always find an outcast who disagrees with it. I'm not sure whether anyone understands what objectivity is, let alone a "majority", and avoiding the term completely will for sure not make the world a worse place. And I'm not just taking about music rating!

Let me rephrase then, because (as usual) I agree with all of what you say.

I would think the majority of people understood what is meant by objectivity - even if they can’t understand what objectively is, because that is something that has been philosophically debated throughout the ages.
Reviewer for The Progressive Aspect
Back to Top
JD View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: February 07 2009
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 18373 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote JD Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 20 2022 at 12:52
Originally posted by progaardvark progaardvark wrote:

Originally posted by progaardvark progaardvark wrote:

Take the number of nouns in the music and divide by the number of pipperpipperpops in the music.

This inevitably leads to division by zero. Once you synergize your channels and integrate it with wearable users while leveraging with robust bandwidth we can then expedite targeted dynamic vortals amidst seamless relationships on a disintermediate front-end. It's cloudy in a valley of hot dogs.
I'll have what he's having please. Thumbs Up
And BTW @Archisorcerus the only time you fail is when you give up trying. Only then do you no longer have an opportunity to succeed. I'm sure you consider either one of the space shuttle incidents failures. But they were in fact terrible tragedies at the time, that gave great rise to succeeding by necessity.
Thank you for supporting independently produced music
Back to Top
Archisorcerus View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: February 02 2022
Location: Izmir
Status: Offline
Points: 2493 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Archisorcerus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 20 2022 at 13:04
^ I didn't mean "failing in life", as is obvious. You fail an exam. You fail. Plain and clear. What I mean should be crystal clear.

I really like having a clear perception. The "I never lose," philosophy I mentioned, and the like, are a delusions and fallacies. I'm of course aware that you learn from mistakes, failures, losses. You can immensely benefit from them too. Even a smart kid knows it.

Edited by Archisorcerus - March 20 2022 at 13:06
Back to Top
David_D View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: October 26 2010
Location: Copenhagen
Status: Offline
Points: 13530 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote David_D Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 20 2022 at 13:58
Originally posted by JD JD wrote:

Originally posted by progaardvark progaardvark wrote:

Originally posted by progaardvark progaardvark wrote:

Take the number of nouns in the music and divide by the number of pipperpipperpops in the music.

This inevitably leads to division by zero. Once you synergize your channels and integrate it with wearable users while leveraging with robust bandwidth we can then expedite targeted dynamic vortals amidst seamless relationships on a disintermediate front-end. It's cloudy in a valley of hot dogs.
I'll have what he's having please. Thumbs Up

LOL  me to Thumbs Up 


Edited by David_D - March 20 2022 at 13:58
                      quality over quantity, and all kind of PopcoRn almost beyond
Back to Top
David_D View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: October 26 2010
Location: Copenhagen
Status: Offline
Points: 13530 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote David_D Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 20 2022 at 14:47
Originally posted by David_D David_D wrote:

Originally posted by wiz_d_kidd wiz_d_kidd wrote:

Nonetheless, some of these attributes could be used to assess the quality of a piece of music, but not entirely objectively.

Someone once said "Music is organized sound". I would extend that notion and say "Music is organized sound that is performed with a purpose".  Good music, therefore, must be music that is well organized, has a good sound, is performed well, and achieves a purpose.

Organizational quality entails:
     Composition (melody/harmony, verse/chorus, tension/resolution),
     Texture (layering/density),
     Arrangement (ordering and assignment of the parts),
     Originality (new/derivative),
     Accessibility (easy/tough listening).

Sound quality entails:
     Dynamics (soft/loud),
     Tonality (unintentional harshness/distortion/noise),
     Mixing/Recording (flatness/varying focus/room acoustics)

Performance quality entails:
     Musicianship (amateur/virtuoso),
     Vocal ability (strained/out-of-tune/melismatic)

Purpose entails the conveyance of Mood, Imagery, and Emotion.

All of these are somewhat objective in that they give the rater something very specific to assess to come up with their rating. 

I can tell you, wiz_d_kidd, this is much more of very well clarified rating criteria I could dream of to see as a result of this thread.
And I agree with you concerning their character, and will call them "partly objective".

Thank you very much for this so good contribution of yours.  Smile


Whatever one will call and characterize these music quality entails worked out by wiz_d_kidd, I'm very satisfied with them as the kind of rating criteria I've had in mind, as they refer to the music and not to a rater's tastes. 

Thank you very much for all the contributions to this thread and the different points of view, except from those posts I didn't find constructive, but on the contrary.

And I hope many of you have found this debate interesting and somehow giving! Star


Edited by David_D - March 21 2022 at 04:10
                      quality over quantity, and all kind of PopcoRn almost beyond
Back to Top
Hugh Manatee View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: December 07 2021
Location: The Barricades
Status: Offline
Points: 1555 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote Hugh Manatee Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 20 2022 at 16:53
This thread became mired in the quicksand of semantics some long time ago (maybe even before its conception).
I should have been a pair of ragged claws
Scuttling across the floors of uncertain seas
Back to Top
Atavachron View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Offline
Points: 64384 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote Atavachron Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 20 2022 at 17:03
ProgArchives--  Mired in Semantics since 2004
"Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought."   -- John F. Kennedy
Back to Top
nick_h_nz View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Prog Metal / Heavy Prog Team

Joined: March 01 2013
Location: Suffolk, UK
Status: Offline
Points: 6737 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote nick_h_nz Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 21 2022 at 01:30
Don’t forget semiotics. This thread, and PA is general, is mired in semiotics as much, if not more, than semantics! 😄
Reviewer for The Progressive Aspect
Back to Top
David_D View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: October 26 2010
Location: Copenhagen
Status: Offline
Points: 13530 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote David_D Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 21 2022 at 05:37
Originally posted by jamesbaldwin jamesbaldwin wrote:

As i tried to explain in another thread I opened,
in my opinion, an artwork must be judged according to aesthetic criteria, that is to say: beatiful or ugly.
..................
How can the beauty of a music album be determined?

There are some factors in which we can divide a song:
1) Composition (melody and harmony)
2) Ability to the musical instrument
3) Ability to sing
4) Arrangement
5) Experimentation
6) Sound (production)
7) lyrics

Then we must consider 

8) the overall effect, that is, how the sequence of the songs composes a whole that is more pleasant than the beauty of the individual pieces.
...................

About your aesthetical approach, James B., in my opinion, it would be good to divide a review in two parts, an analysing and "a judging" one. And when have analysed a musical work by the means of the criteria, you have chosen (which I find to be very fine ones), it would be good to be open for discussion as the aesthetical "judgement" can be quite different, certainly being largely subjective.


Edited by David_D - March 21 2022 at 14:54
                      quality over quantity, and all kind of PopcoRn almost beyond
Back to Top
Guldbamsen View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin

Joined: January 22 2009
Location: Magic Theatre
Status: Offline
Points: 23098 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote Guldbamsen Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 21 2022 at 05:56
How does one to about determining whether or not X artist does any of the aforementioned criterias greatly/perfectly/etc?
Lou Reed, Neil Young, Iggy and Bowie plus a whole host of highly original performers are what I’d personally consider “anti-singers” - most especially put up against folks that can actually sing in a more traditional manner.
Lou Reed and Bowie wouldn’t last a day in something like X Factor…yet does that mean they’re less interesting from a musical point of view?
“The Guide says there is an art to flying or rather a knack. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss.”

- Douglas Adams
Back to Top
nick_h_nz View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Prog Metal / Heavy Prog Team

Joined: March 01 2013
Location: Suffolk, UK
Status: Offline
Points: 6737 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote nick_h_nz Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 21 2022 at 06:06
Originally posted by Guldbamsen Guldbamsen wrote:

How does one to about determining whether or not X artist does any of the aforementioned criterias greatly/perfectly/etc?
Lou Reed, Neil Young, Iggy and Bowie plus a whole host of highly original performers are what I’d personally consider “anti-singers” - most especially put up against folks that can actually sing in a more traditional manner.
Lou Reed and Bowie wouldn’t last a day in something like X Factor…yet does that mean they’re less interesting from a musical point of view?

Completely agree, and they are among my favourite musicians, too. Whenever I have been asked to give my top five bands/artists of all time, invariably Bowie, Reed, Pop and Young are in there. None are conventional singers by any stretch of the imagination. I also love Young’s guitar style (or lack of style, I suspect many would say), and Bowie’s saxophone playing (which has drawn considerable criticism over the years). Reed speaks more often than he sings, and even when he sings, it still often sounds more like speaking. One of the most common criticisms of Lulu was that Reed couldn’t sing. I have to wonder how many people making that criticism had ever listened to much (or any) Reed previously, as his “singing” on Lulu was far from atypical.

Almost every criteria that has been presented here as something objective is barely so, if at all.
Reviewer for The Progressive Aspect
Back to Top
SteveG View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: April 11 2014
Location: Kyiv In Spirit
Status: Offline
Points: 20513 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote SteveG Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 21 2022 at 06:17
Originally posted by Guldbamsen Guldbamsen wrote:

How does one to about determining whether or not X artist does any of the aforementioned criterias greatly/perfectly/etc?
Lou Reed, Neil Young, Iggy and Bowie plus a whole host of highly original performers are what I’d personally consider “anti-singers” - most especially put up against folks that can actually sing in a more traditional manner.
Lou Reed and Bowie wouldn’t last a day in something like X Factor…yet does that mean they’re less interesting from a musical point of view?
You can throw Bono into that class too.
This message was brought to you by a proud supporter of the Deep State.
Back to Top
Archisorcerus View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: February 02 2022
Location: Izmir
Status: Offline
Points: 2493 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote Archisorcerus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 21 2022 at 06:17
Like I said, utilising objectivity while rating albums is not the same as creating objective criteria for assessment. And one's objectivity is still subjective. One can give a conventional performance a 5-star, and another can give it a 1-star as it is too typical. One can find perfect precision as something to be praised, whilst another can find it too robotic.

Edited by Archisorcerus - March 21 2022 at 06:18
Back to Top
wiz_d_kidd View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 13 2018
Location: EllicottCityMD
Status: Offline
Points: 1362 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote wiz_d_kidd Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 21 2022 at 06:57
Originally posted by David_D David_D wrote:

I can tell you, wiz_d_kidd, this is much more of very well clarified rating criteria I could dream of to see as a result of this thread. And I agree with you concerning their character, and will call them "partly objective".

Thank you very much for this so good contribution of yours.  Smile

Originally posted by David_D David_D wrote:

Whatever one will call and characterize these music quality entails worked out by wiz_d_kidd, I'm very satisfied with them as the kind of rating criteria I've had in mind, as they refer to the music and not to a rater's tastes. 


You're welcome. Glad I could help.
Back to Top
David_D View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: October 26 2010
Location: Copenhagen
Status: Offline
Points: 13530 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote David_D Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 21 2022 at 12:39
Originally posted by wiz_d_kidd wiz_d_kidd wrote:

Someone once said "Music is organized sound". I would extend that notion and say "Music is organized sound that is performed with a purpose".  Good music, therefore, must be music that is well organized, has a good sound, is performed well, and achieves a purpose.


This is important, as it's about appreciating ambitious music. Star




Edited by David_D - March 21 2022 at 12:40
                      quality over quantity, and all kind of PopcoRn almost beyond
Back to Top
Hugh Manatee View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: December 07 2021
Location: The Barricades
Status: Offline
Points: 1555 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote Hugh Manatee Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 21 2022 at 16:31
Originally posted by Guldbamsen Guldbamsen wrote:

How does one to about determining whether or not X artist does any of the aforementioned criterias greatly/perfectly/etc?
Lou Reed, Neil Young, Iggy and Bowie plus a whole host of highly original performers are what I’d personally consider “anti-singers” - most especially put up against folks that can actually sing in a more traditional manner.
Lou Reed and Bowie wouldn’t last a day in something like X Factor…yet does that mean they’re less interesting from a musical point of view?

There is the other end of that spectrum to consider also. Sally Oldfield for instance is a technically very good singer however some people might not like her singing and consider it shrill, and that's not to mention opera singers...
I should have been a pair of ragged claws
Scuttling across the floors of uncertain seas
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 910111213 15>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.258 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.