It seems like most thorough album guides give out between 350-500 5 star ratings. I can see both how this is good (Why should Led Zeppelin IV being a 5 star affect what if the best Trip Hop album is a 5 star?) and bad (Is the best of every genre really worthy of the same grade as Revolver?)
What do you personally think makes an album worthy of a 5 star? How many albums do you consider 5 star albums?
If you allow half stars, I would have only 19 5 stars (maybe 20, I hesitate on the last one).
I don't have any clear rating, I don't like rules for ranking music, only the feelings matter, it just mustn't have more that one song I find average, I must find at least half the songs amazing.
I don't like the idea of having a maximum rating. If I were to design a scale I would have 10 mean 'Average, just what you'd expect' and then go up or down from there. That way, there's no way to rate an album 'perfect'.
If I do have to call something a 10, I'd reserve it maybe for my top three or four of all time. In general it should only go for the absolute peak of a genre -- the sort of album the rest of the genre can just imitate.
I seem to be a little high when it comes to this, as there's about 50 or so albums I'd say are good enough in my book to merit 5 stars. Keep in mind I've heard about 500 albums, so 1/10th of all the albums I've heard are in my mind "perfect or near perfect".
The album that has come out most recently that I'll give a perfect score to is "Sound of Silver".
But I really detest the ranking of 1 to 5 stars. I prefer a scale of 1 to 100.
So Sound of Silver will get a 100, while something like In Rainbows (my number 2 for 2007) might get a 94.
I have about 20 five star albums, but I prefer to rate them on a 1-10 scale, in which case about half of my five stars drop to 9.5 and I'm left with around ten "perfect 10s."
As for album guides, I'm fine with the best of every genre being worthy of a 5, but All Music Guide seems especially leniant in rewarding fives to famous artists (while virtually no 2000s albums are a 5 on their scale).
I seem to be a little high when it comes to this, as there's about 50 or so albums I'd say are good enough in my book to merit 5 stars. Keep in mind I've heard about 500 albums, so 1/10th of all the albums I've heard are in my mind "perfect or near perfect".
The album that has come out most recently that I'll give a perfect score to is "Sound of Silver".
But I really detest the ranking of 1 to 5 stars. I prefer a scale of 1 to 100.
So Sound of Silver will get a 100.
Personally, I would give out between 50 and 60 five star ratings. But a five star rating for me doesn't necessarily mean it's perfect, just damn close to it.
I like the five-star system because I don't think it is actually reducing art down to numbers as much as it might seem.
Just rating something on a scale of 0-5, even if you use half stars, isn't very exact. In other words, when you're rating something using this method, you're still just giving it a ball park figure and saying it belongs in a group with other albums that are this good (or bad).
The 0-5 scale is better than a mere thumbs up or down because it's more nuanced, but it's also better than 0-100 because it's still dealing in generalizations of the subjective nature of judging art. When you use 0-100 you're trying to use more of an exact science than art really fits into.
You have to look at it this way: yes you maybe rating the top 10% of albums you heard that, but chances are (especially since you're on this site) that the albums you've heard are mostly within the top 10% of albums of all time.
When you think that there have been a quarter a million different records made in this decade alone, it makes saying there are many 5 star albums less of a stretch.
You have to look at it this way: yes you maybe rating the top 10% of albums you heard that, but chances are (especially since you're on this site) that the albums you've heard are mostly within the top 10% of albums of all time.
When you think that there have been a quarter a million different records made in this decade alone, it makes saying there are many 5 star albums less of a stretch.
I don't agree with giving 10's to 1/10 of the stuff you've heard. There's a much bigger distinction between my #1 an #50 albums than my #500 and #550 albums.
Paul: Of course art can't be reduced to numbers. But given people don't have the time to read ten page critical essays for every album they're considering, a number is a good way to express the strength of your recommendation.
If you're going to rate everything 1-10, I think the top few levels should be reserved for your absolute favorite records you couldn't do without, rather than just being a pile of everything you really enjoy.