5 star album rating system gone??

  • 3
  • Question
  • Updated 6 years ago
  • Answered
The 5 star album rating system is extremely useful to me when I find an artist I've never heard before, especially when they have a huge catalog. Is that feature officially done with?
Photo of Joshua Championship

Joshua Championship

  • 0 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes

Posted 8 years ago

  • 3
Photo of Zac Johnson

Zac Johnson, Official Rep

  • 3335 Posts
  • 189 Reply Likes
Nope. All albums should still have ratings. Take a look in an artist's discography or on an album page. Look for the red stars under an album image.

Hope this helps,
Zac
Photo of Gary Smith

Gary Smith

  • 9 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
But the stars have move to the right - I preferred them as the first column
Photo of jimmispoons

jimmispoons

  • 0 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
You can conveniently and quickly sort by album rating though - if that helps, just click on the column title...
Photo of avinerseiler

avinerseiler

  • 0 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
I love the old feature where one album is selected above all others as the one to get, particularly with "best-of" compilations. But sometimes it's not clear why one album was selected when several others with the same rating were not. Plus the one selected is often long out of print .
Photo of sleepypowell

sleepypowell

  • 0 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
The AllMusic Album Picks are still there. Look to the left of the album covers.
Photo of Zac Johnson

Zac Johnson, Official Rep

  • 3335 Posts
  • 189 Reply Likes
From our FAQ:
http://beta.allmusic.com/faq#picks

What are Album Picks and Track Picks?

When looking at an artist's discography, you may see a check mark next to the album cover. That represents the AllMusic Pick for the release most representative of that artist's entire body of work.

On specific album pages you may also see smaller checks next to two or three tracks on a recording. Those are AllMusic Song Picks. These are the songs on a recording that our experts feel are most representative of the entire album.
Photo of Mike DiCarlo

Mike DiCarlo

  • 0 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
I find it odd that over the past 2-3 years there hasn't been a single new work/release that has been deemed meritorious enough to receive 5 stars. Is this a statistical anomaly?
Photo of Chrysta Cherrie

Chrysta Cherrie

  • 731 Posts
  • 9 Reply Likes
Hi Mike,
Ratings, among other things, are handled by our data provider. See http://www.allmusic.com/faq#whoisrovi for more info and how to contact them.

Also, here is some info about how are data provider assigns album ratings: http://www.allmusic.com/faq#ratings -- Please note five stars are reserved for albums, after passing the test of time, that represent the best of their genre.

Thanks.
Photo of Andy DeNardi

Andy DeNardi

  • 231 Posts
  • 20 Reply Likes
OK, here's one that is your responsibility. Do an advanced search for 2009 to 2013 / 5 stars / main albums. Fifteen of the eighteen albums returned are various artists. Why is that, when you have a separate button for those?

The other issue is that these are primarily compilations and if they had been listed under one specific artist they would fall under the category of All Recording Types instead of Main Albums. I understand the difference between greatest hits and compilation but it's still confusing and sloppy. Some posters have stated that they are annoyed that there are many compilations of older material mixed in with the era they are interested in.

A) various artists albums should be listed under various artists at all times

B) compilations / greatest hits / box sets / collections should have their own category

Mike, it's Rovi's dirty little secret that they rate albums in retrospect. Five years out, they look at what's still popular and upgrade those to 5 stars. That way they're never embarrassed by calling a debut by The Beatles, Ramones or Nirvana a crap album when it's actually a revolution in music. Or praising a new artist as a revolution when they're only a one hit wonder.
Photo of Zac Johnson

Zac Johnson, Official Rep

  • 3335 Posts
  • 189 Reply Likes
Andy, you're right that it is strange that those VA albums come back in a "Main Albums Only" request. In fact, some of them show up in both the Various Artists requests and in the Main Only requests. This is a bug. We'll check it out.
Photo of Andy DeNardi

Andy DeNardi

  • 231 Posts
  • 20 Reply Likes
I mentioned this in another thread a week or two ago. There are some albums (we'll use Marlo Thomas as an example), where they are assigned to a specific artist even though they are various artist albums. This sometimes makes sense.

It appears to me that there are two artist fields, and one may say "various" while the other lists one person or group. I believe that your advanced search is looking at the artist field which is hidden from the rest of us. This is my guess as to why this bug appears.

I like that compilations are tracked differently than greatest hits, since it is helpful to see them when I am looking up albums from a specific year. It is also helpful that my search isn't cluttered with hundreds of greatest hits albums. So, I'm in favor of how things work now. But you need to provide text that explains what each selection allows and filters so that the user can get the results they desire. The title Main Albums is not at all descriptive. You may even need to institute the AND/OR feature that someone else is ranting about. It's embarrassing that a website this old has such a crude search tool.

It would be nice if you could hone the date fields down so that a compilation of jazz from 1937-1950 doesn't appear in a search for 2010 albums, but I suspect recording dates have been fine-tuned already and this is the best it will ever be.
Photo of Zac Johnson

Zac Johnson, Official Rep

  • 3335 Posts
  • 189 Reply Likes
As far as rating albums in retrospect, this is indeed true.

Our editorial team has a policy of not giving a new release a five-star rating until it has proven itself over time.

I personally think this is a terrific idea, simply because I have been known to passionately rave about a new release, threatening to put it into my Walkman and glue the door shut because the album is all I ever plan to listen to for the rest of my life. After a month or two, the blush can wear off and even a terrific album may not be the best album that was ever recorded.

On the other hand, a 41⁄2 star rated album may end up standing the test of time and move itself into the pantheon of really really great albums and be updated to be a 5 star album so that users who may not be familiar with an artist can get our overall view of that album's value.
Photo of Andy DeNardi

Andy DeNardi

  • 231 Posts
  • 20 Reply Likes
I can agree with a reassessment five years down the road although I'd prefer that the interval be half that. I have problems with ratings on twenty and thirty year old albums having their ratings changed, as their worth should be proven by now. Some have changed several times. If, As I have recently seen, a forty-five year old album is upgraded from a 2 to a 5, how much confidence can I have that it won't be changed to a 3.5 when another reviewer looks at it two years from now?

If an album's rating has changed, it should be accompanied by a new review, and there should be a monthly notice that lists changes for albums over five years old. My other problem is that already reviewed albums are coming up for re-review while others still haven't garnered their first.

But these are issues with Rovi more than AllMusic.
Photo of rootsmusic

rootsmusic

  • 570 Posts
  • 3 Reply Likes
Andy, I believe that the last sentence in your second paragraph meant to type the word "re-rating" instead of "re-review" (inferring from the prior sentence). See https://getsatisfaction.com/allmusic/...
Photo of Andy DeNardi

Andy DeNardi

  • 231 Posts
  • 20 Reply Likes
An example, which I just noticed today.

Metaliica's Ride The Lightning was upgraded within the last year. The album is 29 years old. Here's a history of it's ratings: Does it inspire confidence in the integrity and expertise ogfthe reviewers or does it make it appear as though ratings at the whim of an outside force?

  • 1995 AMG Guide to Rock 1st Ed.- 4.5 stars

  • 1995 AMG Guide to Rock 2nd Ed.1997 - 4 stars

  • 2002 AMG Guide to Rock 3rd Ed. - 5 stars

  • 2012 AMG website - 4.5 stars

  • 2013 AMG website- 5 stars



It looks a lot like Rovi exists to drive the sales of whatever albums are in still in print.
Photo of rootsmusic

rootsmusic

  • 570 Posts
  • 3 Reply Likes
Andy, your example should reply to John's question at https://getsatisfaction.com/allmusic/...
Photo of Andy DeNardi

Andy DeNardi

  • 231 Posts
  • 20 Reply Likes
Gene Chandler - The Duke of Earl [Vee Jay] (R 170558) rates 4.5 stars and the review notes that there is a Japanese release with better sound and five bonus tracks. Oddly, it is not linked to this release but is a separate entry.

But maybe there was a good reason they aren't linked. The Japanese edition Duke of Earl [P-Vine Japan] (R 834217), with (mostly) the same review by Bruce Eder doesn't list the bonus tracks and is only rated at 3.0 stars.

The Duke of Earl [Pazzazz] (R 782765) is linked to the original vee-jay album but appears to be an entirely different record, possibly a compilation. Two fewer tracks and a different cover, while the vee-jay review specifically calls out that the illusory Japanese upgrade has the original cover.

You're not giving me warm feelings about the reliability of the reviews on your site. It's a shame that there is not a representative from Rovi to fill out your support because it appears that the majority of complaints here are about the data you're hosting.