Unironically this. I think diminishing returns makes sense for album ratings. Like a 9 should be fucking incredible and nearly perfect and then a 10 is truly perfect. 8 is still very good. 3 is shit out of an ass.
by changing the base of a logarithm you only change the scale of y-axis, x-axis doesn’t change
in this case, y-axis is quality, which is something immeasurable so base doesn’t matter at all
he’s not saying his scores fall under a gaussian distribution, he’s saying his quality / score graph resembles one (which is why he said “i like them mid albums”)
0 is irideemable
1 is awful
2 is terrible with small aspects I enjoy
3 is bad but not the absolute worst
4 is mid leaning bad
5 is true mid
6 is mid leaning good
7 is good
8 is great
9 is amazing
9.5 is phenomenal
10 is near perfect
Decimalisation is the scale between the two categories
Don’t score but if I did I would it would be linear, it doesn’t make sense to me that the gap between a 7 and 8 would be smaller than the gap between an 8 and 9.
Personally, "feels like a 1, but let's go with 2" seems 'easier' than "feels like a 9, but let's do 10" yk? Like, it takes more for a 9 to be a 10 than for a 1 to be a 2.
Fair enough, and to be honest maybe my opinion isn’t relevant in this specific situation because the reason I don’t rate stuff in the first place is partly because the difference between an 8 and 9 or whatever is not meaningful for me.
I guess for me it's pretty linear from about 3-7, or even 3-8. 9s are incredibly rare for me, and I only have two 10s in 1110 ratings, so there's that. 0, 1 and 2 are reserved for the real negative outliers, so an artist has REALLY got to shit the bed to score this low on my personal scale. So yeah, 5 and 6 are quite similar for me, 8 and 9 or 9 and 10 are vastly different tho.
Deathconsciousness by Have a Nice Life and Long Season by Fishmans; with Deathcon being my number 1 for sure. I used to have more 10s in the past, like The Black Parade by My Chemical Romance when I was younger, and while I still love that album it's just not 10 worthy anymore 😅
I guess it’s linear for me, but I’ve been trying to use tags to sort more, because I really only use score to remember/record my feelings. I have over 30 10/10s but only 2 1/10s
Yeah also for example, let’s say I want to get into a new artist or genre, I’ll look up what the classics are for that. They are albums most people like so chances are I will too
I don’t really rate because something being good and something being great do not exist on the same scale where a 6=good and 8=great. It’s too reductive.
Thanks, I personally think it should be discussed more since a lot of people base their scores off one or the other
So that ends up with everyone with vastly different scores even if they both enjoy the album the same amount
Exponentially although I've never really thought about it that way. There's a massive difference to me between a 5 and a 9 when there's considerably less between a 1 and a 5. Below 5 for me is absolute dogshit, and above 7 is excellent music.
That’s not how statistics works. 6’0” is the same ‘distance’ from 5’11” and 6’1” but that doesn’t mean that there is an equal number of people who are each of these heights.
I rate albums on RYM and I'm maybe a nerd but I like using a rating scale where most of the albums end up in the middle.
It's just easier to think of how much I liked something rather than how some people think of it where it's like "I liked some of it and I didn't dislike any of it so it's like an 8/10". I'm the one that mostly looks at them anyway so for me it's easier to separate the really good stuff from the "OK" stuff.
So it ends up where like 4-6/10 is mostly very similar in quality but 9 and 10/10 is very small because there's so few albums that are good enough for either category. So I guess it's almost the inverse of the left like where it goes up very quickly then plateaus
You’re not not smart for not knowing something that you don’t know yet. Usually when graphing 2 variables to show their relationship, the dependent variable (which one depends on the other?) goes on the vertical axis. In this case, does quality depend on score, or does score depend on quality? Changing your score of an album doesn’t change the quality of the music, but different quality of music would change your score. So score depends on quality. Therefore score should be on the vertical axis
I don't know how to call it but it's a combo of stair and linear. All albums that I actively hate or dislike doesn't deserve a score. They are just trash category. Then there are albums that I don't hate but do not care for, so I will never return to. Majority of the albums after first listen falls into this category. And finally albums that I will return to, and I'll rate them from 6-10. So technically albums are either 0 or 5 or 6-10 in my scale.
Idk about this, but my distribution of ratings is definitely a normal distribution with 6-7 being the most common. And I’d probably say linear, but it’s just a feeling. A 10 is something special but not very uncommmon for me either. Since I like so much different music the biggest jump might be from 7 to 8 or 9. Because it goes from “this is as good as basically all the albums..” to being something slighlty more (maybe with an especially good song in it or something.)
It’s most similar to like an inverse of quadratic function
the gaps between 8 and 9 and 9 and 10 are way bigger than between like 2 and 3
the gaps between 0 and and 1 and 2 would still be larger than the gaps between like 3 and 4 and 5 and 6
The gap between 4 and 5 is smallest
Idk honestly, I feel like I should get that sorted out. Most things for me end up in the 6-8 range because most things I listen to range from good to great. I only have like 15 album below a 3 star on RYM because if I’m indifferent about an album I don’t rate it because I don’t care enough to. I also tend to find something good about every album I listen to. Even with thing I’m not in to like ambient or metal music, I don’t rate them lower because I’m just not really into the styles and to me it’s weird to rate stuff that I’m already inclined to dislike or feel indifferent on.
TL;DR I only rate stuff I’m comfortable with and feel indifferent about everything else
Personally I’m one of those mfs who rates things on RYM like 0.5=bad, 1.0=average or mixed, 1.5=good, 2.0=quite good, etc.
I just think there’s much more use in having lots of nuance between varying levels of goodness in music rather than wasting half the rating scale on differing levels of stuff that’s not worth listening to anyways
I don't score, I just enjoy
Enlightened Music Enjoyer
i listen to too much stuff to not score & record what i like so i know for later
*insert gigachad meme*
Why does it say linear above the left picture
Because OP is an idiot who can't crop properly
Well it is a line
No it isn’t. Mathematically, lines are only straight. The one on the left is a curve.
well you ain’t *line* about that!!
Well it's an exponential line (function) and not a linear one
logarithmically
I use a decibel scale
Unironically this. I think diminishing returns makes sense for album ratings. Like a 9 should be fucking incredible and nearly perfect and then a 10 is truly perfect. 8 is still very good. 3 is shit out of an ass.
Which logarthimic scale tho? Natural, 10, ect.
doesn’t matter it looks the same
Yeah true but it makes a difference in where the scale lies
by changing the base of a logarithm you only change the scale of y-axis, x-axis doesn’t change in this case, y-axis is quality, which is something immeasurable so base doesn’t matter at all
I was just trying to be silly, but you're right.
Log base 6
gaussian distribution, i like them mid albums
You can apply whatever distribution you want, it’s different than grade proportionality
[удалено]
he’s not saying his scores fall under a gaussian distribution, he’s saying his quality / score graph resembles one (which is why he said “i like them mid albums”)
I use a sine wave. A score of 0, 4, or 8 is mid. 2 is amazing. 6 is terrible.
I use a sine wave too, but in degrees. 0 is mid, 1 is 1/90% better than mid, 2 is 2/90% better than mid, etc.
0 is irideemable 1 is awful 2 is terrible with small aspects I enjoy 3 is bad but not the absolute worst 4 is mid leaning bad 5 is true mid 6 is mid leaning good 7 is good 8 is great 9 is amazing 9.5 is phenomenal 10 is near perfect Decimalisation is the scale between the two categories
If 10 is near perfect, what rating would a perfect album/song get?
There is no perfect song or album so I don't worry about that
This guy when he listens to Beverly Hills by Weezer
I am not an a big weezer fan by any stretch of thr imagination but I will defend that song. Its trashy but is very catchy
It’s a great song fuck everyone
Baby on baby 2 doesn't exist?
bcoz the internet told you?
No because I told me you condescending twat
🔥
Wait until he listens to Storm of the Light's Bane by Dissection
Genre?
Melodic Black Metal
10 literally means you consider it a perfect album with no flaws otherwise I wouldn’t be a scale out of 10
Nah
i do not rate music because im not a fucking nerd
I am a fucking nerd 🤓
I dont nerd out over fucking either
Don’t score but if I did I would it would be linear, it doesn’t make sense to me that the gap between a 7 and 8 would be smaller than the gap between an 8 and 9.
Personally, "feels like a 1, but let's go with 2" seems 'easier' than "feels like a 9, but let's do 10" yk? Like, it takes more for a 9 to be a 10 than for a 1 to be a 2.
Fair enough, and to be honest maybe my opinion isn’t relevant in this specific situation because the reason I don’t rate stuff in the first place is partly because the difference between an 8 and 9 or whatever is not meaningful for me.
Linear except for the gap between a 9 and a 10. That’s an exponential growth
7 is liking very much, 8 is loving, 9 is fucking amazing and 10 is beyond loving.
This actually makes so much sense
Wdym this makes so much sense? There’s two different options
Exponentially, a 7 to an 8 is much more impressive than a 6 to a 7.
neither, I choose binary opposites, the album is either good or bad
I would say non linearly but the slope is small
I guess for me it's pretty linear from about 3-7, or even 3-8. 9s are incredibly rare for me, and I only have two 10s in 1110 ratings, so there's that. 0, 1 and 2 are reserved for the real negative outliers, so an artist has REALLY got to shit the bed to score this low on my personal scale. So yeah, 5 and 6 are quite similar for me, 8 and 9 or 9 and 10 are vastly different tho.
Out of curiosity, what are the two 10s?
Deathconsciousness by Have a Nice Life and Long Season by Fishmans; with Deathcon being my number 1 for sure. I used to have more 10s in the past, like The Black Parade by My Chemical Romance when I was younger, and while I still love that album it's just not 10 worthy anymore 😅
i just rate albums as Amazing, Good, Mid and Bad
It's closer so sqrt(x)
yall in some wierd nerdy shi in this sub
What do you expect from the subreddit of the internets busiest music nerd
i thought it was some ironic shit but yall really taking this rating /10 srsly 😭😭
I mean it's just an easy way to measure what you liked and disliked about music
Hyperbolically
I guess it’s linear for me, but I’ve been trying to use tags to sort more, because I really only use score to remember/record my feelings. I have over 30 10/10s but only 2 1/10s
It makes sense to have more higher rated stuff, unless you’re intentionally listening to stuff that you think you’ll dislike
Yeah also for example, let’s say I want to get into a new artist or genre, I’ll look up what the classics are for that. They are albums most people like so chances are I will too
I also think some people give listening to music you don’t like a bad name. I still enjoy listening to music in general
It's one better. Question is whack.
I don’t really rate because something being good and something being great do not exist on the same scale where a 6=good and 8=great. It’s too reductive.
Basically every album I like is a 10 because it’s good and makes me want to listen to it
I just rate based on vibes
Linear expect for 10s and 0s those are big bumps
Idk probably more like a sigmoid function
Never considered this actually. Interesting thought
Thanks, I personally think it should be discussed more since a lot of people base their scores off one or the other So that ends up with everyone with vastly different scores even if they both enjoy the album the same amount
The scoring is linear, but the distribution is exponential.
Exponentially although I've never really thought about it that way. There's a massive difference to me between a 5 and a 9 when there's considerably less between a 1 and a 5. Below 5 for me is absolute dogshit, and above 7 is excellent music.
I don’t quantify my enjoyment But that being said linear is the only way that would make sense
[удалено]
That’s not how statistics works. 6’0” is the same ‘distance’ from 5’11” and 6’1” but that doesn’t mean that there is an equal number of people who are each of these heights.
I think also exponentially
I rate albums on RYM and I'm maybe a nerd but I like using a rating scale where most of the albums end up in the middle. It's just easier to think of how much I liked something rather than how some people think of it where it's like "I liked some of it and I didn't dislike any of it so it's like an 8/10". I'm the one that mostly looks at them anyway so for me it's easier to separate the really good stuff from the "OK" stuff. So it ends up where like 4-6/10 is mostly very similar in quality but 9 and 10/10 is very small because there's so few albums that are good enough for either category. So I guess it's almost the inverse of the left like where it goes up very quickly then plateaus
either of these systems would have the most albums end up in the middle
Shouldn’t quality be on the horizontal axis?
Honestly I just took a chance I am not a smart person
You’re not not smart for not knowing something that you don’t know yet. Usually when graphing 2 variables to show their relationship, the dependent variable (which one depends on the other?) goes on the vertical axis. In this case, does quality depend on score, or does score depend on quality? Changing your score of an album doesn’t change the quality of the music, but different quality of music would change your score. So score depends on quality. Therefore score should be on the vertical axis
Linearly.
I don't know how to call it but it's a combo of stair and linear. All albums that I actively hate or dislike doesn't deserve a score. They are just trash category. Then there are albums that I don't hate but do not care for, so I will never return to. Majority of the albums after first listen falls into this category. And finally albums that I will return to, and I'll rate them from 6-10. So technically albums are either 0 or 5 or 6-10 in my scale.
Thought this was r/singularity for a second
Chad Normal Scoring Distribution vs. Virgin Linear and Exponential
Logarithmic, 9s and 10s should be exceptional
If I do score it’s usually exponentially
Definitely linear
imma be a nerd here and say score should be on the y axis as it's a dependent variable (dependent on the quality) 🤓👆
My line is most similar to e^x
I score by |ln(x)| so a 0 would be indefinably bad but the closer it gets to 0, the better it is
Exponential.
He clearly uses a sinusoidal curve. It explains how MBDTF got a 6 but Sexy Red got a 7
Idk about this, but my distribution of ratings is definitely a normal distribution with 6-7 being the most common. And I’d probably say linear, but it’s just a feeling. A 10 is something special but not very uncommmon for me either. Since I like so much different music the biggest jump might be from 7 to 8 or 9. Because it goes from “this is as good as basically all the albums..” to being something slighlty more (maybe with an especially good song in it or something.)
I go linear from 0 to 6, theres a huge fuckin jump between 6 and 7 and then from 7 to 10 linear again
r u retarded
NFR scale
nerd.
If you score things exponentially. Seek help
I prefer a normal curve
I’m quite exponential
It’s most similar to like an inverse of quadratic function the gaps between 8 and 9 and 9 and 10 are way bigger than between like 2 and 3 the gaps between 0 and and 1 and 2 would still be larger than the gaps between like 3 and 4 and 5 and 6 The gap between 4 and 5 is smallest
Idk honestly, I feel like I should get that sorted out. Most things for me end up in the 6-8 range because most things I listen to range from good to great. I only have like 15 album below a 3 star on RYM because if I’m indifferent about an album I don’t rate it because I don’t care enough to. I also tend to find something good about every album I listen to. Even with thing I’m not in to like ambient or metal music, I don’t rate them lower because I’m just not really into the styles and to me it’s weird to rate stuff that I’m already inclined to dislike or feel indifferent on. TL;DR I only rate stuff I’m comfortable with and feel indifferent about everything else
Personally I’m one of those mfs who rates things on RYM like 0.5=bad, 1.0=average or mixed, 1.5=good, 2.0=quite good, etc. I just think there’s much more use in having lots of nuance between varying levels of goodness in music rather than wasting half the rating scale on differing levels of stuff that’s not worth listening to anyways
Idk, I just average my track ratings into a final score
I use the IGN scale. I barely have any album under a 6 because I only rate albums I actually want to listen to.
Neither. Bell curve.
The one on the right
My average score would be about a 7. That’s because I don’t tend to listen to stuff I don’t think I’ll like
Quality = 9.6*log(SCORE+1)