Teenbeat Mayhem launch date......

[troggy]

vinyl01 - For what it's worth, I agree with you about "My Buddy Sin". Pretty sure that I even had a copy of it at one time. I might give it a 3 on a good day.

 

[vinyl01]

Thanks troggy, but if Chas Kit or anyone else likes it that much it's ok with me. I relate this a little like food...everyone has different tastes there too, but if you do not like something you don't have to eat it, so that cut will not be on my plate/play list.

Mike, why didn't you round up on the 1.9 to 2? Surely there was enough space for that, no?

 

[MopTopMike]

Because 1.9 is not mathematically the same value as 2.0

 

[vinyl01]

It's funny that you are complaining about the ratings, yet in your comment you give the reason why they were necessary - the fact is that most of these songs are not able to be heard easily. Imagine if the book had gone out without ratings as was the original plan. Then Mike would be flooded with complaints from people saying there should have been a rating system.

Where in my statement did I say the rating were necessary? I would be happier without the ratings and just go with the descriptions given even though some that I noticed seem not to match to me. I think by giving every 45 in the book a rating opened this up by using a select group of collectors to critique them insinuating this is a true rating to the reader.

 

[vinyl01]

Because 1.9 is not mathematically the same value as 2.0

Wow, I did no know this was a math book. If you are really that picky why didn't you put the actual rating down to the one thousandth as you calculated it? Then it would be more understandable.

 

[MopTopMike]

Complain, complain...write your own book!
If you bothered to read what I have been saying in both threads, you would understand why.

 

[vinyl01]

I don't remember those threads, but I do remember you saying you were welcoming all comment good or bad and you would not take it personally. It sounds like you are now by mine.

If I had all the info I would write my own book, but I don't.

 

[pfft]

vinyl01, you should buy one of these:

Voila - all ratings gone!

 

[pfft]

I think by giving every 45 in the book a rating opened this up by using a select group of collectors to critique them insinuating this is a true rating to the reader.

Crazy talk.

 

[pfft]

It now seems that most of the complaints are from people who want their own favorites to be rated higher than the number shown. Newsflash: one person does not a consensus make. The only people makin' a fuss are a handful of G45 folks. No one else takes an issue.

I don't think anyone's actually complaining about the ratings, they (I) just want to express their disagreement, which I don't see a problem with. It makes for interesting reading.

 

[vinyl01]

I'm going to try to ignore the ratings and go by the descriptions given if I don't know the record.

 

[troggy]

I don't think anyone's actually complaining about the ratings, they (I) just want to express their disagreement, which I don't see a problem with. It makes for interesting reading.

Yeah, I'd never try and insinuate that the ratings are wrong, merely that I have a conflicting opinion on some of them. There are quite a few songs that I'd have rated higher and quite a few that I'd have rated lower. That's neither here nor there, really. I still wouldn't be afraid to use the ratings as a guide in most cases.

 

[MopTopMike]

I don't mean to be 'mean' but if a point of view is not a reasonable / valid one (i.e, the book would be better without ratings) then it is pretty pointless to continue the discussion. The reason there is disagreement on Vinyl 01's behalf is that a few songs he likes are rated too low, and those he doesn't like are too high. What he fails to understand is that a consensus is a true, valid representation of a song's musical quality.
I knew people would find the ratings more on the conservative side, and that personal favorites might not meet the shown result. But, that is how a consensus vote works. There is no hidden agenda or bias against certain songs, which is what Vinyl 01 implies because his favorites are maligned (in his mind).

 

[vinyl01]

Of course It's in my mind where my tastes differ from the judges. I said before that is my own opinion/tastes. Yes, I disagree with some of the ratings I mentioned, but not all of them. I just took a small sample. When a rating system of 1 to 10 is used and something is given a 1 or 3 it leads me to believe that it is not a good one. For example, if you see a rating like that in the paper of a movie you would be very reluctant to go see it. That's my take on it.

I think it was a mistake to drop the decimal points off in effect rounding every one down. The rating of a 1 for the Distant Cousins is misleading when it was actually a 1.9 which is almost double. Why did you decide not to round up, but to round down? I find it hard to believe that there wan not enough space to show the whole rating.

 

[vinyl01]

I think a better comparison is if a guy on ebay rated/graded his record as a One I doubt anyone would buy it.

 

[Michael W]

Yeah, it's such a huge difference between 1 and 2 ...

 

[MopTopMike]

Sigh..To reply, once and for all:

1 - there was not enough page space to show the decimal rating for every single song. I feel it is more important to have a clear and crisp layout design that is uncluttered. As the waxidermy bro's would tell you: DEAL.
2 - 1.9 tagged as a 1 is not "rounding down". The numeric value to left of the decimal is the relevant / important value. The decimal values helped me to mathematically sort all of the songs for the Top 1000 as well as the entire list down to #14,800 or thereabouts.
3 - rounding up a calculated decimal amount is a manipulation not representative of the mathematical result.
4

When a rating system of 1 to 10 is used and something is given a 1 or 3 it leads me to believe that it is not a good one. For example, if you see a rating like that in the paper of a movie you would be very reluctant to go see it. That's my take on it.

Depends on what you think is "not good". TBM clearly spells out the musical impact value, or song strength - a 2 or 3 rating is considered "average". "Not good" would denote a borderline 1 rating for a song. And this, once again, is important - the ratings are a consensus, derived from a dozen or so participants, and not the view of one person.
5 - If you do not listen to any song / 45 before you buy it, then you buy it and do not like it based upon the information given in this book, you have no one to blame but yourself. The book is a guide. If someone doesn't want to be bothered listening to a song as a 1, that is their choice. Maybe there are songs shown as a 1 that some people will like, some songs shown as a 6 that some people will not like. That's life, dude. The consensus rests, your honor...

 

[Lee de Parade]

I will show this discussion for my wife and she will laugh and then smack me over the face with a wooden spoon. This is exactly why I creep her out!

After just checking the rates on the comps (see thread Shiver Me TBMbers) I could start to predict what rating the songs would be given. I might've been surprised some times, but only like 5 times in a hundred.
The rating fucking ROCKS and if there'd be none, that would've SERIOUSLY SUCKED!

Especially if you like me suffer from a Needtos Hearius decease.

 

[Lee de Parade]

"Decimal rating" is a synonym for "being-total-anal".

 

[vinyl01]

If making a 1.9 to a 1 is not rounding down I don't know what is. So, on all the rating of ''10'' every member gave it a ''10''?

I can deal no problem...just trying to sort this out.

I've been around record collecting long enough to know that there is bias.