# Listening Rating System



## 20centrfuge (Apr 13, 2007)

In participating in listening groups I have become aware of our friend *Art Rock's rating system - the Artrockometer.* While this type of system doesn't fit everyone's style, I admire it because it is a systematic way of keeping track of music that has made a personal impact.

I know that I have a list of my own favorites that I keep on my computer for easy reference. I try to keep track of important recordings as well. At times it helps me analyze where my tastes lie and to see what areas of the repertoire I have neglected. It is also handy when people ask for recommendations or when I'm considering making a recording purchase. Perhaps some of you have similar systems.

The purpose of this little thread is to ask:

*1) Do you have any system to keep track of (or evaluate) music that is important to you? If so, what is it?

2) If you were to come up with a rating system, what would it be like? *

Art Rock's scale is as follows:

6/6 "hors concours", one of about 100 most favourite compositions.
5/6 "essential", a must-have for my CD collection.
4/6 "important", I really like to have it in my CD collection.
3/6 "good to have", OK for my CD collection, no big deal if not.
2/6 "not required", I don't need this.
1/6 "no thanks", I really prefer not to hear this.

I ask that everyone keep this respectful!


----------



## D Smith (Sep 13, 2014)

I have most of my music in iTunes and use the 5 star rating system included. But when there is that extra special album I add the 'Love' symbol to the 5 stars, so this corresponds to Art Rock's system of 1-6 I guess. The description of each category is also great except for 1/6; instead of "no thanks" I'd say "never again!"


----------



## Guest002 (Feb 19, 2020)

1) to keep track of music that's important to me, I scrobble most things I play to Last.fm. That lets me build up a listening history (currently, nearly everything I've listened to since 2008, so 12+ years). I can then see who makes my personal 'top 10' -i.e., whose music I keep on playing a lot. I can also see who I keep overlooking. For the past year or so, I've been deliberately trying to listen to people who are *not* in my top 10, so that my 'long tail' shrinks a bit, and I'm "forced" to listen to the composers-less-travelled.

2). I think rating works is a dubious practice, because what I rate something today is liable to be re-rated up or down tomorrow! I think a long-term 'trendometer' (such as Last.fm) will show you what you have found most compelling over time. You can't argue with those sorts of objective facts. Whether that makes a piece compelling for someone else is an entirely different kettle of fish, of course!

The only thing I'd say about using Last.fm (or equivalent services) is: your metadata has to be spot-on, otherwise your statistics get filled up with completely meaningless stuff. You'll find, one day, for example, that the Vienna Philharmonic is your favourite "artist", which is somewhat less than helpful when you're wondering which _composer's_ work to listen to next.


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

AbsolutelyBaching said:


> I think rating works is a dubious practice, because what I rate something today is liable to be re-rated up or down tomorrow!


Agreed, but for me that would be bottom of one rating to the top of the rating under it or vice versa. Of course, there's a continuum of appreciation which is artificially cut into tiers, so plenty of works will hover on the borders of tiers. For the same reason, there's still a clear distinction between top and bottom of any tier.



> Whether that makes a piece compelling for someone else is an entirely different kettle of fish, of course!


Absolutely. A system like this is 100% subjective, and gives no guarantees how others hear it, let alone where it should rank "objectively" for those who believe there's such a thing.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Despite having a terrible memory I do remember what I thought of most music that I have listened to. I often do not remember so clearly why I like/dislike something or details of a performance. Of course, I do sometimes change my mind but I when I do I know I am doing so!

The only rating system I could use would be very big blocks - extraordinarily wonderful; wonderful; good music; meh and urgh - but I do think it can be difficult comparing music from different eras.


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

I don't have any system.

If I did, I imagine it would look like:

1) sub-par
2) decent
3) good
4) excellent
5) superb
6) transcendent


----------



## Allegro Con Brio (Jan 3, 2020)

Whenever I first hear a new work, I occasionally rate it on a scale of 1-5 or 1-10, but the problem is that this is most likely not my final impression of the work. I view the process of musical discovery as a continuous journey in which reevaluation is key, so the temptation to simply rate something and shove it aside would be too great for me if I had a personal scale that I used frequently.


----------



## Fabulin (Jun 10, 2019)

I used to do that years ago, but ever since I started actually studying music, and developed a good memory for it, I simply remember all the pieces that are good enough for mood listening, and draw others into the player only when I want to study a specific detail. It helps that everything I have is digital, and can be scrolled through very fast. Also, since everything is digital, it's easy to delete all unnecessary tracks.

But I remember Beethoven's 5th being a five-star with 4 honours, the only in its tier, back when I rated pieces.

I think it went like this:
* bad. Kept just in case, and skipped on playlists
** rather bad, but is ok if on a playlist
*** fine even on its own
**** good, but second tier
***** perfectly enjoyable
*****1 perfectly enjoyable and of high quality
*****2 perfectly enjoyable and of very high quality
*****3 perfectly enjoyable and great even among high quality pieces
*****4 tytyty dym

I experimented with something like 5/10 for "perfectly enjoyable", but it did not fit my vision to give the greatest pop / rock songs a mere 5/10. I felt it was more like classical composers going an extra mile than non-classical music being bad.


----------



## BrahmsWasAGreatMelodist (Jan 13, 2019)

Allegro Con Brio said:


> Whenever I first hear a new work, I occasionally rate it on a scale of 1-5 or 1-10, but the problem is that this is most likely not my final impression of the work. I view the process of musical discovery as a continuous journey in which reevaluation is key, so the temptation to simply rate something and shove it aside would be too great for me if I had a personal scale that I used frequently.


The next step is to discard "evaluation" entirely.


----------



## MarkW (Feb 16, 2015)

My only system is: Have I ever listened to it a lot? Has that frequency changed over time? Do I feel like listening to it now? That tells me everything. 

In terms of rating composers, my rough estimation goes: If that composer were to suddenly cease to exist, how many of his/her works would I really miss?


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

MarkW said:


> In terms of rating composers, my rough estimation goes: If that composer were to suddenly cease to exist, how many of his/her works would I really miss?


That sounds excellent to me.


----------



## larold (Jul 20, 2017)

_Do you have any system to keep track of (or evaluate) music that is important to you? If so, what is it?_

If I hear, learn about, or find something I don't know I find attractive or think I may like I will either listen to sound bytes online or see if it is posted on YouTube. If so I'll listen to it; if I get all the way through it and like it I may search for a recording and read reviews of recordings. I will look to see if any of my favorite conductors recorded it.

I have no scoring for composers, musical pieces or recordings in my collection. If they are in my collection I either want to hear them again and/or I always want to have a copy available to me in case I want to hear it again while above ground.

If I found music bland or uninteresting it didn't enter my collection.


----------



## Knorf (Jan 16, 2020)

For me, with recordings think it's something like:

A. Gotta have it.
B. Happy to have it, or would be, but could do without. 
C. Don't need it or want it.
F. Would feel ashamed if someone saw I had it.


----------



## 20centrfuge (Apr 13, 2007)

Mine would be:

1. I don’t get it or it doesn’t do anything for me
2. Not bad
3. I like it
4. I really like it
5. Reaches the status of a favorite
6. The pantheon of works that I adore


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

A, B, C, D, F, with + or - as needed.


----------



## 20centrfuge (Apr 13, 2007)

Knorf said:


> For me, with recordings think it's something like:
> 
> F. Would feel ashamed if someone saw I had it.


:lol::lol: and other characters equaling 15


----------



## zxxyxxz (Apr 14, 2020)

My rating system is as follows:

A* - candidate for one of the best things ever written. Always happy to hear the work.

A - great work, always happy to hear it but something always seems to hold it back from true greatness.

B - good work, usually happy to hear it but my mood will play more of a part in my enjoyment. On some days I may be less forgiving of things about it that drive me nuts.

C - meh. I don't like it, I don't hate it.

D - a bad work. I actively dislike, getting through is a hard unenjoyable slog.

U - candidate for worst thing ever written. 

I don't rate recordings, however a good recording can cause a change in rating. And bad recordings in my collection get ignored or revisited as curios.


----------

