Poll

Votes for all entries you feel are important enough to deserve a spot on the list. Don't just vote for shit because you like it, and don't just not vote for shit because you don't like it.

A Night at the Opera - Queen
10 (14.3%)
Ten - Pearl Jam
11 (15.7%)
Avalon - Roxy Music
5 (7.1%)
Paranoid - Black Sabbath
7 (10%)
Ænema - Tool
6 (8.6%)
What A Crying Shame - The Mavericks
2 (2.9%)
Life'll Kill Ya - Warren Zevon
4 (5.7%)
Sailing The Seas Of Cheese - Primus
6 (8.6%)
London Calling - The Clash
11 (15.7%)
Off The Deep End - Weird Al Yakovic
8 (11.4%)

Total Members Voted: 24

Voting closed: August 19, 2012, 04:15:28 PM


Author Topic: 100 Albums to Which You Have to Listen, or All Y'all Need to Hear This!!!  (Read 43483 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline LucasM

  • Ephialtes
  • *****
  • Posts: 7749
  • Liked: 4922
Not a prob on the clarification, D.B..  :)


In prep for future nominations (as it is easier for me to do the 'same thing' for a while than to change from doing one thing to another), I used a program that gives me an expanded directory tree for my iTunes folder (containing most or all of my 500-600 CDs).  I've been whittling albums off of it off and on as I get energy.  I've done this partly by just checking my iTunes ratings for the tunes on each album: if there's more than one or two 'average' tunes on it, the album is disqualified for my nominating it.  But so far I still have a LOT I'd want to nominate, which I'll have to prioritize in order to come up with roughly the 'top 20-25' as that may be the max number of rounds here, since it seems roughly 4-5 albums stand out enough in any given round to make the final list.
To dispel some of the misconceptions about head injuries you have developed from watching movies and TV, I wrote this: ...Some Information on Head Injury Effects


Offline Asbestos Bill

  • Not Hurt By Pain
  • ******
  • Posts: 1961
  • Liked: 466
  • Are YOU dedoodaydolah?
    • QuipTracks
if there's more than one or two 'average' tunes on it, the album is disqualified for my nominating it.

I would disagree with this, but I know that my rating system is heavily skewed. My 2-star tracks are still good songs, and I give extremely few 5-star ratings. Nevertheless, I will say that a song can be better in the context of the album than it is on its own.


Offline Mrs. Dick Courier

  • The FBI Pays Me to Surf
  • *
  • Posts: 2096
  • Liked: 1204
  • keeping an eye on the sammich since 1993
Got out my Automatic for the People CD to listen to this weekend.  Still as awesome as ever.

I had totally forgotten about the song "Drive" on the CD though.  I remembered loving the video, black and white, and the crowd surfing.  One of the best videos I've ever seen.
Opticians are easy on the eyes


Offline Asbestos Bill

  • Not Hurt By Pain
  • ******
  • Posts: 1961
  • Liked: 466
  • Are YOU dedoodaydolah?
    • QuipTracks
Got out my Automatic for the People CD to listen to this weekend.  Still as awesome as ever.

I had totally forgotten about the song "Drive" on the CD though.  I remembered loving the video, black and white, and the crowd surfing.  One of the best videos I've ever seen.

I'm not really an REM fan ("UP" is my favorite album), but there are several songs I like on each of their other releases. Drive is probably my favorite.


Offline TheUnabeefer

  • Bilbo Baggins Balladeer
  • ******
  • Posts: 4211
  • Liked: 937
  • I am a flying cow... worship me or DIE!!!
    • The Unabeefer Beefs
I may be mistaken, but it's possible that D.B. meant 'hold off until round TWO is done before sending in noms for round four'.  [i.e. so that people aren't nominating two or more rounds into the future, but so there's enough for the next round that 'takes over' from the current one].

Yes. Thanks for clarifying that, Lucas.

It's just how we're doing it now, Beef. Round three is all ready to go, but until the poll for round three goes up, hold off on round four nominations.

Oh I've BEEN holding off.  I wasn't nominating anything, just pointing out that your post didn't make any sense with the whole "When round three is over, then you can nominate for four" thing...  This IS a web forum, after all, and if you can't point out the errors in peoples' posts, what CAN you do?! ;)
...and there he was, reigning supreme at number two.  The One... The Only... The Unabeefer.



Offline Space version 2.0

  • Not Hurt By Pain
  • ******
  • Posts: 1037
  • Liked: 719

Moving Pictures requires further listening to form an opinion. I don't remember if I voted for it or not, but I listened to it two or three times, and I don't remember anything about it.

:'(


Offline LucasM

  • Ephialtes
  • *****
  • Posts: 7749
  • Liked: 4922
if there's more than one or two 'average' tunes on it, the album is disqualified for my nominating it.

I would disagree with this, but I know that my rating system is heavily skewed. My 2-star tracks are still good songs, and I give extremely few 5-star ratings. Nevertheless, I will say that a song can be better in the context of the album than it is on its own.

For me, while it is true that context can 'improve' the relative quality of a tune, I did this simply because of the sheer volume of music I have to consider.  Currently iTunes says I have 6167 songs, which, if played continuously, would play for 21.2 days.  So I've done some 'pruning' of less-than-stellar music from my collection [for clarity's sake: the 21.2 days measure was what was left AFTER the purge of nearly 1000 tunes].

For me, I use the star-system in my iPod like this:
  • 1-star = tunes to delete the next time that I synch the thing
  • 2-star = tunes that are questionable as to whether they are worth listening to, and that I need to focus on them and listen to them to see if I want them to remain [these, after focused listening, basically either become 1-star or 3-star]  2-star are also tunes that I likely wouldn't bother turning off the radio for if I ever listened to the radio... so they are 'average' tunes, basically.
  • 3-star = good enough to be worth the time to listen to, given I've got over 20 days worth of music
  • 4-star = exceptional music, but not quite 'there'
  • 5-star = 'there' ;)   These tunes must meet at least one of the following three criteria for me (listed in reverse order of which would guarantee them a 5-star rating [i.e. criteria 3 is an instant '5*', criteria 1 gets a bit of thought first]).  1. They must prompt a need to move in some fashion to ‘keep up’ with what they evoke (more than ‘tapping one’s feet’).  2. They must elicit a STRONG emotional reaction (usually positive, even ecstatic, though ‘positive’ wasn’t required if they were evocative enough).  3. They must have resulted - at some point - in goose bumps &/or tears because of how compelling they are.  This - for me - is basically a spiritual criteria (as - at these points - with closed eyes I often no longer feel connected to my body I am 'in' the music so much).

So for this list, I'm looking at CDs that pretty much have '4' and '5' scores throughout, with rare exception.  Simply because there would otherwise be far too many to want to nominate.  I have over three days worth of '5' tunes, and over 10 days of '4's.  I'm basically looking for where the two intersect within specific albums. :)

But - and you are right - I may have stated that a little too strong: I may let one or two through depending on just how good a 'unit' the album as a whole is.  If the whole album is astonishing, I'll let it slide.  But my priority is to try to find things that only fit the 4+5 star criteria.  [I seem to recall there only being a couple CDs where they were 'all 5s' when I went through and scored them all.]

[[Again: this thread could kill me if I let it. :P ]]
« Last Edit: July 23, 2012, 07:29:06 PM by LucasM »
To dispel some of the misconceptions about head injuries you have developed from watching movies and TV, I wrote this: ...Some Information on Head Injury Effects


Offline D.B. Barnes

  • Grendel's Mom
  • ***
  • Posts: 9952
  • Liked: 6621
  • "AMIRITE?!?"
Okay, the winners from round two are as follows:

Who's Next - The Who
Axis: Bold As Love - The Jimi Hendrix Experience
Nevermind - Nirvana
Q: Are We Not Men? A: We Are Devo! - Devo
True Stories - Talking Heads


All received more that 33% of the vote.

New poll is up! Feel free to get those round four nominations in.
VIVA IL ESORDIO DEL DIABETE ADULTO DUCE!!!


Offline Asbestos Bill

  • Not Hurt By Pain
  • ******
  • Posts: 1961
  • Liked: 466
  • Are YOU dedoodaydolah?
    • QuipTracks
All received more that 33% of the vote.

Does this mean that voting for all of the entries does...nothing? Is my math right there? Would that actually make it harder for each of them to place?

Math is not my forté, so someone who knows more, please jump in and correct me if I'm on the wrong track.


Offline D.B. Barnes

  • Grendel's Mom
  • ***
  • Posts: 9952
  • Liked: 6621
  • "AMIRITE?!?"
All received more that 33% of the vote.

Does this mean that voting for all of the entries does...nothing? Is my math right there? Would that actually make it harder for each of them to place?

Math is not my forté, so someone who knows more, please jump in and correct me if I'm on the wrong track.

Maybe I put that wrong in saying "33% of the vote." Winners are voted for by at least of third of the voters.

Does anybody not understand what constitutes a winner?
VIVA IL ESORDIO DEL DIABETE ADULTO DUCE!!!


Offline Tripe

  • Stars in Musicals
  • *
  • Posts: 41553
  • Liked: 9932
  • Very dapper
    • Nick Rowley, Voice Artist
No voting for everything essentially just creates a flat line

Sam votes for all 10, result each gets 10% of the total votes (10).
Ella also votes for all 10, result, each has 10% of the total votes (20).
Cal votes for 6, result six of those have 11.3% of the total votes while four have 7.7% of the total votes (26)
Medea votes for 6 and so on and so forth.

Voting for all of them doesn't really do anything useful.

EDIT: 11.3 not 11.6 sorry. Rounding obviously.
« Last Edit: July 25, 2012, 12:19:24 PM by Tripe H. Redux »


Offline TheUnabeefer

  • Bilbo Baggins Balladeer
  • ******
  • Posts: 4211
  • Liked: 937
  • I am a flying cow... worship me or DIE!!!
    • The Unabeefer Beefs
All received more that 33% of the vote.

Does this mean that voting for all of the entries does...nothing? Is my math right there? Would that actually make it harder for each of them to place?

Math is not my forté, so someone who knows more, please jump in and correct me if I'm on the wrong track.

Maybe I put that wrong in saying "33% of the vote." Winners are voted for by at least of third of the voters.

Does anybody not understand what constitutes a winner?

Winner [win-ner] (n) - That which is not a loser; Charlie Sheen. (ant. Loser - See "Beck")
...and there he was, reigning supreme at number two.  The One... The Only... The Unabeefer.



Offline Asbestos Bill

  • Not Hurt By Pain
  • ******
  • Posts: 1961
  • Liked: 466
  • Are YOU dedoodaydolah?
    • QuipTracks
Winners are voted for by at least of third of the voters.

That makes sense. For some reason I thought you could only see the number of votes, not voters.


Offline LucasM

  • Ephialtes
  • *****
  • Posts: 7749
  • Liked: 4922
With the math-intensive example given, I think that confuses what D.B. is saying.  If I understand his clarifying statement correctly, if 1/3 of people who voted voted for something, then it was a 'win'.  How many votes each person cast for how many albums is irrelevant (i.e. it is not % of votes cast, it is 33.33% of voters voting).

i.e. if 24 people vote in a round, then anything getting =/> 1/3 of 24 (or 8 ) votes gets in the list
      if only 18 people vote, than something would have to get =/> 1/3 of 18 (or 6) votes to get on the list

With that, as long as 1/3 of the people voting voted for any given album, it would be in, whether they voted for all 10 or just 1 album.  So, while voting for all 10 increases the likelihood all 10 would be winners, voting for less than 10 lowers the likelihood that those not voted will get in.

Is that it, D.B.?
To dispel some of the misconceptions about head injuries you have developed from watching movies and TV, I wrote this: ...Some Information on Head Injury Effects


Offline D.B. Barnes

  • Grendel's Mom
  • ***
  • Posts: 9952
  • Liked: 6621
  • "AMIRITE?!?"
With the math-intensive example given, I think that confuses what D.B. is saying.  If I understand his clarifying statement correctly, if 1/3 of people who voted voted for something, then it was a 'win'.  How many votes each person cast for how many albums is irrelevant (i.e. it is not % of votes cast, it is 33.33% of voters voting).

i.e. if 24 people vote in a round, then anything getting =/> 1/3 of 24 (or 8 ) votes gets in the list
      if only 18 people vote, than something would have to get =/> 1/3 of 18 (or 6) votes to get on the list

With that, as long as 1/3 of the people voting voted for any given album, it would be in, whether they voted for all 10 or just 1 album.  So, while voting for all 10 increases the likelihood all 10 would be winners, voting for less than 10 lowers the likelihood that those not voted will get in.

Is that it, D.B.?

That is correct. Thanks again for clarifying. I should probably just hire you to write posts where I need to explain shit. I sure hope you don't charge by the word, though.  ;)
VIVA IL ESORDIO DEL DIABETE ADULTO DUCE!!!