Hey guys, I have a big issue. I really, really like a lot of music. Like, so many albums I can come to and be in euphoria. It's just perfect. But the problem is my curve is too top heavy. I've even had to make 6, 7, and 8 star ratings for albums I get a high too.
So my question is: How do I hate listening to music more?
Other urls found in this thread:
rateyourmusic.com
youtube.com
rateyourmusic.com
twitter.com
Why would you even want to do that?
The most important thing is you found the genre you like the most and you listen to the music you like, who cares about rym
Oh come on, OP. Don't even say that. You enjoy music, that's a wonderful thing! You shouldn't wish for that to change.
Leave this board while you can, user
Congrats you just discovered that rating music is a tool for elitist sadsacks
There's nothing wrong with what you're doing
This. Rym is structured in a way to make listening to music less intrinsically enjoyable and encourages the user to unnecessarily rank and compare all the music they enjoy.
Now having said that, i suppose it's possible to try and break down your 5's into 4.5, 4, 3 etc. to differentiate your layers of favoritism, and then move your current 3's and 2.5's down to 1's and 0.5's.
Let me ask you about your 3 stars and worse ratings... what made you give those low ratings? You're currently ranking and differentiating between tiers of enjoyability, why not move those lower scores down to the 1-star level?
Those questions are meant for OPbtw..
I was kinda being sarcastic, but the response is genuinely appreciated. I'm sure music won't get less enjoyable for me anytime soon. ^w^
This is probably what I'm going to do. Then move all the ones above 5 stars into the new 5 star category.
Make 2.5 stars mean euphoria.
Why can't low IQ people understand the concept of curving things?
>tfw you move all your ratings to negative because you want to be edgy and elitist and have a good curve but the site takes it the same as if you were to give 5 stars to everything and removes your weight
Start listening to rap and hip hop
make 10/10 8 star, 9/10 7 star, 8/10 6 star, and 7/10 5 star. or something like that
just be yourself, babe :)
Pushing the bulk of your ratings down regardless of whether or not most music makes you cum is literally pragmatic and useful in several ways.
5.0 - I wouldn't be the same person without it
4.5 - Life-changing
4.0 - I listen to this almost every day
3.5 - Profound
3.0 - "I get a high to it"
2.5 - Euphoria
2.0 - Amazing
1.5 - Very good
1.0 - Good
0.5 - Decent to bad
This allows people to see what's actually important, and it allows you to search your music in rank order by quality even if you're parsing out small differences in good-ness. You (or anyone else) will never need to search your collection for mediocre to bad music so you lose nothing by bulking all of that stuff together.
rateyourmusic.com
OP has 561 five-stars.
It's impossible to listen to 561 albums on regular rotation, especially if you're listening to new music at the same time.
There are likely albums OP has at 5.0 which he hasn't heard in over a year.
OP can easily rank albums by how important they are to him, but he's set on being a pozzed faggot.
>how important they are to him
why would you rate albums on how important they are to you instead of the quality
that makes no fucking sense
Because RYM is a utility and you're not Pitchfork, you narcissistic retard.
I would have taken you seriously but I can't after
>HURR DURR RETARD POZZED FAGGOT
Here lies a big problem with rym at its core. People are rating based on different things. So the aggregate user ratings don't mean anything in the end.
t. pozzed faggot
post hog
If you have more than 25 fives, you are literally gay and probably have HIV.
read sade
I don't read French authors.
read mcafee's twitter
>libertarianism
Some of the most important music to me isn't stuff I can listen to every day. I have to be in a mood to listen to Robbie Basho whereas I listen to Justin Timberlake's Can't Stop the Feeling (inb4 pleb) probably multiple times a day because it gets me going and in a good mood.
Congratulations, you have bad taste.
t. favorite album has a 3.4 or lower
Don't do this.
No I'm just honest about it unlike you.
>please I want to browse through 20 pages of five star ratings when looking at your profile instead of just seeing 4 top albums which I can use for direct recs and then promptly get on with my day
The thing about pop music is that it's ephemeral, there's rarely a pop song that's still appealing 2 years after you get into it. Basically, flavor of the month music gets boring/annoying fast. New stuff comes along to replace it, so you discard the old and basically never listen to it again except for nostalgia purposes. Unless you are a mindless pleb in which case your ratings should reflect it.
That's irrelevant to the point I'm making. Listening to your favorite music on a daily or even routine basis isnt a requirement for it to be a 5 star rating in your eyes.
Listening on a regular basis (i.e. at least once a month) is a requirement for 4.0+ for me. There is no music I listen to every day, I was just giving OP ideas based on his constant euphoria because he seems to be extremely pozzed.
>Listening on a regular basis (i.e. at least once a month) is a requirement for 4.0+ for me.
Yeah, that seems silly to me for certain albums. I could never hear any piece of music again and live a happy life but my 5s would still be 5s, 4s would be 4s, etc.
If an album could disappear from existence and it wouldn't affect you -- newsflash, that album is worthless to you. Worthless = probably not perfect.
Everything in my life could flash from existence and I'd carry on. If I lived in a cave with decent sunlight, warmth and food nearby I'd be content.
Perfection doesn't exist.
Shouldn't most people's curves be like this? Why listen to music you dont like?
based.
the person who uses "pozzed faggot" is probably not a person who would ever be able to understand this.
What I do is rate out of 10 then minus 5 to get the RYM score. So a 7/10 is 2 stars. Makes my curve look patrician.
Earlier you were telling me that you didn't believe me when I said I listen to some music on a regular basis and doing so is connected to my judgement of its relative importance to me.
Now you're telling me your parents could die and you wouldn't care.
>he said mean words so he wouldn't understand being a based rootless cosmopolitan with no loved ones like me
amazingly the best music i've found via rateyourmusic has been looking at one star reviews for albums i love, thinking "wow what an asshole let me see your 5s" and then finding out they have really good 5s.
You realize 3 stars is above average right?
I didn't say I didn't believe you that you listen to it on a regular basis, only that listening to your favorite music on a regular basis isn't a requirement for it to be a 5 star.
I was in the room when my grandpa died and have yet to shed a tear.
>he said mean words so he wouldn't understand being a based rootless cosmopolitan with no loved ones like me
this but unironically
cope more
>only that listening to your favorite music on a regular basis isn't a requirement for it to be a 5 star.
It's a requirement for people with useful and interesting profiles. Not so much for people with 50% of their collection at 5.0 whose profile you'll immediately close-tab out of because there's no utility in looking at their ratings because they say nothing.
>I was in the room when my grandpa died and have yet to shed a tear.
Wow what a stoic, did everyone clap?
>I have no loved ones or connection to my hometown
>cope more
Well, if it makes you feel any better, I already said I was going to make adjustments to my rating system.
>It's a requirement for people with useful and interesting profiles.
My profile is for my own purposes, none of which are to be useful or interesting to strangers on the internet.
I never said that I was a stoic or that it was a good thing. You like to put words in my mouth. I've sincerely questioned whether or not I'm a psychopath numerous times, I've been cruel to pets, had a traumatic childhood, etc. This isn't me posturing, just stating matter of facts.
>My profile is for my own purposes, none of which are to be useful or interesting to strangers on the internet.
Concentrating everything you like into the same category deprives you of the ability to search your own collection by genre and immediately see the highest-priority releases.
>I want to put on some jazz that I know is good but I'm not really sure what
>search own profile for jazz
>sort by rating
>Oh look, 5 albums stand above the result
>This limits the deliberation time and mental processing I have to do in order to make a selection
>Thanks, positive rating scale!
> I've sincerely questioned whether or not I'm a psychopath numerous times, I've been cruel to pets, had a traumatic childhood, etc.
No one cares.
*stand above the rest
I've never argued for a positive rating scale and don't use one. Stop putting words into my mouth. Saying that I don't have to listen to my favorite albums on a consistent basis is not the same thing as saying I rate every album I highly enjoy as a 5. Out of the 1381 ratings I have 206 are 5s. This includes singles and compilations.
You've kept responding up until this point.
And I'd rather go into an album somewhat blind.
>I've never argued for a positive rating scale and don't use one. Stop putting words into my mouth.
That greentext was meant to be a simulated scenario of the utility of what I'm arguing in favor of. You're dropping the ball user.
>Saying that I don't have to listen to my favorite albums on a consistent basis is not the same thing as saying I rate every album I highly enjoy as a 5.
No, but allowing albums to which you don't listen to accumulate in your highest ratings over time without a mechanism of cutting the wheat from the chaff will, in effect, combine the stuff you actually listen to and the stuff you don't listen to into the same category. Which is what I said deprives you of the ability to immediately see releases which you'd be most inclined to hear upon doing a profile search by genre.
I still have yet to see the problem with that. Again, Visions of the Country by Robbie Basho is a desert island choice for me but I haven't heard it in months. I'd rather be in a situation where I actually have time to appreciate it than have it on rotation a the time. Whereas I can put on the Ramones at any time and enjoy it just the same. And I like going into new art blind (new anything, really), it adds to the freshness of the experience.
user we're obviously not going to reach a common ground here, we have extraordinarily different views on art and life. I'm willing to call it a day if you are. If not we can bicker for another hour or so.
Use a positive rating scale. Some people here would call you a pseud for doing it or fucking whatever but as long as your account is a tool you use to catalog music then it doesn't matter.
Instead of tossing everything in the top 2 or 3 slots, have a greater degree of variance with distinguished types of "good."
Alright.
2-3 months would probably be the maximum for me. 4-6 for extreme cases like a very demanding and long classical work. But there aren't any albums I can go half a year without listening to and still consider relevant to my life or that I prefer them over other albums, which is the basis of my rating scale. Yes, our rating scales have different purposes, and in that sense we're at an impasse, but my argument was that mine has a practical utility.
Music is personal, not practical.
>enjoying music
Music is personal, organizing it into a hierarchy of preference is practical.
And there are albums (Blaze Foley's work being another example) I haven't listened to in months (may be even a year) that are still relevant to me as a person.
just listen to bad music on purpose. duh
based retard rym-er
I'm gonna try this.
... to reinforce my conviction that everybody has shit taste except me.
i only listen to music i like.
just listen to genre's and artists you don't like
Though honestly if you really care that much just start differentiating your degrees of favorability. I highly doubt all 560 of those albums you gave 5 stars to are all equally supreme masterpieces that you cherish deeply.
>All Eyez on Me
>5 stars
>Out of the 1381 ratings I have 206 are 5s.
found your profile