What's your RYM scale?

What does each number usually mean to you?
Here's mine:
>0.5 Completely unlistenable garbage.
>1 Fucking terrible
>1.5 Fucking bad
>2 Bad
>2.5 Weak
>3 eh
>3.5 Worth it
>4 Good
>4.5 Great
>5 Flawless all the way through

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=42JTU4vuyEg
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

idunno I just rate by feel desu

the numbers mean what they mean

explain

.5 IDK
1 Terrible
1.5 Bad
2 SubPar
2.5 Mediocre
3 Alright
3.5 Good
4 Great
4.5 Fantastic
5 Personal favorite

I might change it soon

i have one for a 10 scale
>10 to 9.6: Essential
>9.5 to 9: Amazing
>8.9 to 8.3: Great
>8.2 to 7.6: Worth It
>7.5 to 6: Mixed
>5.9 to 5: Regular
>4.9 to 3.5: Mediocre
>3.4 to 2.5: Not Remarkable
>2.4 to 1.7: Awful
>1.6 to 1: Terrible
>0.9 to 0: Atrocious

standard deviation

>2 stars - 5 stars: stuff i like
>1.5 stars: stuff i'm indifferent to
>1 star: stuff i don't like
>0.5 stars: stuff i don't like and want to mock

>0.5 Audio-based Hell
>1.0 Near-Atrocious
>1.5 Awful
>2.0 Nearly-Passable
>2.5 Passable
>3.0 Above-Passable
>3.5 Great
>4.0 Near-Amazing
>4.5 Audio-based Heaven
>5.0 Impossibly Perfect

...

>0.5 I don't know about this
>1 Is this good?
>1.5 Wow I'm really not sure here
>2 Really stumped by this one
>2.5 What a mystery!
>3 This is really throwing me for a loop
>3.5 I just don't know what to make of this
>4 I can't make heads or tails out of this one
>4.5 Really puzzling, that
>5 Hmmmmm

>0.5 Eww
>1.0 Umm
>1.5 Nuh
>2.0 Hmm
>2.5 Yeh
>3.0 Mmm
>3.5 Mmmhmm
>4.0 MMM
>4.5 MMMMHHMMMM
>5.0 8==D~~~~~~~

>3.5 - ver naise
3.0 - relisten every once in a while
2.5 - listenable but not gonna keep in my collection

>0.5
>1
>1.5
>2
>2.5
>3
>3.5
>4
>4.5
>5 "shit"

I have limited time so
>0.5 Raditude
>1.0 don't bother
>1.5 don't bother
>2.0 don't bother
>2.5 painfully mediocre
>3.0 some good ideas but mostly a failure
>3.5 pretty good all around but nothing groundbreaking
>4.0 success!
>4.5 it's amazing!
>5.0 it's a favorite!

>1.0 bad
>2.0 okay
>3.0 good
>4.0 very good
>5.0 personal favorites

I don't use rym, it's for trannies.

i want to log in into sonemic but i can't
i made another account due to thinking the username was bad
didn't work
how the fuck do i make it work

Cringe

Based

this is a good one

this is how it should be you retards

lol fuck rym, everyone who takes their reviews way too seriously are fucking pretentious shitlords who need to get a reality check that no one fucking cares

let i still use the site and vote on genres endlessly. conflicting as shit, i know

Mostly blank, but my husband gets the top spot

Miss me with that negative bullshit.

normie

you can't possibly like everything you retard

>assigning meaningless numbers to anything in the year of our lord two thousand seventeen

...

>56 masterpieces
I think you dont understand the meaning of this word.

Jesus, I thought I gave out a lot of 5/5

>masterpiece
ˈmɑːstəpiːs
noun
a work of outstanding artistry, skill, or workmanship.

Sounds pretty fair to me 2bh

>you can't possibly like everything you retard
But it's not everything. I've given negative ratings too.
And what says I can't?

>0.5 Raditude
kek

Most of what I listen to is fine.

Don't use ".5" 'cause I don't like how there'd be no middle rating if I used it.

Mine is similar, but to describe at length

>5.0 Own this NOW!
Quite obviously, anyone who has even a passing interest in music should go lengths to acquire this release if possible. The kind of album you never leave home without. The kind of music where the sentiments are felt even in your darkest hours. The kind of music you'd feel incomplete were they to suddenly disappear from your life. The kind of music you never tire of. The kind of music that gives you purpose.

>4.5 Masterpiece
A monumental achievement in a band's career. The music highlights a band's skills as musicians and is a testament to a genre. Your tastes may vary, but what's undeniable is the strength of the music. These albums have at least one song you always go to at any given moment. In sum, superb.

>4.0 Excellent
A fine release in a band's career. Very few, if any, dull moments, and no song here could be considered mediocre, much less bad. The music usually introduces some novel ideas that elevates it from its peers and stands out on its own as a good album. Of course, it's still missing some key elements that would merit high praise, but nonetheless a strong piece of music.

>3.5 Solid
A good, listenable album for any moment. Not too dense nor too weak. Just right. Perfect for genre fans and may be accessible to those seeking new artists to explore. Don't expect too much, though.

>3.0 Ordinary
Passable, but missing far too much to merit revisiting. Mediocre. Neither love nor hate.

>2.5 Only if you like 'em
For completists only. Similar to the above, but missing even more. The music is a tedium, but the music lacks anything detestable. Like studying a blank white wall. The music lacks anything warranting a revisit.

>2.0 Disappointing
Falling horribly short and painfully flawed, but far from terrible. A dud in a band's discography.

Anything below is either hilariously bad or cringeworthy.

1 = very bad
1.5 = bad
2 = not very good at all
2.5 = okay, kind of good
3 = good
3.5 = very good
4 = great
4.5 = amazing, second-tier favourites
5 = top-tier favourites

0.5 shit
1 very bad
1.5 has something cool but big bad
2.0 mediocre
2.5 good
3.0 great
3.5 sex
4.0 holy shit this is
4.5 AAa
5.0 subjective favorites

0.5 or 1 is bad, 1.5-2 is mediocre, 2.5-5 are diffferent levels of good

5.0 - Useless rating
4.5 - Favorites
4.0 - Amazing
3.5 - Great
3.0 - Good
2.5 - Par
2.0 - Useless rating
1.5 - Useless rating
1.0 - Useless rating
0.5 - Apathy / bad (most music fits here)

I named mine after ice cream

I don't really see the need to put any specific meaning to the numbers, although I do tend to put really good albums in genres I don't listen to much at 4.5

HI Todd

I mostly agree with this except I have a couple of 5s and I use 1.0 star instead of .5

But 2.0 is just poor and anything below goes into the 1.0, I don't care enough to try to discern how BAD an album is.

> I don't care enough to try to discern how BAD an album is.
yeah after a certain point it's just masochistic

no you guys are idiots who hate music
why not try concentration camps or anal rape instead you fucking pieces of shit

people who put shit like "masterpiece" "truly incredible" take their ratings too seriously

5 - Masterpiece of its genre and in general. It is uncommon for me to give a 5 to any release of the year. Only an estimated 100 known to even exist.
4.5 - aoty in general or strong entry for aoty of its genre
4 - excellent and about 100 given each year
3.5 - reserved for special recognition of epoty and other honorable mention. About 5 given each year
3 - very good albums and hundreds given out each year
2.5 - special recognition for local aoty to each city in competition. Many local albums will far exceed this with up to a 4 but 2.5 isbyhebstandard which could be given out hundreds of times
2.0 - usually have a couple good songs and some of these albums I actually love but they have significant flaws and at very best could be whittled down to a great ep
1.5 - so far actually reserved for/mu/core aoty meaning some shill who posts here and would otherwise be held beneath contempt
1.0 - are the worst albums I hear all year with almost zero redeeming qualities and should literally have not been made.
0.5 - I haven't given one out yet so I could only speculate

You rate based on how often you listen. Albums you listen to more often should be rated higher. Please don't be that guy that gives 4.5's to albums he only listened to once.

5.0 - OH HOLY GOD AND ALL THAT IS HOLY
4.5 - this is so amazing
4.0 - i really fucking like this
3.5 - i really like this
3.0 - i like this
2.5 - eh...
2.0 - this is lame
1.5 - this is really lame
1.0 - I'm angry
0.5 - THE FUCK? THIS IS GARBAGE

i feel like everybody who posted a non-ironic stratification can be safely assumed to be underage b&?

oh and keep your 5 stars below 20 faggots.
nobody should have 100 5 star ratings

5 star albums are the ones you get addicted to outside of listening to the album

there albums you look up the wikipedia page, vouch for on social media, recommend to your friend,

i personally think a big sign that you have a new 5 star album is looking up videos of live performances of the songs

aswell as, you need to wait at least 6+ months before first hearing the album and see if you still find yourself liking it after awhile

blonde was at 3.5 stars for me, and i just kept coming back to it, over and over again MONTHS apart.

that would be a clear sign you have a 5 star album

Nope, what now?

1 star: I wouldn't care listening to it, but if it has some sort of artistic merit I would maybe listen to it a couple times a year.
2 stars: Same as above, but artistic merit yields enjoyment
3 stars: Enjoyed it a bit, would listen to it again maybe a few times a month; nice song; rating in the "fad" zone
4 stars: Quite good. I would listen to this kind of stuff several times a week; Could be my "favorite songs of the week", few albums are consistently 4 stars- a lot of albums on 1001 albums before you die, year end lists, are capable of being just 4 stars. This album is consistently good, and probably has some unique merit, and definitely makes me feel a certain way, in which it intended to.


**5 stars** Awesome song. These are the ones I wouldn't want to lose. If I only had 1TB of flac songs, I would choose these. A few albums are five stars, but not too many. Endtroducing is one. Kind of Blue is one. Untrue is one.

Also some of these can be "personal faves" which transcend artistic merit, and are just cool, personally, to me. Mew - No More Stories is an example. Not the most incredible artsy music, the mastering/production is definitely not AAA / class A but it's the feels and the memberberries that matter most.

...

You start in the middle as a neutral value (favoring either good or bad because there is no true middle) and then things get either better or worse as you move away from that, because duh. Also it's really troubling how many people don't seem to understand where the center of the numbers are, so many of you are starting good at 3.5 for some reason.

>0.5 Worst
>1 Worse
>1.5 Worse
>2 Worse
>2.5 Pretty not good
>3 Pretty good
>3.5 Better
>4 Better
>4.5 Better
>5 Best

I'm not wasting half my scale on different levels of shit.

same here man. If it's that shit, I just will skip it entirely or delete it. Skipping is nice.

...

That's literally what numbers mean though, if something is merely average it should be in the absolute middle. Trying to do otherwise doesn't mean you have "a system," it just means you don't understand basic concepts.

>That's literally what numbers mean though
Thanks Einstein

>if something is merely average it should be in the absolute middle.
That's actually not true at all btw

The numbers are actually inconsequential. They could literally be colors.

the assumptions necessary for this to be true are unrealistic in practice

Retards

yeah man im retarded for not understanding how a fucking random distribution is supposed to work

>not understanding
for understanding

holy shit though off yourself loser lmao

K, cool tripfag

nobodys fault but your own that you didnt take the literal most basic intro to stats course at yr local community college lmao

fucking failure dude

>holy shit though off yourself loser lmao
friendo that's mean apologize to him

nah hes a joke

...

You don't have to take any class to know you're a retard, tripfag

are you drunk

back to highschool kid

extremely yes

Pretty standard

Haven't been in high school for years and I'm never going back

not gonna judge your decision to drop out but at least get your ged

I graduated

doubt

Why?

...

I didn't post that

Why do you even keep responding? It’s a sad no name tripfag craving for attention, leave it be.

wtf is with anonymous ppl continuing each others conversations seamlessly

...

congrats on the numbers

0.5: lol how did you fuck this up
1: really bad
1.5: bad
2.0: below average
2.5: average
3.0: good
3.5: great
4.0: excellent
4.5: classic
5.0: classic but i actually like it

0 = Impossible. Unless it is stale white noise stampered all over the place. (Harsh noise doesn't count, because they have tons of variety.)
1 - Heavily Flawed (e.g. Noveller - Vasovagal)
2 - Flawed (e.g. Brian Eno - Ambient 1)
2.5 - Average, not good, not bad. (e.g. Caught in the wake forever - Against a simple wooden cross)
3 - good (e.g. Chris Weeks - Iris & Norman)
4 - Excellent (e.g. Tiny Leaves - A Good Land, An Excellent Land.) (no pun intended)
5 - Perfection, impossible. However, A Broken Consort - Crow Autumn comes quite close at it.

I never say this, and in fact I really hate it when people do, but go back to tidder please, this place is not for you
(chekd tho)

what the fuck are you babbling about lmao

It's pretty clear what I said

nah i have no clue what tidder is your incoherent
ive been 4channing since the vast majority of you were autistic preteens giggling at garys mod vids on youtube
kids these days act like bulls in a china shop- no respect

LOL I bet you started using Sup Forums in like 2012. Read tidder backward. It wouldn't let me post it front ways because it marked it as spam

LOL 2006
fucking newkids running around thinking theyre hot shit dude you are pond scum
literal sub human filth giving worthless (you)s
dont @ me not wasting my time with newkid garbage

Lmao. I'm sure you've been posting since 2006, tripfag...

newkid loses and resorts to mad hominems color me shocked
dont @ me newbie

...

what have you been listening to Friendo?

Are you OK?

mostly pink flohyd and john cale
youtube.com/watch?v=42JTU4vuyEg

probably

Really only use rym to dig deeper into specific genres/movements and drone niqqas.

why 1.5 instead of 0.5