Mate's Takes - The Weezer Discography

General music discussion.
Chuck Mangione
User avatar
Spitting Image
Posts: 6713
Joined: 17 Jun 2009, 10:45pm
Location: Up your boulevard.

Re: Mate's Takes - The Weezer Discography

Post by Chuck Mangione » 23 Jul 2010, 4:38pm

matedog wrote:
ImSoBoredWithTheUSA wrote:I thought the same exact thing as Kory; how can one of your favorite albums of all-time only be a 7 [out of 10?]
From what I just said:
matedog wrote:If you asked me off the top of my head, i'd say an 8 or a 9. But assessing each track, with a serious attempt to eschew nostalgia, I rate it a little lower than that. 7 is really good in my book.
I still find that weird to have some of your favorite albums of all-time be rated personally as a 7. Mine would be either 9 or 10, almost never an 8.

eumaas
User avatar
Klezmer Shogun
Posts: 23287
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 8:10pm
Location: outer space

Re: Mate's Takes - The Weezer Discography

Post by eumaas » 23 Jul 2010, 4:47pm

Dr. Medulla wrote:
eumaas wrote:I tend to think of albums as having two ratings. One is vis-a-vis music in general or its genre (which would be the absolute scale), and the other is vis-a-vis the total artist output. The latter is what I mean by a relative scale. For example, GEER rates as 10 on the relative scale, but would not rate a 10 on the absolute scale as there are albums I think are superior.

I guess Hoy is rating it on the absolute scale.
How about vis-a-vis the albums in one's collection?
The albums of any music or the albums of that artist? If it's the former, I don't think that's really an issue--we can only rate things based on our knowledge, so I'm not sure how one could have a separate scale for what you know and what is knowable because the latter is measured in the former. I guess you could talk about a platonic absolute (the perfection that your knowledge does not encompass but I guess is still conceivable though not perceivable) and an empirical absolute. If you're doing that, though, you might as well start speculating on how many angels can fit in the grooves of GEER (the answer is n + awesome).

We should be rating things on the Tasty Scale. For example, Starship is :cool: :cool: :cool: :cool: :cool: / :cool: :cool: :cool: :cool: :cool: .
I feel that there is a fascistic element, for example, in the Rolling Stones . . .
— Morton Feldman

I've studied the phenomenon of neo-provincialism in self-isolating online communities but this place takes the fucking cake.
— Clashy

eumaas
User avatar
Klezmer Shogun
Posts: 23287
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 8:10pm
Location: outer space

Re: Mate's Takes - The Weezer Discography

Post by eumaas » 23 Jul 2010, 4:48pm

If it's the latter it's subject to the limit of knowledge too. I wouldn't be overly concerned about it though as any rating is usually subject to change, no? I guess rock critics have to put a line in the sand, but I've seen opinions shift on here.
I feel that there is a fascistic element, for example, in the Rolling Stones . . .
— Morton Feldman

I've studied the phenomenon of neo-provincialism in self-isolating online communities but this place takes the fucking cake.
— Clashy

matedog
User avatar
Purveyor of Hoyistic Thought
Posts: 21323
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 4:07pm
Location: 1995

Re: Mate's Takes - The Weezer Discography

Post by matedog » 23 Jul 2010, 4:50pm

ImSoBoredWithTheUSA wrote:
matedog wrote:
ImSoBoredWithTheUSA wrote:I thought the same exact thing as Kory; how can one of your favorite albums of all-time only be a 7 [out of 10?]
From what I just said:
matedog wrote:If you asked me off the top of my head, i'd say an 8 or a 9. But assessing each track, with a serious attempt to eschew nostalgia, I rate it a little lower than that. 7 is really good in my book.
I still find that weird to have some of your favorite albums of all-time be rated personally as a 7. Mine would be either 9 or 10, almost never an 8.
Another issue with this rating system is that it weighs each song equally. But seriously, I give almost no 10's, very few 9's, and so on, so a 9 or 10 rated album is pretty much impossible under this system, so a 7 rating is actually very good.
Look, you have to establish context for these things. And I maintain that unless you appreciate the Fall of Constantinople, the Great Fire of London, and Mickey Mantle's fatalist alcoholism, live Freddy makes no sense. If you want to half-ass it, fine, go call Simon Schama to do the appendix.

eumaas
User avatar
Klezmer Shogun
Posts: 23287
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 8:10pm
Location: outer space

Re: Mate's Takes - The Weezer Discography

Post by eumaas » 23 Jul 2010, 4:53pm

matedog wrote:
ImSoBoredWithTheUSA wrote:
matedog wrote:
ImSoBoredWithTheUSA wrote:I thought the same exact thing as Kory; how can one of your favorite albums of all-time only be a 7 [out of 10?]
From what I just said:
matedog wrote:If you asked me off the top of my head, i'd say an 8 or a 9. But assessing each track, with a serious attempt to eschew nostalgia, I rate it a little lower than that. 7 is really good in my book.
I still find that weird to have some of your favorite albums of all-time be rated personally as a 7. Mine would be either 9 or 10, almost never an 8.
Another issue with this rating system is that it weighs each song equally. But seriously, I give almost no 10's, very few 9's, and so on, so a 9 or 10 rated album is pretty much impossible under this system, so a 7 rating is actually very good.
If you don't really give 10s, you've just shifted the scale by one. I remember hearing of a very dumb professor who claimed never to give an A. Well, then A- takes the place of A, and B the place of A- and so on.
I feel that there is a fascistic element, for example, in the Rolling Stones . . .
— Morton Feldman

I've studied the phenomenon of neo-provincialism in self-isolating online communities but this place takes the fucking cake.
— Clashy

Dr. Medulla
User avatar
Atheistic Epileptic
Posts: 84190
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:00pm
Location: Nerdo Crombezia
Contact:

Re: Mate's Takes - The Weezer Discography

Post by Dr. Medulla » 23 Jul 2010, 4:57pm

eumaas wrote:
Dr. Medulla wrote:
eumaas wrote:I tend to think of albums as having two ratings. One is vis-a-vis music in general or its genre (which would be the absolute scale), and the other is vis-a-vis the total artist output. The latter is what I mean by a relative scale. For example, GEER rates as 10 on the relative scale, but would not rate a 10 on the absolute scale as there are albums I think are superior.

I guess Hoy is rating it on the absolute scale.
How about vis-a-vis the albums in one's collection?
The albums of any music or the albums of that artist? If it's the former, I don't think that's really an issue--we can only rate things based on our knowledge, so I'm not sure how one could have a separate scale for what you know and what is knowable because the latter is measured in the former.
That was, however hidden, my point. Our evaluations are always going to be limited by what we've heard. Even if, say, you only own CR and CtC, it'd be odd to declare CR a 10 within the scope of all your Clash albums. Your expectations of the other albums in your collection are always going to bleed into the evaluation.
We should be rating things on the Tasty Scale. For example, Starship is :cool: :cool: :cool: :cool: :cool: / :cool: :cool: :cool: :cool: :cool: .
You underrate it and limit your use of math: :cool: :cool: :cool: :cool: :cool: :cool: :cool: :cool: :cool: :cool: :cool: / :cool: :cool: :cool: :cool: :cool:
Poonty, boloques, juffmunch, carpoo, snazellfonks.

Dr. Medulla
User avatar
Atheistic Epileptic
Posts: 84190
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:00pm
Location: Nerdo Crombezia
Contact:

Re: Mate's Takes - The Weezer Discography

Post by Dr. Medulla » 23 Jul 2010, 4:59pm

eumaas wrote:
matedog wrote:
ImSoBoredWithTheUSA wrote:
matedog wrote:
ImSoBoredWithTheUSA wrote:I thought the same exact thing as Kory; how can one of your favorite albums of all-time only be a 7 [out of 10?]
From what I just said:
matedog wrote:If you asked me off the top of my head, i'd say an 8 or a 9. But assessing each track, with a serious attempt to eschew nostalgia, I rate it a little lower than that. 7 is really good in my book.
I still find that weird to have some of your favorite albums of all-time be rated personally as a 7. Mine would be either 9 or 10, almost never an 8.
Another issue with this rating system is that it weighs each song equally. But seriously, I give almost no 10's, very few 9's, and so on, so a 9 or 10 rated album is pretty much impossible under this system, so a 7 rating is actually very good.
If you don't really give 10s, you've just shifted the scale by one. I remember hearing of a very dumb professor who claimed never to give an A. Well, then A- takes the place of A, and B the place of A- and so on.
Except his scale also impacts your relative evaluation measured against those instructors who do give A's. It's unfair because it falsely skews your achievement down relative to others.
Poonty, boloques, juffmunch, carpoo, snazellfonks.

eumaas
User avatar
Klezmer Shogun
Posts: 23287
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 8:10pm
Location: outer space

Re: Mate's Takes - The Weezer Discography

Post by eumaas » 23 Jul 2010, 5:01pm

Dr. Medulla wrote:
eumaas wrote:
matedog wrote:
ImSoBoredWithTheUSA wrote:
matedog wrote: From what I just said:
I still find that weird to have some of your favorite albums of all-time be rated personally as a 7. Mine would be either 9 or 10, almost never an 8.
Another issue with this rating system is that it weighs each song equally. But seriously, I give almost no 10's, very few 9's, and so on, so a 9 or 10 rated album is pretty much impossible under this system, so a 7 rating is actually very good.
If you don't really give 10s, you've just shifted the scale by one. I remember hearing of a very dumb professor who claimed never to give an A. Well, then A- takes the place of A, and B the place of A- and so on.
Except his scale also impacts your relative evaluation measured against those instructors who do give A's. It's unfair because it falsely skews your achievement down relative to others.
Oh yes. It fucks with your GPA and has no benefit other than appeasing his platonism.
I feel that there is a fascistic element, for example, in the Rolling Stones . . .
— Morton Feldman

I've studied the phenomenon of neo-provincialism in self-isolating online communities but this place takes the fucking cake.
— Clashy

matedog
User avatar
Purveyor of Hoyistic Thought
Posts: 21323
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 4:07pm
Location: 1995

Re: Mate's Takes - The Weezer Discography

Post by matedog » 23 Jul 2010, 5:04pm

eumaas wrote:
matedog wrote:
ImSoBoredWithTheUSA wrote:
matedog wrote:
ImSoBoredWithTheUSA wrote:I thought the same exact thing as Kory; how can one of your favorite albums of all-time only be a 7 [out of 10?]
From what I just said:
matedog wrote:If you asked me off the top of my head, i'd say an 8 or a 9. But assessing each track, with a serious attempt to eschew nostalgia, I rate it a little lower than that. 7 is really good in my book.
I still find that weird to have some of your favorite albums of all-time be rated personally as a 7. Mine would be either 9 or 10, almost never an 8.
Another issue with this rating system is that it weighs each song equally. But seriously, I give almost no 10's, very few 9's, and so on, so a 9 or 10 rated album is pretty much impossible under this system, so a 7 rating is actually very good.
If you don't really give 10s, you've just shifted the scale by one. I remember hearing of a very dumb professor who claimed never to give an A. Well, then A- takes the place of A, and B the place of A- and so on.
Except I do. Just very rarely as I only consider very very few songs to be "perfect." I gave VU's "Heroin" a 10. Same for Outkast's "B.O.B." and "Billie Jean." On the other hand, I have yet to give a song a one rating, although the next album will have it. For a song to be released by a mainstream band to fail so miserably is really rare. I'd consider "Boogie With Your Children" a one because it is so absolutely ineptly written and performed.
Look, you have to establish context for these things. And I maintain that unless you appreciate the Fall of Constantinople, the Great Fire of London, and Mickey Mantle's fatalist alcoholism, live Freddy makes no sense. If you want to half-ass it, fine, go call Simon Schama to do the appendix.

Flex
User avatar
Mechano-Man of the Future
Posts: 28265
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:50pm
Location: The Information Superhighway!
Contact:

Re: Mate's Takes - The Weezer Discography

Post by Flex » 23 Jul 2010, 5:07pm

Hoy's rating system doesn't seem too different from Prindle's, although Hoy, I guess you use the same criteria to rate individual songs and albums?
YOU MADE ONE MISTAKE, LENNON, YOU DOUBLE CROSSED MIKE LOVE AND LEFT HIM ALIVE

Sous les pavés, la plage.

Pex Lives!

Dr. Medulla
User avatar
Atheistic Epileptic
Posts: 84190
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:00pm
Location: Nerdo Crombezia
Contact:

Re: Mate's Takes - The Weezer Discography

Post by Dr. Medulla » 23 Jul 2010, 5:08pm

eumaas wrote:
Dr. Medulla wrote:
eumaas wrote:If you don't really give 10s, you've just shifted the scale by one. I remember hearing of a very dumb professor who claimed never to give an A. Well, then A- takes the place of A, and B the place of A- and so on.
Except his scale also impacts your relative evaluation measured against those instructors who do give A's. It's unfair because it falsely skews your achievement down relative to others.
Oh yes. It fucks with your GPA and has no benefit other than appeasing his platonism.
That's one thing I dislike about the humanities compared to the sciences when it comes to grading—science student averages will always be higher because there is a firm right or wrong, whereas humanities courses are graded subjectively and with a sense that no one writes a perfect essay or exam. So humanities students tend to have lower averages, which does impact who gets money. (Tenure is another area that is biased towards the sciences. You can have a dozen "co-authors" on a single science paper but each get full credit for publications. Very rare that more than two humanities scholars will co-author a paper, and it's usually just one.)
Poonty, boloques, juffmunch, carpoo, snazellfonks.

eumaas
User avatar
Klezmer Shogun
Posts: 23287
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 8:10pm
Location: outer space

Re: Mate's Takes - The Weezer Discography

Post by eumaas » 23 Jul 2010, 5:09pm

matedog wrote:
eumaas wrote:
matedog wrote:
ImSoBoredWithTheUSA wrote:
matedog wrote: From what I just said:
I still find that weird to have some of your favorite albums of all-time be rated personally as a 7. Mine would be either 9 or 10, almost never an 8.
Another issue with this rating system is that it weighs each song equally. But seriously, I give almost no 10's, very few 9's, and so on, so a 9 or 10 rated album is pretty much impossible under this system, so a 7 rating is actually very good.
If you don't really give 10s, you've just shifted the scale by one. I remember hearing of a very dumb professor who claimed never to give an A. Well, then A- takes the place of A, and B the place of A- and so on.
Except I do. Just very rarely as I only consider very very few songs to be "perfect." I gave VU's "Heroin" a 10. Same for Outkast's "B.O.B." and "Billie Jean." On the other hand, I have yet to give a song a one rating, although the next album will have it. For a song to be released by a mainstream band to fail so miserably is really rare. I'd consider "Boogie With Your Children" a one because it is so absolutely ineptly written and performed.
Those are song ratings, though. What album would rate a 10?
I feel that there is a fascistic element, for example, in the Rolling Stones . . .
— Morton Feldman

I've studied the phenomenon of neo-provincialism in self-isolating online communities but this place takes the fucking cake.
— Clashy

Chuck Mangione
User avatar
Spitting Image
Posts: 6713
Joined: 17 Jun 2009, 10:45pm
Location: Up your boulevard.

Re: Mate's Takes - The Weezer Discography

Post by Chuck Mangione » 23 Jul 2010, 5:11pm

eumaas wrote:
matedog wrote:
eumaas wrote:
matedog wrote:
ImSoBoredWithTheUSA wrote: I still find that weird to have some of your favorite albums of all-time be rated personally as a 7. Mine would be either 9 or 10, almost never an 8.
Another issue with this rating system is that it weighs each song equally. But seriously, I give almost no 10's, very few 9's, and so on, so a 9 or 10 rated album is pretty much impossible under this system, so a 7 rating is actually very good.
If you don't really give 10s, you've just shifted the scale by one. I remember hearing of a very dumb professor who claimed never to give an A. Well, then A- takes the place of A, and B the place of A- and so on.
Except I do. Just very rarely as I only consider very very few songs to be "perfect." I gave VU's "Heroin" a 10. Same for Outkast's "B.O.B." and "Billie Jean." On the other hand, I have yet to give a song a one rating, although the next album will have it. For a song to be released by a mainstream band to fail so miserably is really rare. I'd consider "Boogie With Your Children" a one because it is so absolutely ineptly written and performed.
Those are song ratings, though. What album would rate a 10?
Image

matedog
User avatar
Purveyor of Hoyistic Thought
Posts: 21323
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 4:07pm
Location: 1995

Re: Mate's Takes - The Weezer Discography

Post by matedog » 23 Jul 2010, 5:12pm

eumaas wrote:
matedog wrote:
eumaas wrote:
matedog wrote:
ImSoBoredWithTheUSA wrote: I still find that weird to have some of your favorite albums of all-time be rated personally as a 7. Mine would be either 9 or 10, almost never an 8.
Another issue with this rating system is that it weighs each song equally. But seriously, I give almost no 10's, very few 9's, and so on, so a 9 or 10 rated album is pretty much impossible under this system, so a 7 rating is actually very good.
If you don't really give 10s, you've just shifted the scale by one. I remember hearing of a very dumb professor who claimed never to give an A. Well, then A- takes the place of A, and B the place of A- and so on.
Except I do. Just very rarely as I only consider very very few songs to be "perfect." I gave VU's "Heroin" a 10. Same for Outkast's "B.O.B." and "Billie Jean." On the other hand, I have yet to give a song a one rating, although the next album will have it. For a song to be released by a mainstream band to fail so miserably is really rare. I'd consider "Boogie With Your Children" a one because it is so absolutely ineptly written and performed.
Those are song ratings, though. What album would rate a 10?
Using an overall album rating system, it's a little more cloudy (although not necessarily inaccurate as a sense of how I really feel about listening to the album). Although I'd rate London Calling way up there on my list of favorite albums of all time, I can't say it is a 10.
Look, you have to establish context for these things. And I maintain that unless you appreciate the Fall of Constantinople, the Great Fire of London, and Mickey Mantle's fatalist alcoholism, live Freddy makes no sense. If you want to half-ass it, fine, go call Simon Schama to do the appendix.

eumaas
User avatar
Klezmer Shogun
Posts: 23287
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 8:10pm
Location: outer space

Re: Mate's Takes - The Weezer Discography

Post by eumaas » 23 Jul 2010, 5:12pm

ImSoBoredWithTheUSA wrote:
eumaas wrote:
matedog wrote:
eumaas wrote:
matedog wrote: Another issue with this rating system is that it weighs each song equally. But seriously, I give almost no 10's, very few 9's, and so on, so a 9 or 10 rated album is pretty much impossible under this system, so a 7 rating is actually very good.
If you don't really give 10s, you've just shifted the scale by one. I remember hearing of a very dumb professor who claimed never to give an A. Well, then A- takes the place of A, and B the place of A- and so on.
Except I do. Just very rarely as I only consider very very few songs to be "perfect." I gave VU's "Heroin" a 10. Same for Outkast's "B.O.B." and "Billie Jean." On the other hand, I have yet to give a song a one rating, although the next album will have it. For a song to be released by a mainstream band to fail so miserably is really rare. I'd consider "Boogie With Your Children" a one because it is so absolutely ineptly written and performed.
Those are song ratings, though. What album would rate a 10?
Image
n + :cool:
I feel that there is a fascistic element, for example, in the Rolling Stones . . .
— Morton Feldman

I've studied the phenomenon of neo-provincialism in self-isolating online communities but this place takes the fucking cake.
— Clashy

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests