[JK1dotNET]

I've been thinking of starting up a website that would be sort of like audioreview, but instead of for audio gear, it would be for audio recordings. I've searched and searched, and have never found such a website. I've seen forums like this where music and its recording quality is discussed, but never a website where I can go to see what a dozen audiophiles and aspiring audiophiles think about a recording of Dvorak's Stabat Mater, or how they rate different recordings of Debussy's Preludes for piano on their sound quailty, musicality or other criteria.

So.... would there be any interest in such a site? I, for one, would love something like this, but, it would do me no good to rate all the music I own and have nobody else contribute. If such a site existed, would you use it as a resource and would you contribute?

I don't want to compete with any good forums like this, just address a need that I see.

Comments?

 

[dhwilkin]

Sounds like a good idea to me. Just so long as the comments are focused on the recording quality, and not on whether you like the music or not. Listing your associated equipment w/ these reviews would definitely need to be done, since somebody listening to Beyer 770s might have a very different opinion than somebody using Grado 325s.

 

[JK1dotNET]

Quote:

Originally posted by dhwilkin Sounds like a good idea to me. Just so long as the comments are focused on the recording quality, and not on whether you like the music or not. Listing your associated equipment w/ these reviews would definitely need to be done, since somebody listening to Beyer 770s might have a very different opinion than somebody using Grado 325s.

Thanks for the feedback. I had originally intended to allow users to rate music on whether they liked it or not, but not factor that rating into the final rating of a recording. That way people can see the possible biases associated with peoples rating. That way you can take ratings with a grain of salt if they strongly love or hate a particular recording.

That's a good idea about equipment. I hadn't thought of that.

Thanks for the idea!

 

[Dusty Chalk]

Seconded!

And if you really want to get fancy-shmancy, you can add a similar music link (I.E., "recommended if you like..." etc.). But I would make that an optional field.

 

[XXhalberstramXX]

That is exactly the type of website i have wanted to see for years now! If i had any website experience, i would've made one myself.

In my opinion, however, a such website which evaluated primarily sound quality would be:
A: Useless and uniteresting to me
B: IMO likewise for the general populous.

That's not to say there isn't a place for comments on sound quality, but i think a site where people posted stuff like "five stars, deep soundstage and tight bass with my Grado SR325s and Headroom Max, etc etc etc" and "one star, thin and scratchy" and little else would not persuade me one way or another to buy an album. That said, i think the Stereophile (and for that matter Grammophone) music reviews are rather good at balancing a review of the music (we're not just listening to pretty sounds after all) and sound quality. Something like a star rating for proformance and sound quality, and maybe something else would be excellent.

There is a dire need for such a website, even if it just had musical reviews. no such website exists, and it's annoying to have to refer to commercial sites (amazon.com) to find anything of that sort.

 

[JK1dotNET]

Quote:

Originally posted by XXhalberstramXX In my opinion, however, a such website which evaluated primarily sound quality would be: A: Useless and uniteresting to me B: IMO likewise for the general populous.

You're probably right that many people wouldn't use it if it just rated recording quality because to many it's not an extremely important criterion. Most people listen to rock/pop/country/rap/whatever, not classical. So when U2 comes out with an album, they'll buy it based on whether they like it or not. Unless they release some remaster, then nobody really cares about the sound quality because they have no choice in the matter. But for classical, it's a whole different story. You can choose another recording if you think that one sucks, since most works have been done many times. And it's important to me, and (I assume) to others that listen to classical, to be able to know in advance of purchasing whether or not a recording has good sound quality or is just an old crappy AAD CD.
Quote:

That's not to say there isn't a place for comments on sound quality, but i think a site where people posted stuff like "five stars, deep soundstage and tight bass with my Grado SR325s and Headroom Max, etc etc etc" and "one star, thin and scratchy" and little else would not persuade me one way or another to buy an album. That said, i think the Stereophile (and for that matter Grammophone) music reviews are rather good at balancing a review of the music (we're not just listening to pretty sounds after all) and sound quality. Something like a star rating for proformance and sound quality, and maybe something else would be excellent.

Perhaps users could rate and comment on both things:
(a) How much and why they like the music
(b) What is the sound quality like
Then the site's database could allow users to rank by either, both or a combined ranking as they choose. This would give the site more mass appeal for people not generally into classical.

Thanks for the insight. If enough people show interest, I'll probably go for it.

 

[chych]

Yeah, have both, music and recording. Don't forget to make them mention the label, equipment they are using, and the like.

 

[Dusty Chalk]

Most magazines, when they review recordings, usually have two separate ratings: one for the music or performance, one for the actually fidelity of the recording, why don't you do similarly?

Also, before someone reviews a recording (and you can entice people into still visiting by not making them register to read, only to write), make them enter, as part of their profile, their equipment base, likes/dislikes, etc.

You know, if you are not interested, but you still want to entice people into visiting your site, you could still allow for contemporary music critiques. I know people who, even though they like a particular performance, won't get a record because it sounds like crap (I hear a lot of criticisms of RHCP's Californication -- too much distortion all the way through).

And then (I'm totally getting into this now), to "normalize" recordings which have multiple reviews, you could do like audioreview.com, where you average all the ratings, just like they do on equipment.

Final suggestion about the data-entry portion: you gotta find an easy way for someone to mis-type the name and/or artist of an album, and still check to see if it's the same album as one that is already listed. You might want to look to Merriam Webster for suggestions on how to do this, except you would need the additional ability for the user to add new titles. Or maybe you could do it the way audioreview.com does it, and only allow for you to enter new titles. Or maybe you could somehow cross-reference with AMG -- though I don't know how. I think this last step is crucial, otherwise you're going to get 10 different RHCP's Californication/Californiacation/Californiaction/etc.

Just a couple of suggestions.

 

[JK1dotNET]

Thanks for the suggestions. I agree that doing close match searching is necessary, otherwise combining duplicate entries will become a major pain in the neck when maintaining the database. The questions is how to do it....

 

[Dusty Chalk]

Soundex

This way "van Karajan" and "von Karajan" both come up V526. Of course, that's not enough, but as I said before, I recommend www.m-w.com as a good user interface, I kind of like it.

So, for example, after they log in, they push a button that says they want to enter a new review. The first thing they have to name about it is the title, artist, composer, etc. whatever, as much as they know, and that will search the existing entries. Then they pick one, and add a new review to it. If it's not in the list, they are given two choices, do a new search (always make it as easy as possible for them not to create duplicates) or enter a new recording, after that, then you have to worry about it.

The other thing you can do is make the label and number mandatory, that should eliminate some of them.

Oooh, wait! I have a better idea -- why don't you hook it up to cddb? That's got an API and everything.

 

[JK1dotNET]

I had actually thought of using cddb, but that would have to be an option only, as it doesn't have vinyl, sacd, dvd-audio, etc.

It would still be a good starting point, and would make people more inclined to rate music if they didn't have to go adding all the details like track names and such before posting their review.

 

[huy_ha]

Sounds like a useful site, but I fear it will have to be heavily moderated so you don't get the same complaints that many here have had about sites like audioreview. That is, it's way too easy to get into format wars (well, my MP3 version kicks the ass of your vinyl version anyway), flaming (No way, that band sucks and so do their fans!), and battles of taste (That's not real music) if there aren't some guidelines applied. And that would only taint the usefulness of the site to everyone else. I myself would love to see a site based mostly on recording quality. I'd love to actually learn the names of the good recording engineers and labels that put out consistently. I can't say much of what I've read on the net has influenced my actual taste in music, but lots of what I've read here with regard to recording quality has convinced me to buy particular versions and formats, as well as prevented me from buying poor recordings.

 

[royboy2k]

Good idea but it needs to improve upon Amazon.com's system somehow or people will never use it. I would like to know the major ways in which your new site will be different from Amazon.

The problem with user reviews of music is that people always go out and find their favorite albums to give the highest rating possible. How can you fix that? Reviewing sound quality adds something but that should always take a back seat to the actual music right?

I DON'T want to see something like this on your site:

Backstreet Boys - Millenium
"This CD is the meaning of life! There is absolutely NOTHING better so go buy it now!!

P.S. Justin is HOT"

 

[Xander]

Sounds like a good idea to me. It could be a bit hairy though, since everyones components sound different, and have different levels of revealing qualities... For instance:

Person A, might think this recording is bright, even a bit harsh. He's using Grado SR-80s.
Person B may think it sounds perfectly balanced. AKG K401s.

Person C thinks it sounds bad because theres too much sibilance, but he's using Senn HD570s...

 

[dhwilkin]

Ah, see this is why I was thinking maybe leave the subjective part of the review off, as I can easily see reviews turning into running arguments over why an album is great or it sucks or whatever. Especially if the album in question happens to be something mainstream. I guess having a separate section, away from the technical review, would be good enough.