erland;591770 Wrote: > I wonder how MediaMonkey works ? Have you checked ?
no. i HATE installing apps i don't plan to use, but i figure some folks here use them and would know exactly how they work. foobar, MM, picard, idk what else is even popular in the FLAC world as a media manager. erland;591770 Wrote: > For most users 0-5 should be good enough, I suspect very few users feel > a need to use more than 5 rating levels. There might be users that want > to differ between a strong 4 and a normal 4 but the same people probably > don't have any need at all to differ between a 1 and a 2. i totally agree, (although my personal wish would be for 0-7, but i can live with 0-5). i don't have a beef with the 5 star system windows/winamp uses. what i am trying to do, is get the data values for that representation to be broadly cross app compatible. when they first supported POPM, they did it as 0-5 too, and i pointed out to them that the spec, which WMP followed, uses 0-255, and so they switched, which was only sensible, b/c they wished to align with windows/WMP. unfortunately, i have nothing as substantial to point to for Vorbis, so my thought was to just get them to use 0-100 so SBS would like it, but where is the leverage? what do other apps do? what they said is interesting tho... (more on that in a sec) erland;591770 Wrote: > I suspect many users is like me and use ratings to differ between: > - Excellent 5 stars > - Good: 4 stars > - Normal: 3 stars > - Crap: 1-2 stars > > Which would mean that a 4 level scale would actually be good enough. similar to mine. i use the 5 stars as: 5=awesome/classic 4=good/solid 3=indifferent/avg/unmemorable/no strong feelings or impressions either way 2=dislike 1=hate and when i rate, i think to myself "when i do a random mix, do i want to hear this again?" if i do, it gets a 4 or 5. since i collect music i like, most of my stuff skews into the 4/5 range, with most being 4s, which is only natural. i do see a distinct difference between 1 and 2 though, but like i sid, i agree with you that most users won't have a lot of music they don't like. erland;591770 Wrote: > A more detailed scale makes sense if you start to combine ratings from > different users and if ratings are automatically changed based on > listening behavior, but not if the rating is set by a single user to a > specific value. For example a community site where users together has > rated something as 82% is different than something they have rated as > 75%. Of course, also in this scenario, it's pretty uninteresting if > something is rated as 10%, 25% or 35% because it's probably all crap > and something I don't want to purchase if I trust the community. well sure, but while i might not want to hear anything under 4/5, it is meaningful to me to know where it is... is it a 1, 2, or 3? think of the rotten tomatoes website... it is interesting to rate bad movies on a 0-100 scale, so you can see them in relationship to each other. this is one area where granularity does matter... just HOW bad is it? (or how good?) while songs for a user are best handled by 5 or 7 stars, when a community of users avg together, 0-100 makes sense. also, granularity allows for fractions of a star, which is something windows/wmp does represent via POPM. erland;591770 Wrote: > So to sum it up, in a local library on a local file system, I think the > main reason to have more granularity than 0-5 is if you like to support > automatic modification of ratings based on listening behavior. In > addition to this, one advantage in TrackStat of the 0-100 scale is that > I can easily offer an option to display the ratings as a 0-5 or a 0-10 > stars scale. i hadn't even considered dynamic ratings! cool. erland;591770 Wrote: > In TrackStat, I'm using 60 for 3 stars, to be specific the TrackStat > scale is: > 90-100 -> 5 star > 70-89 -> 4 star > 50-69 -> 3 star > 30-49 -> 2 star > 10-29 -> 1 star > 0-9 -> 0 star > > However, there isn't a standard mapping between 0-100 percentage and > 0-5 stars, so everyone does their own interpretation at the moment. > > To be honest, I'm not sure it makes sense to have 60 as three stars as > I'm sure most people have more music in the 3-5 range than in the 0-3 > range, so it should be better to have more granularity in the 3-5 range > which a 50=3 star interpretation would result in. It's not easy change > this after people have started to use it because then it means that > tracks people earlier has rated as 3 stars suddenly would be close to 4 > stars if the interpretation was changed. i understand what you are saying, but i don't think a data range should account for skewing. i think it should be absolute and equal to all phases, no curve. erland;591770 Wrote: > SBS doesn't care, SBS doesn't support any rating tag besides a tag > called exactly "RATING" that contains a 0-100 integer value. for FLACs/vorbis, winamp is calling the field RATING, but only doing 0-5, so SBS would see all those as crap. erland;591770 Wrote: > I would be very surprised if rating functionality was added to SBS now, > we have asked for it for a many years now and it's pretty obvious that > no one at SlimDevices nor at Logitech cares about ratings. > > Try to focus on uniting the others and hope for SBS to follow if > everyone else does it the same way. indeed, i am trying, and i got a POPM de facto standard in place now imo, but for the rest its hard when nothing major does it. at winamp, they quoted this: http://code.google.com/p/quodlibet/wiki/Specs_VorbisComments and you can see what i said in reply to them at the winamp link: http://forums.winamp.com/showthread.php?t=324322 the interesting part is they didn't do what they claimed to follow. that google link says to use a decimal 0.0 to 1.0 range, which would be 0-100, just not in whole number form. so maybe i can still get them to change. basically, i'd like to see them use 0-100 b/c thats a good range for granularity and works with SBS. i just need to figure out how to convince them of that? -- MrSinatra www.lion-radio.org using: sb2 & sbc (my home) / sbrec & ipeng (parents' home) - sbs 7.5.2b - win xp pro sp3 ie8 - p4(ht) 3.2ghz, 2gig ram - 1tb wd usb2 raid1 - d-link dir-655 - 45k+ mp3 ::VOTE FOR 'BUG 15604' (http://bugs.slimdevices.com/show_bug.cgi?id=15604)!!!:: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ MrSinatra's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2336 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=59929 _______________________________________________ ripping mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/ripping
