Red Mosquito

I do often lay in bed awake at night wondering if my method of ranking my favorite Pearl Jam albums is empirically sound.

flannelking wrote:I was trying to figure out which album I liked best between Vitalogy and Riot Act, whether it would be Vitalogy for having more 5 star songs or RA for having more songs and more songs that are solid.

Say what? Nobody should need a list to tell them that Vitalogy is an infinitely better album than Riot Act.

I just realized that my rankings go in order of release

Thurman Murman wrote:

flannelking wrote:I was trying to figure out which album I liked best between Vitalogy and Riot Act, whether it would be Vitalogy for having more 5 star songs or RA for having more songs and more songs that are solid.

Say what? Nobody should need a list to tell them that Vitalogy is an infinitely better album than Riot Act.

have you read any of flannelking's other posts?

malice wrote:

Thurman Murman wrote:

flannelking wrote:I was trying to figure out which album I liked best between Vitalogy and Riot Act, whether it would be Vitalogy for having more 5 star songs or RA for having more songs and more songs that are solid.

Say what? Nobody should need a list to tell them that Vitalogy is an infinitely better album than Riot Act.

have you read any of flannelking's other posts?

Nooooo.

Thurman Murman wrote:

malice wrote:

Thurman Murman wrote:

flannelking wrote:I was trying to figure out which album I liked best between Vitalogy and Riot Act, whether it would be Vitalogy for having more 5 star songs or RA for having more songs and more songs that are solid.

Say what? Nobody should need a list to tell them that Vitalogy is an infinitely better album than Riot Act.

have you read any of flannelking's other posts?

Nooooo.

good man

liebzz wrote:If you tally the scores, doesn't that ultimately lead to unfair comparisons since Backspacer has 11 songs and self-titled has 13? Wouldn't it make much more sense to average the scores and the mean score would be the winner?

I wanted the albums with more songs/longer albums to get more credit.



Feel free to post a more scientifically sound approach if one exists. Call NASA.

flannelking wrote:I wanted the albums with more songs/longer albums to get more credit.



Feel free to post a more scientifically sound approach if one exists. Call NASA.

You're ignoring how long each good song is. Why should a great five minute song only get as much credit at a great three minute song? It should be rewarded for giving you two extra minutes of enjoyment. I can't really take any ranking system seriously unless this is a factor in the outcomes.

I like my rankings to also include a factor that considers the number of instruments being played. It is for this reason why i never find myself liking any acoustic demo songs.

Can you quantify how much you like each part of each song, and then factor in how long that part is/how many times it repeats itself?

Flannel, can you provide scientific proof that Future Days sucks? Harmless needs convincing.

Who remembers the consultant?

Lament wrote:

flannelking wrote:I wanted the albums with more songs/longer albums to get more credit.



Feel free to post a more scientifically sound approach if one exists. Call NASA.

You're ignoring how long each good song is. Why should a great five minute song only get as much credit at a great three minute song? It should be rewarded for giving you two extra minutes of enjoyment. I can't really take any ranking system seriously unless this is a factor in the outcomes.

IIRC, the PJ albums with the most songs are also the longer albums. Longer albums equals more PJ enjoyment. The more PJ enjoyment the better. Multiply that x Pi squared x Pi once removed + whether or not my children appreciate more than half the songs.

Dammit, flannelking is growing on me.

stip wrote:Who remembers the consultant?

oh boy