Forums

  • previous
  • next
  • 1
  • 2
  •  |  26 posts

  • avatar
    560 sounds
    50 posts
    I think the star rating system is flawed, and needs this improvement:


    I've been a long time Freesound contributor, I love the site so much, but throughout the years I've always been bugged by people who rate my samples 1 or 2 stars. Especially when those are the only few ratings, this gives a wrong impression and it rigs the rating system in general.

    My samples are not bad:
    - they're recorded with decent recording devices and microphones
    - mistakes/noises have been edited out
    - they're neatly normalised etc. so you can hear them well in preview

    So some reasons why people would rate it badly could be:
    - tags are not accurate enough, they think I tried to mislead them (which I do not, I pay careful attention to tagging)
    - normalisation causes background noise to be more audible (users do not realize, or do not have the skill, to change the volume / EQ according to their wishes)
    - they're sour trolls
    - ... ?

    I think this can be solved in 2 ways, either:

    A) Only allow people to rate if they make a comment of at least 10 words, having them explain what their rating is based on

    B) When clicking on the row of stars to rate, pop up a few rows of stars: Sound Quality, Background Noise, Variation (I don't know.. I'm just brainstorming... we could figure these variables out as a community). This would also add valuable metadata to the sound.

    Let me know how you feel.
    Tnx,
    Rutger

    www.rutgermuller.nl
  • avatar
    3326 sounds
    502 posts


    You asked how we feel about this? Personally, I forgot the 'stars' long time ago and work for my own enjoyment. And I wouldnt waste a minute trying to improve something basically useless.

    D

  • avatar
    377 sounds
    70 posts


    I'm obliged to agree after experiencing this as well.

    I've found that it is sort of pot luck as to how users tend to rate sounds; there are some sounds which, granted, sound like what they should, but were recorded with a cheap recorder. Then there are sounds which a lot of people just don't seem to understand, no matter how true the sound is to the source. And then there's decent quality sounds which, for reasons I can never fathom, are rated low.

    I remember seeing another thread on this topic some months ago, and I'll paraphrase from one of the comments there; a sound that means nothing to one person might be exactly what another person is looking for.

    So personally, I'd vote to do away with the rating system, as every sound on this site will have a use for someone, and I see no reason why some sounds should be skipped or ignored simply because of it's rating.

    Or of course, your suggestion to make people write a little comment if they decide to rate a sound, which would then explain the ratings given.

  • avatar
    560 sounds
    50 posts


    dobroide wrote:
    You asked how we feel about this? Personally, I forgot the 'stars' long time ago and work for my own enjoyment. And I wouldnt waste a minute trying to improve something basically useless.

    D

    Fair enough, if it doesn't bother then keep it that way wink. But it would be nice to be able to find good sounds quicker of course. Speaking not only as a contributor but also as a fervent user.

    And yeah, it also simply feels very rude, after spending so much time on decent recording, editing, uploading and tagging, to find someone rate your stuff with 1 star (as in "Awful!"). Kind of irritated, but mostly curious WHY.

    www.rutgermuller.nl
  • avatar
    560 sounds
    50 posts


    InspectorJ wrote:
    I'm obliged to agree after experiencing this as well.

    I've found that it is sort of pot luck as to how users tend to rate sounds; there are some sounds which, granted, sound like what they should, but were recorded with a cheap recorder. Then there are sounds which a lot of people just don't seem to understand, no matter how true the sound is to the source. And then there's decent quality sounds which, for reasons I can never fathom, are rated low.

    I remember seeing another thread on this topic some months ago, and I'll paraphrase from one of the comments there; a sound that means nothing to one person might be exactly what another person is looking for.

    So personally, I'd vote to do away with the rating system, as every sound on this site will have a use for someone, and I see no reason why some sounds should be skipped or ignored simply because of it's rating.

    Or of course, your suggestion to make people write a little comment if they decide to rate a sound, which would then explain the ratings given.

    Very good examples! Yep "Church organ stops" -> people look for church organ > don't hear the organ sound > rate it 1 star....

    I just checked the other topic https://www.freesound.org/forum/freesound-project/37924/ starts interesting, then goes off topic. Was about to suggest a merge, but I think we'd better continue here.

    www.rutgermuller.nl
  • avatar
    328 sounds
    2760 posts


    This thread is relevant: https://www.freesound.org/forum/freesound-project/37924/?page=1#post

    We have more than touched upon this in the past. The general consensus being that the rating system is pretty useless and easily set with bias, therefore is a very good idea not to worry about it. Thanks for the suggestion though, it's decent to try and suggest an improvement, wether the gods hear it or not.

    Personally, I believe that the rating system could be useful if it was fixed. Until then, I kind of just forget it's even there.


    I am the thing that goes bump in the night...

  • avatar
    3326 sounds
    502 posts


    InspectorJ wrote:
    .
    .

    I've found that it is sort of pot luck as to how users tend to rate sounds; there are some sounds which, granted, sound like what they should, but were recorded with a cheap recorder. Then there are sounds which a lot of people just don't seem to understand, no matter how true the sound is to the source. And then there's decent quality sounds which, for reasons I can never fathom, are rated low.
    .
    .

    I'm pretty sure a large proportion of freesound users couldn't a tell a good sample from a so-so one in a blind test. Firstly because samples are often listened to in cheap computer speakers; and secondly, because most users just dont care - they're looking for effective samples, not technically amazing stuff. To make things worst, I suspect a non-negligible part of those that take the trouble to rate sounds tend to base their judgement in the equipment used by the recordist (quite philistine if you ask me, but that's the way it is). Quarter of Americans - and Spaniards - think the Sun revolves around Earth, and we should take freesound's rating system seriously? C'mon!

    I think this/any rating system is flawed, useless, and misleading. To hell with the whole concept.

    D

  • avatar
    3 sounds
    120 posts


    I personally don't touch those stars.

    Some people are just total noobs (I probably come under this category!) and others just take one look at something and decide "that's s**t!" even if it's good. There should be a system where if someone's rating a sound, they have to put a reason for their rating. These reasons could be moderated by the moderators and if it's not a valid reason/good enough reason, then they could refuse to except the rating.

    Mudkipz rule!
  • avatar
    328 sounds
    2760 posts


    Mudkip2016 wrote:These reasons could be moderated by the moderators

    No thanks smile


    I am the thing that goes bump in the night...

  • avatar
    328 sounds
    2760 posts


    dobroide wrote:
    I'm pretty sure a large proportion of freesound users couldn't a tell a good sample from a so-so one in a blind test. Firstly because samples are often listened to in cheap computer speakers; and secondly, because most users just dont care - they're looking for effective samples, not technically amazing stuff. To make things worst, I suspect a non-negligible part of those that take the trouble to rate sounds tend to base their judgement in the equipment used by the recordist (quite philistine if you ask me, but that's the way it is). Quarter of Americans - and Spaniards - think the Sun revolves around Earth, and we should take freesound's rating system seriously? C'mon!

    I think this/any rating system is flawed, useless, and misleading. To hell with the whole concept.

    D

    Just a thought. Possibly some users aren't rating the sound for it's quality or value or methodology. Perhaps the thought process is as follows:

    "This sound is not what i'm looking for > therefore its crap > it deserves 1 star"


    I am the thing that goes bump in the night...

  • avatar
    3 sounds
    120 posts


    Headphaze wrote:
    Mudkip2016 wrote:These reasons could be moderated by the moderators

    No thanks smile


    Oh, well! It was worth a try!

    Mudkipz rule!
  • avatar
    560 sounds
    50 posts


    Headphaze wrote:
    dobroide wrote:
    I'm pretty sure a large proportion of freesound users couldn't a tell a good sample from a so-so one in a blind test. Firstly because samples are often listened to in cheap computer speakers; and secondly, because most users just dont care - they're looking for effective samples, not technically amazing stuff. To make things worst, I suspect a non-negligible part of those that take the trouble to rate sounds tend to base their judgement in the equipment used by the recordist (quite philistine if you ask me, but that's the way it is). Quarter of Americans - and Spaniards - think the Sun revolves around Earth, and we should take freesound's rating system seriously? C'mon!

    I think this/any rating system is flawed, useless, and misleading. To hell with the whole concept.

    D

    Just a thought. Possibly some users aren't rating the sound for it's quality or value or methodology. Perhaps the thought process is as follows:

    "This sound is not what i'm looking for > therefore its crap > it deserves 1 star"

    Yep, basically those ratings need to be filtered out. I'm already quite relieved you all seem to agree with me smile.

    www.rutgermuller.nl
  • avatar
    560 sounds
    50 posts


    Another simple solution. Inspired by some your anti-negative-ratings ideas.

    Replace the 5 stars rating system with a simple heart / like button. I do like that you can sort sounds, so I would suggest the number of likes to show. But I could also live with not showing the number of likes, instead just a heart icon next to all sounds that've been liked 10+ times (as in "Approved by the community!").

    www.rutgermuller.nl
  • avatar
    1373 sounds
    404 posts


    RutgerMuller wrote:
    Another simple solution. Inspired by some your anti-negative-ratings ideas.

    Replace the 5 stars rating system with a simple heart / like button. I do like that you can sort sounds, so I would suggest the number of likes to show. But I could also live with not showing the number of likes, instead just a heart icon next to all sounds that've been liked 10+ times (as in "Approved by the community!").

    No, that's too facebook and puerile. You can't have love without hate, or sound without silence. Don't take the ratings personally. When I hear a sound that is obviously better than one star, I uprate it.

    On a personal level, I think a lot of my sounds are way over-rated, but what can I do? I all evens out.

    The system is fine as it is and needs no changing. One star is still a Star and attracts attention.

    Trouble runs, far away, in the night.
  • avatar
    83 sounds
    57 posts


    I think the star system has some problems, but can be useful. I've seen fellow users (usually children) who consistently self-star, even before a sound is moderated! I've also seen users who make several alt accounts for yet more stars, and it's just silly and a bit sad. A quick comment is a nice way to show appreciation, but I think public tagging of others' sounds could be very useful, if also fraught with potential sillyness. Maybe limit it to non-anonymous and 5/week or somesuch.

  • avatar
    560 sounds
    50 posts


    toiletrolltube wrote:
    RutgerMuller wrote:
    Another simple solution. Inspired by some your anti-negative-ratings ideas.

    Replace the 5 stars rating system with a simple heart / like button. I do like that you can sort sounds, so I would suggest the number of likes to show. But I could also live with not showing the number of likes, instead just a heart icon next to all sounds that've been liked 10+ times (as in "Approved by the community!").

    No, that's too facebook and puerile. You can't have love without hate, or inside without outside. Don't take the ratings personally. When I hear a sound that is obviously better than one star, I uprate it.

    On a personal level, I think a lot of my sounds are way over-rated, but what can I do? I all evens out.

    The system is fine as it is and needs no changing. One star is still a Star and attracts attention.

    It's not only the fact that I take it personally, but I'm just as well thinking as a composer and sound designer who wants to be able to find the best sounds. And like I said, in the future when using A.I. tools (through the Freesound API) accurate ratings can become important in an ocean of files.

    www.rutgermuller.nl
  • avatar
    495 sounds
    170 posts


    I like a simple heart or single-star system, Facebook style, as nothing more than an appreciated hat-tip to the creator.

    The current system is meaningless. One user might not like a sound because it's raw and un-edited, not ready to drop right into their content. Another user, more experienced with digital audio, might appreciate the sound for those very reasons.

  • avatar
    560 sounds
    50 posts


    stomachache wrote:
    I like a simple heart or single-star system, Facebook style, as nothing more than an appreciated hat-tip to the creator.

    The current system is meaningless. One user might not like a sound because it's raw and un-edited, not ready to drop right into their content. Another user, more experienced with digital audio, might appreciate the sound for those very reasons.

    Yep, after some more thought, I still feel this could be a good solution.

    www.rutgermuller.nl
  • avatar
    1373 sounds
    404 posts


    In that case, why not just dump the rating system altogether?

    I'm totally against bias and would be appalled to see a facebook system here where everything is liked against a void. My feeling is: either have it (*s) or don't and the download count can speak for itself. Someone once said, I think Headphaze "this isn't social media" or words to that effect. I'm all for people to express their dislike/opinion on any particular sound, whether it be in comments or stars, positive or negative. Descriptions and tags, and ultimately the sound has the last word.

    This is just silly.

    Trouble runs, far away, in the night.
  • avatar
    560 sounds
    50 posts


    toiletrolltube wrote:
    In that case, why not just dump the rating system altogether?

    I'm totally against bias and would be appalled to see a facebook system here where everything is liked against a void. My feeling is: either have it (*s) or don't and the download count can speak for itself. Someone once said, I think Headphaze "this isn't social media" or words to that effect. I'm all for people to express their dislike/opinion on any particular sound, whether it be in comments or stars, positive or negative. Descriptions and tags, and ultimately the sound has the last word.

    This is just silly.

    I think criticism only makes sense through a comment, while showing appreciation can work through a star/like. Though a positive (constructive) comment is also nicer than just a like. Mmm...

    www.rutgermuller.nl
  • previous
  • next
  • 1
  • 2
  •  |  26 posts