+1

what would be interesting is if the stars for the rating have a slightly different appearance for the album like maybe a border or maybe a horizontal bar graph behind the stars that is related to the album score

Album ratings Please

+1

Magic Nodes add-on has several nodes within its Album Ratings group, e.g. "Albums with avg. track rating >= 4 stars", "Albums with avg. track ratings >= 3 and less than 4" and so on. Each album within those nodes has displayed the average rating next to its name. Albums also could be sorted by that value (if you modify [i]Sort by[/i] quelifier), and you could also add your own nodes with similar filters and/or different sub-nodes.

RegExp Find & Replace add-on has the preset "Assign weighted average Rating of album to <Into Field>..." where you could define into which field you want to store that information, e.g. Custom 1. Of curse, using this preset you would get all tracks from some album with same "Album rating" value.

Honestly, I cannot see a point for users to enter such information manually. In my opinion, this is something which should be automatically calculated based on individual Track Rating values. Let say that I have one album with one track rated 5 stars and 6 tracks rated 2 stars each. I think it is most convenient to rate such album using average ratings of all such tracks (5 + 6 * 2) / 7 = 2.42 stars. Even more better, you could use the weighted average ratings where longer tracks has greater weight in calculation. For example, if I have one album with one track of 20 minutes rated 5 stars and 6 tracks of approx. 4 minutes rated 2 stars each, the weighted average would be (20 * 5 + 6 * 4 * 2) / (20 + 6 * 4) = 3.36 stars.

[quote="MikeCerm"]I don't think that this really makes much sense, because there's not a standard way to do it in tags (like there is with Artist, Album, etc.). If you want to use this non-standard tag in MediaMonkey, you already can using one of the 5 "Custom" tags, or comments. Just use Custom Tag 1 and stick a 1-5 number in there, or use a simplified name (like AR1, AR2, etc.) if you need a reminded that the number corresponds to Album Rating.[/quote]
True, but there are two problems with that:

1. It doesn't make it easy to make sure an "Album rating" is actually the same for all tracks of the same album
2. It's not convenient in terms of looking at the album rating visually; eg. you have to look at a number instead of "stars"

For me it's not about storing that information to the tag (I could care less about keeping that information in the actual song file). I would actually prefer that it is a database-only value that I can use for autoplaylists, etc. and is convenient (eg. I can set it for one track and it automatically be applied to any other tracks of the same album, even if those tracks are added to the library at a later date in time).

I don't think that this really makes much sense, because there's not a standard way to do it in tags (like there is with Artist, Album, etc.). If you want to use this non-standard tag in MediaMonkey, you already can using one of the 5 "Custom" tags, or comments. Just use Custom Tag 1 and stick a 1-5 number in there, or use a simplified name (like AR1, AR2, etc.) if you need a reminded that the number corresponds to Album Rating.

I don't think I will use this as I don't "use" albums myself (I play tracks not albums), but I do think it would be a good addition.

Added to Mantis: http://www.ventismedia.com/mantis/view.php?id=6692

I strongly second this.

+1

I agree

[quote="nohitter151"]Sometimes the album as a whole is better than the sum of its parts.[/quote]

true.

I add my suport to your wish.

Yes, I've wanted this for a long time.

+1

Ditto on the Album Rating.

Would love to see this feature too.

might be alright if you had all the songs by the same artist on the album

but when your version of mediamonkey is causing all various artist albums to be made in to one song per artist albums
with the same album name.

then when it rates by song it is rating by album.?

+1

Agreed. Sometimes the album as a whole is better than the sum of its parts.