A little explanation about my ratings.
- votes from 0.5 to 2.0 refer to albums that suck in every language you write it.
- votes from 2.5 to 4.0 refer in first place to the artist's discography.
- votes from 4.5 to 5.0 are global masterpieces. Not recognizing them would make you gay ; being you gay, it would make you heterosexual.

On a closer look :

* 0.5-1.0 stars = album that I wanna punish for being one of the worst bullshits of the known world, or I simply hate.
* 1.5-2.0 stars = ok, I recognize these may be albums by good artists, and one or two songs are quite listenable but God, I see better things coming out of my stomach when I'm drunk.
* 2.5 stars = it could've been a discreet album ; instead, it sucks for the most part.
* 3.0 stars = you can listen to it but don't expect anything else.
* 3.5 stars = undoubtly a good piece. It still has some flaws which prevent it from becoming a masterpiece.
* 4.0 stars = here we enter the Best Works zone. This rating is given to an album that I liked so much but doesn't have the actual qualities to become a masterpiece. I enjoyed those albums very much and of course they're recommended.
* 4.5 stars = outstanding performance. Only uncommon albums by the best artists in town can reach this heights. You should weld their cd cases to your body for eternity.
* 5.0 stars = boy, milleniums of metaphysics and scientifical research will never make us reach the enlightenment of this shining fragment of God. "Masterpiece" is such a shabby word for this Opera Omnia of Time and Space. I'm not even sure if I would suggest a listen to you, for maybe not everyone is ready to face its monolithic strength. Take some zen meditations or something before, but then, LISTEN.