Earmark
Sign in

Work · two recordings

A Court of Thorns and Roses

Sarah J. Maas · A Court of Thorns and Roses, book 1 · read by Jennifer Ikeda

It tells a story. Hardcover files this book as fiction, and its readers there call it adventurous and dark. Facts, not factors: neither plays any part in our call.

Either. Don't overthink it

Every book we have judged on how far the recording outruns the page: 201 of them, the page's answer at the left-hand end and the recording's at the right. Marked for scale: All the Light We Cannot See, To Kill a Mockingbird and Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone. This one sits between the bottom 31% and the top 42% of our shelf of books for how far the recording outruns the page. −0.40, where we start backing the page; 0.40, where we start backing the recording.A Court of Thorns and Roses (A Court of Thorns and Roses, #1)
close call · 0.21 from tipping either way

It comes out level, but not because nothing is happening: Jennifer Ikeda’s reading sits behind the book itself (in the bottom 25% of our shelf of books, on 6,764 ratings of the narration), and the format is not fighting you either way (between the bottom 34% and the top 23% of our shelf of books for extra work in audio). Those two cancel out, leaving the audio case between the bottom 31% and the top 42% of our shelf of books for how far the recording outruns the page, the band where this figure settles nothing on its own. These are forces pulling against each other rather than a book that asks nothing of you. Pick whichever you will actually finish.

Length does not decide this

16h 07m to listen, at 1×12h 54m to listen, at 1.25×10h 45m to listen, at 1.5×9h 13m to listen, at 1.75×8h 04m to listen, at 2×about 14 hours to readabout 10 hours to readabout 8 hours to readabout 6 hours to readabout 5 hours to read

The runtime is Audible’s own, shown at the speed beside it. The reading time is our estimate: 419 pages at 30 pages an hour, the pace you told us. Ours is 50, about 300 words a page, read at 250 a minute.The runtime is Audible’s own, shown at the speed beside it. The reading time is our estimate: 419 pages at 40 pages an hour, the pace you told us. Ours is 50, about 300 words a page, read at 250 a minute.The runtime is Audible’s own, shown at the speed beside it. The reading time is our estimate: 419 pages at 50 pages an hour, which is about 300 words a page, read at 250 a minute.The runtime is Audible’s own, shown at the speed beside it. The reading time is our estimate: 419 pages at 65 pages an hour, the pace you told us. Ours is 50, about 300 words a page, read at 250 a minute.The runtime is Audible’s own, shown at the speed beside it. The reading time is our estimate: 419 pages at 80 pages an hour, the pace you told us. Ours is 50, about 300 words a page, read at 250 a minute.

Slot → commute-safe

About as demanding in audio as Slaughterhouse-Five.

All the books we hold · 222

About as much work in audio as most of the books we hold.

Fiction · 176

About as much work in audio as most of the fiction we hold.

Long books · 56

About as much work in audio as most of the long books we hold.

Reading load against listening load

Every book we hold placed by how much work it asks on the page, left to right, against how much it asks in your ears, bottom to top: 222 of them. Easy both ways is the bottom left corner, hard both ways the top right; above the dashed line the ears work harder, below it the page does. Marked for scale: Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone, To Kill a Mockingbird and The Diary of a Young Girl. This one is in the middle 40% of our shelf of books for effort on the page and in the middle 40% of our shelf of books for effort in your ears.
The dashed line is where a book would be same effort either way. This one sits on that line (the format is not fighting you either way), between the bottom 34% and the top 23% of our shelf of books for extra work in audio.
On the page−0.50
In your ears−0.69
Audio disadvantage−0.40

Where that puts this one among the books we hold: in the middle 40% of our shelf of books on both counts (effort on the page and effort in your ears). The middle of the scale is not the middle of the shelf (most books sit below the average on both), so a book at 0.00 is already in the top 43% for effort on the page. Each of the three is measured against the whole shelf separately, so the bottom figure is not the top two subtracted. It is this book’s own distance from the middle.

What the audio disadvantage is made of. Two things and no others: how fast readers say this one moves, and how demanding the reviews we read found it. There is no third: the structural one has no data source, so it contributes nothing rather than being guessed at. Both directions are declared priors we have never fitted against a real verdict, which is the weakest-evidenced part of the whole model.

Every book we could measure both features on placed by pace, fast to slow, against how demanding the reviews we read found it, plain to demanding: 166 of them. The easiest listens are the bottom left corner and the hardest the top right, which is the shaded one. Marked for scale: Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone, To Kill a Mockingbird and The Diary of a Young Girl. This one reads at about the pace of most books we hold and about as demanding as most, and neither is pushing it far from the middle of the shelf.
This one reads at about the pace of most books we hold and about as demanding as most, and neither is pushing it far from the middle of the shelf.

How the call was made

Where a bar carries ticks, the grey one is the middle of our shelf and a coloured one is a line we publish, cool where we start backing the page, warm where we start backing the recording. The evidence squares at the foot are a different thing: how far each of our four sources went, hatched where there was nothing to measure at all.

The audio case
0.19It sits between the bottom 31% and the top 42% of our shelf of books for how far the recording outruns the page. Inside the band where neither side has made its case on this number alone, so the call is settled by what else is on the page.
Narration payoff
−0.21Jennifer Ikeda’s reading is less well received than the book it came from: in the bottom 25% of our shelf of books, on 6,764 ratings of the narration. This is a difference, not a score: it sets the reading against its own book, so a much-loved book with a merely good reading sits low on this shelf even where nobody disliked either. Asked the other way (how the reading stands against what the book’s own readers made of it, which is a different crowd rating a different thing), it comes out −0.38. We report that one and never score it: two crowds that do not overlap are held together by nothing but the standardising, which is a cost the figure above does not pay.
What is at stake
−0.45It sits between the bottom 27% and the top 33% of our shelf of books for how well the print crowds think of a book: middling regard, so this barely moves the call either way. Blended across 4,594,084 Goodreads ratings and 3,649 on Hardcover, each scored inside its own population first, and never added together.

For the page

  • The voice lets the book down
  • The crowds’ regard did not reach the line where we protect a first read, this reason did not apply

For the recording

  • Audio is neither helping nor fighting this one
  • 6,764 listeners behind it

Neither column won it: the two came out level, which is the answer above.

A bigger dot counted for more: the voice and the ear are sized by their share of the sum above, the other two by how much stands behind them. A hatched square is a reason that did not apply here, which is not the same as one that counted for little.

Evidence
1.00How much of the picture we actually have, out of 1.00: four questions, each answered as far as the source could answer it, less anything taken off for reading fewer reviews than we aim to.The reading6,764 people have rated this reading: as good as it getsThe second sourceHardcover knows this book, with 3,649 readers there: as good as it getsThe matchHow sure we are that the recording we scored is this book: as good as it getsThe reviewsWe read 300 reviews to judge how demanding it is: as good as it gets

What each crowd complains about

In the reviews we read, how often readers brought it up and how often listeners did, each against what is usual for that same crowd across our whole shelf, which is the grey tick. The track stops at 4×. Listeners are only ever compared with listeners.

Listeners of this book bring up the pace about 3.8 times as often as listeners usually do, while readers of it bring it up about two and a half times as often as readers usually do.

What the two crowds said

Showing the stars as each shop prints them. The two crowds are not measured from the same place: on our shelf Audible’s listeners average 0.35 of a star above Goodreads’ readers, so a recording that is ordinary for Audible can still out-star a book that is genuinely well liked for Goodreads. Switch the toggle to take that difference off.Showing each figure as its distance from its own crowd’s middle on our shelf, in standard deviations, so 0 is a typical book for that crowd. Listeners start 0.35 of a star up, partly because anyone who finishes a twenty-five-hour recording chose it deliberately, and this takes that off. It is not a claim that audio is better, the story figure is still Audible’s own (people rating a story they heard), and none of it moves the verdict above.

4.43·Audible
overallAudible
overall, pooled by the shop, so we hold no ruler for it
65%5 stars: 65 per cent, 4,857 ratings
21%4 stars: 21 per cent, 1,561 ratings
9%3 stars: 9 per cent, 641 ratings
3%2 stars: 3 per cent, 240 ratings
2%1 stars: 2 per cent, 178 ratings

7,477 ratings · performance and story, as the shop pools them

4.50−0.52 sdAudible
the performanceAudible
the performance, against Audible’s own crowd
68%5 stars: 68 per cent, 4,586 ratings
20%4 stars: 20 per cent, 1,363 ratings
8%3 stars: 8 per cent, 560 ratings
2%2 stars: 2 per cent, 144 ratings
2%1 stars: 2 per cent, 114 ratings

How often this goes badly3.8% of the people who rated the performance gave it one or two stars. More than most recordings here. The middle of our shelf is 2.0%, and half of it falls between 1.0% and 3.1%.

258 of 6,767 listeners gave the performance one or two stars

The shape of the room

  • United
  • Warm, this one
  • Split
  • Lukewarm

A warm room: most listeners are happy with the performance, and a small group are not.

6,767 ratings

4.39−0.58 sdAudible
the story, as heardAudible
the story, as heard, against Audible’s own crowd
65%5 stars: 65 per cent, 4,371 ratings
20%4 stars: 20 per cent, 1,322 ratings
9%3 stars: 9 per cent, 623 ratings
4%2 stars: 4 per cent, 237 ratings
3%1 stars: 3 per cent, 211 ratings

6,764 ratings

4.15−0.14 sdGoodreads
the book itselfGoodreads
the book itself, against Goodreads’ own crowd
43%5 stars: 43 per cent, 1,982,973 ratings
35%4 stars: 35 per cent, 1,629,799 ratings
16%3 stars: 16 per cent, 723,219 ratings
4%2 stars: 4 per cent, 182,306 ratings
2%1 stars: 2 per cent, 75,787 ratings

4,594,084 ratings

The series

A Court of Thorns and Roses

Still running · The reading changes hands

7 books numbered on Goodreads’ list. Book 6, A Court of Splintered Harmony, is due in 2026.

The reading changes hands across the 5 volumes Audible names in our records: Jennifer Ikeda reads books 1 and 2, Amanda Leigh Cobb books 3 and 4, Stina Nielsen book 5.

From Goodreads’ own series index, checked on 11 September 2026.

Every reading we hold

Two complete readings of it, and one call above for the book: the verdict is a claim about format, not about a voice. Which voice to press play on is the next question, and this is our answer to it. Below 250 ratings of the reading we name a recording and decline to rank it.

  • Jennifer Ikedaour pick16h 07m12h 54m10h 45m9h 13m8h 04m · One voice · Audible UK and US

    Performance 4.50 · Story 4.39 · 6,764 rated the reading · 3.8% of the people who rated the performance gave it one or two stars

    Hear it · Audible’s clip, its length read from them on load

  • Elizabeth Evanstoo few ratings to judge14h 04m11h 15m9h 23m8h 02m7h 02m · One voice · Audible UK

    Only 191 people have rated this reading, short of our published bar of 250, so we name it and print no scores for it.

    Hear it · Audible’s clip, its length read from them on load

The recording we mean

Runtime
16h 07m at 1×
Read by
Jennifer Ikeda
Kind
One voice
ASIN
B07956LH4M · Audible UK
Rated in
Audible UK and US · 6,018 + 749 ratings of the performance
Judged on
6,764 ratings of the narration
Published
W. F. Howes Ltd · 2018

Audible sorts a search by newest, so ours may not be the first one you are offered. The runtime is the check: if the one in front of you says 16h 07m, that is the reading these numbers describe. “Judged on” is the crowd behind every judgement we make about this reading: the smaller of the performance and story counts, which is why it is a little under the two shop counts added. We do not link out to a shop, and we take nothing if you buy there.