Siddhartha
It tells a story. Hardcover files this book as fiction, and its readers there call it relaxing, inspiring and reflective. Facts, not factors: neither plays any part in our call.
Either. Don't overthink it
It comes out level, but not because nothing is happening: Harish Bhimani’s reading sits behind the book itself (in the bottom 16% of our shelf of books, on 320 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
4h 32m to listen, at 1×3h 38m to listen, at 1.25×3h 01m to listen, at 1.5×2h 35m to listen, at 1.75×2h 16m to listen, at 2×about 5 hours to readabout 4 hours to readabout 3 hours to readabout 2½ hours to readabout 2 hours to read
The runtime is Audible’s own, shown at the speed beside it. The reading time is our estimate: 152 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: 152 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: 152 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: 152 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: 152 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
Harder work in audio than Slaughterhouse-Five.
About as much work in audio as most of the books we hold.
About as much work in audio as most of the fiction we hold.
Harder work in audio than 75% of the short books we hold.
Reading load against listening load
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.
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
- −0.38It 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
- −0.44Harish Bhimani’s reading is less well received than the book it came from: in the bottom 16% of our shelf of books, on 320 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. That is measured on standardised figures rather than on the stars in the charts below, and here the two disagree: listeners mark a performance higher than a story as a rule, 4.62 against 4.54 across our shelf, so this recording’s 4.49 for the performance beside 4.47 for the story is not the level pair it looks. Against their own crowds they are −0.56 and −0.28, which is the same sum the toggle over those charts does. Before we allowed for how many people rated it, the reading stood in the bottom 16% of our shelf of books. The gap between the two places is us declining to let a handful of ratings move a verdict. That is the second mark on the bar, and it is the one our line is applied to: a rule tested on the damped number would pass the same recording at 25 ratings and fail it at 5,000. 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 −0.15. 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
- −0.36It 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 916,598 Goodreads ratings and 1,589 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
- 320 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
- 0.98How 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 reading320 people have rated this reading: enough to lean onThe second sourceHardcover knows this book, with 1,589 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
We would need 40 reviews from each crowd before setting the two side by side, and only 29 of the reviews we read said they listened to it. So we are not drawing this one.
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.
overallAudible
overall, pooled by the shop, so we hold no ruler for it
366 ratings · performance and story, as the shop pools them
the performanceAudible
the performance, against Audible’s own crowd
How often this goes badly4.4% 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%.
14 of 321 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.
321 ratings
the story, as heardAudible
the story, as heard, against Audible’s own crowd
320 ratings
the book itselfGoodreads
the book itself, against Goodreads’ own crowd
916,598 ratings
Every reading we hold
7 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.
- Harish Bhimaniour pick4h 32m3h 38m3h 01m2h 35m2h 16m · One voice · Audible UK
Performance 4.49 · Story 4.47 · 320 rated the reading · 4.4% 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
- Michael A. Smithtoo few ratings to judge3h 47m3h 02m2h 31m2h 10m1h 54m · One voice · Audible UK
Only 13 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
- James Langtontoo few ratings to judge4h 09m3h 19m2h 46m2h 22m2h 05m · One voice · Audible UK
Only 33 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
- Paul Ansdelltoo few ratings to judge4h 42m3h 46m3h 08m2h 41m2h 21m · One voice · Audible UK
Only 47 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
- Mike Vendettitoo few ratings to judge4h 05m3h 16m2h 43m2h 20m2h 02m · One voice · Audible UK
Only 6 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
- David Crosstoo few ratings to judge4h 26m3h 33m2h 57m2h 32m2h 13m · One voice · Audible UK
Only 57 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
- Samantha Novaktoo few ratings to judge4h 09m3h 19m2h 46m2h 22m2h 05m · One voice · Audible UK
Only 7 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
- 4h 32m at 1×
- Read by
- Harish Bhimani
- Kind
- One voice
- ASIN
- B004FTE7EC · Audible UK
- Judged on
- 320 ratings of the narration
- Published
- Alpha DVD · 2010
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 4h 32m, 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.