The Master and Margarita
It tells a story. Hardcover files this book as fiction, and its readers there call it funny, challenging and mysterious. Facts, not factors: neither plays any part in our call.
Read it
Audio is doing this one no favours: 15 readers call it slow and 17% of the reviews we read called it demanding. That is a book that wants a page you can turn back to. Julian Rhind-Tutt’s reading itself is well liked (in the top 9% of our shelf of books, on 4,047 ratings of the narration). This is about the book, not the voice.
Length does not decide this
16h 52m to listen, at 1×13h 30m to listen, at 1.25×11h 15m to listen, at 1.5×9h 38m to listen, at 1.75×8h 26m to listen, at 2×about 12 hours to readabout 9 hours to readabout 7 hours to readabout 6 hours to readabout 4½ hours to read
The runtime is Audible’s own, shown at the speed beside it. The reading time is our estimate: 372 pages at 30 pages an hour, the pace you told us. Ours is 50, about 300 words a page, read at 250 a minute. Treat the reading estimate as a floor on this one: this one runs 2.7 minutes of narration a page against a shelf median of 1.9, so there is more on each page than our 300-word average assumes and it will take you longer than we say.The runtime is Audible’s own, shown at the speed beside it. The reading time is our estimate: 372 pages at 40 pages an hour, the pace you told us. Ours is 50, about 300 words a page, read at 250 a minute. Treat the reading estimate as a floor on this one: this one runs 2.7 minutes of narration a page against a shelf median of 1.9, so there is more on each page than our 300-word average assumes and it will take you longer than we say.The runtime is Audible’s own, shown at the speed beside it. The reading time is our estimate: 372 pages at 50 pages an hour, which is about 300 words a page, read at 250 a minute. Treat the reading estimate as a floor on this one: this one runs 2.7 minutes of narration a page against a shelf median of 1.9, so there is more on each page than our 300-word average assumes and it will take you longer than we say.The runtime is Audible’s own, shown at the speed beside it. The reading time is our estimate: 372 pages at 65 pages an hour, the pace you told us. Ours is 50, about 300 words a page, read at 250 a minute. Treat the reading estimate as a floor on this one: this one runs 2.7 minutes of narration a page against a shelf median of 1.9, so there is more on each page than our 300-word average assumes and it will take you longer than we say.The runtime is Audible’s own, shown at the speed beside it. The reading time is our estimate: 372 pages at 80 pages an hour, the pace you told us. Ours is 50, about 300 words a page, read at 250 a minute. Treat the reading estimate as a floor on this one: this one runs 2.7 minutes of narration a page against a shelf median of 1.9, so there is more on each page than our 300-word average assumes and it will take you longer than we say.
If you must listen → dedicated listening only
Harder work in audio than The Handmaid's Tale.
Harder work in audio than 92% of the books we hold.
Harder work in audio than 91% of the fiction we hold.
Harder work in audio than 91% of the long books we hold.
Reading load against listening load
Where that puts this one among the books we hold: in the top 8% of our shelf of books for effort on the page and in the top 7% of our shelf of books for 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
- −0.58It sits in the bottom 24% of our shelf of books for how far the recording outruns the page. Past the line where we start backing the page.
- Narration payoff
- 0.83Julian Rhind-Tutt’s reading is better received than the book it came from: in the top 9% of our shelf of books, on 4,047 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 −0.23. 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
- 0.39It 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 450,433 Goodreads ratings and 540 on Hardcover, each scored inside its own population first, and never added together.
For the page
- A hard text to follow by ear
- The crowds’ regard did not reach the line where we protect a first read, this reason did not apply
For the recording
- The voice beats the book
- 4,047 listeners behind it
So the case for the page won it, but only just.
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 reading4,047 people have rated this reading: as good as it getsThe second sourceHardcover knows this book, with 540 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 27 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
4,739 ratings · performance and story, as the shop pools them
the performanceAudible
the performance, against Audible’s own crowd
How often this goes badly2.5% of the people who rated the performance gave it one or two stars. About typical for the shelf. The middle of our shelf is 2.0%, and half of it falls between 1.0% and 3.1%.
103 of 4,056 listeners gave the performance one or two stars
The shape of the room
- United, this one
- Warm
- Split
- Lukewarm
A united room: 78% of the listeners gave the performance five stars. A room that agrees this far leaves little to gamble on.
4,056 ratings
the story, as heardAudible
the story, as heard, against Audible’s own crowd
4,047 ratings
the book itselfGoodreads
the book itself, against Goodreads’ own crowd
450,433 ratings
Every reading we hold
One complete reading of this book, and it is the reading every audio figure above is measured on. If there is another, we have not found it. The shelf grows in reviewed batches, never because somebody searched for a book.
- Julian Rhind-Tuttour pick16h 52m13h 30m11h 15m9h 38m8h 26m · One voice · Audible UK and US
Performance 4.67 · Story 4.40 · 4,047 rated the reading · 2.5% 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
2 other listings we set aside, listed with the reason for eacheach one is sold as this book and is not a complete reading of it
- Julian Rhind-Tutt8h 21m6h 41m5h 34m4h 46m4h 11m · 48 ratingsAbridged: it runs 50% of the full reading
- David Catlin, Thomas Cox, Lawrence DiStasi, Christine Dunford, Laura Eason, Joy Gregory, Doug Hara1h 45m1h 24m1h 10m1h 00m53 min · 9 ratingsNot a straight reading of the book
The recording we mean
- Runtime
- 16h 52m at 1×
- Read by
- Julian Rhind-Tutt
- Kind
- One voice
- ASIN
- B004FU28QU · Audible UK
- Rated in
- Audible UK and US · 1,184 + 2,872 ratings of the performance
- Judged on
- 4,047 ratings of the narration
- Published
- Naxos AudioBooks · 2009
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 52m, 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.