So do I, it's too many options and ratings are better without a middle option (that is the # of choices should be even) because uncertain people go too often for the middle option, if there is one.
Is it not a good thing if there is a middle option and you are not forced to unbalance yourself towards a negative or positive rating?
Is not also a good thing that there is an equal number of positive and negative options (specularity)? In the previous model there were only two negative options ("horrible" and "quite bad"), but there were three positive options ("good", "very good", "excellent").
Is it not a good thing that the new words are more open to interpretation? What does "horrible" mean? If a piece has a nice tune and someone votes "horrible", you might have the impression that the voter is saying that the tune is horrible, while in reality maybe he thinks only that the piece is boring and unoriginal and he doesn't care too much about "nice tunes".
Finally, is not a good thing that there is now the possibility to say that a piece is not only excellent, but one of the best pieces of classical music? Or that a piece is excellent but there are still better pieces?