I have noticed that the average ratings for the top 20 albums per year seem to be steadily declining since 2005 or so, from a median of about 8.8 to 8.2 for 2010 so far

This would seem to imply that the general quality of metal has been dropping since then. That might well be the case; there is no guarantee that every year ought to have the same quality, but of course, there are also other plausible alternative explanations... People getting more picky or plain old ranking manipulation as the website gains more members who follow the top albums of the year.

What do you think? Is there an unwarranted bias against newer releases because of this or is metal really getting worse in general for the past 5 years or so?

We've been trying to be more strict with rating abusers in the past few years so this could well be the reason as well... We're basically banning people who rate everything with a 10. In other words, the newer ratings should logically be a little more accurate than the older ratings.

Its not an exact science though but you should be aware of our attempts at weeding out the abusers if you want to discuss how the ratings have changed over the years.

Written by Dologan on 22.06.2010 at 04:25

I have noticed that the average ratings for the top 20 albums per year seem to be steadily declining since 2005 or so, from a median of about 8.8 to 8.2 for 2010 so far

This would seem to imply that the general quality of metal has been dropping since then. That might well be the case; there is no guarantee that every year ought to have the same quality, but of course, there are also other plausible alternative explanations... People getting more picky or plain old ranking manipulation as the website gains more members who follow the top albums of the year.

What do you think? Is there an unwarranted bias against newer releases because of this or is metal really getting worse in general for the past 5 years or so?

Rating everything a 10 is more unacceptable now, like Jupitreas said, plus:
ever since the top albums per year charts became prominent, people are more eager to see their favorite releases at #1, meaning downgrading the albums above it if it isn't...
More members = more downgrading each year

Also there is the happy fun trend of album tanking. douchebags who like Band A's shiny new cd will turn around and vote down other bands that have also put out great albums in the same year to sandbag their ranking... you'll see folks who have 2 2010 albums with "10" and eight 2010 releases with a "1".

we try to proactively police rankings, but we have better things to do than look up each and every album to see if folks are sandbagging it.

I will be the voice of naïve optimism here: maybe most members now rate new releases more objectively?

Could be because great artistic music is becoming harder to creat as a result of all the other previous astounding makings by legends.

Bumped for visibility as it's currently a point of discussion in the shoutbox.

to further on my sandbagging comment, i think it's certainly become more prevalent.

the trend "starts" at roughly the same time as the site had had several years to take off and grow in community and as the boss man added more wonderful features.

it stands to reason more folks are going to be more aggressive in promoting their favorite release of the year in a current year rather than going back 15 years. This is why the trend seems current. in reality, what's the point of fucking with ratings more than 20 years old? but the current top 20 shows up on the front page from time to time and people cannot simply accept the prevailing tastes of others. (People try to sandbag the top 100 of all time as well, but with the sheer number of votes, casting a 1 for "Master of Puppets" because you prefer megadave won't impact the overall rating much).

take Overkill's Ironbound. it's currently hovering at #5 of 2010 with an 8.23. it also has 8 "1" votes. i honestly do not think any rational metal fan could convince me that they think that album is pure shit and the worst thing ever put to record. even if you don't like the particular style of music, a rational fan would be capable of at least acknowledging the band's skills in execution as well as quality of production...

the reason it has 8 "1" votes is it, for a short time, sat atop the polls as the best of 2010.

so people who have other ponies in the race tanked it.

occasionally i go through the lists and if a voter has an irregular history (all 10s and 1s) i nuke 'em. however some people seem to have a nice wide spread of voting habits, so i must assume that those people just have incredibly bad taste and are incapable of even giving credit where credit is due. i remember who these individuals are and pretty much dismiss their point of view in regards to discussing the worthiness or unworthiness of any release.

I learnt to not take the votes too seriously when considering whether to check an album out. I would rather view who voted to guide me because after using this site for over a year, I have quite a good idea of some user's voting style and taste. That's why I still love the voting system and thank you, Ivan ^ ^

But I still get annoyed when seeing so many down votes on some really good releases. Sometimes I feel like reporting them, but run into the same situation at BitterCOld (i.e. a wide spread of votes), so I can only shake my head haha

It's kind of childish to me why people are fighting to get their favorite albums out on top. I too have been noticing the constant "Top 100 Albums" fight and how the top four releases are constantly changing. I honestly swear I think I saw the #1 album lose its spot in less than 24 hours.

I think the decline is a good sign, it says more about the site than the music I think. As people become more familiar with the site, they realize something with a 7 rating doesn't mean that it's bad. I noticed the general population has sort of matured in that sense, I remember years ago when anything rated lower than an 8.5 meant it was crap, yeah, that problem still exists today, but to a lesser extent I think. People just forget to update their old votes from time to time. I wouldn't say this is the sole reason, but I think it could be a contributing factor.

As far as complaining about the top 100. I'm not one of those people that says "I hate the top 100, I never read it!" I think it's a great thing, but should be taken less seriously, don't think of it as "the best metal albums evrrrr" but more of "albums people need to check out". It also makes for a good starting guide for people first getting into metal. I first joined this site years ago to learn about the genre I was just starting to get into, and that list made for a good starting point. Metal is such a wide genre that it can be a bit...daunting for someone first starting to get into it to try and learn, so I think that offers a really great beginners guide for many people, such as myself. So, point being: A) Stop bitching about the rankings, and B) Don't try and tear it apart, it's not the definitive guide to metal, but more a nice overlook at whats popular in metal at the moment.

I've always loved the top 100 btw, even when none of my favourites are on there. I always find interesting to check up on.

/endrant.

I believe that people now tend to overrate an Album with10, 20 or more years because it became a classic and an influence to other bands. I will be interesting to see, for those albums if after the first years the rates will go up.

I'm sure that's part of it, but people pretty inflate stuff across the board here. used to be when doing a review, scoring something an "8" was interpreted by a lot of people as "that album is crap".

i have no doubts that gamesmanship is as well.

the simple way to check that theory is see who sits on top of 2010, copy/paste the votes into a spread or word document.

check again a week later and see where it stands.

Written by BitterCOld on 22.07.2010 at 22:03

I'm sure that's part of it, but people pretty inflate stuff across the board here. used to be when doing a review, scoring something an "8" was interpreted by a lot of people as "that album is crap".

i have no doubts that gamesmanship is as well.

the simple way to check that theory is see who sits on top of 2010, copy/paste the votes into a spread or word document.

check again a week later and see where it stands.

Here is the top ten charting over a few days interval, with data ready for analysis. Not sure what conclusions can be drawn... but interesting to see nonetheless. Strange how albums can gain or drop so many spots with one additional vote... maybe people are altering their original votes?

Top 10 Data (22 Jul - 2 Aug)

Awesome work. not sure, at that level the difference in albums could be pretty minute.

for fun, should try tracking 2010 top 20, particularly as new releases hit. watch them suddenly appear at the top then crater. that one is most easily impacted by votes and rather than +/- 1 or 2 slots, bands can show up and just disappear based on 3-4 bad votes.

Written by Introspekrieg on 03.08.2010 at 07:18


votes?

i created a spread today tracking the current 2010 top 20, noting position, band, album, score, votes, tens, and ones.

what's funny is checking out the votes cast on certain albums, paying attention to the 1's, and seeing the same names crop up. i caught multiple people doling out multiple ones to top 20 albums, including a couple people with 4 or more "1's" cast for other top 20 albums... and at least two people whose votes i'll probably nuke in a month after i track this a while. (i'd do it now, but don't feel like redoing my spreadsheet once all the albums bounce around in positions. )

most amusing is Overkill still showing strong, despite 9 1's cast...

I think as long as the staff continues on publishing reviews on albums that they feel strongly about, brain positive users will ne able to get the info and recommendations they need

Written by BitterCOld on 05.08.2010 at 02:08

Written by Introspekrieg on 03.08.2010 at 07:18


votes?

i created a spread today tracking the current 2010 top 20, noting position, band, album, score, votes, tens, and ones.

what's funny is checking out the votes cast on certain albums, paying attention to the 1's, and seeing the same names crop up. i caught multiple people doling out multiple ones to top 20 albums, including a couple people with 4 or more "1's" cast for other top 20 albums... and at least two people whose votes i'll probably nuke in a month after i track this a while. (i'd do it now, but don't feel like redoing my spreadsheet once all the albums bounce around in positions. )

most amusing is Overkill still showing strong, despite 9 1's cast...

It will be interesting to see for sure...

It seems completely ludicrous that people would cynically give certain albums a "1" to help their favoured albums getting to the top, but it is sadly also very believeable. Im also stunned that 8 people have given "Ironbound" a score of "1". I can get it might not be everybody's cup of tea, but I cant understand any rational metalhead thinking it has no redeeming factors whatsoever, or that it took no talent to create. Ive even seen rabid haters of St. Anger giving that notoriously maligned album a higher rating than a "1". (I have seen people giving it a 1 though lol) Definitely smells like "tactical voting" to me. I dunno why some fans have to be so incredibly childish....

Written by Doc G. on 21.07.2010 at 21:42

I think the decline is a good sign, it says more about the site than the music I think. As people become more familiar with the site, they realize something with a 7 rating doesn't mean that it's bad. I noticed the general population has sort of matured in that sense, I remember years ago when anything rated lower than an 8.5 meant it was crap, yeah, that problem still exists today, but to a lesser extent I think. People just forget to update their old votes from time to time. I wouldn't say this is the sole reason, but I think it could be a contributing factor.

As far as complaining about the top 100. I'm not one of those people that says "I hate the top 100, I never read it!" I think it's a great thing, but should be taken less seriously, don't think of it as "the best metal albums evrrrr" but more of "albums people need to check out". It also makes for a good starting guide for people first getting into metal. I first joined this site years ago to learn about the genre I was just starting to get into, and that list made for a good starting point. Metal is such a wide genre that it can be a bit...daunting for someone first starting to get into it to try and learn, so I think that offers a really great beginners guide for many people, such as myself. So, point being: A) Stop bitching about the rankings, and B) Don't try and tear it apart, it's not the definitive guide to metal, but more a nice overlook at whats popular in metal at the moment.

I've always loved the top 100 btw, even when none of my favourites are on there. I always find interesting to check up on.

/endrant.

Damn, you like stole my whole post! Anyway, I agree with every word.