Registered to express my issues with where album rankings which are going nuts at the moment, I am afraid mainly because of album of the year voting. Age Bias: One issue that I've noticed is that older albums tend to receive higher ratings. Genre Biases: It's disheartening to observe that albums from niche genres often receive lower ratings simply because they don't resonate with some members. My advise don't rate down albums from genre you just don't enjoy listen to - you just skew the rating.Notably, I've observed that albums from more extreme genres, such as extreme death metal, tend to be consistently underrated and only big names are able to keep higher scores. Voting wars for Album of the Year drive top 20 to become collection of the most clichéd, mainstream albums, which tend to accumulate votes from their numerous fans, overshadowing hidden gems from smaller bands which are voted down very quickly by few votes. Recommended solution? Do not publish Album of the Year for at least one year maybe even three. Wrong reasons for voting will stop and it will restore its value as general overview. At the moment it seems Tomb Mold and Dying Fetus released very subpar albums in their catalogue. Truth is those albums are their masterpieces and if not the best then one of the very best offerings they put forward. Same happens now with latest masterpiece of Sulphur Aeon collecting suddenly 7 and 6s by people I believe have no business rating this record. First of all how can you rate an album which is not even 2 weeks old? What can you really tell about it lasting value and how it compares with the rest of discography? I would not dare to rank Sulphur Aeon at the moment I know I love it so it is at least 8 but how this will settle, will I come back to it in a month its long impact will determine if it is 8 or a 10. At the moment it is not possible to decide.

Yeah, genre and age bias exist and are the sole reason why I don't take ratings seriously. Here or in any other site. If I want to find something I might like I need to observe how particular people voted or commented on a certain album.
There is also another bias you didn't mention: the popularity bias. Popular bands tend to get more good grades because they are the bands most people listen to. The average newcomer metalhead will be discovering the popular bands for the first time and finding them awesome, and handling 9s and 10s to all of them. Meanwhile the underground bands do not receive those votes... Also some people listen to always the same bands without much variation, and these bands are bound to all be popular (ie, newcomer metalhead found them first due to popularity, and then never dropped them even after becoming seasoned metalhead); when this happens the metalhead will tend to vote for those whenever they appear on polls without bothering to listen (unbiasedly) to the other nominees.

Unfortunately, I don't think there is a way of fixing those bias, otherwise any other site would have done it already, but if you go to rym or metal-archives, the same things happen there. If I'm not mistaken there was some discussion here on this site while ago about some ways of weighting the votes or something, but I don't know where it was posted and what happened of all of it.

Anyway... You can see it as a mirror of democracy. Maybe you who are more into it can see clearly the options people take are often not the best, but ultimately it's how they choose, and the votes go for whatever is the most chosen, not to whatever really is best.

Agree that biases are hard to resolve. Popularity bias indeed exists and I touched upon it when mentioning that smaller bands are easier to vote down with couple of votes while by sheer number of positive votes bigger bands cannot be voted down so easily by few ranking warriors.
Sad but True that there is no perfect method to beat those biases, but I think this site is experiencing it especially bad latest couple of years and this maybe fixed by not publishing Top 20 ranking from ongoing year. I just hate that moment like recently where latest Stortregn was immediately killed by voters the very moment it hit 20 votes and showed in Top 20. Thats a pattern now and it disgusts me with this ranking.

Written by mde017 on 19.10.2023 at 10:04

I just hate that moment like recently where latest Stortregn was immediately killed by voters the very moment it hit 20 votes and showed in Top 20. Thats a pattern now and it disgusts me with this ranking.

Or maybe you have the regular borderline rating abusers upvoting albums on release day and when the rest of the users start rating the albums it flattens out to a more "correct" rating. As with Stortregn, I'd say that 7.8 is both a fair and a good rating that reflects the album well. I don't know for how long you've been lurking around before creating your account, but if you've been here for a while you should have noticed that way too many albums have way higher ratings than they deserve rather the other way around. This is mainly because many users like to spam 10s on release day to every album they come across. And finally, the more users rating an album, the more we'll get a balanced average rating for said album.

@Nejde Maybe though rating is just one big abuse both for fans giviing tens on a day of release or non fans giving 5s and 6s couple of hours after it hits top 20 list. Rankings here are not correct they are actually kind of joke with biases discussed above in full display. According to rankings Dying Fetus just released worse album this year then the previous one. Is that the case - of course not this is one of their masterpieces but previous was not hitting top 20 so I guess only people who actually like brutal death metal voted for it and this one got a lot of votes from people who have no business listen to Dying Fetus trying to push it down in rankings. I agree with Karlabos that similar biases are on rym but because there are more people there and there is no top 20 list published there is less of abuse. Here the ranking is seriously broken. The highest scored album this year does not crack the list in 90s and 00s. Is it because music is so shit this year? Dont think so frankly.

Written by mde017 on 19.10.2023 at 21:37

@Nejde Maybe though rating is just one big abuse both for fans giviing tens on a day of release or non fans giving 5s and 6s couple of hours after it hits top 20 list. Rankings here are not correct they are actually kind of joke with biases discussed above in full display. According to rankings Dying Fetus just released worse album this year then the previous one. Is that the case - of course not this is one of their masterpieces but previous was not hitting top 20 so I guess only people who actually like brutal death metal voted for it and this one got a lot of votes from people who have no business listen to Dying Fetus trying to push it down in rankings. I agree with Karlabos that similar biases are on rym but because there are more people there and there is no top 20 list published there is less of abuse. Here the ranking is seriously broken. The highest scored album this year does not crack the list in 90s and 00s. Is it because music is so shit this year? Dont think so frankly.

Older albums have had decades to grow and become classics so it's absolutely normal that they are rated higher than newer albums. And while the annual top 20 just needs 20 votes the top 200 needs 200 votes. And trust me, I skim through the ratings on the top 200 from time to time deleting quite a lot of 10s given by users long gone from the site that had several hundreds or even thousands of 10s and it doesn't matter if the 10 was for a true classic or just some random albums they upvoted just because they liked the bands.
And if we have users upvoting with 9s and 10s I say that those who "downvote" with 5s and 6s just balances out the rating to a more fair rating. And giving a 6 which on our site means 'average' to an average album like Dying Fetus for instance (I like my fair share of brutal death but Dying Fetus has never done anything for me) is completely fine and there's nothing strange with that at all. Just because you think they deserve to be in the top 20 doesn't mean that you are correct and everybody else is wrong. The general consensus of those who voted for the album is that it's not good enough to be in the top 20 and that's that.
And finally, who are you to say which bands people can listen to or not?

Quote:
And finally, who are you to say which bands people can listen to or not?

That is ridiculous spin of my words which ends our conversation. Everybody can listen to whatever they want and vote for whatever crap mickey mouse list is there of course. Useless opinion is still an opinion and everybody is entiltled to it I wanted contribute to improve crap rankings which this site puts forward but seems you are happy with them so great I will stop caring about ranking here.

Written by mde017 on 18.10.2023 at 09:28

Same happens now with latest masterpiece of Sulphur Aeon collecting suddenly 7 and 6s by people I believe have no business rating this record.

Is it though? A spin of your words?

For the record, you make some valid points. We are aware of the problems, and we have been trying to find a way for a long time now. It is not that easy, believe me. We also have to take into account that, at the end of the day, we are relying on users' common sense in order to have representative ratings.

Yes it is nasty spin of my words because the fact that I believe someone has no business rating a record because of his voting history e.g no positive score for any death metal album does not mean I refuse his right to listen or rate.
All I am saying and anyone with constrictive approach is that there are users who pollute ratings because (here are many reasons so I will give an example one) they are obsessed with top 20 list and the fact that Sulphur Aean is ahead of their beloved X band. Good that you are chasing out people who blatantly pollute lists with 10s and 1s only but there is still too many people who rate for wrong sport reasons. That is why I don't rate - I have not sorted yet for myself fair way to do it. At the moment I am afraid I would be giving 10s to my 8s and 9s just because my sense of unfair downrating. I rather not vote untill I am more in relaxed mindset to present really factual opinion.
I am sorry for harsh words got carried away - I know it is not easy because of lower users base for this site then for instance Rate your music bigger user pools detracts sporty rankers because their impact becomes miniumum. Site is great and useful to me that s why maybe I am more emotional on its shortcomings.

If only one day people -- and I mean everyone of us -- would start disregarding the average scores and instead solely focus on their own assessment of an album and apply our rating scale accordingly.

Quote:

Quote:

Is it though? A spin of your words?

Bit more why it is a nasty spin.
Let me provide a more detailed explanation for why I believe that some people should refrain from voting for bands like Dying Fetus or Sulphur Aeon, for example. Take, for instance, the user @PROKL. Upon examining his voting history, it's clear that he doesn't fit the typical abuser profile. While he does have clear musical preferences, it's essential to acknowledge that everyone is entitled to their own tastes, and I respect that.

However, when it comes to death metal, it's evident that this individual is not an avid listener of the genre. I noticed that he voted for more extreme death metal bands on two occasions, and coincidentally, both of these albums happen to be in the top 20 list. He voted for the latest Dying Fetus release and Gorguts' "Obscura." I find it difficult to understand the rationale behind voting for albums that one doesn't genuinely appreciate, comprehend, or likely listen to regularly.

I would even wager that he hasn't given these albums more than a single listen.

Summarizing - do I believe that he has no business to rate complex extreme death metal records. Of course yes. Does it mean I say which bands people can listen to or not?
Of course not. I am all for listening to Dying Fetus and Gorguts but maybe just an advise not as an excuse to downrank them, but to enjoy complex, challenging but rewarding piece of music. I would add though that if someone really would honestly like to discover what is it in this death metal people are so into those are not the best starting points. Even Cannibal Corpse is an easier starting point but I would personally recommend bands like Death, Nocturnus, Bolt Thrower, Unleashed, Gorefest - bit more accessible bands ( there is no easy path in death metal though)

I understand what you mean. It would be nice if all of us could have what is called an "informed opinion". If someone has listened to 3 death metal albums in their life in total, it is clear that they have inadequate knowledge of the genre, which would lead to a non-informed opinion, but an opinion nonetheless. And it is impossible to regulate that, even if we wanted to (but obviously we don't). Then you have the issue of individual taste. There is not just one parameter at play, when we talk about album ratings. There have been many moderators in the history of the website, myself included, trying to fix the issue, but there are always going to be loopholes. Now, Nejde has taken over a role that is not pleasant for anyone. You will be shocked at the abuse we get in our inbox from users, simply for telling them to respect the rules of the website when rating.

Anyway, what I do instead, is what Karlabos mentioned above: I look at how certain users have rated or commented on an album, and pay zero attention to the overall rating a release has either on here or over at RYM. I mean, from the current MS Top-20, only 3 albums would make my own top-20, but I find most of the albums here listenable, at least. From the current RYM top-20 in metal, which, according to my taste, is largely awful and a fucking joke, I would put only one or two albums in my own top-20.

Written by mde017 on 22.10.2023 at 11:36
Summarizing - do I believe that he has no business to rate complex extreme death metal records.

I wholeheartedly agree with you. If you can't prove that you have an extensive extreme metal collection, you shouldn't be allowed to rate complex death metal albums.

Also, no one under the age of 30 should be allowed to rate any thrash metal classic from the 80s, because only those who were born before the release of Kill 'Em All and Show No Mercy can truly understand what thrash metal was all about back then. You want to dole out a couple of ratings for your favorite alternative metal albums? That's totally fine, but please upload a profile photo so anyone can see that you actually have a goatee. Needless to say, the same goes for black metal and corpse paint. Furthermore, I find it very inappropriate when people from southern Europe presume to rate Scandinavian (!) viking metal. And if you don't even own a single pair of camo shorts, then please show some dignity and keep your dirty hands off the ratings for Tampa Bay death metal.

Written by Starvynth on 22.10.2023 at 15:27

Written by mde017 on 22.10.2023 at 11:36
Summarizing - do I believe that he has no business to rate complex extreme death metal records.

I wholeheartedly agree with you. If you can't prove that you have an extensive extreme metal collection, you shouldn't be allowed to rate complex death metal albums.

Also, no one under the age of 30 should be allowed to rate any thrash metal classic from the 80s, because only those who were born before the release of Kill 'Em All and Show No Mercy can truly understand what thrash metal was all about back then. You want to dole out a couple of ratings for your favorite alternative metal albums? That's totally fine, but please upload a profile photo so anyone can see that you actually have a goatee. Needless to say, the same goes for black metal and corpse paint. Furthermore, I find it very inappropriate when people from southern Europe presume to rate Scandinavian (!) viking metal. And if you don't even own a single pair of camo shorts, then please show some dignity and keep your dirty hands off the ratings for Tampa Bay death metal.

I see that you're attempting a reductio ad absurdum argument, but I still hold my opinion that expressing one's views on genres about which they lack knowledge or familiarity is weak, and in this case, distorting. Everyone has the right to their opinion, but a layperson's opinion is not on par with that of an expert. I find it somewhat amusing to see people voting for bands or genres they have no knowledge of because in the '90s, posing as someone you're not was frowned upon in the scene, but now it seems to be acceptable. Posers rule the day

Written by mde017 on 22.10.2023 at 11:36

[...] However, when it comes to death metal, it's evident that this individual is not an avid listener of the genre. I noticed that he voted for more extreme death metal bands on two occasions, and coincidentally, both of these albums happen to be in the top 20 list. He voted for the latest Dying Fetus release and Gorguts' "Obscura." I find it difficult to understand the rationale behind voting for albums that one doesn't genuinely appreciate, comprehend, or likely listen to regularly.

I would even wager that he hasn't given these albums more than a single listen.

Or you can take me for example. I usually don't spend more than 10 minutes on albums I don't like, assessing between 4 and 7 depending on hints of objective quality. Also, I sometimes try to listen to metalcore, ending up not liking it once again. Same for most popular melodeath. There are genres I know I don't like but sometimes try, because that's how taste grows.

By your logic, someone should only rate genres they built some expertise in. But that's also a bias since it would mean they already love the genre, so all of the albums would be rated positively. You also believe that the rating has to be objective, if I understand your argument correctly. And so an Evanescence fan has no business rating brutal death. But the rating is just a number. You better rely on comments, or reviews, or forums if you want to find constructive opinion, as for the rating, it's always gonna create problems.

While I agree with the fact that anyone can rate anything dilutes the rating and bury the niche interesting records, profiting the mainstream ones, the solution to the problem does not lay in a rating system.

Written by nikarg on 22.10.2023 at 15:26

I mean, from the current MS Top-20, only 3 albums would make my own top-20, but I find most of the albums here listenable, at least. From the current RYM top-20 in metal, which, according to my taste, is largely awful and a fucking joke, I would put only one or two albums in my own top-20.

I must say that I prefer RYM lists way more - I find it way more informative in finding new interesting music. As mentioned, this site boasts many excellent features, with a particular emphasis on new releases and upcoming ones. I genuinely appreciate its functionality (the only minor suggestion I have is to include the genre in the main view, but that's a minor point). However, the rating system on this site is significantly skewed, and the top 20 list appears to be rather irrelevant, mainly driven by popular bands from very specific subgenres.

I do acknowledge that addressing this issue isn't straightforward, but I firmly stand by my opinion that, at the very least, the site should refrain from publishing the top 20 list for the current year or consider only allowing albums to be listed two months after their release. This change would help deter the manipulation of ratings by posers.

Written by Starvynth on 22.10.2023 at 15:27

No one under the age of 30 should be allowed to rate any thrash metal classic from the 80s, because only those who were born before the release of Kill 'Em All and Show No Mercy can truly understand what thrash metal was all about back then. You want to dole out a couple of ratings for your favorite alternative metal albums? That's totally fine, but please upload a profile photo so anyone can see that you actually have a goatee. Needless to say, the same goes for black metal and corpse paint. Furthermore, I find it very inappropriate when people from southern Europe presume to rate Scandinavian (!) viking metal. And if you don't even own a single pair of camo shorts, then please show some dignity and keep your dirty hands off the ratings for Tampa Bay death metal.

I understand, while I think it's also a bad thing if albums which are not that great get overrated by die hard fanboys, even though it has an historical explaination. They are a couple of oldies records objectively bad if you ask. But it's musically objective and not coulturally objective. In fact even in an effort of objectivity the assesment fails to work.

What's more interesting I think is to analyse the voters pool. To see that the album is praised by a bunch of oldies who were there at the times when there was no internet is relevant information. To see the ratings are from juvenile teenagers who don't know shit is relevant too. Same if you have a bunch of niche scene voting, or if it's mainstream appeal. If the grade was pushed through market communication by a big label. If the praise is specific to a certain country or city or time period... These are all examples.

If you mix all the ratings you get nothing at once in result. - This forum thread will have me pledge I always write a comment below albums I vote to give my reasons.

Written by Ansercanagicus on 23.10.2023 at 09:43


Or you can take me for example. I usually don't spend more than 10 minutes on albums I don't like, assessing between 4 and 7 depending on hints of objective quality. Also, I sometimes try to listen to metalcore, ending up not liking it once again. Same for most popular melodeath. There are genres I know I don't like but sometimes try, because that's how taste grows.

By your logic, someone should only rate genres they built some expertise in. But that's also a bias since it would mean they already love the genre, so all of the albums would be rated positively. You also believe that the rating has to be objective, if I understand your argument correctly. And so an Evanescence fan has no business rating brutal death. But the rating is just a number. You better rely on comments, or reviews, or forums if you want to find constructive opinion, as for the rating, it's always gonna create problems.

While I agree with the fact that anyone can rate anything dilutes the rating and bury the niche interesting records, profiting the mainstream ones, the solution to the problem does not lay in a rating system.

I have my doubts how valuable are rates provided on 10 minutes sample of music. I am old enough though to know that my way of listening to music is not the only right one If it works for you and you feel you give some insight by your ranking all the power to you.
Regarding your comment on rating being just a number - well then we should all stop immediately to rank. I dont agree with this statement though as rankings can be really helpful. I found thanks to RYM ranking quite a lot of niche interesting music, and ranking can be really good guide for newcomers to a genre as well e.g. for me in the world of metalcore RYM ranking was quite useful and today I am a big fan of Converge or The Dillinger Escape Plan. I did not get to like their records in 10 minutes though

This sounds suspiciously like gatekeeping. Getting very strong "You can't have an opinion on this because you aren't one of us" vibes from all this.

It doesn't sound like gatekeeping to me, and I actually agree with what he/she is saying.
I personally don't like metalcore, so I don't rate it. Maybe I have in the past if I've really given it a try and really had an opinion on it. But in general I won't rate a metalcore album. Many people love metalcore, so I'm assuming this is a "me" problem.

Written by Ball Fondlers on 02.11.2023 at 09:38

It doesn't sound like gatekeeping to me, and I actually agree with what he/she is saying.
I personally don't like metalcore, so I don't rate it. Maybe I have in the past if I've really given it a try and really had an opinion on it. But in general I won't rate a metalcore album. Many people love metalcore, so I'm assuming this is a "me" problem.

That's the wrong mindset, you should always assume that your opinion is perfect and that anyone who disagrees with it is stupid, that's how the internet works

Written by Ball Fondlers on 02.11.2023 at 09:38

I personally don't like metalcore, so I don't rate it. ... I'm assuming this is a "me" problem.

Where is the "problem"?

Written by Redel on 02.11.2023 at 11:33

Written by Ball Fondlers on 02.11.2023 at 09:38

I personally don't like metalcore, so I don't rate it. ... I'm assuming this is a "me" problem.

Where is the "problem"?

Funnily enough it is a problem for me. All my festival going friends here in Germany exclusively like metalcore/hardcore and hate on traditional stuff. It annoys me quite a bit. But not enough to come on here and rate every metacore band a 2

Written by Ball Fondlers on 02.11.2023 at 13:11

All my festival going friends here in Germany exclusively like metalcore/hardcore and hate on traditional stuff.

Time for new friends then?

Written by Redel on 02.11.2023 at 13:25

Written by Ball Fondlers on 02.11.2023 at 13:11

All my festival going friends here in Germany exclusively like metalcore/hardcore and hate on traditional stuff.

Time for new friends then?

I wish. I don't make friends easily

Written by M C Vice on 02.11.2023 at 03:51

This sounds suspiciously like gatekeeping. Getting very strong "You can't have an opinion on this because you aren't one of us" vibes from all this.

Depending on your interpretation of gatekeeping, my stance may differ. I am a proponent of informed and educated ratings. If you believe that I am denying younger generations the right to rate death metal albums because they weren't present during the genre's initial explosion and the creation of its classics, then you have misunderstood my position. I, too, was too young to witness the thrash metal explosion, but I believe I've caught up and can engage in fair discussions and ratings of thrash metal albums. Everybody can contribute if they have something to contribute irregardless of age or other factors.

However, if your understanding of gatekeeping is that I'm barring people who have only listened to a handful of albums in a genre and want to rank them for the sake of competition, then, yes, I am in favor of gatekeeping. Such practices erode the value I associate with rating albums. The sole value I perceive in these ratings is not in creating trivial top 10 lists, but in providing recommendations to newcomers seeking a starting point.

There is nothing inherently wrong with the concept of being a "novice." Novices should explore and learn before they begin actively contributing. Call it gatekeeping if you will, that is how I feel and I gatekeep myself from discussing and rating genres I am a novice in.

Written by mde017 on 02.11.2023 at 17:52

providing recommendations to newcomers seeking a starting point.

This is what reviews are supposed to provide, not average rating scores.

Written by Redel on 02.11.2023 at 18:26

Written by mde017 on 02.11.2023 at 17:52

providing recommendations to newcomers seeking a starting point.

This is what reviews are supposed to provide, not average rating scores.

I find reviews to be more valuable when I am well-versed in a particular genre, as they help me navigate through the limited time available and the almost boundless array of choices. When you're just starting to explore a genre, average scores often serve as a helpful starting point. They can also act as a reliable indicator of which bands are worth investigating initially. In addition, they provide direction on which album to begin with when delving into a new band.

Written by mde017 on 02.11.2023 at 20:33

average scores often serve as a helpful starting point. They can also act as a reliable indicator of which bands are worth investigating initially.

Provided this indicator actually is reliable, that is, and provided you know for what precisely it is reliable.

Written by Redel on 02.11.2023 at 21:14

Written by mde017 on 02.11.2023 at 20:33

average scores often serve as a helpful starting point. They can also act as a reliable indicator of which bands are worth investigating initially.

Provided this indicator actually is reliable, that is, and provided you know for what precisely it is reliable.

Absolutely, well said even if with tongue in cheek . This is precisely why I support discouraging voters who focus solely on the top 20 list and those who vote en masse without thinking.