Post 'em
all of them
include the usernames, cowards
this isn't autistic, it's just a different way of rating.
it's curved so that "average" is 0.5, basically rating everything on a scale of 5-10 instead of 1-10
>>61137051
The first one is Digisef
the second one is right there in the pic
https://rateyourmusic.com/~geworfenheit
>1 star out of 5
>liked it
I am shaking my head, comrades...
>>61137025
>0.5, neutral, ok
>1.0, acceptable, liked it
>2.5 exceptional, worth buying
what? why would you set up your rating scale like this? just so you can look harsher than you actually are?
2.5 should be "neutral/ok"
I feel like actual autists would want a perfect curve though.
>>61137067
But your fucking the whole average system rating up by doing this pretentious bullshit
see >>61137082
2.5 is supposed to be mediocre and you should rate from there
He's classically trained in music too.
Also applies for film ratings!
this faggot
>>61137032
I know there's a lot wrong with this curve, but seriously
>4.5
>absolutely perfect
>caring about curves
>implying youre not autistic yourselves
>>61137116
post profile
>>61137082
I read some guy's explanation of it, and it kind of made sense. Basically, I think the idea is you use the lowest rating as a baseline for what you like and increase from there so you have more degrees of separation for what you like, and why would you waste your time listening to and rating shit you hated, etc.
Personally, I don't get it. For me, even half stars are too much nuance in a rating system. But anyway, agonizing over your own rating system is stupid and a waste of time, doing it for someone else's is just pathetic
>>61137141
http://rateyourmusic.com/~BAYAR
Keep them coming guys
>>61137025
>2.5; worth buying
>4.0; plan on buying
>>61137025
makes sense. if you have a good filter and aren't just listening to random music, you aren't going to listen to much that is worse than neutral or acceptable
>>61137097
>But your fucking the whole average system rating up by doing this pretentious bullshit
No, you literally don't. Look up at RYM's weighting FAQ
>2.5 should be "neutral/ok"
What if I don't dislike any music? Should I rate everything 2.5 or more?
I don't think so
>>61137223
fuck off retard
>>61137116
fucking avant-teens of RYM
>>61137116
lol his curve is normal and his taste is pretty good for a faggot. I actually talked to him on soulseek. He's nice and shares everything he rates
>>61137164
>1,700 ratings
>100 5.0s and 70 .5s
>>61137025
>>61137032
>>61137074
>>61137109
How can people bitch about "inflated" ratings but be ok with this shit
>>61137239
lol, u dumb or smthn
>>61137244
There's nothing wrong with giving low ratings to albums you don't like.
>>61137245
Hi BAYAR
>>61137254
same guy, other than that I don't really see anything wrong with it I guess
>>61137244
Have you looked at his top? he is no avant-teen at all.
>>61137254
what's wrong with this?
>>61137258
https://rateyourmusic.com/wiki/RYM:Weighting+FAQ
>>61137025
thank God these autists have weighltsss ratings
https://rateyourmusic.com/~Entracte7
>>61137263
It seems odd to give such low-ratings to competently made music.
>>61137277
Hes a disgusting faggot blend of poptimist/avant teen/and pleb.
LOL AQUA IS SO QUIRKY!!!!
>>61137300
Do these people even enjoy music?
The king of autists
http://rateyourmusic.com/~Qwerty100
The best part are his lists and reviews
>>61137313
yes they generally just dont bother giving much thought to the music they dont like
>>61137305
>It seems odd to give such low-ratings to competently made music.
Read my post again.
Maybe he just doesn't like them.
I'm pretty sure there are bands you don't like as much that were as competent as Pink Floyd were.
>>61137283
A .5/5 is such a low score that there would have to be basically no musical merit in an album for it to receive that. I talk shit about people who like Pink Floyd and other /mu/-core, but giving albums by them a .5 is pretty fucking silly.
Same goes for 5/5s but it's slightly more understandable because it is about personal enjoyment of the album after all. How this man found 100 albums that were legitimately perfect for him is crazy to me but whatever
>>61137337
Why are you defending these clowns?
>>61137032
i'm sure i'm just being trolled, but if he really thinks 60% of music is pointless perhaps he should find a different hobby
>>61137097
>>61137223
it fucks up obsscure releases
when the only rating on your favorite obscure release is by an avant-teen
and the rating is a 1.5
it hurts
>>61137337
I understand he might not like them but it seems retarded to give decently-produced albums with good instrumentation the lowest possible rating.
Besides, nothing kills a conversation more decisively than "OPINIONS"
>>61137330
>Federer loses a slam finale
>>61137330
love the scale though
>>61137305
>competently made
honestly though why should that matter to me as a listener, how does that affect the listening experience, whether i liked an album or not?
musical prowess is just a means to an end isnt it
>>61137337
Even if you don't like an album, your distaste for it should still abide by the scale that is most widely accepted so that your scores contribute toward the average score that EVERYONE can see. It's shitty, but that score is the first thing that most people will see, next to the album cover.
>>61137360
>hobby
>>61137403
>NINETY THOUSAND ratings
what's the username, bruv?
>>61137352
I'm not defending them
>>61137360
99% of music is pointless if you are aware of how much music there actually is.
>>61137373
1) Extreme rating scales have lower weightings
2) Stop being a cry baby
>>61137377
>I understand he might not like them but it seems retarded to give decently-produced albums with good instrumentation the lowest possible rating.
No.
You rate music by how much you like it, not by how well produced it is.
Do you have a rym? I'm curious to see what kind of people have these kind of opinions
>Besides, nothing kills a conversation more decisively than "OPINIONS"
Agree
>>61137418
See >>61137293
Even then, having a ratings system were most ratings are 0.5s is completely fine.
>>61137025
I only created the acc a couple of weeks ago
>>61137430
AlRog, he rates singles
can someone please post the one where he only uses 5.0 and 0.5
lost that screencap but I love the rage it provokes
>>61137373
Then just rate it you dweeb. Spread the word around, get other people to rate it. Like, why do you care, anyway? It's just RYM
>>61137377
>this
>a conversation
You're just bitching about someone rating an album you like poorly. Who fucking cares? Some people don't care about production, or instrumentation, or composition, or anything that you might deem important in music. Does that make them wrong?
>>61137403
Holy shit
>>61137466
>that bio
>>61137377
not that guy, but "OPINIONS" do make sense. i for example fucking hate power metal, i know what its set out to do, but it just isn't for me. i would give most power metal albums, no matter how masterfully recorded and written and produced they are, a 1 or 0.5. im not a cunt enough to go out of my way to listene to these records just to give them a low rating; but in any case, people are entitled to give something they don't like 0.5. its totally legit.
Still the best
>>61137443
https://rateyourmusic.com/~Slurpentine
There's my profile.
I'm basically making the affirmation that rating either Pink Floyd's big albums a .5 is ridiculous. I understand he doesn't have to like them but it's plain to anyone listening to those albums they're not complete shit.
>>61137025
How do I put text below the ratings? I can't seem to figure it out :/
>>61137443
>See>>61137293
But you're implying that RYM's algorithm gives people with lots of .5s ZERO credibility in the average scores, which I don't think is true. Yes, their weighting may be significantly reduced, but it could be 15-25% or whatever.
ANY weight given to rating systems like that is a problem. I don't know exactly how RYM computes the numbers though, so yeah.
>>61137523
Account > Rating System
>>61137466
wow the film rating scale is even better
>>61137523
Profile -> Account - Rating System
>>61137484
> Does that make them wrong?
Yeah, I think it does. And talking about that makes it interesting.
>>61137502
>>61137515
>Euphoria
>>61137443
>1) Extreme rating scales have lower weightings
I've seen enough of them myself to know you're full of shit
>>61137484
>Then just rate it you dweeb
I do, it doesn't bump it higher than a 2.50 (unless I rate it a 4.5 or higher)
the only thing I can do is deal with it and carry on rating other stuff
>>61137544
Using examples as markers for scores is fucking stupid.
>>61137515
>I'm basically making the affirmation that rating either Pink Floyd's big albums a .5 is ridiculous.
It's not. You are rating based on personal enjoyment, and not on the objective quality of music nor the amount of work it took to make.
>I understand he doesn't have to like them but it's plain to anyone listening to those albums they're not complete shit.
Go read the reviews from people who gave those albums a 0.5 and then come back.
>>61137532
If you use the 0.5 and 5.0 system, yes, you get 0%. But some people just don't care about their weighting.
Luckily, almost nobody does that, and many choose for systems like these instead >>61137300
>>61137561
how come? all of music has different qualities, some will interpret those as horrible shit they can't stand, others will interpret them as a godsend. who is in the wrong? take it back to my power metal argument.
>>61137575
examples? is this b8? do you not know who these people are?
Reminder that RYM is going down the shitter and you're a shitter yourself if you still continue using it (or consider using it after it goes full Sonemic).
>>61137615
it's not RYM's fault its users suck
>>61137589
>You are rating based on personal enjoyment
And as a person whose heard those albums I'm saying it's difficult to derive absolutely no pleasure from these records unless you're a dog with no concept of music or something.
>>61137615
What else should I use? Sputnik is ok, but doesn't have nearly as huge database
>>61137615
I just use it as a catalogue, like discogs
>>61137627
this, it's filled with p4k retards and fantanodrones
>>61137647
>p4k retards and fantanodrones
and metalfags and avant-teens
>>61137647
idk about that, they always rail against p4k and fantano in the comment boxes. they may just have generic tastes
>>61137573
>I've seen enough of them myself to know you're full of shit
It says literally on the RYM FAQ
>>61137631
>And as a person whose heard those albums I'm saying it's difficult to derive absolutely no pleasure from these records unless you're a dog with no concept of music or something.
Yeah, I mean, how come there are people who can't even get ANY pleasure from listening Kesha? Crazy stuff how music taste works, huh
who /more addicted to putting #rare dots on the map than rating/ here
>>61137615
There's nothing wrong with Kendrick Lamar
>>61137601
If you're rating a competently produced album released by an artist with a legacy a .5 there's definitely more than just "personal preference" going into that rating. I could even understood if each of the songs on those albums sounded painfully similar but they're all quite different and made by people who know how to make and produce rock music.
I know full well the subjective quality of music evaluation. Talking about it as if it's objective is more interesting though, especially when it's clear it's not just about personal preferences. Dude hates Floyd for Floyd, not because their music is shitty, which is impossible.
>>61137667
this is literally pitchfork
>>61137615
I use it because it's a great place to find new music and catalogue the music I've already listened to.
I have no interest in the RYM community.
>>61137244
i would kill myself if i was one
if u couldnt tell im mostly into popular releases
next time actually look/analyze before posting dumb shit ye?
>>61137245
heyhey
>>61137263
see pic, not me
>>61137310
except it has been one of my favorite albums since i was 6 years old
wats wrong with liking ur youth?
go fuck urself piece of shit, it has nothing to do with being quirky
>>61137351
i dont hate those pink floyd records
i just think its worse than the stuff ive rated higher i.e. no rating of a popular release or band = i dislike it (like radiohead, metallica, nine inch nails, lana del rey, etc.)
and its not just albums u twit, ive rated tons of singles and eps too, and yes, theyre perfect IMO
im afraid u guys take this rating thing too seriously u_u
>>61137712
those are just generally popular in the indie community though. p4k isn't some dictator of tastes, they just mirror the popular opinion
>>61137677
>Yeah, I mean, how come there are people who can't even get ANY pleasure from listening Kesha?
If you look closely at those ratings, you'll see each of them was made in 2010, five years ago. I'd probably give her music a slightly higher rating but I'm not going to change the score, for archival purposes.
I will say that her music is definitely the sort of music I wouldn't fault a guy for rating .5. It's poorly produced, abrasively loud and obnoxious as shit.
the worst oat
>>61137677
>Yeah, I mean, how come there are people who can't even get ANY pleasure from listening Kesha? Crazy stuff how music taste works, huh
It's really weird to me how you people will say this kind of "sensible" shit but then go back to greentexting about /mu/core and whatever other albums you didn't like that other people do, even to the point of participating in flame wars and arguments based on the merits of the music.
>>61137768
I really want to slap these people
>>61137768
ayy
>>61137770
>responding to Autistic-Math God of /lgbt/
>>61137697
>Dude hates Floyd for Floyd, not because their music is shitty
He just doesn't like them, you fucking nazi
>which is impossible.
I don't like Pet Sounds, despite knowing that the album is great, yet I still give it the lowest rating possible on my personal scale.
So yeah, it is very likely someone won't like Piper At The Gates or any other Pink Floyd album
>>61137735
heh
>>61137750
>It's poorly produced
No
>abrasively loud
Maybe
>obnoxious as shit.
Pink Floyd is far more obnoxious than Kesha
>>61137770
>It's really weird to me how you people will say this kind of "sensible" shit but then go back to greentexting about /mu/core and whatever other albums you didn't like that other people do, even to the point of participating in flame wars and arguments based on the merits of the music.
Exactly
>>61137785
I have nothing to do with lgbt, m8
>>61137161
kind of stupid to do that on a site that aggregates users' ratings though, you're fucking the charts up up by rating something 0.5 when a regular person would rate it 2.5
>>61137802
No, you don't. See the FAQ
Even if you did, there would be nothing wrong with it. You either do the same as them, or just accept that your ratings are going to weight less.
>>61137799
>I have nothing to do with lgbt, m8
nice try trannie
>>61137832
haha
>>61137697
i get that talking about stuff is more interesting and i agree; however i think you take a very 'objective' standpoint under which i don't think you can cover all basis. for example, how do you discuss noise music, or any post-modern stuff; stuff that is hard to pin down on a quasi-objective metric. its impossible to cover all music in this way. for example, what do you do with lo-fi music? the objectivist standpoint should be "well the production is shit for which i take off 2 stars" and it's a legit standpoint, just as legit as someone saying "it fits perfectly and wouldn't work any other way". do you see where im getting at? like i said, all music has qualities that people will interpret differently.
>>61137799
wats ur rym boo?
>>61137889
noff
>>61137889
>>61137905
>many 11 peaks
gran autismo
>>61137817
>>61137293 nothing about this suggests that the person in the OP's scores would be disregarded. his ratings are diverse and he has rated a decent number of albums. his scale is just off.
>>61137935
Yeah
>>61137950
Yeah, I was talking about the kind of people who rate everything as 0.5 and 5.0
The example on the OP is perfectly fine and it probably gets a 100% rating weighting.
>>61137950
They may not be disregarded but their weighting's probably still quite low.
>>61137025
>2.5- worth buying
>4.0- plan on buying
>>61137330
honestly for all the hate he gets (extreme hatred from such a calm guy like dmsharegay is pretty odd) he's not that bad
So when are people just going to quit enabling AMGs shit posting?
You know that's all he/she does right?
>>61137971
could you point out some of the "many 11 peaks" on The lemon of pink?
>>61137025
I'd be interested to hear what your 5's are, seeing as anything >1 is good
>>61138161
That's not me pal. the account is >>61137070
>>61137025
https://rateyourmusic.com/wiki/RYM:Weighting+FAQ
Daily reminder that rating everything too low or too high means you have ZERO impact on the scores.
>>61138140
Almost every song on it, really.
The sudden strings on the title track, the glitchy transition on Tokyo with the screams, the screams on Take Time, strings on S Is For Eversing and the samples from Don't Even Sing About It
Can't remember many specific from the other songs, but last time I listened to it almost every track made me shed a tear of emotion and excitement.
>>61138185
Reading comprehension these day's...
>>61137351
>that were legitimately perfect for him is crazy to me but whatever
unless RYM allowed someone to vote 4.9999999999999888 / 5.0 5 doenst mean exactly
5 is any score between 4.75 and 5
you people care about the wrong things in life, and so do i
>>61137768
everything about this guy is so odd i kinda like him
>>61138133
see above
>>61137832
Haha
zizekian general?
>>61138211
These day is what?
>>61138185
That doesn't apply to my op image pal
>>61138261
this is good actually
>>61137778
there is a guy that is worse, he just use one single score
there are all kinds of strange accounts on rym
one where 5 means all shades of good and 0.5 is all shades of bad
one where 5 means all shades of good and 2.5 is all shades of bad
0.5 is all shades of bad, every single one means shades of good
>>61137905
ok thnx
>>61138259
wats ur rym again
i know were friends there but i forgot
>>61137514
haly shit what was the things he rated highest
>>61138331
just added you
>>61138345
this
sine_nomine, zizekian, and spectres are without any doubt my least favorite people to see on RYM. In fact, I absolutely wouldn't even care about the countless other austists if I never had to see them ever again.
CHECK PICTURE
LOL
>>61137737
>p4k isn't some dictator of tastes
If you honestly believe that people aren't influenced by them your delusional
![4ad0db16e5b3950b19456a5addbb5796[1].png](https://i.imgur.com/KxsniOQ.png "4ad0db16e5b3950b19456a5addbb5796[1].png")
>reset everything to re-evaluate what I like
>"im totally gonna re-rate everything"
>only completely fix films
>spend the next month rating dumb puppet films
https://rateyourmusic.com/~HUnewm
add me
I'm not dead, just playing lots of games
>>61138331
hello bayar
https://rateyourmusic.com/~vinylpresident
this man is an autistic u2 fan
>>61138391
maybe i'm too idealistic in thinking people aren't dumb enough to pretend to like stuff because a website tells them to
>>61138356
werent u the liturgy guy?
i thought we were friends already
>>61138401
heyhey
Im autist and i dont have a profile like those people..
>>61138446
oh yeah, forgot to say i made a new one
old acc was himmelfahrt
I love when avant-math can't control his emotions and starts being passive aggressive whilst still trying to hold up 'nice and understanding guy trip'
>>61138469
see i knew i recognized u
i used to sometimes look at ur profile and then suddenly poof u were gone/suspended so i deleted u
good to know ure back huzzah
>>61138464
u sound cute
>>61138537
you type like a 15 year old tumblr cunt I bet you think it's really chill and also uncaring
Even my tumblr sister doesn't type like this anymore
>>61138531
You don't even know what passive-agressive means, so...
>>61138573
tons of people type like that. chill the fuck out, senpai
>>61138573
u type like a 15 year old tumblr cunt i bet u think its really chill and also uncaring
even my tumblr sister doesnt type like dis anymore
>>61138622
hahaha blow back
>>61138584
how do people still enable your shitposting holy hell
>>61138584
lmao
>>61138640
hehehe
>>61138648
Because I don't shitpost.
>>61138664
lol
>>61138688
>Because I don't shitpost.
your entire life is a cosmic shitpost if anything, don't give me that ''i'm not shitposting, for real guize'' bullshit
>>61138688
pls accept my sexuality on rym
>>61138584
Admit it your niceness is completely faux you hate everyone on here and think you have the perfect taste in the last 2 weeks I've seen you make essays in threads that aren't even about anything related to taste and make it about what your criteria of what a good taste is
>>61138377
Bet this guy's name is stefan and he's a DJ
>>61138721
He unironically belives that his taste is objectively good
>>61138715
Whatever. It looks like you already made up your mind about it.
>>61138721
>Admit it your niceness is completely faux you hate everyone on here and think you have the perfect taste in the last 2 weeks I've seen you make essays in threads that aren't even about anything related to taste and make it about what your criteria of what a good taste is
I'm being completely honest when I say I always try to be genuinely nice with everybody on /mu/. That's even one of the reasons I started to use a tripcode, to be become an useful tripfriend and try to improve the board. I don't hate anyone on here, save for the obvious shitposters, but that's barely hate even.
My taste isn't perfect, it's probably not even in the Top 5 best taste's of currently active tripfriends.
My only criteria when it comes to good music is originality (and creativity). That's it.
Now Playing:
ıllıllı [Pink Floyd - 1965 (Their First Recordings) (2015)] ıllıllı
>>61138792
Depends on which standard you use. But I would think my taste is actually good (top 50%) if we use /mu/'s chart threads as a standard.
>>61138813
>>61138796
Limon is going to show up..... and this will be a MASSACRE
>>61138796
>unironically using the word tripfriend
>Top 5 best taste's of currently active tripfriends
>creativity in music taste
is this a joke
>>61138432
too idealistic can be another way of putting sure. Why else do you think they give albums a score out of 10 plaster it at the top of a review? or label something 'BNM'? Just check any p4k thread on this board to see how bad some people are
>>61137544
>>61138796
>autism-math god of /mu/
>>61138796
How the fuck is being nice and helpful related to being a tripfag? What does creativity in music taste even mean?
So many questions
>>61139026
ignore him hes too emotionally tortured because of how many times he documents and cries to cardiac albums
doesnt even like prog that isnt stupid prog that much as he would otherwise suggest
>>61137785
>>61138998
>not "savant-math"
>>61139026
By being nice it's easier to have constructive discussions about music.
>What does creativity in music taste even mean?
Do you know what creativity means first?
>>61139059
I only cry out of excitement and joy, never sadness if that's what you are implying.
>doesnt even like prog that isnt stupid prog that much as he would otherwise suggest
I like all kinds of prog, but it's just hyperactive prog that I like the most
>>61139101
>not avant-mall goth
>>61139114
How does having a trip magically make you nicer?
>>61139166
It doesn't but it does provide a system of accountability when you post. I'm always more tempted to be nicer and more helpful when people will remember who I am later on
Signed up to RYM. Is it really this painful to rate records? That's a lot of clicks. The website is also really slow.
is avant-math still pretending to be a girl or did he stop that
anyways, pretty much all of thecrystalbird's group of friends. worst users on the site.
>>61139166
It doesn't. But being nice and using a tripcode makes it easier for music discussion to happen.
>>61139209
When you first start rating your library, yes, it is indeed slow, but after that it takes no time.
>>61139213
>is avant-math still pretending to be a girl or did he stop that
Stopped
>>61139213
Boundaryfuss is cool though.
>>61139209
Don't worry they will rebrand soon
>>61139213
not me then
thank u
>>61137171
I don't see anything wrong with this
>>61138377
I found Put Yo Hood Up because of this guy and now it's one of my favourite songs
>>61139101
What's his exceptional talent?
>>61139235
>Boundaryfuss is cool though.
not at all
>>61138573
good post, that shit needs to die
>>61137832
haha
>>61138401
How do I put descriptions under my scores? I need a PhD in autism just to change my settings.
>>61139279
agree
>>61137832
haha
>>61137074
Lel, my Heidenigger.
>>61137074
>NICHTIGKEIT
>>61138688
literally a faggot
you will give me a you with some retarded bullshit
>>61137615
Any alternatives, then?
>>61137116
BAYAR is the queen of /mu/
>>61137615
>>61139571
I don't think there are any.
But I could get everyone's disappointment because of the mean score of each album... but as somebody already said, it's a catalog.
You can't be defined by someone because you use it. There's nothing wrong, just some shitty people in it.
I'm really bad when it comes to actually rate stuff.
https://rateyourmusic.com/~pp789
>>61139663
3 is not bad an 1 is meh? what's bad then?
>>61137330
>veni vidi vomit
amazing
https://rateyourmusic.com/~Hesjz
add me as a buddy
recommend me intense classical
happy holidays
>>61139691
Nothing really, or rather it falls under meh. Like all those fags that rate everything with 0.5 because "it exist", just that I actually rate things with other numbers as well.
There should be just one rating for bad and variety for degrees of "good". Also sometimes I rate something as 0.5, because I don't like it, but that doesn't mean that others shouldn't like it. It's better than saying that 0.5 is shittiest shit to ever shit, or something.
>>61137935
how many of those 5.0 rating has 9, 11 peaks
>>61139691
>>61139752
Oh aslo, I know that "not bad" is probably the wrong description for 3, but I don't know what else to use.
Maybe Okay would be better?
>>61139571
try sputnikmusic but it's really metal oriented and not a nearly as complete.
>>61139740
post katte
>>61139740
no dont get into classical please i love u
>>61139902
I love you
H1STER
>>61139844
ok
>>61139902
it's all i've felt like listening to for the past few days
>>61139909
nigga is that piss
5.0 best out of best
4.5 amazing
4.0 very good
3.5 solid
3.0 above average, would recommend
2.5 either you love or it hate it/average (i.e. vaporwave)
2.0 worse than average
1.5 bad
1.0 very bad
0.5 a joke
This is a rating system I use everywhere.
This gay
https://rateyourmusic.com/~DanGCM
>>61139924
<3
i dont know wat u mean with intense classical
but i like this https://youtu.be/VOat_xsGUOw
Surprised I haven't seen this yet, unless I missed it
>>61140580
You missed it:
>>61137514
>>61137032
>>61137025
I've played music since I was 5 and being this picky is absolutely autism or simply a symptom of shitty american music education. either way someone with standards like that probably has no idea what they're talking about or they have autism.
https://rateyourmusic.com/~TheCrystalBird
Literally claims to be autistic in his tumblr bio.
>>61139260
my dik
>>61140871
Just like picky eaters who keep that habit into adulthood. they're just retarded and need to learn to live with it.
>>61140878
oh my
>>61137832
haha
>>61137025
Having a rating scale like this just makes you look fucking stupid.
Any honest person should have a ratings history that is heavily slanted towards the higher scores, because no one spends the time to actually listen to hundreds/thousands of shitty albums all the way through just so that they can give them a valid rating.
>>61137116
I've talked to him, pretty cool fella to be honest
>>61142298
Hi Gayar
>>61142317
not true btw
https://rateyourmusic.com/~boldfaure
>>61137223
if you rate based on your personal enjoyment, yes. if you rate based on whether you feel like an album is worth something or a product of skilled individuals, obviously not.
you're not going to find a single person who likes everything though.
>>61137330
>veni vidi vomit
quality
>>61137799
oh boy, we're calling people nazis! i bet you're a riot at parties.
>>61140871
who cares about you playing music since you were 5. bitch me too the fuck
>>61137116
Here's the thing about BAYAR. The man has some serious dance moves. He has a 4 octave dick sucking range and he excels on any dick. He sucks brilliant dick. And his stage presence is only matched by Adolf Hitler. Seriously, watch him dance to Suicide and then watch a video of the Nuremburg rallies. We had better thank our lucky stars BAYAR didn't go into politics or he would have taken over the world. But the queen as a whole has a brilliant dynamic. It isn't just the BAYAR buttplug band. They all made huge creative cumtributions to what made BAYAR who he is. Yes, BAYAR sucked Brian May, who then wrote We Will Rock You, Save Me, and Fat Bottom Girls, John Deacon wrote I Want to Break Free, Another One Bites the Dust, and You're my Best Friend, and Roger Taylor wrote Radio Gaga and It's a Kind of Magic. Other users like hanky for instance were not like that. Hanky was basically just the Kurt Cobain backup band. BAYAR is this perfect storm of legendary talent, and BAYAR was the face of it all, the delicious BAYAR cherry on top of an already delicious BAYAR sundae. He is the ambassador that allowed the amazing talent of combo that was faggots to be brought into our lives. He was the prism that focused the jizz beams from the brains of Roger, Brian, and John, and amplified them until they were powerful enough to blow our dicks and out through our ass holes. Yes, he is the most incredible faggot who ever lived, hands down.
>>61137330
>disliking federer
nigga r u srs
rate my tastes please
disclaimer: relatively new to /mu/
convert me if necessary
>>61144335
all solid scores, except I've not listened to Sunbather but maybe I will now
>>61144335
>cherry bomb
>1
found >>61137025
i think my film ratings might be a little autistic
>>61144405
my average rating is about 4, and I liked early Tyler, and I'd still agree with 1 for Cherry Bomb
>>61139235
>Boundaryfuss is cool though.
he used to be before becoming a tryhard
>>61144405
>>61144480
talking about black artists, they're almost 90% of my lowest ratings, kek
except public enemy for the moment.
>>61144563
you show the black man how bad he is
keep listening to those albums you don't like, it's important for the liberation of the white race
>>61137223
Yes, you should rate everything 2.5 or higher if you don't dislike anything because that's how a 5 point scale works. There's no reason not to do it that way.
>>61144594
i don't project any form of prejudice before listening, anon.
i know you're joking and in case you thought i was expressing some kind of rhetorical racial hate, i wasn't.
could you show me your profile?
>>61137832
haha
>>61137171
>>61137692
theres nothing wrong with kendrick lamar
but theres something wrong with
>>61137615 ' s
chart
i dont remember King Kunta breaking any walls.
>>61137032
>transcendental
>pointless
kek this pretentious motherfucker has no idea what he's doing
>>61137712
You can see that pitchfork isn't some dictator of tastes because grimes is third place on p4k top 100 and on RYM its beyond 200.
>>61137171
> the avalanches
> 2/5
triggered desu
Does anyone remember that metal only rym user who basically gave rant reviews about a bunch of /mu/core?
>>61144618
It's a lot better to use all the available rating scores possibles than not using half of them.
There's nothing bad with using a rating system like the one used in the OP's image.
>>61137032
>sublime
this word should be removed from the dictionary
>>61137171
knife is too high. otherwise fine
>>61137615
the website is just as useful as it ever was. the charts are always shit, this year is no different
>>61144618
lol, of course, the slots are there in order to leave them blank, I hope rym is going to update the rating system leaving only 2.5 rating as an option
>>61144335
>Sunbather - 10/10
>>61137032
There's a point at which if you've listened to 3 Nickelback albums and given them a 'pointless' rating it doesn't seem to make sense to listen to the rest of their output
>>61137832
haha
RYM newbie here.
I dont feel too confident to rate albums from 1 to 5.
Is there anyway I can just rate them with liked and not liked?
>>61140871
>I've played music since I was 5 and being this picky is absolutely autism or simply a symptom of shitty american music education
I'm a music conservatory graduate. I spent years analyzing music for grades, so when I come across something that's garbage, I know. Rap music has the melodic complexity of a train horn (actually less; train horns often are tuned to a tritone, which seem to be absent in Rap) and the lyrical complexity barely goes beyond a 3rd grade vocabulary. Not only is this music intended for ignorant audiences, it's intended to provoke ignorant young people into committing crimes, in order to fill the for-profit prisons in the US.
>>61137333
Why are they listening to 20 Prince albums when they haven't enjoyed one of them. It's so fucking pretentious it's killing me
>>61145488
There's a thing called listening to music ironically.
What's more autistic, the autistic reviewer or those who discuss his review on a Chinese finger painting forum?
>>61145459
the only rap music's mistake is that James Joyce wasn't around in the eightees
>>61145488
maybe theyre rating on a different concept than enjoyment
maybe they just dont respect his artistry by some weird standard of theirs, but like his music viscerally
maybe they used to love him one time but got tired of his music
>>61137832
haha
>>61145488
What about listening to those albums because their parents/friends/girlfriends or boyfriends made them to listen to? What about changing your opinion about certain styles of music over the years? Do you still listen to the same music you were listening to years ago? I rest my case.
