"Okay, so what if their was an album that was extremely well-written, and completely original, with virtually no outside influences. Something like Spiderland. BUT, you don't really enjoy it."

There's no such thing, bro. Everything has outside influences, and nothing, NOTHING is completely original anymore. As good as Spiderland is, it has plenty of outside influence.

Album Rating: 3.5

"Yeah, and this is why people look down on metalcore fans. Good job at perpetuating the stereotype."



Whatever, dude. Bands like Misery Signals probably wouldn't exist without bands like Botch, but I still enjoy them the same, because they're both fucking good.



"Same formula =/= recycling songs"



I just figured that that was what he meant by "recycling songs," or whatever it was that he said.

Album Rating: 3.5

"There's no such thing, bro. Everything has outside influences, and nothing, NOTHING is completely original anymore. As good as Spiderland is, it has plenty of outside influence."



You didn't answer the question. IF there was something with no outside influence, and you didn't really enjoy it, would you still give it a high rating?

"Are you gonna give it a high rating just because you think it's objectively good, even if you don't enjoy it?"

Not a high rating, but I'd respect it more.

Album Rating: 3.5

"Not a high rating, but I'd respect it more."



Fair enough. My main point here is just that rating albums should be at least mostly based on how much you enjoy them.

"You didn't answer the question. IF there was something with no outside influence, and you didn't
really enjoy it, would you still give it a high rating?"

Once again, that's not what we're talking about. We're talking about THIS album, but to answer your
question, I'd give it more credit than I normally would because of what it was, and I'd show it the
respect that it deserves. Something like the band Oxbow, which is basically a band that stands on
its own when it comes to originality. I don't enjoy their music that much, but I would still give
it a 3 because of what it is.


If you noticed, I still gave this a 3.5. I'm not going to overboard like most of you fanboys and
rate this higher because it isn't anything new. If I want to listen to this genre, I'll go with the
older stuff. As I said earlier, rate it how you want and like the music however much you want.

This is about trying to being objective, is it not?

I respect someone who pushes boundaries more than someone who recycles old and overused ideas.

"I don't enjoy their music that much, but I would still give it a 3 because of what it is."


basically

Album Rating: 3.5

Of course I'd respect a completely original band a bit more than a band who just uses formulas that other bands came up with before them, I'm just saying that that respect isn't going to be part of my rating.

"I'm just saying that that respect isn't going to be part of my rating."


Why? That seems stupid.

"Of course I'd respect a completely original band a bit more than a band who just uses formulas that other bands came up with before them, I'm just saying that that respect isn't going to be part of my rating."

Of course it's part of your rating. Respect is part of everyone's rating.

Album Rating: 3.5

"Why? That seems stupid."



Because I rate albums solely based on how much I enjoy them, as I think everyone should.



"Of course it's part of your rating. Respect is part of everyone's rating."



You know what I mean, dude.

"Because I rate albums solely based on how much I enjoy them, as I think everyone should."

So rating a Bring Me the Horizon album as a 5 and rating a Botch album a 5 is okay just because you enjoy the former? That's inherently dumb.

"Because I rate albums solely based on how much I enjoy them, as I think everyone should."

Then I just enjoy music on a different basis than you. I enjoy music largely based on its creativity.

Album Rating: 3.5

"So rating a Bring Me the Horizon album as a 5 and rating a Botch album a 5 is okay just because you enjoy the former? That's inherently dumb."



No, it isn't. You're only saying that because you have a bias against BMTH. Music is subjective. No matter how much you and I dislike it, it's perfectly reasonable for someone to enjoy a BMTH album just as much as a Botch album.

"No, it isn't. You're only saying that because you have a bias against BMTH"

No, I'm not. I'm saying it because it doesn't make sense, just like rating this the same as something that helped generate the original sound.

"it's perfectly reasonable for someone to enjoy a BMTH album just as much as a Botch album."

I never said it wasn't. All I said was that I believe people should also look at the godfathers of the genres when rating albums, because genres get watered down with the same sounding shit.

I agree with Maniac!

Album Rating: 3.5

"I never said it wasn't."



lol, did you mean something else by "So rating a Bring Me the Horizon album as a 5 and rating a Botch album a 5 is okay just because you enjoy the former? That's inherently dumb."?



"No, I'm not. I'm saying it because it doesn't make sense"



That statement doesn't make sense. For the third time, music is subjective. It's possible for anyone to enjoy an album that uses aesthetics that other bands/albums created long before it, it's possible for people to enjoy albums that came after even more than the original trail-blazers. It all depends on your preference and your taste.

"lol, did you mean something else by "So rating a Bring Me the Horizon album as a 5 and rating a Botch album a 5 is okay just because you enjoy the former? That's inherently dumb."?"

I used both as an example because they are in the same genre. It's not that hard to comprehend.

"For the third time, music is subjective."

I never said it wasn't. That's not what we're debating. Jesus christ.....

" It's possible for anyone to enjoy an album that uses aesthetics that other bands/albums created long before it, it's possible for people to enjoy albums that came after even more than the original trail-blazers"

I never said it wasn't. Holy shit, bro, read my posts before you get all angry. I said there's more to rating an album than how much I like it, in my opinion.

Album Rating: 3.5

I guess I just thought that you saying it was "inherently dumb" meant you didn't think it was "perfectly reasonable." Silly me.



"I never said it wasn't. That's not what we're debating. "



Yeah, not directly, but I said it because you kept saying that people shouldn't give high ratings to albums that recycle the same formulas as albums of the same genres that came before them.



"I never said it wasn't."



Dude, when I was saying "it's possible...," I just meant that people will do that. I understand that you think that they shouldn't, I was just saying that they will. I think we've hit a dead end in this discussion, anyway. I guess we just have different ways of rating albums.