[Guest]

You can never have everybody (whoever have lived or lives or will live in the world) listen to all of the music produced in the history (or those that will be produced) and measure (which is impossible to do) their enjoyment (which is impossible to define) to achieve that ultimate objectivity.

[revolver94]

I think you guys are defining "objectively" a little too stringently. It's important to remember that anything we quantify or qualify is based solely on models that humans have constructed, and not on any sort of inherent truth. As it happens, we don't have any sophisticated way of measuring the greatness of music (beyond sites like this and RYM). Outlaw's proposed method, while seemingly simplistic, gets at what would probably be one of the better ways to model what the "best" music is, if one has the desire to do so.

Unless God comes down from the heavens to tell us that water is more dense as a liquid, or that Pet Sounds is the greatest album ever created, we're never going to have a purely objective answer to those or any questions. Because we (well, some of us) still want the answers to these questions, though, we have to make some arbitrary definitions ( e.g. greatness of an album corresponds to average human brain response) and make some sacrifices in terms of measurement (not everyone will listen to every album, nor will we test every human being). However, using Outlaw's or a similar method would yield a result that is (probably) both interesting and convenient.