There seems to be a stigma against including recent releases on overall charts and so forth.
Why is this? Does it show lack of education? If so, why should unfamiliarity with older releases suddenly mean a lack in quality?
Do we naturally assume people are being lazy?
Is newer music inherently lesser in quality? If so, does this mean that music's quality is so significantly determined through how it's contextualized with other music?
I haven't noticed said phenomena. Not as a general trend anyway. And I've seen quite the opposite in many people. So... Yeah. New music is just as great as older music. It's all equalized by subjective context. In the last 5 years more great music was made than between 67-71. That's my opinion and there is absolutely no doubt about it in my mind.
Where do you get the idea there is an "aversion to newer music"? Is this how you feel? _________________ -Ryan
I usually avoid adding newly listened albums to my overall chart, mostly due to my tendency to over-appreciate new listens too much. I try to wait at least half a year after discovering something, and if I still like it by then then I add them up, so most of a year's new albums aren't added until the next.
Right now there'd be 4 2014 records on my overall, and if they're still there by November, then I'll update my overall accordingly.
MercuryTurn your back on the pay-you-back last callProfile St. Louis
@Defago, does the same thing apply to older albums that you only just heard or discovered for the first time? Like, lets say you hear for the first time a miles Davis album or s/thing from the 50s and really love it. Will you also wait so many months before adding that album to your overall chart? _________________ -Ryan
@Defago, does the same thing apply to older albums that you only just heard or discovered for the first time? Like, lets say you hear for the first time a miles Davis album or s/thing from the 50s and really love it. Will you also wait so many months before adding that album to your overall chart?
Yeah, everything. It's more noticeable with the last year, though, because I listen to way more current year albums than older, and because the chart noticeably only goes up to 2013.
- The 2010s make up 11% of the BEA overall. Considering we're not even halfway through the decade, that's quite a lot.
- Compared to other "greatest albums" lists, new music is dramatically overrepresented on the BEA overall. Here's the year distribution of the top 500 on BEA compared to Rolling Stone:
Thumbnail. Click to enlarge.
- There are a wide range of chart philosophies for BEA users, some of which give weight to factors like historical importance and influence. This would put new music at a distinct disadvantage in some charts.
- Defago's reason.
I have or had Grizzly Bear Shield on my list. But it takes me years to judge an album as a best ever for me. I think I removed Grizzly Bear for that reason. I don' know if I would listen to them in 10 years?
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
HoldenM
Mercury
Defago
