I'd say I listen to anywhere from 3-5 full albums a day. Of course, sometimes it's less than that, but on average, I can get in something brand new (to me), something from this year I've already heard and enjoyed, and something from the past that I want to hear again.

Part of it is also affording many new albums per year (unless you are an intellectual property stealing pirate who supports FULL COMMUNISM of course).

Seriously though, a new album every day? I assume you cycle out the ones you listen to but don't care for, while giving the interesting ones multiple spins over the year allowing you to finalize your opinion by year-end list time?

Yeah, I mean, when I say a new album, I mean new to me. So it can be something from the 70's I've never heard before. For year end lists, I do cycle out the ones I don't care for. I just checked my list and I've heard 183 released in 2017 (all genres, not just metal) and I still have a couple on my list to get to (and waiting on the new U2 before compiling a list).

In terms of affording, between bandcamp, Spotify an purchasing records and CDs over the last 20+ years, the collection is really endless.

Or, you know, paying 9.99 a month for Spotify, which has about 80-90% of the new releases I'd be interested in checking out anyway.

With regards to developing a big list like this, it's really not as daunting as one would think. I usually listen to about 4-5 new releases a week which equates to about 200 new releases a year. Usually I can tell on the first listen whether something has any potential to end up on my year-end list. Even things I don't immediately enjoy will at least be intriguing enough for me to want to revisit. Throughout the year I'll continue revisiting albums that I've flagged as having 'year-end potential' and by December it's usually pretty easy to determine which ones I've continued to enjoy enough to make the cut.

Does anyone else use this method as well:

At the beginning of the year, the first record I hear, I start a notepad. Example, for next year, I'll star with;

1. Summoning- With Doom We Come

the next record I hear, I will place it either above or below Summoning. Over the course of the year when I go back and re-listen, I adjust the order accordingly. I'll usually do 2 or 3 big revisits/edits throughout the year and then one in December.

I know, #geek.

That's actually really smart.

Propagandhi should be way higher (like, number 1).

Personal bias aside I always like Decibel's lists. They have good mix of popular and obscure, always has something from different genres. I'm actually surprised they put Converge so low, considering how much they love them. Either way I always find some good picks I missed throughout the year which is really why I read year end stuff like this.

This year I've just been putting everything in an Excel spreadsheet, which I realize is geeky as fuck, but it's quite efficient, effective, and easy to manage:



(The third column is my approximate % rating for the album. The '^' sign means I think it may have potential to grow on me with further listens.)

I'm not sure if I will ever understand the obsession with quantitatively measuring something that's qualitative. Feels like a pretentious and arbitrary way to compare music. Outside of a personal context, it makes zero sense to me.

EDIT: At the least it appears it gives corporate media an opportunity to push their opinions down our throats.

For me, I have a group of friends that have been comparing year-end lists for over a decade. I also always look forward to the year-end list of M-A. If one of the top 10 is something I missed, I go back and check it out. For me, I'm not out to "prove" my favourites are better than anyone else's. I genuinely enjoy seeing them.

Yeah I just view it as a chance to possibly find some cool stuff. Even more so if you read the write ups in the magazine instead of just the list. Hadn’t heard that Disharmony record and I am really enjoying the sound on that one.

Very surprised Dying Fetus didn't get a mention. I thought that was the best album from an established band this year.

Also to comment on why there is usually so much doom on these Decibel lists, honestly at this point I feel like doom metal is such a safe and accessible genre for people to get into. That being the case it doesn't surprise me that is what Decibel wants to push and promote. I do agree that it feels very forced and inorganic though. Seriously, the "Pallbearer always having one of the top 5 records of the year" thing really confuses me. Not saying that band is bad by any means, I just don't care for them. That isn't even the worst part about Decibel though. I think the worst that they do is when they interview dudes like Phil Anselmo and the guy from Machine Head, a.k.a. people with 0 artistic integrity at this point.

They interviewed Azagthoth this month.

I keep all my purchases in a spreadsheet to help track and rank everything I own. I average 2 purchases a week, and that's pretty much my upper limit because I still listen to my back catalogue as much as possible. I'm really skeptical of anyone who can create a best of list with more than 40 records. Listening to an album once or twice on Youtube/Spotify then claiming to understand it doesn't count - If you don't own it, you can't rank it. I buy any album I think I'm going to listen to more than once and do my best to listen to it 3-5 times before ranking.

I don't really get this. I understand artwork and lyric sheets are a huge part of the whole package, but to say someone can't rate an album they don't own? I don't know about that. If I listen to a record 25 times on a streaming service, I think I am adequately qualified to rank it on my own list. I think I'll understand it just as well by looking at the cover art online and reading the lyrics if I can find them.

Yeah, my thoughts on this are pretty out there and I don't expect anyone to agree with me. I just fundamentally don't believe in streaming services. In my mind you have to support the artist in some way to call yourself a fan of their work. That's awesome you listened to their album 25 times, but that still means you gave them only a couple of pennies for a piece of art they spent hundreds or thousands of hours creating. Not being willing to spend a few dollars on something you claim to be a fan of means you're no fan at all and thus aren't in a position to judge/rank/review.

I understand this will sound insane to a lot of people, and I don't judge people who primarily stream. It just doesn't make sense philosophically to me and I like to support artists financially as much as possible.

I support plenty of artists I like - streaming services are just ways to hear things you're not sure you want to buy, and to know exactly what else is going on out there in terms of music you don't voraciously consume already.

I can’t imagine having enough free time to listen to the extrent that you guys deem necessary to make the list. Then again I didn’t make a list.

I totally see your point about the band only getting pennies for their work. I buy a lot of records every year. (This year alone, I purchased 63). But I also use Spotify to weed out what I wouldn't want to waste money on. And sometimes, certain albums aren't even physically released anymore (or they are just on CD, which is completely useless to me.)

Well been going through the list to see if there is any good albums I missed, a of these bands are too noisy and chaotic for my taste (Coming from some who loves Black Metal) or albums that sounded cool but didn't impress me enough to keep listening or revist. Meh. Maybe I will find something cool on the list. But I have been noticing nosy Crust/hardcore seems to be an influence on a lot of upcoming bands.

Converge is too noisy for me and they make the list each year, but to each his own I guess. There is also a lot of really weird death metal (Teitanblood, spectral voice, phrenelith) that’s been doing well that I haven’t been able to get into. I gotta find the right album to bridge me into that sound.

List is meh, but nowhere NEAR as bad as Loudwire's:

http://loudwire.com/25-best-metal-albums-2017/

Lol. At least the #1 is a respectable choice.

I've heard only 11 of these, and enjoyed about 5.

For me the count is 10 listened, 5 enjoyed, although most of the albums on the list that I haven't listened to I've really been trying to avoid.

Horrific list, actually. Power Trip is what, 37? LOL. No Azarath, no Ascended Dead, no Shaarimoth, no The Ominous Circle, no The Furor. I could go on.

This doesn't strike me as a list of 2017's top 25 so much as 25 albums that just happened to be released this year. I suppose I gotta give them props for acknowledging the existence of Elder, Bell Witch, and Power Trip.

Re: being amazed at how people can listen to so many albums: This guy called RNG on rym (I think he has an account here too) has listened to an obscene number of death metal albums this year, like nearly 1000, and that's just death metal.

It's mind boggling that there are people out there who have both the time, patience, and money to listen to so much metal. I think some of these people are just obsessive shut-ins and it's *all* the do; there's really no other explanation. I listen to music probably 6 hours a day but that's the absolute most my brain can handle, I can't imagine just constantly cycling through new albums 24/7. I follow some Bandcamp fans who buy 2-5 albums every.single.day (they must spend $1,000/month just on BC alone). There is no way they listen to these albums more than once, ever, and I don't see how that's satisfying.

https://bandcamp.com/stevenleslie
https://bandcamp.com/Loud-Quiet-Loud

Oh god Steven Leslie. I check his profile quite frequently as he's always on top of new releases and seems to buy anything remotely noteworthy. To be fair, I think he writes for some metal website or something.

Jesus Christ. I wouldn't even know which end is up by the end of all those.

I have a feeling if you played this guy dozens and dozens of songs from the albums on his list, he wouldn't be able to tell you the title of the song, nor which band it is.
I mean, I said in an earlier post I've heard around 180 albums released this year (spanning all genres, not just metal) and on some of the ones I discarded after 1-3 listens, I would not be able to tell you some of the songs.

there's albums i've discarded after a spin or two that i wouldn't be able to name the band of if you played me a song; probably even stuff i wouldn't recognize as having heard before at all

i also couldn't name a single track by name from some of my vary favourite albums - like shaarimoth is looking strong for my personal aoty and i have no idea what any of the songs are by name; i just listen to the album

granted i have terrible memory in general

This list hits on a lot of things that annoy about Decibel, a magazine I have subscribed too for a few years now:

1) They interview, review, and praise the same 30-ish bands over-and-over again, to the point of redundant absurdity. Look, we get it Decibel, you really love Obituary and Paradise Lost, jeez.

2). They totally ignore underground thrash & speed metal, which is in the middle of yet another musical renaissance yet no Antichrist, Condor, Stalker, Vampire, etc. Only Power Trip & Kreator -- the former, underrated by them; the latter barely listenable now.

3) Their lists don't match their reviews: Converge got a 7 from them but is in the top 10; Godflesh got an 8 but isn't on the list -- huh?!?

4) Lately too they've really pushed the entry-level stoner rock/alt-metal stuff to a point where I wonder if are trying to shift their reader demographic.

Overall, it is a crap list.

2 and 3 are very good points.

As for Loudwire, how are you gonna have a list with Gwar and Trivium and leave off stuff like Tomb Mold, The Ruins of Beverast, etc.

And they have never even touched power metal, yet have no problem with melodic hard rock. It's a really bizarre bias.

This one makes sense. A single writer comes up with review scores, but the year-end list is voted on by the staff. That's how every site/blog/magazine does it and it would be insane if it were any other way.

It's really just not accurate "ranking." When you get into lists that go into the hundreds, you have about 10 albums that you rank honestly and then it just gets arbitrary, ie choice 34 could easily be number 51. Plus the vast majority of these albums, like others have said, are listened to like one time and just thrown on a list. They're not digested in any meaningful way.

The list is fine. Plenty I haven't heard but I'm happy that bands such as Cannibal Corpse, Dodecahedron, Artificial Brain, Bell Witch, and Immolation got a mention. I didn't get into the new Pyrrhon album too much, and Obituary at #14 is exceedingly generous for a band who've lost their way (personally), but otherwise it's fine.

To Loudwire's credit, they gave the new Immolation and Dying Fetus pretty high rankings.