This is the most critically acclaimed album of all time

Ayyyy lmao

The releases that follow the actual groundbreaking masterpiece are always the best-reviewed and the bestselling, based on reputation alone. This is true in the movie industry as well as music. Not that DAMN. is bad, but most people - reviewers on Metacritic included - would agree that TPAB was the standout.

What a joke

There are already multiple albums with 100/100 on metacritic, so at best it's tied for most acclaimed.

damn

>>72253954
it's only a 99. Kendrick is finished.

I really don't know why. I liked it a lot but it's step back from TPAB. Why are the critics rating it higher? I'm honestly baffled. I hope pitchfork gives it an 8 or 8.5 to bring it down a little.

>>72253954
I can't think of any that are original releases. Those are reissues with perfect scores. The other highest was madvillainy who got taken by tpab and now amazingly damn

>>72253954
all albums on meta with 100 are rereleases or special editions. this currently holds the highest initial release ever
and in 2 mins pitchfork will give it its first initial 10/10 since MBDTF.

>>72254100
he paints himself as a fucking god, and its believable.

>>72254141
Nah. They aren't going to give this a higher score than TPaB.

>>72254158
Don't misunderstand, I REALLY liked the album, but as it is now it's the most acclaimed album since Dark Fantasy, which is just preposterous.

>>72254179
damn, you nailed it.
9.2
what.

>>72254189
what makes dark fantasy deserve a perfect score compared to this one?

>>72254213
Too edgy

>>72254213
MBDTF was ridiculously ambitious, broke many of the conventions of hip-hop, and could have only been made by Kanye. DAMN. is just a solid hip hop album. It doesn't feel like it'll change the landscape of the genre like MBDTF. TPaB was a much closer experience to MBDTF than this is.

>>72254213
hip hop as we know it now is a product of MBDTF and that becomes more obvious every day

>>72254213
Because Dark Fantasy is the better album. It is Kanye's masterpiece. Saying DAMN is a 99 is saying that not only is it better than Dark Fantasy, it's better than TPAB and GKMC. I'm sorry but my ears work really well and this just doesn't compute with me. DAMN is NOT better than any of those 3 albums but the entire critical community says it is.

>>72254307

if anything damn. is just reinforcing trap's grip on pop music

>all these reviewers purposely not mentioning Bono's verse and U2's instrumental contribution to XXX

It's literally one of the best tracks and they won't even mention that aspect of it.

>>72254370
Well maybe numbers are a dumb thing to translate music to?

>>72254521
can you blame them? it's not cool to talk about U2. Nobody on twitter is talking about that, its not trending. and honestly it was probably kendricks biggest mistake on the album. p4k don't want to come across as old.

>>72254580
>Nobody on twitter is talking about that
Nah, the first thing I saw in my timeline today was fucking Eric Andre talking about the song

>>72254559
Numbers have immediate connotations. It is what it is.

File: damn_errors.png (163KB, 654x1766px) Image search: [Google]

163KB, 654x1766px

>>72253755
Fyi:

(100 + 100 + 100 + 100 + 100 + 92 + 91 + 90 + 90 + 90 + 90 + 88 + 82)/13 = 93.3

93/100


Like they say, trust but verify.

>>72254959
Why is it at 99? Clerical error? This image makes a LOT more sense to me. No fucking way DAMN is a 99.

>>72254990
>>72254959
They claim to weight different reviewers different amounts

>>72255019
That doesn't seem fair. It's borderline editorializing ..

>>72255039
>that doesn't seem fair
we are literally talking about the Opinion Industry here

>>72254428
Can you elaborate? I don't know much about trap

>>72255159
Sure but you should still fairly represent the numbers. Having your opinion versus hiding someone else's opinion are very different.

>>72255205
what metric are we using to determine 'fair' here?
cuz if you want equal representation then i can go get a blog started in 5 minutes and start bombing albums i dont like

>>72253755
culled from what...3 websites?

>>72255239
I think it's quite simple. They already have a criteria for trustworthy publications, you can go on the list and see all of them. Fair is ADDING UP THOSE REVIEWS and representing the proper average, which the person in this thread did to show that it was a 93, NOT a 99.

it's somewhere in the high 8s for me. i think it's maybe a bit lower than gkmc, but tpab is eons better.

>>72255272
oh i see what youre saying. yeah i guess youve got a point. i agree with you... no need to weigh reviewers differently once criteria for being trustworthy is met. thats kinda shitty.

>>72255310
Right. I can't help but wonder now what other albums have a drastically different score because of this system now. I mean the whole point of that website is to aggregate review scores but apparently they don't even do that properly so I don't know what to think.

>>72255380
yeah i wonder. not trying to be dismissive, but at the end of the day does metacritic have any bearing on anything or are we just getting pissed about a number that literally doesnt matter? genuinely curious

tldr am i autism

>>72255400
>but at the end of the day does metacritic have any bearing on anything or are we just getting pissed about a number that literally doesnt matter?
I mean yeah you're right it is, and music journalism in general, is pretty much worthless outside of showing you something new.

I guess it stems from my own 'tism. I'm really big on stats, I think stats are sacred and should mean what they mean so they can be referred to. One of the reasons I like sports so much is because of all the stats.

I mean, yeah it doesn't matter what the score is I'm still going to decide for myself if I like the music, but I like the score. I feel like it should mean something. I'm thinking about little Timmy in 25 years going through a list of the best albums of the century and he sees DAMN. by Kendrick with a near perfect score and gets so excited because that's the best album of the century.

So yeah I'm probably somewhere on the spectrum for me there is a certain sanctity to the number because the number lasts forever. I care deeply about history and so I want this album properly represented in history.

>>72255487
i relate heavily with the love for the numbers my man. so it looks like the answer is yes.... we're autism.

guess I'll just go to bed now. good night /mu/

>>72255503
At least it's benign autism then. Thanks for reading all my shit, good night.

>>72254990
>>72255019
I'm going to assume - for the time being - that the overall Metascore simply hasn't updated yet to reflect the latest gathered review scores. Even taking their mysterious weighting strategies into account, the only way you could get a 99% average out of this list of scores ( >>72254959 ) is by weighting all the 100s at 100%, the 92 at 100%, and ALL THE REST at 000% (which would make absolutely no sense whatsoever.)

Either that or KL has some pretty savvy hackers (minus common sense about obvious stats fraud) on his payroll desu.

>>72253755
>Thoughts?
I think that we don't need to have half the fucking catalog about it.

>>72255556
Lol you think DAMN. has taken over a large chunk of the catalog? When MBDTF came out it was LITERALLY half of every thread, and this lasted for at least 2 months.

>>72255569
Doesn't mean that it's okay.
Jesus Christ this board is all about validation it's insane.

>>72255581
What's not OK about it? If an album has taken over the catalog, it means a LOT of people love the album and want to talk about the album. It's completely proportionate and thus fare. And it will go away in the coming weeks so shut up and deal with it.

>Metacritic

>>72255593
Bump limits are plenty big enough to keep your circlejerking to one or two threads, ongoing if need be.

>>72255019
This doesn't make sense because nobody takes the publications that gave the best scores seriously

>>72255614
>circlejerking
So you've outted yourself. You don't care that an album is popular on /mu/, you care that THAT album is popular on /mu/. There's a lot I could say here but I won't. a) This is a kendrick thread that you are contributing to. Want it to go away? Don't post in it. b) Within 1 week you'll see the amount of threads go down by over half, so again, sit down and be humble.

I think we should start calling this "Be Here Now Syndrome" or "The Oasis Effect" or something like that

> Reviews in the British music press for Oasis' previous album (What's the Story) Morning Glory? had been generally negative. When it went on to become, in the words of Select editor Alexis Petridis, "this huge kind of Zeitgeist defining record" the music press was "baffled".[47] Realising they had got it wrong the last time, Petridis believes the initial glowing reviews were a concession to public opinion.

Overhyped.
Crutics love to see a sentient nigger.

>>72255751
>wah, why do black people have more sex than me?
fuck off faggot

>>72255751
>>72255785
please don't fucking start. just exchange emails and argue there. this is a board about music..

>>72253824
wtf is yeezus

>>72256141
an abomination that people still praised