How obscure is your taste /mu/?

>>74272877
Fuck off

>>74272916
did you score 0?

>>74272929
Kys weeb

>>74272916
Are you afraid to find out that you aren't as unique as you mom said?

>>74272972
post your score faggot

>>74273114
just sage, he's an autistic tripfag who took his trip off to samefag later
he made the same thread yesterday

0.72, shit algorithm. My top 10 is super mainstream shit

>>74273133
>My top 10 is super mainstream shit
post them

>>74273185
1: Loveless
2: luv(sic) Hexalogy
3: Heaven or Las Vegas
4: Songs about Leaving
5: Souvlaki
6: Modal Soul
7: The Downward Spiral
8: Going Blank Again
9: Grandeur of Hair
10: 98.12.28

Unless I calculated wrong, I got a 0.72, the most obscure shit in that entire top 10 is Grandeur of Hair which is known to anybody who likes shoegaze anyway.

0.841766

cardiacs
the mars volta
mr bungle
red house painters
captain beefheart
sidi bou said
foetus
sheena ringo
faust
bob drake

>>74272877
0.41

King Crimson
The Microphones
Daft Punk
Kanye West
Gorillaz
Kendrick Lamar
Genesis
The Grateful Dead
David Bowie
Pat Metheny Group

>>74273348
fuck off faggot

>>74273679
That's not the way you should treat a girl!

Dragon King - 233
Metal Machine Music - 18 400
Pseudoscorpion - 10
Buyer's Market - 1 428
Masta - 1 479
Drinking Songs - 25 300
Live at The Matrix - 26
White Light/White Heat - 281 900
Bitches Brew - 179 300
Magical Mystery Tour - 654 900

Dragon King
Metal Machine Music
Pseudoscorpion
Buyer's Market
Masta
Drinking Songs
Live at The Matrix
White Light/White Heat
Bitches Brew
Magical Mystery Tour

>>74272877
This is all useless because if I don't like an album, I don't even bother to finish it let alone rate it. Am I right, or am I limiting my taste?

>>74273745
shit, accidentally pasted albums instead of score
0.951495

>>74272877
>Not combining the number of listeners AND the album's overall rating into a single score

Now that would be a good thread, poor execution OP

just use this site
http://mainstream.ghan.nl/

i got like 20% overall top 50 artists but i have no problem listening to popular music. radiohead really shifts it

0.614

Am I still allowed to post on /mu/?

>>74273737
but you're a boy!

>>74273974

Yeah, who gives a fuck? You'll listen to more music eventually. My chart from september was horrible but now it's ok I'd say.

>>74273992
nope.

>>74273228
Yeah, I guess the formula boosts your obscurity score. I will try to see what can be done about it.

>>74273764
I don't think you understand what this thread is about...

>>74273855
Nah

>>74273966
That one is pretty flawed really.
>i got like 20% overall top 50 artists
>but i have no problem listening to popular music.
20% is popular music.

0.52

The Lonesome Crowded West
Not Available
The Smile Sessions
Selected Ambient Works Vol. II
Madvillainy
World Of Echo
Music Has The Right To Children
There's A Riot Goin' On
Endtroducing...
Chiastic Slide

>>74272877
What's this gif from tho?

File: sreggin.png (37KB, 722x468px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 722x468px

>>74274236
it takes into account how much of the artist you've listened to. because my top artists are radiohead, wilco, modest mouse, etc i got a high score.

File: 223.jpg (54KB, 720x960px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 720x960px

>this thread

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maya_(illusion)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maya_(illusion)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maya_(illusion)

1. The Books - The Lemon of Pink (2003)
2. Cardiacs - Sing to God (1996)
3. Captain Beefheart - Trout Mask Replica
4. Tipographica - God Says I Can't Dance
5. World's End Girlfriend - Seven Idiots
6. Koenjihyakkei - Angherr Shisspa
7. IOSYS - Whoa! Hyper Denpa-chan
8. Various Artists - The Sounds of Earth
9. Venetian Snares - Songs About My Cats
10. Henry Cow - In Praise of Learning

Score: 0.85
Score squared: 0.72

>>74273228
Maybe multiplying your score by itself gives a more accurate answer?
Score: 0.72
Score squared: 0.52
This sounds pretty fair to me desu
What do you think?

>>74274296
Yes, that's one of the many reasons it's flawed. You got a high score because of almost everything you listened to though. 20% is a pretty high score (as in, not obscure).

>>74274282
Google no Nichijou

>>74274157
Yeah whatever, how degenerate

>>74274342
.52 seems too low, >>74274247 got 0.52 but his albums are more scrobbled than mine in all likelihood, I'd say 0.6-0.65 would be fair.

>>74274383
You got 0.52, but he (>>74274247) got 0.27 (remember it's squared now). Seems about fair to me to be honest. I mean, your taste seems to be about average for /mu/, so 0.5 is about perfect.

>>74274342
i like that it uses data on how much you've listened to an artist. mostly though i feel like people are just going to pick albums that are deliberately obscure so they can get a good score. i could rattle off 10 post rock bands like zbogom, ajda or something and get a real "obscure" rating but i just think its dumb to use that as a point of pride

>>74274421

I'd wager .52 is fair enough then after you square everyone else's down yeah.

>>74272877
3 of my favorite albums are from 1 artist and 2 of those have 1 listener, the other album on there which has more listeners is my #1 pick, kinda would pull down my obscurity score a bit

File: scared loli.png (65KB, 398x225px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 398x225px

>>74273745
>Pseudoscorpion
>Buyer's Market
Eh...

>>74274442
>i feel like people are just going to pick albums that are deliberately obscure so they can get a good score
They would be lying to themselves. Also, scrobbles are very inaccurate to determine such things. It's biased in favor of artists with a lot of songs per album, for example. And the algorithm of the whole things sucks as well.

>>74274444
Nice, thanks you for your input, and nice quads!

>>74274462
Read the OP carefully again!

>>74274540
Why is that girl trying to pull that man's pants down?

>>74274540
I-I just like darker albums

>>74274540
By the way, the word would be "transcript"

>>74274559
She's actually scared of the man in front of her trying to pull HER pants down!

>>74274608
I get it anon. First tracks more Buyer's Market is one of my all time favorites (although calling it a favorite is misleading, it would be more accurate to say it's one of the most intense "musical" experiences I have ever experienced):

>>74274617
huh

>>74274662
>huh
>Oh, and by the way, does anyone on here have the "lyrics" for this?

>>74274674
Oh lol
You should have specified the context lol
So, do you have the transcript?

>>74274701
Nope, sorry

>>74274540
>Read the OP carefully again!
i see it now, then that comes with the issue cause my favourite artist shares a bunch of listeners of another artist with almost the same name. (the album with the most listeners is from the wrong artist), another artist also has a very similar state, last.fm. also favourite albums =/= favourite artists.
..........
ok scratch that the score turned out higher than i expected anyways, at 0.94

Alright, super plen comin thru

My Beautiful Dark Twisted Fantasy
To Pimp A Butterfly
Ok Computer
channel Orange
I Love You, Honeybear
Lift Yr Skinny Fists
Have One On Me
Coloring Book
Marry Me
Untrue

Score: 0.479
Score Squared: 0.223

Pretty lame, but desu kanye and radiohead take half of my top 10

>>74274157
Came here just for this

>>74274803
>my favourite artist shares a bunch of listeners of another artist with almost the same name
In which case you would need to make a guess on how many aritsts "your artist" has. For example, the proportion of listeners his most popular album has versus the other album from your non favorite artist of the same name.
>favourite albums =/= favourite artists
Yes, but this considers the artists of your favorite albums (not the same as favorite artists). This is useful since it gives more accurate scores to artists with a lot of albums, and because counting the number of listeners for a specific album is a complete mess (try with Uncle Meat, for example, and you will see like 50 different titles for it).
Care to post your favorites anyways? You seem to be the one with the highest score so far.

>>74274875
batfinks - (3260) which has mixed listeners with "The Batfinks" so i'd take 1000 off.
nicolas collins - (1716)
fishmans - (26744)
c-schulz & f.x. randomiz - (138) would this count as "various artists"?
the avalanches - (601666)
olivia tremor control - (203628)
vert - (17188) i'd probably remove 7,000 to compensate for the other artist which has this name
you c + foresteppe (69) same question about various artists here
colugo - (2006)
sirconical - (1154)

>>74275144
Interesting stuff. Thanks for sharing :3

>would this count as "various artists"?
If it's a duo (or trio, maybe up to quartet), I would consider the artist with the most listeners.

Glad to see the wonderful autism of Avant-Math continues. To be fair, I am looking to dive deeper, and he (she? I don't even know, not like it matters) definitely has some good advice, even though I don't always agree with their opinions.

>>74275236
>Glad to see the wonderful autism of Avant-Math continues
<3
>even though I don't always agree with their opinions.
Out of pure curiosity, which ones?

Also, post your favorites and score, faggit c;<

>>74275207
>If it's a duo (or trio, maybe up to quartet), I would consider the artist with the most listeners.
then
f.x. randomiz - (2264)
foresteppe - (2023)

>>74275273
I disagree with some of your opinions on prog and your rather neverending smugness is both amusing and irritating at times. Nevertheless:

>The Beatles - Revolver
>The Who - Quadrophenia
>Mouse on the Keys - The Flowers of Romance
>The Mars Volta - Frances the Mute
>She Her Her Hers - Stereochrome
>Brian Eno - Music for Airports
>the pillows - Runners High
>Titãs - Titanomaquia
>Bill Evans Trio - The Complete Live at the Village Vanguard
>Venetian Snares - Rossz Csillag Alatt Született

Score - 0.69925. Surprisingly alright. Could be better, though.

This was rather fun.
I have the most /mu/core top 10 list ever but fuck it, hard to outgrow your old favorites.

Godspeed You! Black Emperor-Lift Your Skinny Fists Like Antennas To Heaven!
toe-The Book About My Idle Plot on a Vague Anxiety
Tortoise-TNT
Swans-Soundtracks for the Blind
Unwound-Leaves Turn Inside You
Slint-Spiderland
Dirty Three-Ocean Songs
Elephant Gym-Angle
Mogwai-Young Team
Stars of the Lid-And Their Refinement of the Decline
.724 is my score, my overall mainstreamometer is around 15%

>>74275504
Oh, you are that guy lol
This time your score (once squared, like I explained above) makes more sense. You get around 48%, which is about slightly more than the average /mu/core.

>>74275731
Wait, squared? You never mentioned squared.

File: chart.png (4KB, 600x371px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 600x371px

>>74275784
I did in this thread, just not in the OP. Because the answers were too boosted towards obscurity, so I had to find a way to boost scores down. Squared was the perfect solution for this. In fact, it was so perfect, that 50% is the score the average /mu/tant gets (out of 13 data pieces so far, but still).
See pic related. Almost perfectly distributed!
Now I feel ready for making the belong thread tomorrow, and this time people won't be able to cheat like before!

>>74275784
He brought it up here >>74274342
In that case my score >>74275574 becomes .524
The squaring is probably done to stop the scores from mostly clustering between .5 and 1 and make them seem more diverse

>>74272877
>obscure
Wow who cares

Just enjoy what you like

>>74275850
Fair enough, and squared makes a lot of sense when I think of the formula. You should check the score for /mu/core, while I'll go diving looking for more stuff to listen to.

got 0.511388

fair enough I guess

>>74275978
>i have never bothered to listen to anything beyond /mu/core so neither should you!
okay

>>74276023
The score for /mu/'s top 10 albums (from around 2016) is 20%
In order:
Spiderland
In the Court of the Crimson King
In the Aeroplane Over the Sea
Loveless
Pet Sounds
The Velvet Underground & Nico
Kid A
Remain in Light
Lift Your Skinny Fists Like Antennas to Heaven
Pink Moon

>I'll go diving looking for more stuff to listen to
Did you find the Patriciancore chart?

>>74276065
\Wwhom are you quoting?

>>74276065
I found them, yeah, though honestly I'm also going after other stuff as well thanks to what boils down to multiple Wikipedia diversions.

>>74276065
>>i have never bothered to listen to anything beyond /mu/core so neither should you!
pretty good strawman

>>74276372
>implying I'm wrong

>>74276388
Yeah you are. Nice try though

Notice how defensive you got though

>>74276410
Post your favorites and score then, faggit

>>74276420
See >>74275978

Please pay attention

>>74276431
Thank you for confirming my assumptions >>74276388

>>74276445
How so?

I don't care what you like, you can listen to anything you want. I literally just said, listen to what you like. Are you tarded?

File: IMG_9947.jpg (35KB, 492x372px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 492x372px

>>74273745
>Pseudoscorpion and Buyer's Market
Wait what the fuck

.75

Same albums: >>74253452

>>74272877
Is she snugging at my cock?

File: muh_score.jpg (54KB, 504x283px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 504x283px

Lift to Experience: The Texas Jerusalem Crossroads 17981
USA Out of Vietnam: Crashing Diseases and Incurable Airplanes 1941
Sweet Trip: Velocity;Design;Comfort 29587
Dead Can Dance: Into the Labyrinth] 469940
Roomful of Teeth: Self Titled 2346
King Crimson Thrack 467782
RP Boo: Fingers, Bank Pads &Shoe Prints 16772
The Constructus Corporation: The Ziggurat 18742
Oxbow: Let me be a woman 35263
Lovesliescrushing: Bloweyelashwish 42637
I swapped Lovesliescrushing in for Massacre's Killing Time because they got lumped with a prolific and still active thrash band and I didn't feel like more math.
This got 0.889248 which squared is
0.7907620055
I'm happy. If I went back and calculated Massacre's solo listeners it'd probably be lower but I'm not complaining.
>>74273966
I got 9%. Do I get a cookie? or a sticker?
Still if everything is judged against Coldplay I think it's kind of broken. they should use a more moderate artist and do weighted scores above and bellow.
>>74276457
If you don't care what people think yiu won't be ashamed of your score, regardless of what it is.
Also, if you really didn't care, you'd look for that perfect album that will socially break you because yiu hear perfection while others hear autistic noise because it coincides with your personal sensibilities.

>>74277137
>If you don't care what people think yiu won't be ashamed of your score
Who said I was ashamed of my score?

Why does the score matter?
>Also, if you really didn't care, you'd [look for music in relation to social status]
See >>74275978

>>74277137
>Still if everything is judged against Coldplay I think it's kind of broken. they should use a more moderate artist and do weighted scores above and bellow.
This is why I use my method. It's an improved version of the mainstream calculator.

>>74277174
>Who said I was ashamed of my score?
Post it then. If it doesn't matter, it makes no difference to post it.

>>74277191
>Post it then. If it doesn't matter, it makes no difference to post it.
I will if you answer my quetsion

.63
The Mars Volta - Deloused in the Comatorium
Ween - The Mollusk
The Shaggs - Philosophy of the World
At the Drive-In - Relationship of Command
Slint- Spiderland
ITAOTS
Barenaked Ladies - Gordon
John Frusciante - The Empyrean
Dr. Octagon - Dr. Octagonecologyst
Deltron 3030

File: alright.gif (393KB, 640x360px) Image search: [Google]

393KB, 640x360px

>>74276445
You have the 'tism. Additionally, I really wish you would stop being such a stupid tripfag and end your life. At the very least, stop being a tripfag. It's narcissistic and it makes you look like a retard.

>>74277260
>implying I should care about what people think of me on an anonymous forum
And let me guess, you care about what people think about your music taste, right?

>>74277274
>>implying I should care about what people think of me on an anonymous forum
Then why are you so concerned about proving how obscure your tastes are?

>>74277274
No, you're just really obnoxious and you shit up threads. There's no need for the trip.

>>74277306
I'm not. It's just a fun little experimental. Statistics and mathematical modeling are fun, you know?

>>74277309
Wrong.

>>74277319
>you know?
I don't.
>It's just a fun little experimental.
I don't think it's fun. Why expect someone else to think it is?
>>74277309
If he dropped his trip, he'd still be obnoxious and shit up threads. What's the difference?

>>74277274
Ya know I've been reading through and witnessing your posts for a few years now and it literally just hit me how much of a manipulator you are when you're arguing. I don't think you've ever exercised any sort of self-awareness or humility despite being wrong on numerous occasions and at this point it's just really sad. Good luck.

>>74277337
The best part about it is he claims that he argues because he wants to learn about other peopel's point of view, but then he only persistently pushed his own point of view, ignoring everyone else's

He's like the guy who asks how you are doing, only so that he's asked the same in response and just talks about himself for an hour.

>>74277332
>I don't think it's fun.
Too bad.
>Why expect someone else to think it is?
Well, I don't think most people are masochists who posts in threads that are not of their interest.

>>74277337
>manipulator
huh? how come?
>I don't think you've ever exercised any sort of self-awareness or humility despite being wrong on numerous occasions and at this point it's just really sad
But that's wrong. I have no trouble admitting being wrong, I have already done so many times in the past. Sorry for being right most of the time though.

>>74277319
>I'm not concerned about proving how obscure my tastes are
>argues with people about how obscure music is inherently better than popular music
Alright bud
>>74277332
The trip makes them look like a narcissist. This is also supposed to be an anonymous imageboard, and on a site where people argue constantly, I dont see why you'd want any sort of reputation to build up here.

>>74277372
>Well, I don't think most people are masochists who posts in threads that are not of their interest.
Are you talking about yourself?
>>74277372
>I have no trouble admitting being wrong, I have already done so many times in the past.
Show 20 examples of this.
>>74277386
>The trip makes them look like a narcissist
Judge the content of the post, not the trip.

how desperate for validation are you? multiply the number of these hoops you're willing to jump through with your attractiveness on a scale of one to ten

File: そうなの？.jpg (29KB, 900x810px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 900x810px

>>74277398
uhh his posts are still shit and hes a faggot

>>74277369
It's true though. That's why I like arguing. If that explanation doesn't convince you, then interpret it as me arguing for the sake of refining my ideas, to have some outside criticism and improve my own views. You also have to consider that most of the time I would be right because I have argued a lot of subjects many times already while most people I argue with have not.

>>74277386
>argues with people about how obscure music is inherently better than popular music
Wrong. I never said obscure music is inherently better. I said obscure music, if it manages to reach your all time favorites, is very likely to be great music because it reached that place out of merit instead of popularity.

>>74277398
>Are you talking about yourself?
No, I genuinely enjoy arguing here.

>Show 20 examples of this.
Come on now... I recall arguments with Hampus and the Beatles tape loop guy where I had to admit being wrong. I don't keep a track of my mistakes.

File: 110.jpg (134KB, 720x960px) Image search: [Google]

134KB, 720x960px

>>74277425
>if it manages to reach your all time favorites, is very likely to be great music because it reached that place out of merit instead of popularity.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non_sequitur_(logic)

>>74277451
What a fat cat

>>74277423
So are those weeb images but I don't see you complaining
>>74277425
>It's true though. That's why I like arguing. If that explanation doesn't convince you, then interpret it as me arguing for the sake of refining my ideas, to have some outside criticism and improve my own views. You also have to consider that most of the time I would be right because I have argued a lot of subjects many times already while most people I argue with have not.
kek
>>74277425
>No, I genuinely enjoy arguing here.
No I mean I've seen you pop into threads on subjects you don't understand and argue like a child
>Come on now
I'm waiting. You made a claim, you back it up

PRO-TIP: You won';t be able to, because you have never admitted you are wrong before, even when you were wrong. I know this because in the past I have trapped you into an erroneous claim, and attempted to force you to admit you were wrong. You always refused and tried to find a loophole to get out of it.

>>74277369
yeah he's pretty much just confrontational and argumentative for the sake of being confrontational and argumentative. then, when anyone says that nobody likes him, he takes the trip off and makes about how his posts are high quality. it's a pretty sad existence

If your favorite band has a Last.fm page, it's not obscure.

File: 130.jpg (663KB, 1536x2048px) Image search: [Google]

663KB, 1536x2048px

>>74277466

>>74277425
>the Beatles tape loop guy where I had to admit being wrong
I actually am that guy, and no, you did not admit you were wrong.

>>74277425
>implying that everyone who likes popular stuff likes it simply because it's popular
>implying that people dont like obscure music simply for its obscurity so they can jerk off themselves and others for having such ""patrician taste"" (see >>74272877)

>>74277482
What a fluffy cat

>>74277469
>No I mean I've seen you pop into threads on subjects you don't understand and argue like a child
[citation needed]
>I'm waiting. You made a claim, you back it up
I already mentioned two examples.
>in the past I have trapped you into an erroneous claim, and attempted to force you to admit you were wrong
[citation needed]

>>74277478
I never post as anon to speak good about myself.

>>74277451
Wrong.

>>74277486
Yes, I admitted they were the first to use tape loops (I admitted my mistake). I later argued however that what's a more relevant discovery/invention is the use of tape music in rock in general, as tape loops are too specific.

>>74277512
>implying that everyone who likes popular stuff likes it simply because they haven't listened to less popular stuff
Fixed.
>>implying that people dont like obscure music simply for its obscurity so they can jerk off themselves and others for having such ""patrician taste""
Who cares? Having obscure taste only has merit if it's honest. Otherwise it's just lying to yourself.

File: 99.jpg (1MB, 2448x3264px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2448x3264px

>>74277516

>>74277525
>I never post as anon to speak good about myself.
wrong
you also started this thread and the thread yesterday without a trip so it wouldn't get filtered by everyone sensible enough to do that

>>74272877
0.0325407

Lmao

I'm not even surprised.

I listen to a lot of variety, and yes even obscure stuff.

But my most favorite albums are for the most part, very well known.
Their artists even more so.

Here my normal top 10 (followed by the other albums I used for the equation since I have some of multiple artists).

1: Kishi Bashi - Lighght
2: Tame Impala - Currents
3: Kishi Bashi - 151a
4: Daft Punk - Random Access Memories
5: The Beatles - Abbey Road
6: Kanye West - Yeezus
7: ELO - Time
8: Fleet Foxes - Helplessness Blues
9: Pink Floyd - DSOTM
10: Kanye West - MBDTF

Bonus Used:
11: St. Lucia - When the Night
12: Death Grips - Exmilitary

>>74277525
>[citation needed]
You just name dropped me. You know who I am.
>>74277525
>Yes, I admitted they were the first to use tape loops (I admitted my mistake).
No, you did not. You backpedaled and goalpost shifted. That's what you do when you get in a corner. If you were truly here to argue in order to expand your musical intellect, you wouldn't do this.

Feel free to link the thread from the archive so everyone here can see what we are talking about.

Also I'm really impressed you remember me.

>>74277544
>wrong
In all honesty, I have never, ever done that.
>you also started this thread and the thread yesterday without a trip so it wouldn't get filtered by everyone sensible enough to do that
More because I didn't want the thread to get further derailed because a tripfriend made it.

>>74277545
>yes even obscure stuff
Doubt it. Your taste seriously sucks.

>>74277567
>ask him to cite his claims
>doesn't
Thank you for proving to me than you have never proven me wrong without me admitting it.

>No, you did not. You backpedaled and goalpost shifted.
I admitted I was wrong, then I shifted the discussion (goalposting? I admitted you were right that time, I argued for a different position next) to tape music in general.
>That's what you do when you get in a corner.
I admitted being wrong. Then argued for what I believed was the more important issue.
>If you were truly here to argue in order to expand your musical intellect, you wouldn't do this.
No, because the tape loops part was already settled, so I started another discussion around tape music in general.
>Also I'm really impressed you remember me.
I'm really impressed you have to remind me of that thread every 6 months and that you still make a fuzz about it.

>>74277534
Okay its fat

>>74277525
>>implying that everyone who likes popular stuff likes it simply because they haven't listen to less popular stuff
That's not a logical argument. Music's popularity is not inherently related to its quality.
>Who cares?
You, and everyone else who jerks themselves off for having obscure taste.

>>74277628
>Music's popularity is not inherently related to its quality.
Correct. That's why I said in one of my previous posts that having an obscure album as your favorite it's very likely to be a great album because it's against the odds that a less popular album would "climb the ladder" of favorite albums when popular albums are much more likely to be listened to and therefore reach the top.

>You, and everyone else who jerks themselves off for having obscure taste.
I don't claim to have a pretty obscure taste, I just claim I don't have /mu/core taste.

>>74277619
>ask him to cite his claims
Misdirection.

It won't work on me. You should know better

>>74277619
>I admitted I was wrong
You did not do this
>then I shifted the discussion
You DID do this, but it is misdirection, like above. You are pretty good at it.
>Then argued for what I believed was the more important issue.
That's not how conversations work. Arguments are not one sided. If you are losing, you can't decide to just change to something else that only you think is more important.
>I'm really impressed you have to remind me of that thread every 6 months and that you still make a fuzz about it.
I literally lolled.

I only do this to remind the new posters here your MO.

And holy fuck it's not every 6 months, but more like a year. And jesus christ I haven't even seen you post here in a year anyways, I thought you left.

>>74277619
>Doubt it. Your taste seriously sucks.

Ya'll can think whatever you want about my taste, I like what I like.
But for the other part.
Here's a random 10 from my library.
1: M83 - MoonChild
2: Sister Nancy - Bam Bam
3: Genesis - Mama
4: Cam'ron - Oh Boy
5: Talking Heads - Swamp
6: Uriah Heep - The Wizard
7: David Soul - Silver Lady
8: Bobby Blue Bland - In the Ghetto
9: Boards of Canada - Satellite Anthem Icarus
10: Olivia Tremor Control - A Peculiar Noise Called Train Director

>>74277619
>>74277701
Also now you are jogging my memory about this thread from what, 2, 3 years ago?

You didn't directly state "I was wrong" like I asked you to... you vaguely implied it and quickly changed the subject to something you knew you'd be right about.

So no, you never directly stated you were wrong.

>>74277701
Alright, if you seriously can't cite a single case of what you claim here >>74277469
>I know this because in the past I have trapped you into an erroneous claim, and attempted to force you to admit you were wrong
Then I will just call you out on spewing bullshit.
>You did not do this
I did, at least two years ago in fact.
https://archive.rebeccablacktech.com/mu/thread/60877956/#60883522
>I admitted I was wrong when I said that the Beatles weren't the first rock group to use tape loops on their music.
>Mon 07 Dec 2015

>You DID do this, but it is misdirection, like above. You are pretty good at it.
I admitted being wrong, then I shifted the discussion to what I believed was the more important subject (tape loops -> tape music).

>If you are losing, you can't decide to just change to something else that only you think is more important.
I admitted I lost, then I decided to argue for another position.

>nd holy fuck it's not every 6 months, but more like a year.
Sure, that's fine.
>And jesus christ I haven't even seen you post here in a year anyways, I thought you left.
I did kind of left for a whole year.

>>74277730
I'm not trying to be mean, but you just confirmed for me what I said before. You don't listen to obscure stuff.

>>74277757
>you vaguely implied it and quickly changed the subject to something you knew you'd be right about.
Maybe I didn't expressly say "I'm wrong", in which case I apologize. Now, I don't understand why you have to keep pushing for this when I already admitted being wrong 2 years ago.

>So no, you never directly stated you were wrong.
I did two years ago and I implied I was wrong in the original thread. Next time, if you want me to say "I'm wrong", expressly ask me when it happens if you are going to be so autistic (literally) about it.

>>74277831
Alright.
Suit yourself matey.

Outside of two of the albums that those songs are from, I've never heard any of them mentioned in real life.
Whether by people around me, or just media in general.

But I suppose for /mu/ standards, it's different.

File: 45.jpg (77KB, 960x648px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 960x648px

>>74277619
>>yes even obscure stuff
>Doubt it. Your taste seriously sucks.

>mfw you only made this thread because you wanted to boast about taste and not because of whatever flimsy excuse you mentioned >>74277319 here

man i did this shit so fucking much when i was a tripfag teen and i'm telling you from experience dude, and as someone who's known you for a number of years here -- stop it. it's not healthy, what you're doing here.

>>74272877
what fucking number am I supposed to be looking at

>>74276461
like I said, I just like darker albums

File: badda bing BADDA BOOM.jpg (22KB, 326x316px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 326x316px

>>74277831
This, ladies and gentlemen, is why /mu/ is bad

>>74277897
>I've never heard any of them mentioned in real life
Yeah, there is your problem. If your standard of what's popular is based on what your irl friends say, then yeah, your taste is super obscure, but not over here where most of /mu/ has already listened to 90% of the albums you listed (both the favorites and randoms).

>But I suppose for /mu/ standards, it's different.
Correct.

>>74277910
I know your case well enough to know that you and me are very, very different people regarding personality and ambitions. Let's not even get into the heavy personal details of your life (drugs, brother) so you can understand why your case is much more unstable than mine (which is not unstable at all).
In my case, browing and arguing on /mu/ is a healthy hobby just like watching movies or listening to music.

>>74277941
On the contrary. /mu/ has turned each time worse because people don't even to explore music outside of /mu/core anymore. You would know this if you had browsed this site for a year or more.

>>74277971
No, I meant your incessant and pointless arguing.

>>74278018
In which case you are exaggerating a lot when you say that's the reason /mu/ is bad. It's simply not accurate.
Also
>pointless arguing
It's pointless to post on here, so...

File: 25.jpg (114KB, 743x695px) Image search: [Google]

114KB, 743x695px

>>74277971
>tries to turn this onto me

lol

i can't help but wonder what you would have said to my response had my name not been attached. as if i'm sitting here digging up and projecting dirt onto you about your personal life and not giving you advice based on experience. no matter how you try to mold it otherwise, what you're doing here is exactly what i was doing when i was a tripfag, and i'm telling you, it's not good.. i'm giving this to you raw and sticking to it because i know YOUR case (your case here on /mu/ at least, not your personal life, which is totally irrelevant and you should be ashamed of yourself for attacking mine frankly) all to well and i know how much you love to spin what people say so your e-self looks consistently shiny and perfect.

>>74277701
Oh, by the way, I was browing the archive with my posts and I have already found quite a few times I admitted I was wrong.
>https://archive.rebeccablacktech.com/mu/thread/60418443/#60422318
>Okay then, I was wrong there [in claiming Music for 18 Musicians used Indonesian music influences, when in reality it used African music influences]
Funnily enough, that anon proving I was wrong was such an uncommon occurrence that he had to make a thread with a screenshot of me admitting being wrong.
https://archive.rebeccablacktech.com/mu/thread/60422835/
Maybe I actually am right most of the time.

>https://archive.rebeccablacktech.com/mu/thread/64075500/#64076626
>Oh, I always thought Slanted Enchanted was from 1996.
>I'm wrong about my previous post then.
Funnily enough, yet again, the anon who proved I was wrong HAD to make a screenshot of my admitting being wrong.
>https://archive.rebeccablacktech.com/mu/thread/64075500/#64076658
Pretty funny, isn't it?

>https://archive.rebeccablacktech.com/mu/thread/53594398/#53595075
>The thread about Prog influences yesterday I knew I was wrong, for example.

>https://archive.rebeccablacktech.com/mu/thread/60877956/#60883522
>I admitted I was wrong when I said that the Beatles weren't the first rock group to use tape loops on their music.

>>74278124
>tries to turn this onto me
No. I was only saying how your experience doesn't apply to me in the slightest, and you know it.

>i'm giving this to you raw and sticking to it because i know YOUR case (your case here on /mu/ at least, not your personal life, which is totally irrelevant and you should be ashamed of yourself for attacking mine frankly)
Again, I didn't attack you personally, I only talked about how your experiences are irrelevant to me, and you can't deny those two things did play a great part in your attitude here on /mu/. In my case, I don't have to worry about such things and have always posted with a "clear conscience", because I liked arguing and discussing about music. I know my case pretty well, so I know I'm living a healthy life and therefore /mu/ shouldn't be something that worries me.

>i know how much you love to spin what people say so your e-self looks consistently shiny and perfect.
Sorry for being to perfect, I guess. I mean, people try so hard to prove me wrong that they even make threads and screenshots about it (see post above) when they succeed (such a rare occurrence, I know).

By the way, I sent you a RYM message a few days ago, check it out :3

>>74272877
>having favorite artists, and not just favorite compositions

are you 12?

>>74278825
But it clearly says artists that created your favorite albums.

>>74272877
Stevie Nicks - In Your Dreams
Fleetwood Mac - Rumours
f(x) - Pink Tape
Lady Gaga - The Fame
Anekdoten - Until All The Ghosts Are Gone
Céline Dion - Loved Me Back To Life
Nick Drake - Pink Moon
Madonna - Confessions On A Dance Floor
Doves - Kingdom Of Rust
Pink Floyd - Wish You Were Here

0.466082
idk, seems like i should be lower

>>74272877
Artist Listeners

Bohren & der Club of Gore - Black Earth 194479
David Munrow - Music of the Crusades 2797
Ensemble Unicorn - Minnesang in Sudtirol 4053
Tangerine Dream - Rubycon 375734
Coil - Ape of Naples 237801
Forseti - Erde 26229
Big Black - Atomizer 174636
Tenhi - Maaaet 77338
Sleep - Holy Mountain 211257
Of the Wand and the Moon - Sonnenheim 73625

Result:
0.840124

It was kind of fun, though mathematical model seems pretty strange. Can you explain your reasoning behind it?

>The Lord Weird Slough Feg - Traveller
>The Axis of Perdition - Deleted Scenes
>Current 93 - All The Pretty Littles Horses
>Urfaust - Verraterischer
>Impiety - Ravage & Conquer
>Ash Ra Tempel - Schwingungen
>Locrian - The Crystal World
>Sabbat - The Dwelling
>Ved Buens Ende - Written In Waters
>Ed Rush & Optical - Wormhole

Result: 0,879801

i'm gonna ignore your stupid rules and just pick 10 of my favorite albums from this year so far

Bill Baird - 16,335
Damaged Bug - 7,657
Dutch Uncles - 97,187
Foxygen - 258,480
Jib Kidder - 17,485
Moonlandingz - 11,593
Oxbow - 35,263
Pond - 184.944 doesn't even filter out the 90s US band lol
Ride - 361,064
Sampha - 169,255

Google Log Output: 4.74089467563
Wolfram Output: 0.849915

---

Alright now let's try and blow this system a new asshole.

Beatles, Radiohead, Coldplay, Muse, RHCP, Metallica, Pink Floyd, Linkin Park, SOAD, DCFC

log(187,359,799 * 186,635,031 * 127,597,122 * 120,517,958 * 112,820,916 * 106,382,967 * 99,661,651 * 96,254,075 * 93,143,075 * 87,780,946)/10 = 8.07043219691

-3.22678

---

pt. 2 incoming

Ann Steel - 1,076 (My Time)
Hairy Chapter - 2,141 (Looking For a Decent Freedom)
Pony Time - 3,727 (Geordie)
Sharpie Crows - 1,211 (Thank You Ladies for the Spread)
Coloured Balls - 1,943 (Flash)
Libythth - 806 (It's My Beak)
Streetband - 602 (Toast)
Here Lies Man - 2,268 (Here Lies Man)
Dat Oven - 2,441 (Icy Lake)
Slugbug - 873 (Nervous Man Music)

Tryhard: 3.16755618815 ---> 0.969927

---

log(1^10)/10 = 0/10 -> 1 [well at least that unsurprisingly works]

So I guess my question is: what the fuck is so special about 4,265,795 last.fm listeners?

log(4265795 * 4265795 *4265795 *4265795 *4265795 *4265795 *4265795 *4265795 *4265795 *4265795)/10) = 6.62999998086

6.62999998086 ---> 1.91653×10^-8 (0.0000000191653)

log(4265796 * 4265795 *4265795 *4265795 *4265795 *4265795 *4265795 *4265795 *4265795 *4265795)/10) = 6.62999999104

6.62999999104 ---> 8.97184×10^-9 (0.0000000897184)

>>74280692
>So I guess my question is: what the fuck is so special about 4,265,795 last.fm listeners?

That's basically because model is not very well-thought and relies on 'magical numbers' rather than more or less cohesive formula.

>>74280750
FUCKING ENGINEERS

lmao and this is all before i read that he suddenly decides to invoke square law without knowing how or why it corrects errors when his formula's asshole is so loose you can squirt out a negative

the NEW score you'd get on the obscurity scale, WHICH GOES FROM 0 TO 1 MIND YOU, for the 10 most scrobbled last.fm artists is... 10.4121091684 ahahahaha

File: Screenshot_20170801-210605.jpg (80KB, 978x532px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 978x532px

Modry Efekts Nova Synteza 2

Synkopys Sluneci Hodiny

National Healths Queues and Cures

Atolls Laraignee Mal

Opus 5s Serieux ou pas

Maneiges Ni Vent Ni Nouvelle

Bondage fruit II

Kazumi Watanabes Spice of Life

Kenso Sparta

Shub Niggurath Les Morts Vont Vite

king crimson 467782
kendrick lamar 1206289
brockhampton 23510
swans 358460
cal chuchesta 3517
sza 162562
xiu xiu 419096
ajj 184002
death grips 302854
danny brown 350039

0.753239
kill myself?

>>74281149

Get more oldschool favourites. A moderately well known old band may still have less listeners than a relatively obscure new band. This is a flaw of using last fm for data i suppose; unless comparing the obscurity of online users only is the point.

>>74280750
No, it's because thats the maximum score you can get, Jamal. No magic numbers at all.

>>74280837
You are doing the math wrong, nigger

>>74281582
>No, it's because thats the maximum score you can get, Jamal. No magic numbers at all.
6.63 seems pretty much like a magical number. Can you elaborate on the way you got this constant?

>>74281677
It's the score you get when you have the ten most listened artists on LastFM as the artists of your ten favorite albums. No magical numbers, retard.

>>74281720
>It's the score you get when you have the ten most listened artists
Sorry, I should have read this thread more carefully.

>>74272877
Why not just use
http://mainstream.ghan.nl/

>>74281984
Because it's flawed. It's biased towards artists with many songs per artists, records your most listened instead of most enjoyed, goes by artists instead of albums (meaning artists with more albums get more hits), and the scores are way too low (like, the average on /mu/ is about 10%). My system fixes all of this, and gives the average /mu/tant a 50% score (once you do the squared thing).

>>74282541
>my system
i thought it was OP system

>>74282635
:^)

>>74277831
>I did, at least two years ago in fact.
>https://archive.rebeccablacktech.com/mu/thread/60877956/#60883522
No, again, you were speaking in past tense (which was also a lie). In the original thread that thread was referencing, you did not admit you were wrong.
>Maybe I didn't expressly say "I'm wrong", in which case I apologize
haha OK fair enough.
>you are going to be so autistic
topkek Tell me more about this ridiculous process to determine how obscure your taste is, because numbers are fun
>that anon proving I was wrong was such an uncommon occurrence
Here's the problem: we are specifically gunning for you because you come off as a smug asshole who thinks he's always right (case in point, after reading that sentence, you will think "But... I *am* always right!").

Real people who aren't fucking autistic don't think they are right all of the time and then going around flaunting this false belief. If you weren't acting like a douche, we wouldn't go after you.

>>74282682
>that false tripcode

>>74275144
Just realized the guy behind Batfinks died last year. That's fucking devastating.

>>74282738
I obviously know I'm not always right, I'm making a joke about that part ;P Now, if we were to say I'm "less wrong" than the average /mu/tant? That sounds believable.

>>74282761
Oops, sorry!

131,392 This Town Needs Guns
1,230,102 A Tribe Called Quest
1,244,416 Animal Collective
190,792 Lightning Bolt
105,002 King Gizzard
237,592 Thee Oh Sees
143,311 Hella
147,124 The Ruby Suns
9,297 Yowie
13,017 Los Angeles Police Department

Result was 0.005

I ain't ashamed ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

>>74283915
I'm pretty sure you did the math wrong...

>>74283915
I think you actually have 0.7759.