Objectivity in rating albums

Archisorcerus wrote: For me, objectivity in ratings is rating an album justly, defying your tastes/preferences, and all that entails. I hate Pink Floyd, but I wouldn't give one of their accomplished albums a 1-star. Or, I hate djent, but I wouldn't give a well-crafted album in that genre a single star. Or else, I love Symphony X, but I would only give 5 stars to a single album of them, out of their 9. As a final example, I love Therion - Theli. It is one of my favourite albums. But it is flawed. So, I would give it 3 or 3.5 stars (if possible). There is still subjectivity here for sure, but we are "the" subjects, and the ratings come out of us. So...

What I see in this, and with which I can identify, is the honourable attitude to go beyond the straight "judgement" of one's own taste when reviewing. This means asking myself more than just "do I like it?"; a commitment to become more analytic when listening, that is, to consciously evaluate certain criteria even if these don't seem to play a role to whether the immediate taste is drawn to something or not,  but also a commitment to try to find a way to appreciate qualities in an album that the personal taste may not have gone for when listening to the album for the first time or even never without consciously making an effort. For sure a review can benefit from this, as it may bring up aspects of the album with which a reader can identify more than the writer themselves. In fact even the personal taste can benefit, because going down this path brings the chance to discover something about the album, to like and appreciate something that wouldn't have been obvious to the immediate taste judgement.

One can see in this an attempt to go beyond subjectivity, however I still think that objectivity is the wrong word for it. In this way we don't go outside our own mind and personal perception (as "objectivity" would require), rather we add to it and extend it.

Can you provide evidence of an album review that is not subjective? I don’t think I’ve ever seen an objective album review in my life. Every album review will have some objective criteria mentioned, even if it’s just the number of musicians or the instruments they play - but the vast majority of every album review will be subjective, because it’s virtually the only way to write a review. A music review, by definition is a critical appraisal/assessment of a work that seeks to judge the worth/value/importance of it, as heard by the listener. By its very nature, it’s subjective. I sincerely doubt there has ever been a purely objective review written for an album, and furthermore doubt that it would even be possible,

As usual in your posts and comments, you make plenty of observations, but provide very little evidence to back them up. When questioned as to what exactly you mean, you tend to either completely ignore the questions (as I expect you will do in this case, given you have expressed elsewhere your dislike of me), or get overly defensive and suggest that people are not reading your OP and/or not understanding what you mean. The thing is, we have all read your OP, and while we ask for elucidation of what you mean, you stubbornly resist answering on the basis that we don’t understand, rather than trying to help us understand.

It would be unfair of you to reply to my posts knowing that I won't reply to yours - and you're wrong about that I read your posts, so I'd suggest, don't read mine, either.

And if you do reply to my posts, it will just make me more pissed with you and think worse about you.

Finally, don't ask me about the reasons for all this, as they are several and very different, and I'm sure you wouldn't like to hear them - even they might be good for you to work with.