NOMINATE SONGS FOR REVIEW
Members can nominate up to ten songs for review each month. This enables all users to review and vote on those songs. Songs with 10,000 votes are sent to a team of music experts for their review. Unused nominations do not carry forward. A selection of the highest-reviewed songs receives special commendations at an annual Authoritative Rock Hall of Fame ceremony.
REVIEW SONGS
Members can review any nominated song in accordance with the ARHOF scale and post comments on the forum. Song ratings are aggregated to produce a song score. Each user can decide how important each category is in their personal settings. Enabling this will affect the overall song ratings for you but not for other users.
SEARCH
Users can use advanced search filters to create many different kinds of lists of best and worst songs by artist, year, song feature, or overall.
FORUM
Share thoughts on songs, artists, the review process, and more in the forum.
PLAYLISTS
Create playlists of songs.
COMMISSION A SONG FOR REVIEW
Rather than waiting to see if a song receives 10,000 votes, members can commission a team of music experts to review it.

ARHOF is an organization devoted to identifying and honoring exemplary rock songs without bias or influence from dubious individuals and entities. Record reviews and song ratings are ubiquitous, but there are no established standards by which music is evaluated. This is fine if people want to share their personal preferences, but what is widely enjoyed is not necessarily what is objectively good. Fast food is by far the most popular cuisine, but few would seriously argue that fast food represents culinary excellence. By evaluating songs in accordance with metrics, assessments are consistent and meaningful, and one can make objective comparisons. Exceptional songs can be identified using these impartial standards.

Taste- what one does and does not like- is subjective. However, quality is not subjective. The assertion that quality cannot be approached objectively is intellectually and culturally destructive. For instance, people may claim that a song is better than another song because they like it more, but that reduces the function of art to its capacity to subjectively amuse. The aspiration of art, and broadly culture, thereby becomes the endeavor to create expressions that are entertaining, and entertainment is typically fleeting and disposable. There is no need to craft works with meaning when the priority is amusement. Objective metrics provide a basis by which all works can be assessed consistently and whereby aspirations are established.

The metrics were derived from the academic paper, A Framework for an Empirical Evaluation of Popular Music. These metrics are not intended to be the final word on what can and should be evaluated but rather as the first step in an evolving process where they can be developed, expounded, revised, and improved. The site’s Forum is a place where potential revisions can be discussed.

In My Profile, users can decide the importance of each metric. The relative significance selected will affect the overall rating of the song for that user. While there should be minimal variance regarding how each metric is graded among users, the relative importance of each metric will always be subject to debate.