What should you use, spot, matrix, or one of the other metering modes?

I would say, it does make a lot of difference what you use. Because not every exposure metering method is the same in all circumstances.
you therefore need to know well when to use which exposure metering method.

recently photographed a dance competition in a theater.
So spotlights, black background etc. If you use multi-segment metering there, the dance part becomes heavily overexposed because the meter measures a lot of darkness around it.
Then I always do a spot metering on the spotlight, and after that I don't change the exposure anymore (except if they suddenly change the lighting). Because you can't use spot metering anymore then either. Whether the dancer is wearing a white shirt or a black shirt already makes a difference as to whether he is under- or overexposed.

ps
I photograph with pentax, and when I use multi-segment exposure metering, it takes the focus point into account, and uses that area as middle gray.

Dear Nando,
Recently I asked you this question and you gave me the answer that it depends a bit on the situation and what you find most comfortable.
However, with these examples I now completely understand your answer.
For general landscapes like the first photo, I would personally choose evaluative metering.
I think that if I want to photograph, for example, a daisy in a meadow, and I want to keep that orange centre nicely orange and the petals white, can I then assume that I can use spot metering on the orange centre? Or will the white petals then be somewhat greyish and would I be better off using partial metering in this case? I think it will take a lot of practice to assess the situations properly. In any case, thank you for this article.
Kind regards, Viviane

When you use a modern system camera where you can see the actual exposure of the photo in the viewfinder or on your screen, it makes no difference. You turn the control dial for aperture or shutter speed until the exposure is right. When you then have the blue colour for underexposure and the red-pink for overexposure switched on as a tool … then you're getting your money's worth. Blue and red-pink areas at the same time? HDR !

I agree with you that matrix metering (Nikon) gives excellent results in almost all cases. Spot metering can sometimes be tempting, but my experience is that it isn't quite so precisely at the focus point, and then gives an incorrect value. With a photo of a full moon using a powerful telephoto lens, it is accurate, but I have difficulty with a small object.

I think the choice of spot, matrix or yet another metering method is more important to apply to DSLRs and perhaps the older mirrorless cameras. Modern mirrorless cameras allow you to choose the more correct or desired exposure directly via the viewfinder or screen. Also viewing the histogram is no longer necessary at all with modern mirrorless cameras when you enable the tool for underexposure and overexposure. I look (usually through the viewfinder) and adjust with the two dials as needed, either the aperture for depth of field or the shutter speed for moving subjects … or both until I see the exposure I want. And I keep ISO adjustments and HDR as a solution at hand when necessary. Spot, matrix or another exposure metering method makes no difference at all in that.
I stick almost exclusively to nature and landscape photography. Perhaps the choice is important for flash photography and special techniques?

I have a Sony A7 IV mirrorless camera, and use matrix metering. You can see what the exposure is like on the screen or through the viewfinder, but I don't always find this reliable.

In the bottom right corner I also always have the histogram.
The A7 IV has a handy exposure compensation button for correction, plus the zebra marking as an exposure warning.

In addition, there are 18 continuous and 18 single EV bracketing combinations.
Finally, there's always post-processing, for fine tuning or as a last resort.
You can almost always get the exposure right.

I wouldn't know why I would still check the histogram when I can directly observe underexposure and overexposure with appropriate tools. On my cameras, those are the dark blue marked zones where there is underexposure and the red-pink ones for the places where overexposure reigns. This goes much faster than evaluating a histogram. That could really mean 'missing the moment'. I have removed the histogram from my viewfinder image.

As Nando already points out, this is personal. I always have that function turned off, for example, it bothers me. Besides, if the meter is a little off once, you can easily straighten that out in your editing program, so unless you shoot in jpg it isn't an (insurmountable) isue. Modern cameras and meters are so good, so make it easy on yourself, concentrate on your image/composition, because the camera can't do that.

I always use the histogram, which is displayed in the viewfinder, and overexposure and underexposure are also shown there