What about 'Alternative'. What the hell does that even mean anymore? You know, when you have 'Alternative Rock/Pop' groups being rated at the top of the charts of iTunes and everywhere else. It is such a confusing term as far as I am concerned. Alternative to what? Typical Miley Cyrus, Justin Bieber, Lady Gaga Pop that is sharing similar ranking positions on the billboard charts as that very same 'Alternative' stuff? What is with the meaning of that label. Or when bands are labelled as Alternative Rock/Pop/Metal/Hip-Hop/Electronic when they are being played on Triple J or any other variant station considering the fact that they are probably one of the biggest radio stations in Australia. You should do a video on that Anthony. The evolution of the term 'Alternative' It would be interesting.
Brandon Tadday I actually did a radio show on alternative rock music last week talking about this on the Sydney University radio station. Alternative rock was a term that sprang up in the early 1980's that defined all the rock music that deviated from the mainstream rock sound AT THAT TIME. Pretty much every alternative rock band was on an independent record label because it wasn't a popular sound back in the day. Once Nirvana and MTV sprang up, many alternative rock bands were given record contracts by major record labels in hopes to get commercial success, and the term 'alternative rock' stayed with them, despite the growing popularity thanks to grunge and Nirvana. All the 'alternative rock' bands that sticked to independent record labels then had a new term given to them called 'indie rock'. Indie rock was a form of alternative rock that generally didn't have much of a grunge sound, but instead chose to stick to independent record labels to keep their creative freedom. For indie rock, it wasn't until the 2000s when it really gained its commercial success. So that too, has an ironic name. So all in all, 'alternative' is a term that had true meaning in its roots, but nowadays where modern society are more accustomed to different genres and sounds (partly due to the internet), these 'alternative' and 'indie' terms aren't so much relevant anymore. Hope that cleared it up!
Led Zeppelin made me love rock music so nice comparison. I pretty much agree with what you said. I also feel that pop is a very vague and unfair genre but that's a whole other topic.
I personally view Pop as more of a descriptive term than a genre in the classic sense, because what's classified as Pop varies from decade to decade, same with Alternative and Indie.
There are a lot of genres that don't seem to have a clear definition and bands are being thrown into them for no apparent reason. My best example is alternative rock, pretty much every rock band from the last 20 years that isn't metal, punk or grunge is being called alternative rock.
I always say I don't listen to country, but I do like Johnny Cash. Never considered it country music, but I guess it is. Good music is good music, regardless of genre.
As a guy who loves RateYourMusic, YES genres are amazing and are essential. If it weren't for genres, you wouldn't know of the history or context of a type of music.
One look at any comment section of a random metal music video and theres a 90% chance you'll find people arguing which sub sub genre the band fits into/ is supposed to fit into.
I agree with you. Eminem got me into rap and hip hop. Thanks to him I discovered guys like Big L, A Tribe Called Quest, OutKast, and others. Genres are important.
You mean "Bologna" ? Btw the real name is "Mortadella", Bologna is just the city where most of Mortadella is made. It's like if i would call the hot dog something like "New York". Not mad tho, just sayin
I like to categorize my music so I can make good playlists, or only listen to stuff that will sound good to me in that moment. To this effect, I categorize songs on four aspects: 1. Does the song trigger positive or negative emotions? 2. Is the song dynamic/busy, or lethargic/minimal? 3. Are the instruments Acoustic, Electric, Synthetic, or Orchestral? 4. Is it Pop, Art, or Tonal (as in, does it try to have broad appeal, does it experiment / use music for music's sake, or is it trying to create a feeling/sonic environment?)
I feel like we could eliminate some of the negatives presented by genres while still keeping the positives by moving away from combinations of abstract words and going more towards using sets of more concrete, traditional adjectives as tags. For example: slow, heavy, dark, chaotic, deep, synthetic music, or fast, light, bright, deliberate, high, acoustic music. I think that the music genome project is an example of what a step in the right direction could look like for reform in the way that we create, define, apply, and interpret genres.
I think that genres are a great way to organize and classify music, by breaking it down into shared qualities that follow a pattern and are shared with other songs, and expressed in those songs in similar ways. I also think that genres are great in that they show how music progresses over time, as new genres are created. I also think that one of the things seen as a major drawback to genres is also benefits music in general greatly; the black-and-white sort of way it limits many artists, while, as stated, causes some bands and artists to think that they have to follow certain patterns to play an abstract concept of the music they decide they want to play, the artists that are often truly great or the most passionate are the ones that cut the middle man, and either revolutionize the genre they choose to identify as through their personal style, or create a new genre themselves. However, if genres are to achieve their full benefit, they should be specific, and the terms used to define sub-genres should be used to describe qualities of that music that take a certain precedent over the original genre; for example, progressive metal and death metal. If one were to create a song that falls into the genre "progressive death metal", it should be something that sounds like primarily death metal, with key charactaristics of progressive metal, as progressive is the adjective and death metal is the noun, and such. It should be done in a way that makes sense.
I understand why we need genres but I myself dislike them very much. Up until a couple of years ago I never listened to music out of some genres because I though that the genre wasn't something I liked. Since ditching that idea I have discovered much music I really enjoy listening to.
wow great video!! I feel like I get a little caught up in the genre thing as well, not intentionally but sometimes it happens that I subliminally avoid certain genres or artists even though I might actually enjoy it if I gave it a try. That's a personal problem of mine but other than that, I agree that genres are a great thing to organize or describe things, just as long as they don't restrain your musical horizon.
I think it depends on how it goes and who you are talking about it with, as well as their knowledge of that particular genre. If I want a band recommendation, and know what I want, I can tell someone metal. If they're not recommending quite what I want, I can say doom metal. If it's closer, but still a little different, then I could say stoner doom. Then they can find me a band that fits the general style that I want. It makes it easier to find new bands that play fairly similar styles. And then once I get into stoner doom, someone can recommend someone else, saying it's sludge doom, but that means it's fairly close. So I can branch out to another style. Of course, this is mostly helpful if I know that much. If I just say I want metal, then I can be introduced to a ton of different styles and my experience can really branch out. Seeing as how i wouldn't have as much knowledge on it as others, it wouldn't make sense to me if someone referred to a band as sludge doom metal, because I don't even know what doom is, let alone the different types. It's all just metal to me at that point. But I do think it can get a bit ridiculous when it's 10 words long and people start arguing about things. I still people throw a fit when someone says Deafheaven is black metal, even though they have a huge black metal influence. But they pick it apart to the point of being ridiculous. So they can be helpful as well as harmful. I would say it mostly just depends on the person and how they use them, and why they use them.
I think it's ok to dislike certain genres as long as you still keep yourself open to listening to artists from those genres sometimes. I don't like country or rap in general but I have found a few artists/songs I like.
This is so true I never thought about this. I generally only listen to hip hop and R&B because I love that type of music and there may be so many other songs out there that don't fit into this category that I might enjoy. Usually I'll say I don't like let's say country just because I don't like maybe Taylor Swift, but I've only heard a limited amount of country. On top of that I've only heard the radio's taste of this other type of music. This video has inspired me to venture out and listen to
good points there Anthony, i am personally one of those people who must pigeon-hole everything, i have become a judge of subgenres, and so i am a bit obsessive of labeling and such xD since i listen to a good handful of punk and metal subgenres, it bugs me when people who hate labeling will just be like "metal is just metal", and so when they describe as band simply as metal, it's a peeve for me to take that as a such generalized category. 80% of the people who say that are usually describing a hardcore/metalcore/deathcore band, which is like 20%+ hardcore punk influence (hence, hardcore breakdowns automatically make you -core). some subgenres seem like jokes or are just strange also, so i take those with a grain of salt, examples of such are Powerviolence (e.g. Bastard Noise), Shoegaze (e.g. My Bloody Valentine), Crabcore (e.g. Attack Attack!), Mexicore (e.g. Pierce The Veil), Pornogrind (e.g. Cock And Ball Torture), and Djent, which wasn't supposed to be an actual genre, it's an onomatopoeia describing the sound of a heavily muted guitar riff, first coined by Misha "Bulb" Mansoor (Periphery) and Fredrik Thordendal (Meshuggah), somehow Djent had become a genre because too many people popularized using the term to describe any sort of prog metal/metalcore band who has that guitar sound now.
Have a nice life- blackened-Industrial-drone-post rock- shoegaze- midwest emo- noise rock- gothic- postpunk- lofi indie- folk (surprisingly a lot of hip hop fans love them)
I cannot define the genre of my favourite band: Pixies. Don't say they are alternative because thats an umbrella term that includes everything from Elvis Costello to Dinosaur Jr, Indie Rock is the same. They aren't loud enough for grunge, the closest I can get is noise pop, but they don't really have the right fit. Of course you could say it varies on different albums like Bossanova is obviously Surf Rock + the Pixies' sound, and Trompe Le Monde is more punk and also more Lo-fi. Could anyone help me define them?
'Pixies are The Pixies man; they're just one of those bands that pushed the boundaries of rock music in their time, accidentally pioneering things that would later become normal and popular shit. They were weird enough to make a lasting impact on what we know as alternative rock.
Pixies are my fave too... I would say Surfer Rosa is Semi-Experimental, Doolittle and Trompe le Monde are Indie Punk, and Bossanova is Alternative/Noise/Maybe even Noise Pop. But really, they are simply the most influential INDIE ROCK band of all time and that's probably the best way to describe them.
Alternative rock and indie rock aren't just umbrella terms, just genres that have many different sounds. There are certain characteristics of each though. Pixies are an alternative rock and indie rock band.
i think i know how my musical path went: led zeppelin/pink floyd/etc. - queens of the stone age - kyuss - electric wizard - sleep - om - sunn o))) - merzbow - grindcore
@William Magee Around 7 years ago when I originally posted this, I was really into grindcore, it quickly died and I went back to my stoner doom metal origins. And the reason I got into Merzbow, and noise in general, was because sunn and Boris have done plenty of collabs with Merzbow. I never expected someone to reply to one of my oldest comments from my highschool account.
I happen to be really into 2 types of music that have a lot of debate around specific words and if they are genres. I'm really into 'djent' and 'skramz'. Both words may sound silly, restrict some bands that get lumped in to these labels etc but in general they have helped me discover more music I like and so I find such infamous "is djent a genre?" debates beyond tedious now, it's been had so many times.
I like your voice and the way you speak, just very calmly and thought out. And about that genre thing, i think genres aren't bad. They're great to organize stuff and, like you said, find artist that are similar to what you're listening to. I'm not bothered by labeling music but it seems that many people are.
I also think even the word "experimental" in front of something can be helpful. Because when I listen to Black Metal, I don't typically like traditional Black Metal, but because I don't wanna be one of those people that you mentioned in your video that close themselves down to one or two genres, so I found myself getting really into Atmospheric Black Metal, and while searching, I found an artist named Germ who experiments with Electronic, Power Pop, and Black Metal. Genres are helpful.
Great discussion Anthony. I believe genres are necessary, especially for those of us that write or video opinions of music. I agree with you that some can get a little carried away with genre-izing though, myself included. Luckily I've matured and attempted to be a better writer, so I don't fall into that category as often as I used to. Take the new Kylesa album. Theres a lot going on there, so much that I don't think it can be labeled sludge anymore. Pop, prog, psychedelic, & shoegaze...
Me and my friends have been discussing this off and off for the past year, because as you said there are blatant positives , but the reason we were talking about it was because we knew somebody who said they only listened to tech death metal, witch made it were when we talked to him about music we would never use genres but compare the sound of a band to another band he would know to try and make it more likely that would check them out and that seem to work and keep his closed fist yelling about "inferior genres" down a bit, even though we were still splitting music up into category's .
I definitely think genre can mislead the listener or discourage a band from expanding there sound, however, genre also allows prevalent themes to manifest as an identifiable "movement" or "scene" which has many advantages. I think the solidification of punk as a genre - for example - allows musicians to create music that mite otherwise be interpreted as crude or base, in a supportive community.
You always seem to have a perspective on these question/comment things that I haven't thought about before I watch the video. You're perceptive and I like that.
Language is imprecise. Genre debates are like semantics debates, where a definition can be lost when we minimize the entirety of something into one singular phrase. A word can have many acceptable connotations, just like a genre (like punk or indie) can have many different (yet still acceptable) definitions between people. Artists rarely fit into 1 genre. But "tagging" an artist with multiple influences works to sort them, which is helpful for discovering new music. Elaboration can follow.
What defines a genere? Concurrent compositional techniques like in synthwave or jazz? Or instrumentation like in chiptune or rock? Maybe only the artist can really define the genere, but then there's a certain threshold to which we say "this is not ". Is that threshold defined by a set of rules or previous experiences of what artists in that genere make?
I think genres are a good thing to have. Like discussed in the video, it helps me find specific artists that sound somewhat similar and depending on the influences of any artist i listen to i can go and look for something in a different genre and fall in love with it or not like it as much. I think the problem with genre isn't so much labeling, even though it isn't helpful, it's simply people choosing not to listen to a certain type of music and that's what they're going to have to live with.
I love genres, it's easy to differentiate and find music. For example, we live in a world where Have Heart, Defeater, Blood For Blood, Xibalba, Terror are all considered "hardcore" all are quite different while all still being hardcore. In saying that, it does creates barriers for people that, but those people would find another way to create barriers because they are closed minded.
I agree with you completely. When I discover a new artist or song that I enjoy, I like to have a vague idea of what genre they come under so I can discover similar sounding artists. On the other hand I can't stand the people who will completely rule out an entire genre because of a few artists. Like people who will rule out rap or hip/hop because of say Lil Wayne or Nicki Minaj when infact they are just looking at the more mainstream artists in that charts that are actually closer to pop.
As a library science student, categorization is extremely important - imagine a record store with no divisions as to format, genre, price. Genre works to diversify that sorting. Anthony, you have done a fantastic job of already setting up genres in your reviews' dbox, it hasn't been completely a controlled and consistent vocabulary, but that's to be expected - your output is immense. I have searched for "drone needledrop" to find reviews of similar artists you have done. tl;dr Genre good!
As a listener, i must say that categorizing music by it's genres is a good thing. It helps a lot. On the other hand, there are bands that don't like to be put in a box. It's not putting yourself in a box, it's just establishing some parameters that you fit in so we know how to find you and find more bands like yours. For example, if i didn't knew that Kyuss was a stoner rock band i wouldn't have heard of them, because no one would have told me and i discovered them by searching stoner rock.
I always feel that my genre is Electronic, but since there are so many sub-genres it helps me discover artists with slightly different aspects that I enjoy leading to me discovering new artists that I enjoy which I may not have thought I would
I like genres for organizational purposes and to help me find new music or pick music that I'm in the mood for. Any good thing can be use improperly though. All it takes is a simple mind to limit themselves from whole genres. People even limit themselves from whole mediums. People who've never watched an anime in their life beyond DBZ or other Cartoon Network stuff swear off the whole medium all the time for example. That said, I do agree with the inherent flaws you mentioned.
Love your videos! You should do a video on your studio setup! Love the lighting, weather you tried or not! looks great and I'd love to see how you did it!
I have seen comments regarding Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, when artists like Donna Summer, Public Enemy and even Randy Newman was inducted this year. They meant that they are not "Rock and Roll", but that depends how you define it. Hip hop has its roots in disco and soul, soul has its roots in jazz and blues - and blues is the roots of Rock. I don't know, the Hall shouldn't been taken so serious - like genres in general. Everything is connected. What's "music" and not might be more interesting.
I like genres because it helps me easily organize my music and find music similar to that which I already like. one thing that perplexes me is when bands express anger about being associated with a particular genre, such as AFI who have repeatedly stated that they aren't goth, and Black Sabbath who have repeatedly claimed not to be heavy metal, despite these tags being applied to them by many many people.
I think I agree.My example has to do with watching one of your reviews.It was Shlohmo - Bad vibes. I took your advice and gave it a listen and I was instantly hooked.I "binged" on Shlohmo and as a result, last.fm gave me all these similar artists.Before I knew it i was neck deep in the "lo-fi, glitch-pop" scene, much of which has completely changed the way I look at music. However,the downside is that whenever I talk about music, I sound pretentious using those labels. The double edge sword.
one of my favorite bands was in there. I thought that in the pop section there was stuff like phoenix's shitty new album. Like I said, I think that the real problem is people deciding that they hate a genre and then completely avoiding it, as to the artist being limited or limiting their music to fit a genre they feel comfortable in, that's the artists fault, look at David Bowie, the dude has changed his style like a thousand times. Great video man, really
Just like most people have been expressing, genres are particularly helpful in describing large, varying differences between pieces of music. It helps people realize that the music they listen to falls within a certain tradition. However, after digging into every genre, most people find that there are nuances that then allow you to question the basis of the genre. This trend, though, might be linked to a nature for art to eventually become inward looking. Just look at the free jazz mvmt.
Agreed. If the artist is good enough, they're gonna transcend however they're labeled. Genres, along with image, gimmicks, advertising, etc., only go so far as to help catch interest. None of that is gonna matter if people don't think you're stuff is special. And if they DO think you're stuff is special, then nothing else will matter as much. Artists can make a fuss about how they appear all day, but in the end they need to worry more about becoming better musicians/songwriters.
Genre's are helpful & hurtful. Genre's can help people find a type of music they're interested in. However sometimes people categorize artists in a genre they don't really fit in and some artists don't fit in a certain genre although they claim they do. An example of it being hurtful is arguments people have over whether a band is punk or a band is pop punk, it can get pretty ridiculous.
I gotta say for the longest time I allowed genre tags to dictate what I listened to. But with openness and being more outgoing I have found music that I love that originally I may not have given a chance if I just looked at its genre and didn't bother. I gotta thank you too Anthony for helping me find this music too!
I'd say that defining genres is a way to enjoy music more easily. Like if I listened to Led Zeppelin and Daft Punk and I wouldn't like Daft Punk but enjoy the Zeps' I would say that I like rock and I want to listen more, but I also don't like electronic music so much so it's easier for me to know what bands I can or can not like (probably). That being said, it's not good to generalize
I think it does a lot of good, as long as the artist doesn't feel pressured to restrict themselves to the genre, or the type of music they "should" be making. It helps me find other bands that have styles similar to ones I like, and helps me pin down different influences that certain bands have. Plus, they can act as great tools for the artists. Would Death Grips have been as amazing as they are if there were not conventions of hip-hop for them to break? Probably, but perhaps not.
I love genres, as a metal and extreme punk fan its fun for me to delve into all the subgenres and then the subgenres of subgenres etc., but at the same time I think it can definitely become a little ridiculous, I also think that something, especially within metal and punk that is the use of metalcore and post-hardcore, I actually think you should do one of these comment things on just those two names for genres and how diverse the bands that are labeled with those genres are
I don't specify my genre very much because I don't really fit into one. I used to call myself "industrial", but I no longer find that a fitting term, so I guess nowadays it would be better to just call myself alternative. I have influences from (hard) rock, electronica, rap, classical, jazz, whatever I feel like, basically. I find that I could perhaps help people be more understanding of genres in this way, at least.
I think many passionate people become far too caught up in classifying music in very specific genres & subgenres. They'll argue over which subgenre a particular song is, and then suggest that the artist should never deviate. Particularly in Electronic music; there is a very aggressive divide between House & Trance, which is strange because they are very similar in many ways. And yet anything that isn't clearly Trance or House is often given the term Trouse, and that's used in a derogatory way.
I love (and/or hate) all genres. I love (and/or hate) bands who follow genre doctrines. I love (and/or hate) people who use use genres to put bands into neat boxes that never (and/or always) adequatly describes what bands sounds like. On a totally (un)related note: this morning my 5-year-old heard the opening of a Besnard Lakes song and desdcribed what she imagines the stage would look like when the band plays it.
I agree fully that genres are a double edged sword. Sometimes it hurts my listening experience and impression of certain music, like when I listen to hip hop, a genre I am still slowly getting into, it sometimes seems like I'm having a hard time getting into it simply because I'm thinking of it as hip hop, instead of just music. However, as a musician myself, I find genres a useful tool in advertising my music
Genres are like umbrella terms. A lot of them can encompass a huge variety of sounds. They're less useful the more specific they try to be. There are lots of artists/bands that don't really fit into one genre or another and in attempts to categorise them they become avant-garde progressive industrial groove technical electronic black metal or something. Then people disagree with such genre tags and a huge argument stems from pointless stuff.
See I disagree with "genres" in general. Now, I'm ok with a band being labeled as "rock" or someone being a "hip-hop" artist or "metal" etc. The all encompassing genres are helpful for organizing things. But when you dive into meticulous genres, like black-sludge-nu-metal or any over the other trillions of subgenres out there, it gets a bit ridiculous. I think artists AND listeners shouldn't pay attention to genres. Sure it's good to find similar artists, but slapping that label on something can be restrictive and does more harm than good in the end.
I will always make a distinction between soft rock (Billy Joel, Bob Seger, U2), hard rock (AC/DC, Twisted Sister), and metal (Nirvana, Green Day, Black Sabbath).
Of course they are. It makes finding music easier. Though I do think people sometimes put too much emphasis on genres. I usually don't have a genre in mind when people ask me what type of music I listen to.
My digital library is completely genre-less. While I understand why other people use them for organization purposes and to find new music, I don't really feel the need. I listen to music regardless of the label attached to it. The only label I attach to music is 'I liked it' or 'I didn't like it'.
Understanding genres and their usefulness is very important to any musician and avid music listener. Thanks for clarifying the concept of genres Anthony.
I think, or I like to think that genres are natural to our human tendencies... While coming from an artist point of view I more often deal w/some of the negative aspects of genres, but moreover; I think that it's just a natural thing that, a lot of times, or at least in the beginning started as something that had to do w/culture. In the early years, or first 1/2 to 2/3 of 20 century pop music, things for the most part were made up of what we now call "Root's Music" (Blues/Blue Grass/Country&Western/Jazz/Rock'n'Roll). At which point in time you could transition, or "change" from one genre to another simply by changing time signatures or adding a chord or two, or both.. So, yeah.. I think, for me anyway, genre is something indigenous to culture. Like I definitely have a rock side and sound to me.. But, my brother calls it "Rural Rock"... It fits.. 'cause there is this undeniable, sorta, "Outlaw Americana Lyrical-Bluesiness" within the rock.. So, yeah! I say all of this knowing, full well, that things like; Satellite TV, SmartPhones, & the Web could possibly be making things like indigenous culture LESS and LESS relevant in the make up of genres and their definitions.. There are some that believe of the possibility that in the 50 yrs anything played organically &/or recordings recorded w/live musical instruments(when mostly strings(guitr, bass, electrc, ect...) will be labeled "Country Music"... I see what these people are getting at, but, I don't know.. I'd like to think things turn out better than that, but, who knows.... : D
I hate to be that guy who suggests a record to review, but I wouldn't mind seeing a review on the new Eisley record "Currents." With that being said, I use genres as a way to distinguish bands from one another, so bands and record labels know who to market certain bands/artists to. Like you said, it becomes negative when people dislike a whole genre, and think it's all the same, but mainly, close-minded people seem to think this, because of one band/artist they heard, and didn't like.
I pretty much agree with all the points you made. Genres can put limits on an artist and block people from listening to them, but it's also good to be able to describe a certain sound you like. To add another point, I'd say people take these labels way too seriously. I can't tell you how many times I've seen people get into arguments over "That's not punk!" or "That's not black metal!" And I'm like, "Why are you arguing over what adjective to use?"
I love genres and sub-genres. eg; in metal circles some people say "it's all metal" but someone who listens to grindcore may not like 80s hair metal. Someone who listens to black metal may not like power metal. Sure some bands cross genres, but you can still say it's a bit of this and bit of that, and people will get a rough idea of what they're in for. A bad side of genres is when it's used to restrict musical freedom, like when fans expect a band to stay within a certain template.
I agree Quite a bit... I Don't really Believe in Genres at home... when it is My time to Listen I don't consider it at all... But the Genre Labeling Gets me on a Path to Pursue in the Digging Picking up Phase... and that's Cool... It is Not always going to work... but it gives me a chance to go down a road for awhile
Genres are good for sharing and pointing to new music, but I think it gets bad when people exclude certain genres altogether or when bands are described only as sounding like other bands.
I'm not a genre person, mostly because I like lots of different kinds of music. I also really like it when artists feel free enough to kind of mix things up, kind of like David Bowie and how he experimented with sounds. I really liked his last album and it is obvious that it is very jazzy and rock synth sounding. I was kind of surprised to hear that he had been listening to a lot of Kendrick Lamar while making that album, until I really sat down and listed for where that sound might be, and he is in there. That's why Bowie was a genius though. I don't like putting artists in boxes, because I think that they can be more. That's also why I love Joni Mitchell.
I think they are in fact really useful, but just like you said, it is inevitable that people use it to avoid a sound that's been labeled. There are solid genres, but there's also a lot of variations in a single one, and fusions, combinations of diferent genres which makes the whole thing diferent and maybe more complex. I just think music should be music, not politics or religions.
I'd describe myself as primarily a metal listener (among a few others), but I don't know if I would want to identify as a metalhead because I don't always share the same opinion about different genres or sub genres that a 'normal' metalhead would have. For example, I don't attach the same stigma to Deathcore or emo music that seemingly a lot of metalheads do. When it comes to a lot of other genres, be it pop, rap, jazz, house, country etc. I find it difficult to become interested in what those musicians do, even though I would like to have a larger range of tastes.
The only time I try to use a genre is when I'm organizing my music folder. What's weird is I never know what what to label anything. "Is this punk?" maybe... someone would tell me, "No dude that's New wave!" I'm that person who'd say "I don't care for rap", yes I generalize a lot. But at the same time I never even know what genre an artist is. As long as the music is good I'll listen to it. Though, it does help to open up to other artist in the same "genre". It's a tough call, I just leave it be
I think genres are really important because artists, songs, albums would be only described by emotions (happy, sad, heavy, soft...) if there weren't genres. In this case, the question "What genre(s) do you like?" wouldn't exist anymore, which is a good thing, but... imagine a music conversation where you CAN'T evoke any already existing genre. No "funky", no "indie", no "rap". Sure, I acknowledge that a music piece can have different genres and sometimes, we're obligated to invent a genre to describe it, but I still think genres are important.
In conversation, I usually try and use other artists as a reference instead of genres, and I see a lot of reviewers doing that these days as well. I think it's important to not quote genres or microgenres to generously because that generates buzz, which encourages bandwagon-jumping, which often negatively impacts a lot of genuinely inventive styles.
A true music enthusiast will not let genres get in the way of the accessing music they may like, they'll delve through tons of genres and take out what they like for themselves, genres should only be used as a tool to help find more music really, I totally agree with everything he says in this, Kudos Anthony.
It's necessary with such a saturation of music to have some way to navigate them, and outside of publicity, genres are probably the best way to explore... and the only other option (outside hearing music off friends). Totally can limit what people listen to in as much as there are likely to be things in genres they right off that they enjoy, but at the same time without genres in the first place, it seems to me that most of your music tastes will be defined by publicity and chance encounters.
I think genres are a great way for people to fnd music they like. I use last.fm genre tags all the time and "microgenres" as you call them are especially helpful. for example, when I first discovered Disclosure a couple months back, I heard that it was house music, but to me, it sounded like there had to be a specific subgenre they were following. and I happened to stumble upon genre pages for UK House and UK Funy, and many other genres of that sort. and I found a shitload of amazing artists.
Wrap your mind around this: Waht band/song was it that led me into listening to hard rock bands like Led Zeppelin, Aerosmith, AC/DC, Alice Cooper, Kiss and later metal, like Black Sabbath and Metallica? believe it or not it was Styx, the album "Pieces of Eight" and the song "Queen of Spades" and unlikely band that would do that, but there you go.
My first thought was, which you may know, Captain Beefheart - Trout Mask Replica. But how experimental it is depends on how used you are to experimental music, I would say. First time I heard it, five years ago, it was experimental - but as you hear music that is more experimental you get used. And it might just be called experimental blues rock, I don't know. It has, however, the spirit of free jazz.
I generally dont care too much on factorizing genre as i like to listen to a wide variety of music, music is my escapism techniques, and i like to just get out of the norm and listen to things which make me feel great, being country, hip hop or dubstep.
I think what is important when talking about genres is the reason they exist in the first place. In film you have all different genres such as action, drama and comedy ect. Why do they exist? Genres exist as a tool used by the audience to find something new they might like. It's really a very simple concept. What is not a simple concept however is the impact that art has on people. For example Actions movies have been known to have plenty of comedy in them. So what separates an action film from a comedy? Thus the birth of the Action Comedy. We see this in the music world as well. With genres we never expected at times...."Pop Punk" However their is usually a consistency. When talking about Film be it Action, Horror, Comedy and Drama they all are essentially the same thing. Film. The same concept applies to music. You have people combining genres, creating new genres but for the most part using all the same tools used for making most of these different styles. The music nerd is correct when he says that this is a double edged sword.
The base might be good, but surface is also everything it is. Like you say it's good to find new artists - and that's when you scratch the surface. But in all it's like stereotypes when it comes to different personalities. But I think it's impossible to not have genres, since it's a part of how we think. It both opens up and close. I think it comes down to how you are as a person. If you are open-minded you might see it more as tools, and if you're close-minded you might see it more as borders.
Genres are simply descriptions of different music, apart from using abstract images from life. And if someone mixes different genres to the point where it's difficult to categorize their music, then it's whether a mix of genres or a new genre. I, personally, do have a limited amount of genres that meet my personal expectations, but I don't them get in my way of judging the artists. I simply use genres as a simple way of finding music previously undiscovered by me but that I'm in the mood for.
Genres are useful, but ephemeral and often times dysfunctional as labels. Grouping music into movements is, in my opinion, more constructive for the understanding and exploration of music. A movement forms when a notable number of artist rally behind a definable aspect(s) of music at one time, and preferably one geographic place. A good example would be Britpop, which was not a discrete genre, but an over-arching pattern of influence and aesthetic among bands at that place and time.
One band I just can't put a label on is The Heavy, they have rock influences, funk influences, hip hop influences, RnB influences, and most and foremost soul influences. Though I can't really say that they are any just one of those genres.
Genres and even subgenres are there to market to individual fans. Retailers try to carve out sections so customers can find other artists who are similar. Punk, New age, Nu-wave, and vocal are such subgenres. The key here is that there is a lack of crossover with these styles for the most part. A vocal artist typically sings and covers standards written in the 20's-40's. With punk, nu wave, and hard bop, the given is that you have to have a group of musicians skilled enough to enter that style of playing. Since it's on the age, those artists tend not to include a more centrist style atleast on the same release. However, other subgenres should be seen like we see tags. Blues rock is very broad and many of those artists would perform different styles. In that case, leave them filed in rock/pop but highlight each release with a different color perhaps.
![Lp. Сердце Вселенной #30 ДВА В ОДНОМ [Один человек]• Майнкрафт](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/nrXy15orKhY/mqdefault.jpg)
It's simple: just lump everything into "Alternative" just like iTunes does.
Oh God you do not know how much that used to irritate me LLMFAO
The term "Alternative" in music is so overused.
Racist Santa Every single Radiohead album is under "Alternative" on iTunes. 😂
also death grips
Metal= Alternative
Post-Avant Jazzcore is better than Progressive Dreamfunk
if these genres exist please link me some examples, that sounds pretty damn cool
bloody hell, calm down :-)
+Michael McCann Progressive dreamfunk seems amazing.
+Michael McCann Is Post-Avant double forward-thinking, or just present-day Jazzcore? Because maybe post-avant we're done pushing boundaries?
+iop223
I dont have any Progressive Dreamfunk
... but I have some Progressive Dream Technical Death Metal.
you want some?
My favourite genre is Progressive Psychedelic Blackened Folk Rock with Krautrock undertones and Post-Rock leanings
I like Proto-Blackened Heavy Experimental Mambatronicore
I like Proto-Blackened Heavy Mambatronicore
With bluescore, nu-jazzstep, and avant-reggae influence
+Barış Görgü Post-Math-Gamelan-Jazz-Crust-Sludge-Tango-Goth-Samba-80's Synthpop-core
Barış Görgü so Ulver then? ;)
UA-cam please stop showing me ads for shrimp I am allergic
F
F
Ф
mmmm shrimp is so good. yummy yummy.
How much shimp do you have to eat
I only listen to progressive country jazzcore synth trap avant pop post punk.
What about 'Alternative'. What the hell does that even mean anymore? You know, when you have 'Alternative Rock/Pop' groups being rated at the top of the charts of iTunes and everywhere else. It is such a confusing term as far as I am concerned. Alternative to what? Typical Miley Cyrus, Justin Bieber, Lady Gaga Pop that is sharing similar ranking positions on the billboard charts as that very same 'Alternative' stuff? What is with the meaning of that label. Or when bands are labelled as Alternative Rock/Pop/Metal/Hip-Hop/Electronic when they are being played on Triple J or any other variant station considering the fact that they are probably one of the biggest radio stations in Australia. You should do a video on that Anthony. The evolution of the term 'Alternative' It would be interesting.
Brandon Tadday I actually did a radio show on alternative rock music last week talking about this on the Sydney University radio station. Alternative rock was a term that sprang up in the early 1980's that defined all the rock music that deviated from the mainstream rock sound AT THAT TIME. Pretty much every alternative rock band was on an independent record label because it wasn't a popular sound back in the day. Once Nirvana and MTV sprang up, many alternative rock bands were given record contracts by major record labels in hopes to get commercial success, and the term 'alternative rock' stayed with them, despite the growing popularity thanks to grunge and Nirvana. All the 'alternative rock' bands that sticked to independent record labels then had a new term given to them called 'indie rock'. Indie rock was a form of alternative rock that generally didn't have much of a grunge sound, but instead chose to stick to independent record labels to keep their creative freedom. For indie rock, it wasn't until the 2000s when it really gained its commercial success. So that too, has an ironic name. So all in all, 'alternative' is a term that had true meaning in its roots, but nowadays where modern society are more accustomed to different genres and sounds (partly due to the internet), these 'alternative' and 'indie' terms aren't so much relevant anymore. Hope that cleared it up!
TheMrRhombuss Thanks for clarifying! :)
Captain Beefheart yea man
I use them to both find and avoid music. I think i will change the avoid part now. You make some great points about how misleading they can be
Hey Suma. Wasn’t expecting you here. What is your favorite Automatic Minecraft Farm? Also, what’s the best way to find new genres?
@@gwen_gets_got I think you're a bit late
@@chabadrien441 - you are too 😳
Doesn't matter, every artist you can think of is labeled 'Indie' these days.
kanye west?
badman jones I mean he did create the record label...
Even “The Helio Sequence”?
That just means independent. Isn't a major record company that owns them. Which IS most artists these days so
@@badmanjones179 Kanye owns his own label im pretty sure. If im right yeah he is indie.
Led Zeppelin made me love rock music so nice comparison. I pretty much agree with what you said. I also feel that pop is a very vague and unfair genre but that's a whole other topic.
thank you!
Your welcome. Thanks for replying.
I personally view Pop as more of a descriptive term than a genre in the classic sense, because what's classified as Pop varies from decade to decade, same with Alternative and Indie.
There are a lot of genres that don't seem to have a clear definition and bands are being thrown into them for no apparent reason.
My best example is alternative rock, pretty much every rock band from the last 20 years that isn't metal, punk or grunge is being called alternative rock.
Peleg Tsadok Grunge is considered sprung in with the history of alternative music actually. Really odd.
not pop punk enough, 3/10
I always say I don't listen to country, but I do like Johnny Cash. Never considered it country music, but I guess it is. Good music is good music, regardless of genre.
As a guy who loves RateYourMusic, YES genres are amazing and are essential. If it weren't for genres, you wouldn't know of the history or context of a type of music.
One look at any comment section of a random metal music video and theres a 90% chance you'll find people arguing which sub sub genre the band fits into/ is supposed to fit into.
My favorite genre is funkadelic bluegrass dubstep
stephen w that sounds fucking crazy
Xtrullor - Karma
I listen to everything but post blackened progressive synth folk and nu wave alternative noise hop with avant jazzcore influences
That's specific
If you had noweigan electro folk and post post industrial post punk grindcore elements along with electrofunk segments it tends to even things out.
I agree with you. Eminem got me into rap and hip hop. Thanks to him I discovered guys like Big L, A Tribe Called Quest, OutKast, and others. Genres are important.
Julian Bell You should listen to some Wu-Tang
The new Eminem stuff sucks
the new eminem suck stuffs
I suck new eminem
I fuck new eminem
I only listen to AESTHETIC Mallcore b/w YTP music pressed on balogna.
ok but when are we gonna get ytp music for real
You mean a physical release? Because we could probably crowdsource a glass master for some of the better YTPMVs and press a run of CDs.
well yeah that, but also like, professional ytp music. like i wanna get big beat mario on itunes
You mean "Bologna" ?
Btw the real name is "Mortadella", Bologna is just the city where most of Mortadella is made. It's like if i would call the hot dog something like "New York". Not mad tho, just sayin
I like to categorize my music so I can make good playlists, or only listen to stuff that will sound good to me in that moment. To this effect, I categorize songs on four aspects: 1. Does the song trigger positive or negative emotions? 2. Is the song dynamic/busy, or lethargic/minimal? 3. Are the instruments Acoustic, Electric, Synthetic, or Orchestral? 4. Is it Pop, Art, or Tonal (as in, does it try to have broad appeal, does it experiment / use music for music's sake, or is it trying to create a feeling/sonic environment?)
I feel like we could eliminate some of the negatives presented by genres while still keeping the positives by moving away from combinations of abstract words and going more towards using sets of more concrete, traditional adjectives as tags. For example: slow, heavy, dark, chaotic, deep, synthetic music, or fast, light, bright, deliberate, high, acoustic music. I think that the music genome project is an example of what a step in the right direction could look like for reform in the way that we create, define, apply, and interpret genres.
Wow smart 👍 I approve
I think that genres are a great way to organize and classify music, by breaking it down into shared qualities that follow a pattern and are shared with other songs, and expressed in those songs in similar ways. I also think that genres are great in that they show how music progresses over time, as new genres are created. I also think that one of the things seen as a major drawback to genres is also benefits music in general greatly; the black-and-white sort of way it limits many artists, while, as stated, causes some bands and artists to think that they have to follow certain patterns to play an abstract concept of the music they decide they want to play, the artists that are often truly great or the most passionate are the ones that cut the middle man, and either revolutionize the genre they choose to identify as through their personal style, or create a new genre themselves. However, if genres are to achieve their full benefit, they should be specific, and the terms used to define sub-genres should be used to describe qualities of that music that take a certain precedent over the original genre; for example, progressive metal and death metal. If one were to create a song that falls into the genre "progressive death metal", it should be something that sounds like primarily death metal, with key charactaristics of progressive metal, as progressive is the adjective and death metal is the noun, and such. It should be done in a way that makes sense.
Anthony i dare you to listen to contemperary gospel music
oh no
Bringing it All Back Home!
i dont think there is bad genres, theres just bad music. Hating on a genre can prevent you from listening things that are worth your time.
Genre is a social construct.
I understand why we need genres but I myself dislike them very much. Up until a couple of years ago I never listened to music out of some genres because I though that the genre wasn't something I liked. Since ditching that idea I have discovered much music I really enjoy listening to.
Genres are really needed sometimes. You can't have The Carpenters and Death Grips in the same category, in any way, lol
both are music?
Dickass
+badman jones w0ke
+badman jones he said category you hipster
Both are pretty good tbh
Another good question would be: what makes a genre?
wow great video!!
I feel like I get a little caught up in the genre thing as well, not intentionally but sometimes it happens that I subliminally avoid certain genres or artists even though I might actually enjoy it if I gave it a try. That's a personal problem of mine but other than that, I agree that genres are a great thing to organize or describe things, just as long as they don't restrain your musical horizon.
I think it depends on how it goes and who you are talking about it with, as well as their knowledge of that particular genre. If I want a band recommendation, and know what I want, I can tell someone metal. If they're not recommending quite what I want, I can say doom metal. If it's closer, but still a little different, then I could say stoner doom. Then they can find me a band that fits the general style that I want. It makes it easier to find new bands that play fairly similar styles. And then once I get into stoner doom, someone can recommend someone else, saying it's sludge doom, but that means it's fairly close. So I can branch out to another style.
Of course, this is mostly helpful if I know that much. If I just say I want metal, then I can be introduced to a ton of different styles and my experience can really branch out. Seeing as how i wouldn't have as much knowledge on it as others, it wouldn't make sense to me if someone referred to a band as sludge doom metal, because I don't even know what doom is, let alone the different types. It's all just metal to me at that point.
But I do think it can get a bit ridiculous when it's 10 words long and people start arguing about things. I still people throw a fit when someone says Deafheaven is black metal, even though they have a huge black metal influence. But they pick it apart to the point of being ridiculous.
So they can be helpful as well as harmful. I would say it mostly just depends on the person and how they use them, and why they use them.
I think it's ok to dislike certain genres as long as you still keep yourself open to listening to artists from those genres sometimes. I don't like country or rap in general but I have found a few artists/songs I like.
This is so true I never thought about this. I generally only listen to hip hop and R&B because I love that type of music and there may be so many other songs out there that don't fit into this category that I might enjoy. Usually I'll say I don't like let's say country just because I don't like maybe Taylor Swift, but I've only heard a limited amount of country. On top of that I've only heard the radio's taste of this other type of music. This video has inspired me to venture out and listen to
I love genres. My favorite genre is industrial-noise-sludge-ambient-post-rock-Punk. It's a nice go-to genre.
So, Swans???
good points there Anthony, i am personally one of those people who must pigeon-hole everything, i have become a judge of subgenres, and so i am a bit obsessive of labeling and such xD
since i listen to a good handful of punk and metal subgenres, it bugs me when people who hate labeling will just be like "metal is just metal", and so when they describe as band simply as metal, it's a peeve for me to take that as a such generalized category. 80% of the people who say that are usually describing a hardcore/metalcore/deathcore band, which is like 20%+ hardcore punk influence (hence, hardcore breakdowns automatically make you -core).
some subgenres seem like jokes or are just strange also, so i take those with a grain of salt, examples of such are Powerviolence (e.g. Bastard Noise), Shoegaze (e.g. My Bloody Valentine), Crabcore (e.g. Attack Attack!), Mexicore (e.g. Pierce The Veil), Pornogrind (e.g. Cock And Ball Torture), and Djent, which wasn't supposed to be an actual genre, it's an onomatopoeia describing the sound of a heavily muted guitar riff, first coined by Misha "Bulb" Mansoor (Periphery) and Fredrik Thordendal (Meshuggah), somehow Djent had become a genre because too many people popularized using the term to describe any sort of prog metal/metalcore band who has that guitar sound now.
"xD"
Have a nice life- blackened-Industrial-drone-post rock- shoegaze- midwest emo- noise rock- gothic- postpunk- lofi indie- folk (surprisingly a lot of hip hop fans love them)
All I'm going to say: Primus
all im going to say: all im going to say
easy that's goblin rock.
Wtf are they lol
Sucks
@@aestheticbeatz5700 Avant-garde Metal/Funk Metal
I cannot define the genre of my favourite band: Pixies.
Don't say they are alternative because thats an umbrella term that includes everything from Elvis Costello to Dinosaur Jr, Indie Rock is the same.
They aren't loud enough for grunge, the closest I can get is noise pop, but they don't really have the right fit. Of course you could say it varies on different albums like Bossanova is obviously Surf Rock + the Pixies' sound, and Trompe Le Monde is more punk and also more Lo-fi. Could anyone help me define them?
'Pixies are The Pixies man; they're just one of those bands that pushed the boundaries of rock music in their time, accidentally pioneering things that would later become normal and popular shit. They were weird enough to make a lasting impact on what we know as alternative rock.
Pixies are my fave too... I would say Surfer Rosa is Semi-Experimental, Doolittle and Trompe le Monde are Indie Punk, and Bossanova is Alternative/Noise/Maybe even Noise Pop. But really, they are simply the most influential INDIE ROCK band of all time and that's probably the best way to describe them.
Alternative rock and indie rock aren't just umbrella terms, just genres that have many different sounds. There are certain characteristics of each though. Pixies are an alternative rock and indie rock band.
Lofi post-punk alternative indie rock
i think i know how my musical path went:
led zeppelin/pink floyd/etc. - queens of the stone age - kyuss - electric wizard - sleep - om - sunn o))) - merzbow - grindcore
@William Magee Around 7 years ago when I originally posted this, I was really into grindcore, it quickly died and I went back to my stoner doom metal origins. And the reason I got into Merzbow, and noise in general, was because sunn and Boris have done plenty of collabs with Merzbow. I never expected someone to reply to one of my oldest comments from my highschool account.
I happen to be really into 2 types of music that have a lot of debate around specific words and if they are genres. I'm really into 'djent' and 'skramz'. Both words may sound silly, restrict some bands that get lumped in to these labels etc but in general they have helped me discover more music I like and so I find such infamous "is djent a genre?" debates beyond tedious now, it's been had so many times.
I like your voice and the way you speak, just very calmly and thought out. And about that genre thing, i think genres aren't bad. They're great to organize stuff and, like you said, find artist that are similar to what you're listening to. I'm not bothered by labeling music but it seems that many people are.
I also think even the word "experimental" in front of something can be helpful. Because when I listen to Black Metal, I don't typically like traditional Black Metal, but because I don't wanna be one of those people that you mentioned in your video that close themselves down to one or two genres, so I found myself getting really into Atmospheric Black Metal, and while searching, I found an artist named Germ who experiments with Electronic, Power Pop, and Black Metal. Genres are helpful.
Great discussion Anthony. I believe genres are necessary, especially for those of us that write or video opinions of music. I agree with you that some can get a little carried away with genre-izing though, myself included. Luckily I've matured and attempted to be a better writer, so I don't fall into that category as often as I used to. Take the new Kylesa album. Theres a lot going on there, so much that I don't think it can be labeled sludge anymore. Pop, prog, psychedelic, & shoegaze...
Me and my friends have been discussing this off and off for the past year, because as you said there are blatant positives , but the reason we were talking about it was because we knew somebody who said they only listened to tech death metal, witch made it were when we talked to him about music we would never use genres
but compare the sound of a band to another band he would know to try and make it more likely that would check them out and that seem to work and keep his closed fist yelling about "inferior genres" down a bit, even though we were still splitting music up into category's .
I definitely think genre can mislead the listener or discourage a band from expanding there sound, however, genre also allows prevalent themes to manifest as an identifiable "movement" or "scene" which has many advantages. I think the solidification of punk as a genre - for example - allows musicians to create music that mite otherwise be interpreted as crude or base, in a supportive community.
You always seem to have a perspective on these question/comment things that I haven't thought about before I watch the video. You're perceptive and I like that.
Language is imprecise. Genre debates are like semantics debates, where a definition can be lost when we minimize the entirety of something into one singular phrase. A word can have many acceptable connotations, just like a genre (like punk or indie) can have many different (yet still acceptable) definitions between people.
Artists rarely fit into 1 genre. But "tagging" an artist with multiple influences works to sort them, which is helpful for discovering new music. Elaboration can follow.
What defines a genere? Concurrent compositional techniques like in synthwave or jazz? Or instrumentation like in chiptune or rock? Maybe only the artist can really define the genere, but then there's a certain threshold to which we say "this is not ". Is that threshold defined by a set of rules or previous experiences of what artists in that genere make?
I think genres are a good thing to have. Like discussed in the video, it helps me find specific artists that sound somewhat similar and depending on the influences of any artist i listen to i can go and look for something in a different genre and fall in love with it or not like it as much. I think the problem with genre isn't so much labeling, even though it isn't helpful, it's simply people choosing not to listen to a certain type of music and that's what they're going to have to live with.
Sunbather is the perfect example how tagging a genre into an album can hurt it more than help it.
I love genres, it's easy to differentiate and find music. For example, we live in a world where Have Heart, Defeater, Blood For Blood, Xibalba, Terror are all considered "hardcore" all are quite different while all still being hardcore. In saying that, it does creates barriers for people that, but those people would find another way to create barriers because they are closed minded.
I agree with you completely. When I discover a new artist or song that I enjoy, I like to have a vague idea of what genre they come under so I can discover similar sounding artists.
On the other hand I can't stand the people who will completely rule out an entire genre because of a few artists. Like people who will rule out rap or hip/hop because of say Lil Wayne or Nicki Minaj when infact they are just looking at the more mainstream artists in that charts that are actually closer to pop.
As a library science student, categorization is extremely important - imagine a record store with no divisions as to format, genre, price. Genre works to diversify that sorting. Anthony, you have done a fantastic job of already setting up genres in your reviews' dbox, it hasn't been completely a controlled and consistent vocabulary, but that's to be expected - your output is immense. I have searched for "drone needledrop" to find reviews of similar artists you have done. tl;dr Genre good!
As a listener, i must say that categorizing music by it's genres is a good thing. It helps a lot. On the other hand, there are bands that don't like to be put in a box. It's not putting yourself in a box, it's just establishing some parameters that you fit in so we know how to find you and find more bands like yours. For example, if i didn't knew that Kyuss was a stoner rock band i wouldn't have heard of them, because no one would have told me and i discovered them by searching stoner rock.
I always feel that my genre is Electronic, but since there are so many sub-genres it helps me discover artists with slightly different aspects that I enjoy leading to me discovering new artists that I enjoy which I may not have thought I would
I like genres for organizational purposes and to help me find new music or pick music that I'm in the mood for. Any good thing can be use improperly though. All it takes is a simple mind to limit themselves from whole genres. People even limit themselves from whole mediums. People who've never watched an anime in their life beyond DBZ or other Cartoon Network stuff swear off the whole medium all the time for example. That said, I do agree with the inherent flaws you mentioned.
Love your videos! You should do a video on your studio setup! Love the lighting, weather you tried or not! looks great and I'd love to see how you did it!
I have seen comments regarding Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, when artists like Donna Summer, Public Enemy and even Randy Newman was inducted this year. They meant that they are not "Rock and Roll", but that depends how you define it. Hip hop has its roots in disco and soul, soul has its roots in jazz and blues - and blues is the roots of Rock. I don't know, the Hall shouldn't been taken so serious - like genres in general. Everything is connected. What's "music" and not might be more interesting.
I like genres because it helps me easily organize my music and find music similar to that which I already like. one thing that perplexes me is when bands express anger about being associated with a particular genre, such as AFI who have repeatedly stated that they aren't goth, and Black Sabbath who have repeatedly claimed not to be heavy metal, despite these tags being applied to them by many many people.
I think I agree.My example has to do with watching one of your reviews.It was Shlohmo - Bad vibes. I took your advice and gave it a listen and I was instantly hooked.I "binged" on Shlohmo and as a result, last.fm gave me all these similar artists.Before I knew it i was neck deep in the "lo-fi, glitch-pop" scene, much of which has completely changed the way I look at music. However,the downside is that whenever I talk about music, I sound pretentious using those labels. The double edge sword.
one of my favorite bands was in there. I thought that in the pop section there was stuff like phoenix's shitty new album. Like I said, I think that the real problem is people deciding that they hate a genre and then completely avoiding it, as to the artist being limited or limiting their music to fit a genre they feel comfortable in, that's the artists fault, look at David Bowie, the dude has changed his style like a thousand times.
Great video man, really
Just like most people have been expressing, genres are particularly helpful in describing large, varying differences between pieces of music. It helps people realize that the music they listen to falls within a certain tradition. However, after digging into every genre, most people find that there are nuances that then allow you to question the basis of the genre. This trend, though, might be linked to a nature for art to eventually become inward looking. Just look at the free jazz mvmt.
Agreed. If the artist is good enough, they're gonna transcend however they're labeled. Genres, along with image, gimmicks, advertising, etc., only go so far as to help catch interest. None of that is gonna matter if people don't think you're stuff is special. And if they DO think you're stuff is special, then nothing else will matter as much. Artists can make a fuss about how they appear all day, but in the end they need to worry more about becoming better musicians/songwriters.
Genre's are helpful & hurtful. Genre's can help people find a type of music they're interested in. However sometimes people categorize artists in a genre they don't really fit in and some artists don't fit in a certain genre although they claim they do. An example of it being hurtful is arguments people have over whether a band is punk or a band is pop punk, it can get pretty ridiculous.
I gotta say for the longest time I allowed genre tags to dictate what I listened to.
But with openness and being more outgoing I have found music that I love that originally I may not have given a chance if I just looked at its genre and didn't bother.
I gotta thank you too Anthony for helping me find this music too!
I'd say that defining genres is a way to enjoy music more easily. Like if I listened to Led Zeppelin and Daft Punk and I wouldn't like Daft Punk but enjoy the Zeps' I would say that I like rock and I want to listen more, but I also don't like electronic music so much so it's easier for me to know what bands I can or can not like (probably). That being said, it's not good to generalize
I think it does a lot of good, as long as the artist doesn't feel pressured to restrict themselves to the genre, or the type of music they "should" be making. It helps me find other bands that have styles similar to ones I like, and helps me pin down different influences that certain bands have. Plus, they can act as great tools for the artists. Would Death Grips have been as amazing as they are if there were not conventions of hip-hop for them to break? Probably, but perhaps not.
I love genres, as a metal and extreme punk fan its fun for me to delve into all the subgenres and then the subgenres of subgenres etc., but at the same time I think it can definitely become a little ridiculous, I also think that something, especially within metal and punk that is the use of metalcore and post-hardcore, I actually think you should do one of these comment things on just those two names for genres and how diverse the bands that are labeled with those genres are
I don't specify my genre very much because I don't really fit into one. I used to call myself "industrial", but I no longer find that a fitting term, so I guess nowadays it would be better to just call myself alternative. I have influences from (hard) rock, electronica, rap, classical, jazz, whatever I feel like, basically. I find that I could perhaps help people be more understanding of genres in this way, at least.
I totally feel you.
I think many passionate people become far too caught up in classifying music in very specific genres & subgenres. They'll argue over which subgenre a particular song is, and then suggest that the artist should never deviate.
Particularly in Electronic music; there is a very aggressive divide between House & Trance, which is strange because they are very similar in many ways. And yet anything that isn't clearly Trance or House is often given the term Trouse, and that's used in a derogatory way.
I love (and/or hate) all genres. I love (and/or hate) bands who follow genre doctrines. I love (and/or hate) people who use use genres to put bands into neat boxes that never (and/or always) adequatly describes what bands sounds like.
On a totally (un)related note: this morning my 5-year-old heard the opening of a Besnard Lakes song and desdcribed what she imagines the stage would look like when the band plays it.
I agree fully that genres are a double edged sword. Sometimes it hurts my listening experience and impression of certain music, like when I listen to hip hop, a genre I am still slowly getting into, it sometimes seems like I'm having a hard time getting into it simply because I'm thinking of it as hip hop, instead of just music. However, as a musician myself, I find genres a useful tool in advertising my music
Genres are like umbrella terms. A lot of them can encompass a huge variety of sounds. They're less useful the more specific they try to be. There are lots of artists/bands that don't really fit into one genre or another and in attempts to categorise them they become avant-garde progressive industrial groove technical electronic black metal or something. Then people disagree with such genre tags and a huge argument stems from pointless stuff.
See I disagree with "genres" in general. Now, I'm ok with a band being labeled as "rock" or someone being a "hip-hop" artist or "metal" etc. The all encompassing genres are helpful for organizing things. But when you dive into meticulous genres, like black-sludge-nu-metal or any over the other trillions of subgenres out there, it gets a bit ridiculous. I think artists AND listeners shouldn't pay attention to genres. Sure it's good to find similar artists, but slapping that label on something can be restrictive and does more harm than good in the end.
Bob Dylan used to say that all the time
I will always make a distinction between soft rock (Billy Joel, Bob Seger, U2), hard rock (AC/DC, Twisted Sister), and metal (Nirvana, Green Day, Black Sabbath).
Guy McPerson I'm what planet is green Day metal?
This is why knowing genres is important
How about genres related to history or movements like no wave? I think labeling those as such is respectful to its intention
Of course they are. It makes finding music easier.
Though I do think people sometimes put too much emphasis on genres. I usually don't have a genre in mind when people ask me what type of music I listen to.
My digital library is completely genre-less. While I understand why other people use them for organization purposes and to find new music, I don't really feel the need. I listen to music regardless of the label attached to it. The only label I attach to music is 'I liked it' or 'I didn't like it'.
Understanding genres and their usefulness is very important to any musician and avid music listener. Thanks for clarifying the concept of genres Anthony.
I think, or I like to think that genres are natural to our human tendencies...
While coming from an artist point of view I more often deal w/some of the negative aspects of genres, but moreover; I think that it's just a natural thing that, a lot of times, or at least in the beginning started as something that had to do w/culture. In the early years, or first 1/2 to 2/3 of 20 century pop music, things for the most part were made up of what we now call "Root's Music" (Blues/Blue Grass/Country&Western/Jazz/Rock'n'Roll). At which point in time you could transition, or "change" from one genre to another simply by changing time signatures or adding a chord or two, or both..
So, yeah.. I think, for me anyway, genre is something indigenous to culture. Like I definitely have a rock side and sound to me.. But, my brother calls it "Rural Rock"... It fits.. 'cause there is this undeniable, sorta, "Outlaw Americana Lyrical-Bluesiness" within the rock.. So, yeah!
I say all of this knowing, full well, that things like; Satellite TV, SmartPhones, & the Web could possibly be making things like indigenous culture LESS and LESS relevant in the make up of genres and their definitions.. There are some that believe of the possibility that in the 50 yrs anything played organically &/or recordings recorded w/live musical instruments(when mostly strings(guitr, bass, electrc, ect...) will be labeled "Country Music"... I see what these people are getting at, but, I don't know.. I'd like to think things turn out better than that, but, who knows.... : D
I hate to be that guy who suggests a record to review, but I wouldn't mind seeing a review on the new Eisley record "Currents." With that being said, I use genres as a way to distinguish bands from one another, so bands and record labels know who to market certain bands/artists to. Like you said, it becomes negative when people dislike a whole genre, and think it's all the same, but mainly, close-minded people seem to think this, because of one band/artist they heard, and didn't like.
I pretty much agree with all the points you made. Genres can put limits on an artist and block people from listening to them, but it's also good to be able to describe a certain sound you like. To add another point, I'd say people take these labels way too seriously. I can't tell you how many times I've seen people get into arguments over "That's not punk!" or "That's not black metal!" And I'm like, "Why are you arguing over what adjective to use?"
I love genres and sub-genres. eg; in metal circles some people say "it's all metal" but someone who listens to grindcore may not like 80s hair metal. Someone who listens to black metal may not like power metal. Sure some bands cross genres, but you can still say it's a bit of this and bit of that, and people will get a rough idea of what they're in for.
A bad side of genres is when it's used to restrict musical freedom, like when fans expect a band to stay within a certain template.
I agree Quite a bit... I Don't really Believe in Genres at home... when it is My time to Listen I don't consider it at all... But the Genre Labeling Gets me on a Path to Pursue in the Digging Picking up Phase... and that's Cool... It is Not always going to work... but it gives me a chance to go down a road for awhile
i am mostly into Black Metal , Death Metal, Noise, Edm, Post Rock , Rock, and country
Genres are good for sharing and pointing to new music, but I think it gets bad when people exclude certain genres altogether or when bands are described only as sounding like other bands.
I'm not a genre person, mostly because I like lots of different kinds of music. I also really like it when artists feel free enough to kind of mix things up, kind of like David Bowie and how he experimented with sounds. I really liked his last album and it is obvious that it is very jazzy and rock synth sounding. I was kind of surprised to hear that he had been listening to a lot of Kendrick Lamar while making that album, until I really sat down and listed for where that sound might be, and he is in there. That's why Bowie was a genius though. I don't like putting artists in boxes, because I think that they can be more. That's also why I love Joni Mitchell.
I think they are in fact really useful, but just like you said, it is inevitable that people use it to avoid a sound that's been labeled. There are solid genres, but there's also a lot of variations in a single one, and fusions, combinations of diferent genres which makes the whole thing diferent and maybe more complex. I just think music should be music, not politics or religions.
I'd describe myself as primarily a metal listener (among a few others), but I don't know if I would want to identify as a metalhead because I don't always share the same opinion about different genres or sub genres that a 'normal' metalhead would have. For example, I don't attach the same stigma to Deathcore or emo music that seemingly a lot of metalheads do.
When it comes to a lot of other genres, be it pop, rap, jazz, house, country etc. I find it difficult to become interested in what those musicians do, even though I would like to have a larger range of tastes.
The only time I try to use a genre is when I'm organizing my music folder. What's weird is I never know what what to label anything. "Is this punk?" maybe... someone would tell me, "No dude that's New wave!" I'm that person who'd say "I don't care for rap", yes I generalize a lot. But at the same time I never even know what genre an artist is. As long as the music is good I'll listen to it. Though, it does help to open up to other artist in the same "genre". It's a tough call, I just leave it be
I think genres are really important because artists, songs, albums would be only described by emotions (happy, sad, heavy, soft...) if there weren't genres. In this case, the question "What genre(s) do you like?" wouldn't exist anymore, which is a good thing, but... imagine a music conversation where you CAN'T evoke any already existing genre. No "funky", no "indie", no "rap". Sure, I acknowledge that a music piece can have different genres and sometimes, we're obligated to invent a genre to describe it, but I still think genres are important.
In conversation, I usually try and use other artists as a reference instead of genres, and I see a lot of reviewers doing that these days as well. I think it's important to not quote genres or microgenres to generously because that generates buzz, which encourages bandwagon-jumping, which often negatively impacts a lot of genuinely inventive styles.
A true music enthusiast will not let genres get in the way of the accessing music they may like, they'll delve through tons of genres and take out what they like for themselves, genres should only be used as a tool to help find more music really, I totally agree with everything he says in this, Kudos Anthony.
It's necessary with such a saturation of music to have some way to navigate them, and outside of publicity, genres are probably the best way to explore... and the only other option (outside hearing music off friends). Totally can limit what people listen to in as much as there are likely to be things in genres they right off that they enjoy, but at the same time without genres in the first place, it seems to me that most of your music tastes will be defined by publicity and chance encounters.
I think genres are a great way for people to fnd music they like. I use last.fm genre tags all the time and "microgenres" as you call them are especially helpful. for example, when I first discovered Disclosure a couple months back, I heard that it was house music, but to me, it sounded like there had to be a specific subgenre they were following. and I happened to stumble upon genre pages for UK House and UK Funy, and many other genres of that sort. and I found a shitload of amazing artists.
Wrap your mind around this: Waht band/song was it that led me into listening to hard rock bands like Led Zeppelin, Aerosmith, AC/DC, Alice Cooper, Kiss and later metal, like Black Sabbath and Metallica? believe it or not it was Styx, the album "Pieces of Eight" and the song "Queen of Spades" and unlikely band that would do that, but there you go.
My first thought was, which you may know, Captain Beefheart - Trout Mask Replica. But how experimental it is depends on how used you are to experimental music, I would say. First time I heard it, five years ago, it was experimental - but as you hear music that is more experimental you get used. And it might just be called experimental blues rock, I don't know. It has, however, the spirit of free jazz.
I generally dont care too much on factorizing genre as i like to listen to a wide variety of music, music is my escapism techniques, and i like to just get out of the norm and listen to things which make me feel great, being country, hip hop or dubstep.
I think what is important when talking about genres is the reason they exist in the first place. In film you have all different genres such as action, drama and comedy ect. Why do they exist? Genres exist as a tool used by the audience to find something new they might like. It's really a very simple concept. What is not a simple concept however is the impact that art has on people. For example Actions movies have been known to have plenty of comedy in them. So what separates an action film from a comedy? Thus the birth of the Action Comedy. We see this in the music world as well. With genres we never expected at times...."Pop Punk" However their is usually a consistency. When talking about Film be it Action, Horror, Comedy and Drama they all are essentially the same thing. Film. The same concept applies to music. You have people combining genres, creating new genres but for the most part using all the same tools used for making most of these different styles. The music nerd is correct when he says that this is a double edged sword.
The base might be good, but surface is also everything it is. Like you say it's good to find new artists - and that's when you scratch the surface. But in all it's like stereotypes when it comes to different personalities. But I think it's impossible to not have genres, since it's a part of how we think. It both opens up and close. I think it comes down to how you are as a person. If you are open-minded you might see it more as tools, and if you're close-minded you might see it more as borders.
Genres are simply descriptions of different music, apart from using abstract images from life. And if someone mixes different genres to the point where it's difficult to categorize their music, then it's whether a mix of genres or a new genre.
I, personally, do have a limited amount of genres that meet my personal expectations, but I don't them get in my way of judging the artists. I simply use genres as a simple way of finding music previously undiscovered by me but that I'm in the mood for.
Genres are useful, but ephemeral and often times dysfunctional as labels. Grouping music into movements is, in my opinion, more constructive for the understanding and exploration of music. A movement forms when a notable number of artist rally behind a definable aspect(s) of music at one time, and preferably one geographic place. A good example would be Britpop, which was not a discrete genre, but an over-arching pattern of influence and aesthetic among bands at that place and time.
One band I just can't put a label on is The Heavy, they have rock influences, funk influences, hip hop influences, RnB influences, and most and foremost soul influences. Though I can't really say that they are any just one of those genres.
Genres and even subgenres are there to market to individual fans. Retailers try to carve out sections so customers can find other artists who are similar. Punk, New age, Nu-wave, and vocal are such subgenres. The key here is that there is a lack of crossover with these styles for the most part. A vocal artist typically sings and covers standards written in the 20's-40's. With punk, nu wave, and hard bop, the given is that you have to have a group of musicians skilled enough to enter that style of playing. Since it's on the age, those artists tend not to include a more centrist style atleast on the same release.
However, other subgenres should be seen like we see tags. Blues rock is very broad and many of those artists would perform different styles. In that case, leave them filed in rock/pop but highlight each release with a different color perhaps.