DMusic.com | for indie musicians and fans | Free MP3 music downloads

Forums > Music

I think genres suck

milladrive	Date: October 9, 2002 @ 10:22 AM Then let's go listen to Toby Keith's "Let's Talk About Me," Lonestar's "Amazed," Jessica Andrews' "Who I Am," or Shedaisy's "Little Goodbyes." Country or rock? 60's Supremes, 70's Stevie Wonder, 80's Michael Jackson, or 90's Red Hot Chili Peppers: Rock or r&b? Listen to some of my stuff and tell me if you think my cheesy production gives off a particular indication of genre. Rock? Country? Alternative? Lo-fi? .."Rock" seemed like the best umbrella term, so I put them there, but honestly, did they hafta be there? Lately, I've been listening to a lotta music from countries where English isn't the first language. I have yet to decide (figure out) whether some of them are rock, country, or alternative. Nor do I really care. Okay, enuff examples. You all see what I'm sayin, I'm sure. _Then_, we have the audacity to wonder whether bluegrass falls within the realm of country or not? Or whether hiphop is r&b? Why is it that we (the music-loving public and the artists) insist on creating smaller and more specialized "groups" when all we want is more exposure? Of course country websites are gonna distinguish amongst the various strains of country, as will any site dedicated to a particular genre. But in the broadest sense of the word "music," genres should be thoroughly unecessary, imo. Now, don't get me wrong here. I've been studyin' popular music now for most of my life, and I realize that there's indeed a certain necessity for the separation of musical tastes. Billboard's been doin' it for decades. But even Billboard knows it's be overdoin' it if they created a special bluegrass chart, or a special thrash chart, or a chart for music played only by midgets at 4:30pm on Sundays during a hail storm. On the broad scale, it can just get a little ridiculous. Thank you. I just had to get that off my chest." id="22778">I think music genres suck, and I'll tell ya why. Let's go listen to just about any Elvis Presley from the 50's. Country, rock, or r&b? Everly Brothers, Chuck Berry, Buddy Holly, Little Richard, Jerry Lee Lewis: country, rock, or r&b? Let's go listen to "Squeeze Box" by The Who. Let's go listen to "Hot Dog" by Led Zeppelin. Let's go listen to "Act Naturally," "I'll Cry Instead," or "Two Of Us" by The Beatles. Rock or country? Then let's go listen to Toby Keith's "Let's Talk About Me," Lonestar's "Amazed," Jessica Andrews' "Who I Am," or Shedaisy's "Little Goodbyes." Country or rock? 60's Supremes, 70's Stevie Wonder, 80's Michael Jackson, or 90's Red Hot Chili Peppers: Rock or r&b? Listen to some of my stuff and tell me if you think my cheesy production gives off a particular indication of genre. Rock? Country? Alternative? Lo-fi? .."Rock" seemed like the best umbrella term, so I put them there, but honestly, did they hafta be there? Lately, I've been listening to a lotta music from countries where English isn't the first language. I have yet to decide (figure out) whether some of them are rock, country, or alternative. Nor do I really care. Okay, enuff examples. You all see what I'm sayin, I'm sure. _Then_, we have the audacity to wonder whether bluegrass falls within the realm of country or not? Or whether hiphop is r&b? Why is it that we (the music-loving public and the artists) insist on creating smaller and more specialized "groups" when all we want is more exposure? Of course country websites are gonna distinguish amongst the various strains of country, as will any site dedicated to a particular genre. But in the broadest sense of the word "music," genres should be thoroughly unecessary, imo. Now, don't get me wrong here. I've been studyin' popular music now for most of my life, and I realize that there's indeed a certain necessity for the separation of musical tastes. Billboard's been doin' it for decades. But even Billboard knows it's be overdoin' it if they created a special bluegrass chart, or a special thrash chart, or a chart for music played only by midgets at 4:30pm on Sundays during a hail storm. On the broad scale, it can just get a little ridiculous. Thank you. I just had to get that off my chest.
thumbtack	Date: October 9, 2002 @ 10:28 AM One of the things that has been discussed, is the ability to have different genres per song, That is in the works. Let the artist decide what song goes where, but have them all listed under the artist. That way Milla could have a country, metal and hip hop tune, and even have multipe genres per song.
leflaw	Date: October 9, 2002 @ 10:32 AM lef.dmusic.com" id="22781">Actually this is my pet ppeve about the music business. Any decent musician knows that genres are for marketing people, and that greatness lies in between the cracks in the genre . Maybe multiple genre's make sense, but genre's are for fools and non-musicians. I play Negroe classical music and country reggae my self. lef.dmusic.com
milladrive	Date: October 9, 2002 @ 10:33 AM ExZACTly, lef.
Fenderbenders	Date: October 9, 2002 @ 10:43 AM to add my own two cents. I am more Banjo Player than an actual Country singer so to me that would make me more Bluegrass than Country? I hate to call myself just 'Country' cause to me that would be like, someone like, lets say Dolly Parton and or Kenny Rogers WHO IS country right? Would you call Dolly or Kenny Bluegrass or Country?
Fenderbenders	Date: October 9, 2002 @ 10:48 AM Thumbtack: wouldn't that be a tad bit confusing to the listeners? to have an artist songs scattered about in diff areas? Hip/hop should be seperated from Rap. Rap is more or less talking while hip/hop is the beat. I'm not an expert on the genre so I can't really say.
thumbtack	Date: October 9, 2002 @ 10:54 AM I think you miss understand, the hip song for example would show in hip hop playlists and picks, but all of the artists tunes would show on their page. So you could have a hip hop song on your page along with a country, or rock etc. But only your hip hop song would appear in the hip hop section. Me personally, I listen to everything, but there are those who listen to nothing but one type of music.
milladrive	Date: October 9, 2002 @ 10:58 AM Fenders, I think you're missin' my point here (as you seemingly are too, tack). First bluegrass is always country, but country is not necessarily bluegrass. You may lean more toward a specific strain of country, as with bluegrass, but it's still rightfully considered country music. Kenny Rogers and Dolly Parton may both be considered country artists, but both have had multitudes of hits on the both the pop and adult contemporary charts. Are they country, pop, or adult contemporary? No need to answer. They're all of the above. Does "Islands In The Stream" sound country? Perhaps. But that's production for ya. The song hit #1 on the pop and ac charts, as well as the country, and it was written by Barry, Maurice, and Robin Gibb. .....Kenny Roger's "Lady." Prime example. Hit #1 on country, pop, and ac. Know who wrote it? Lionel Richie. Sounds like a Lionel Richie song too, don't it? And guess what, had Lionel recorded it with the IDENTICAL production, it would've dissed the country chart and shot to #1 on the r&b instead. ..Go figure.
thumbtack	Date: October 9, 2002 @ 11:01 AM So what do we do? Put them all in one pot? As despicable as genres are, they do serve somewhat of a purpose. Many songs crossover, to other genres and this is a good thing as it exposes those with limited tastes to new and different artists, and music.
milladrive	Date: October 9, 2002 @ 11:03 AM I've acknowledged that lumpin' them into one pot is impratical and there's a need for genres to a certain extent. My main point here is that we often overdo it (and seldom don't), plus the fact that there are many songs that defy classification.
thumbtack	Date: October 9, 2002 @ 11:08 AM Absolutely I agree on that 100%, there are many songs that defy classification, but who better than the artist to choose?
leflaw	Date: October 9, 2002 @ 11:11 AM Hey bill, lets do a screen shot of how one artists can have songs in ultiple genres!!! I can't even figure it out!!!
milladrive	Date: October 9, 2002 @ 11:18 AM Yes, sir, artists here at DMusic should have the option. And more options. No doubt. Let's get away from DM for this sake of this thread, tho. What if you're an artist like Elvis and even you, the artist, can't decide?? And why should the artist hafta make a choice at all, thus limiting yourself to a prospective audience? Would Prince have made a name for himself had he blocked himself off from either the rock or r&b audiences? Of course not. In the broadest sense, music is music, and genres are in the eye of the beholder. Any song can be produced and arranged into any style at any time. If it's a good tune, then who cares if it's got a twang on one side and unnatural percussion sounds on the other? The only reason we have genres is so radio stations and record stores can maintain their neat little tidy formats.
thumbtack	Date: October 9, 2002 @ 11:26 AM http://images2.dmusic.com/users/t/h/u/thumbtack/2829.gif" id="22796">Here's a screen shot I did of Leflaws artist area, and added genre's beside the tunes, (of course these are made up, but you get the point.) http://images2.dmusic.com/users/t/h/u/thumbtack/2829.gif
leflaw	Date: October 9, 2002 @ 11:29 AM Now, bill, show us how you did that!
thumbtack	Date: October 9, 2002 @ 11:32 AM Milla, It would be target marketing so to speak. Elvis and Prince were already hits before they crossed over.
thumbtack	Date: October 9, 2002 @ 11:32 AM Photoshop is a wonderful thing...
milladrive	Date: October 9, 2002 @ 11:32 AM sigh
thumbtack	Date: October 9, 2002 @ 11:34 AM Its going to take some coding in the file manager, to add genre to the choices, like we have now for feature, delete, then have a cript that reads that
thumbtack	Date: October 9, 2002 @ 11:34 AM Seriously, Milla I understand what you're saying.
Fenderbenders	Date: October 9, 2002 @ 11:38 AM ooooo way cool, I like that thumbtack, that would make sense. and Milla I guess you got point. but, I like to think Bluegrass can be a stand alone genre lol.
creativetim	Date: October 9, 2002 @ 11:40 AM Too many gold bolts!!!!
thumbtack	Date: October 9, 2002 @ 11:41 AM ADMINS RULE!
Fenderbenders	Date: October 9, 2002 @ 11:43 AM haha I dont have a bolt. love the guitar icon
creativetim	Date: October 9, 2002 @ 11:47 AM Admins rule and members drool?
thumbtack	Date: October 9, 2002 @ 11:48 AM LOL
Fenderbenders	Date: October 9, 2002 @ 11:48 AM hey, that could be a new slogan? lol.
billhudson	Date: October 9, 2002 @ 11:48 AM Well coming from a musician who has been playing for over 25 years (damn!, how time flys) One has to be focus,and centered. That being said....as an artist you can't be all things to all people. It must from from inside and what comes out is sometimes a surprise. And as we know radio format needs to put you in a box. As artist we don't like that but if you want to get your music out there,well you need to be like a beam of light.... focus! Now as a listening to music .... I too like all kinds but love the singer/songwriter stuff, Ray Wylie Hubbart and so on. But and this is inportant, music is not like sports as someone once said. That is what makes the world go around. We all like different kinds of music and thank your god its not all the same. From the American Heritage dictionary : Genre-"A realistic style of Painting (Songwriting) that depicts everyday life".
mcarp555	Date: October 9, 2002 @ 11:50 AM It is a very fluid concept, and having worked in record stores myself, I know how difficult it is. Where do you draw the line? Who decides? And if artists don't know themselves, who does? Don't forget also that genres change over time. Does Scott Joplin go in Jazz or Classical? Gershwin? I've seen 'em in both, but neither would probably consider themselves 'classical' (with a small 'c', as dsch would note). It may ulitmately come down to space. Small record stores have Rock, Rap, and basically Other. Larger stores have County, Folk, Bluegrass, Classical by composer or instrument, etc etc. You're bound to piss off someone anyway you slice it, so whatdya do? Make your Faustian bargain, draw your line in the sand, and hope you come close to getting a majority to agree. Is this part of a plot to make the charts here meaningful?
billhudson	Date: October 9, 2002 @ 11:56 AM thanks mcarp555, bingo! Its the same old thing we are always trying to figure it out. In the folk world, (and this is a can of worms) someone will always come up with, "This is what folk music really is". That is the begining of the end as far as I am concerned.
Fenderbenders	Date: October 9, 2002 @ 11:59 AM People lare gonna 'label' your music no matter what, period. whether your country, rock or heavy metal, you need theses genres so peaple have choices. It's human nature since the dawn of time to pinpoint what category your song falls into. Without, indexing and catalogging the music would be haphazard and no one would be able to say, hay man I dig that rock song. Rock and heavy metal need their own genres period. to lump the two together is like lumping hip/hop and rap. I like seprate genres as it tells me more or less what that artist is mostly about. and like mcarp555 said, you need it for chart reasons.
Fenderbenders	Date: October 9, 2002 @ 12:01 PM or was Milla simply refering to Dmusic charts? In that case then I like thumbtacks idea. (typos above but to lazy to keep correcting em)
milladrive	Date: October 9, 2002 @ 12:03 PM But when I'm cataloguing my collection, however, I feel there's positively no need for it." id="22815">Well, I for one would like it to be known that I had absolutely no intention of makin' DMusic the focus of this thread. What do we do? That's a good question. As long as I'm marketing, I'll need to focus on a genre. Radio has fickle listeners with narrow tastes who'll turn the dial if they stray too far from the "sound." And record stores need a certain organization so that their customers can easily find what the ywant where they expect to find it. But when I'm cataloguing my collection, however, I feel there's positively no need for it.
milladrive	Date: October 9, 2002 @ 12:06 PM Well, I agree that it's human nature to wanna separate things (including themselves) into nice neat little groups and categories. However, music was never categorized en masse as it has been since the dawn of mass marketing (about the second half of the 20th century)." id="22816">"It's human nature since the dawn of time to pinpoint what category your song falls into." Well, I agree that it's human nature to wanna separate things (including themselves) into nice neat little groups and categories. However, music was never categorized en masse as it has been since the dawn of mass marketing (about the second half of the 20th century).
billhudson	Date: October 9, 2002 @ 12:10 PM here is what I do Milladrive, I find radio that plays my kind of music (folk&roll, thats a funny one). Then I find the DJ and I make sure they get a CD. Before ya know it you are making friends with him or her. And I have DJ's around the world that are playing my CD and my hope is I get to meet'em all, someday.
mcarp555	Date: October 9, 2002 @ 12:18 PM Well, and that's why I think we've seen the last of the 'mega-star' days. In the 60's, if you bought the new Stones single, you'd also buy Beatles, Aretha, Dave Clark, Troggs, Jackie Wilson, 5th Dimension, et al. The audience is too fragmented today to do that. If you like Tool, you're not into Shania. If you like Jay-Z, you're not into Dave Matthews, etc. How could any artist today capture such diverse sections of the listening public? Yeah, Eminem sells a bizllion copies, but dueting with Elton doesn't mean that the bizillion and one Elton fans are gonna get any Slim Shady for their discman anytime soon. So I think, much like the universe after the big bang, we live in a age of 'shattered symmetry'.
OmegaDaemon	Date: October 9, 2002 @ 12:27 PM Since the early 1900's the world has seen a musical explosion of different styles branching off and mixing with other 'genres'/styles of music. Essentially modern music comes from the advent of rythm+blues, the true rythm+blues that is, and from there such styles/genres as rock, jazz, blues ect. were born. Personally from witnessing in the past couple years mp3.com's categorizing methods I have noticed more of a category splitting with such genre/style choices as experimental, death metal, adult contemporary, minimalistic techno ect. ect. ect. and so on and so on. So I know where your viewpoint comes from with the frustration all this categorizing gives you and many other people. When I create a song I don't simple state "this is hardcore mystical ambient chill trance". I can't simple state what the song is, its not that simple. What one person sees as r+b could be as easily and readily be classified as jazz or rap or even rock.... ....and as milla has said this isn't just a thread about DMusic's classification, this is about the whole classification and genre 'problem'" id="22819">Milla: Also for the reason for categorizing "en masse...since the dawn of mass marketing" is that pre-massmarketing there weren't very many different categories of music (basically classical and new music). Since the early 1900's the world has seen a musical explosion of different styles branching off and mixing with other 'genres'/styles of music. Essentially modern music comes from the advent of rythm+blues, the true rythm+blues that is, and from there such styles/genres as rock, jazz, blues ect. were born. Personally from witnessing in the past couple years mp3.com's categorizing methods I have noticed more of a category splitting with such genre/style choices as experimental, death metal, adult contemporary, minimalistic techno ect. ect. ect. and so on and so on. So I know where your viewpoint comes from with the frustration all this categorizing gives you and many other people. When I create a song I don't simple state "this is hardcore mystical ambient chill trance". I can't simple state what the song is, its not that simple. What one person sees as r+b could be as easily and readily be classified as jazz or rap or even rock.... ....and as milla has said this isn't just a thread about DMusic's classification, this is about the whole classification and genre 'problem'
milladrive	Date: October 9, 2002 @ 2:15 PM You both make many valid points, carp and Omega. In fact, carpie seems to be able to grasp the abstractness in my original concept. Winamp is a great example of how outta control the genre classifications have gotten. Pretty soon, there'll be so many genres that each artist will have their very own.
OmegaDaemon	Date: October 9, 2002 @ 2:24 PM the OMEGA GENRE!!!!!!!????????????
thumbtack	Date: October 9, 2002 @ 2:33 PM The Tacky Genre (refering to meself)
milladrive	Date: October 9, 2002 @ 2:36 PM hehehe
mracky	Date: October 9, 2002 @ 2:38 PM Late to the party again. Thumb, you would have to add a new column to the song table in your database to add a specified genre (as well as fixing the scripts which acquire the song, create the user page and create the charts' pages). Om: The first Billboard chart was in 1913. Previous to this charts were mainly used in-house by publishing businesses to forecast sheet music sales. (The top of the chart did not neccessarily mean that it was the most popular song, since an easy tune could be faked by a musician -- no need for sheet music.) A year ago, uploading my first internet song, I was faced with the genre question. I made a list of the genres which I found across sites -- over 150! I have the list buried on a harddrive if you want to see it... - a large part of the genre problem is in the lack of definition to what the genre means. E.g., Techno is between 130-160 beats per minute with no vocals and repeated hypnotic rhythms. - another problem occurs when the programmatic structure of the site does not allow the artist to classify the individual songs. like this site. Hence, you have rock songs in the classical list because the artist is classical. For myself, I solved the problem on other sites by splitting my personality -- I divied my works into two genres and do admin for two separate artists. Not the best solution, but it was the marketable thing to do.
milladrive	Date: October 9, 2002 @ 2:50 PM See, I'd love it if music didn't hafta be classified at all. PS: The first Billboard "chart" may have been in 1913, but Billboard's charts did not become officially acknowledged as accurate surveys until the issue of July 27, 1940. Before then, they were sporadic and unreliable at best.
OmegaDaemon	Date: October 9, 2002 @ 3:02 PM my answer: Artists have to create more diverse music. Try experimenting in different styles and time signatures. Try doing things that wouldn't normally be done, that is what makes(in part) a 'mega-star'. This is the topic I tried to address in the 'new sound of music?' thread that I started, what people think the new amazing sound is going to be. Mega-stars are made through hard work and innovation (and the RIAA), not born." id="22847">"How could any artist today capture such diverse sections of the listening public?" my answer: Artists have to create more diverse music. Try experimenting in different styles and time signatures. Try doing things that wouldn't normally be done, that is what makes(in part) a 'mega-star'. This is the topic I tried to address in the 'new sound of music?' thread that I started, what people think the new amazing sound is going to be. Mega-stars are made through hard work and innovation (and the RIAA), not born.
icisnizz	Date: October 9, 2002 @ 4:24 PM I think that genres are definitely needed but sub-genres would be an ideal thing. In my city we have two moma and pop record stores that actually do this. Instead of lumping all of the rock into a 'rock' section they have albums classified into types of rock. Same goes for the hip-hop and electronica sections which I think is greatly needed. Even today some stores don't even have anything near this. I went into one the other day and it had what they called a 'dance/r&b/rap' section. What the hell is that? It royally pissed me off because when I was discussing consignment they told me that my album would go into the dance section that was filled with everything from stevie wonder to madonna to britney spears to Master P to Puff Daddy to Tricky. In most Canadian owned record stores there is now a section called 'independent', where there is no genre titles given and is directed at people who could care less(musicians). This is where I get most of my albums put because there is no way that I wanna be anywhere near music that I think is somewhat opposite to mine just because it might have similar bmp's or because I rhyme. I think attitude should have a lot to do with genres but unfortunately it doesn't. Using hip-hop as an example, I think that there should be classifications such as gangster conscience underground experimental etc. (there is enough music to do this now, just look at the rap section here at dmusic...some of use shouldn't even be close to each other) And I didn't just pull these names out of my ass...got em from mom and pop's. It's a great concept and makes it a lot easier for someone like me to find something I like instead of sifting through a hundred 'gangster/ego' rap records just to find a nice artist who is more abstract and original. I normally wouldn't mention this but since it was brought up I thought I'd give my 2 cents. The idea of me being able to put some of my electronica into the electronica section would be great. Electronica also has many different movements such as Jungle, Drum & Bass, Trance etc. I don't think these genres were created to sell records faster but to recognize that there are different movments. I consider it a good thing but then again getting carried away with genre types could get ridicules.
icisnizz	Date: October 9, 2002 @ 4:31 PM If I could have things my way I'd have two different sections. Music made to make profit and music made out of passion. I would also like the 'Music made for profit' section to be full of clowns with big shoes that would give candy to all the kids who don't know what good music is.
leflaw	Date: October 9, 2002 @ 6:51 PM DMUSIC SHOULD HAVE ONLY FOUR GENRES MUSIC RAP COMEDY ETC.
Wordsense	Date: October 9, 2002 @ 7:18 PM so Leflaw, you're sayin rap isnt music? and i agree with Icis..
Svensta	Date: October 9, 2002 @ 7:46 PM " id="22938">Milla, our own 92.3 K-Rock (NYC) is a good example of your argument. Billing itself as a hard rock station (this IS a corporate owned station, mind you) They play the hell out of Enimem now (who I dislike, but still he AINT hard rock) They also dabble in ska and hard country (there is such a thing) Also on late Saturday nights, they broadcast "Solid State" which features exclusively techno and electronica (aka: Crystal Method, Fluke, Aphex Twin, Orbital, etc.)
leflaw	Date: October 10, 2002 @ 9:01 AM Rap is poery, not music. Hip Hop is music. How about this: Music Poetry and Rap Comedy Spoken word Self Help Since poetry is clearly superior to music, wordsense, I resent you trying to diss rap by sticking it with world and country. I transcend all current societal thinking about everything. I am a cunning linguist. signed, Leflaw Noam Chomsky
icisnizz	Date: October 10, 2002 @ 9:17 AM Rap is music, hip-hop is a culture.
icisnizz	Date: October 10, 2002 @ 9:18 AM All music involving lyrics contains poetry.
milladrive	Date: October 10, 2002 @ 9:21 AM ...And you're modest, too." id="23012">"I transcend all current societal thinking about everything. I am a cunning linguist." ...And you're modest, too.
Psyence131	Date: October 10, 2002 @ 9:37 AM good thread. i agree.
theguppykillers	Date: October 10, 2002 @ 9:57 AM well ...........yep.........ok......
mtbatol	Date: October 10, 2002 @ 11:23 AM mmmmmkay?? Dammit missed another great debate!!??! That sucks since I'm the master-debater and all and... ummmm nevermind
mcarp555	Date: October 10, 2002 @ 11:57 AM Leflaw: I guessed you would save that based on my prediction you would. Now get back in the box. signed, Mcarp555 B.F. Skinner
Fenderbenders	Date: October 10, 2002 @ 12:12 PM Today's music gives me a headache, it's hard to tell who's who and what's what, they are or have been crossing over and lumping everything in the same ball fo wax that is why I guess I listen to mainly country artists.
billhudson	Date: October 10, 2002 @ 12:47 PM Just to let you folks out there that there is still cool radio out there ,check out WRVG,Lexington,KY,www.wrvg-fm.org,their moto : free the music, no format!
leflaw	Date: October 10, 2002 @ 7:20 PM Hip hop is a culture? I must have meant bunny hop.
GrooveTonic	Date: October 10, 2002 @ 7:52 PM In my mind there are two genres: Pop music and regular music. Pop music is wayyyyyy too trite and overdone.
pog	Date: October 10, 2002 @ 10:31 PM I've had trouble classifying some styles of music, but the more I understand about music, the easier I find it to come up with genre's. I guess what I'm trying to say is ppl can get as offended as they want when someone puts eminem in a rock programming, but if you listen to it enough times, then you should easily see why the songs get classed as rock/pop." id="23092">I once saw "Primus" listed as a genre on a ripper... I had to laugh. I've had trouble classifying some styles of music, but the more I understand about music, the easier I find it to come up with genre's. I guess what I'm trying to say is ppl can get as offended as they want when someone puts eminem in a rock programming, but if you listen to it enough times, then you should easily see why the songs get classed as rock/pop.
pog	Date: October 10, 2002 @ 10:36 PM At the same time, I do agree that it's getting outta hand...
TheOriginalD...	Date: October 10, 2002 @ 10:36 PM you dont need photoshop to take a screenshot... just push control+print screen, it copies what is in a window to the clip board.. then go to word or powerpoint or even paint (really just anything to paste to) and paste.
TheOriginalD...	Date: October 10, 2002 @ 10:37 PM and genres do suck
TheOriginalD...	Date: October 10, 2002 @ 10:41 PM We are taking over! Mwahahahahaha..ha....ha.......ha... um.. yeah, bye." id="23096">Hip hop IS the culture which contains many things: Rap Breakdancing Turntablism OpenMic Poetry Graffiti Art (not vandalism) even the Xtreme sports are coming in ...so are "Punks" We are taking over! Mwahahahahaha..ha....ha.......ha... um.. yeah, bye.
theguppykillers	Date: October 10, 2002 @ 11:15 PM no your not taking over. every thing is in style now instead of one generation. I have noticed there is a little of every thing that is popular now and thats the way it should be.
Cryxan	Date: October 11, 2002 @ 2:55 AM you say alternative, what exactly do you mean? I think it's fine to use these labels as descriptions, where all the music in question is together, but with a tag or three attached. But there shold be an option to not have any tag all, because there's music out there that simply doesn't want to be labeled. Artists that don't want to be labeled. Most of the music I listen to is from other countries, and genres are completely useless to me. When I listen to music I mix genres and languages, and I can't imagine the need to keep things separate. Even in stores. They're alpha by name, isn't that enough? Icis, you said "...there is no way that I wanna be anywhere near music that I think is somewhat opposite to mine..." Why?" id="23101">I hate genres. I see little point in segragating music into packages, especially when half the time a song fits into several categories like milla said, and when the labels themselves change, like carpie said. Some sites I get mp3's from now have an Oldies section that includes music from the 80's, and in the Columbia House catalog, you'll find Bjork under the Dance section. Wtf is up with that? (Not sure what kind of a dance that would be ) Alternative has become fairly huge nowadays, but does "Alternative" represent the same thing it did when it first became a common music term? And when you say alternative, what exactly do you mean? I think it's fine to use these labels as descriptions, where all the music in question is together, but with a tag or three attached. But there shold be an option to not have any tag all, because there's music out there that simply doesn't want to be labeled. Artists that don't want to be labeled. Most of the music I listen to is from other countries, and genres are completely useless to me. When I listen to music I mix genres and languages, and I can't imagine the need to keep things separate. Even in stores. They're alpha by name, isn't that enough? Icis, you said "...there is no way that I wanna be anywhere near music that I think is somewhat opposite to mine..." Why?
leflaw	Date: October 11, 2002 @ 4:03 AM Alphabtized by name --- Thats how I just organized ny CD and record + tape collection. No more genre categories. Worthless.
icisnizz	Date: October 11, 2002 @ 8:49 AM hey, good point. I take that back and blush. That was a dumb thing to say(or a bad way to word what I was trying to get across). 'that I think' could be confusing. I didn't mean a style of music but an attitude. It's like putting a Satanists album next to a Christians just because they both make rock music. It would be nice if they had some sore of attitude listing because there's just some shit I'm so sick of hearing when trying to find good music. Ex)looking for some hip-hop I might be looking for an artist that is deep & conscience but come across a hundred albums that are filled with songs about how they 'slap hoe's and clock doe's'. I just wish there was some way of separating the two because even though I'm opened minded I can't stand hearing artists bash women and promote violence. I am sure the conscience section would be small but it would be full of music 'that i think' and many others would consider worthwhile to listen to. This isn't far fetched, a lot of stores actually do this...and it has increased sales because people like me keep coming back. I'm not defending anything, just re-stating what I meant. I categorize my music collection by genres. Music is music, but sometimes I might be in the mood to listen to rock, maybe punk, maybe hip-hop, country, electronica, folk etc. I think they all create/enhance similar but different mood's. Genres are good for some things either than sales. In my sections at home I might have a rock section but many different categories. My record collection is f'en huge and listing them in alphabetical order would only get me confused because I always forget band names. " id="23125">Icis, you said "...there is no way that I wanna be anywhere near music that I think is somewhat opposite to mine..." Why? hey, good point. I take that back and blush. That was a dumb thing to say(or a bad way to word what I was trying to get across). 'that I think' could be confusing. I didn't mean a style of music but an attitude. It's like putting a Satanists album next to a Christians just because they both make rock music. It would be nice if they had some sore of attitude listing because there's just some shit I'm so sick of hearing when trying to find good music. Ex)looking for some hip-hop I might be looking for an artist that is deep & conscience but come across a hundred albums that are filled with songs about how they 'slap hoe's and clock doe's'. I just wish there was some way of separating the two because even though I'm opened minded I can't stand hearing artists bash women and promote violence. I am sure the conscience section would be small but it would be full of music 'that i think' and many others would consider worthwhile to listen to. This isn't far fetched, a lot of stores actually do this...and it has increased sales because people like me keep coming back. I'm not defending anything, just re-stating what I meant. I categorize my music collection by genres. Music is music, but sometimes I might be in the mood to listen to rock, maybe punk, maybe hip-hop, country, electronica, folk etc. I think they all create/enhance similar but different mood's. Genres are good for some things either than sales. In my sections at home I might have a rock section but many different categories. My record collection is f'en huge and listing them in alphabetical order would only get me confused because I always forget band names.
icisnizz	Date: October 11, 2002 @ 8:58 AM sorry for the long ass posts, this topic interests me.
theguppykillers	Date: October 11, 2002 @ 9:02 AM the only thing I dont like is if some one wanted to come here and listen to heavy metal they would have to dig for it instead of just going to metal.
milladrive	Date: October 11, 2002 @ 10:01 AM Whoa. Cryxan, I don't think I could've said it better.
mcarp555	Date: October 11, 2002 @ 11:13 AM Funny how in the end, it all comes down to this: Music we like is 'good', music we don't like is 'not good'. Those are the only catagories in our heads, no matter how we arrange them on a shelf.
leflaw	Date: October 11, 2002 @ 12:21 PM We are recoding the site to make it clear genres are multiple and cross sectional ( the same track may appear under reggae and alternative and world, for example
GrooveTonic	Date: October 11, 2002 @ 12:57 PM nice
icisnizz	Date: October 11, 2002 @ 1:24 PM sweet
theguppykillers	Date: October 11, 2002 @ 1:49 PM this should be interesting. I am on sites like this where you can choose what gen it is. it's pretty cool.
mtbatol	Date: October 11, 2002 @ 3:57 PM " id="23149"> Yeah Icis brought up a few good points. It's funny though how in hip-hop there are a bunch of subgenres such as "old school" "gangsta" "conscience" (or as some people like to call "backpacker" rap ) "abstract", "DJ" and whatever sounds very damn different from the original idea and concept of hip-hop just toss it aside as "trip-hop" . While it'll be a tiresome task for the staff to do the work themselves it would be nice if they give the artist the freedom to define themselves using some of those preset definitions and if possible throw themselves up in more then one catagory since holding one person to one genre or in this case style of rapping can make one feel kind of claustophobic (sp¿) (the same way someone like Nas is gangsta one moment and the next is a conscience MC). Just my two cents n five pesos of me freestylin my thoughts... meeh
milladrive	Date: October 11, 2002 @ 4:02 PM That's very true, carpie. Very true. Isn't it interesting how two completely separated discussions can go on in the same thread? Fascinating.
icisnizz	Date: October 11, 2002 @ 5:07 PM haha...sorry milla. 'backpacker' sounds good to me. Now back to the topic. Genres suck!
milladrive	Date: October 11, 2002 @ 5:12 PM lol
Fenderbenders	Date: October 11, 2002 @ 5:18 PM having the same artist scattered in diff gens or, the songs?
leflaw	Date: October 11, 2002 @ 8:22 PM Fender: The Songs and the artists, if thats the way the artists feels. Your stuff could be in Bluegrass, Country, World, Alternative, and dance (square, that is)
Fenderbenders	Date: October 11, 2002 @ 8:53 PM ahh, ok, leflaw. I see what you mean.
ebjcoat	Date: October 11, 2002 @ 11:44 PM oh, man genres suck my ass! there are so many different genres of techno, it makes me want to puke!
icisnizz	Date: October 12, 2002 @ 7:34 AM hmmm, there's ambient house techno drum n bass trip-hop breakbeats trance hard trance progressive trance jungle Electro Eurodance Garage Hardcore House Funky House Illbient Industrial just to name a few
ABG	Date: October 12, 2002 @ 2:00 PM you forgot my favourite genres too! Ambient D'n'B (sub genre of DnB), and Melodic Trance (sub genre of Trance). And don't forget about Hard House (sub genre of House) and Intelligent Techno, or Abstract either ;p
mtbatol	Date: October 12, 2002 @ 6:04 PM Yup... techno is definately the most confusing out of all the genres
icisnizz	Date: October 12, 2002 @ 9:27 PM haha...I said 'just a few'. Fingers got sore. 'Intelligent Techno', is this really needed, shouldn't the listener decide that?
pog	Date: October 12, 2002 @ 9:48 PM Isn't ther like 4 subgenre's for drum and bass - Jungle, Dark, Trip-hop, and happy hardcore ?? Then there's the time we plugged a coverband I was in as 60s-90's rock (implying old hard rockin bands), and when we got hired, one group expected rock around the clock sorta songs
theguppykillers	Date: October 12, 2002 @ 11:31 PM and also I have noticed that dmusic has the least amount of generations. go to some different sites and see. it is already narrowed down on dmusic and I think it's fine the way it is. other sites have some where around 20 different versions of rock,hip hop and so on and so on. thats over doing it.
icisnizz	Date: October 13, 2002 @ 12:22 AM I think the greater number of uploads of a certain genre should mean more sub-genres. Especially battle rap. That should be in a separate category altogether. I realize that 'battling' is a big part of hip-hop and probably where it's roots lye but it's elevated into something much more. Battling in general should be left as freestyle not written or recorded for that matter. That's the one sub-genre I'd like to see is 'battle crap' because it's not music, it's ego bla's. Battling is an art form in itself but you need to do it face to face or else it looses its integrity.
midob	Date: October 13, 2002 @ 9:53 AM http://www.mp3.com/midob" id="23300">True! I've been making music for almost two years now.. and STILL I wouldn't call myself Hip Hop or R&B (which is what I was aiming at!) So I just decided to call it "HIP-POP"! And quite frankly this is the category I think my music falls in. It's a crossbreed!! There's nothing else you can call it. http://www.mp3.com/midob
mracky	Date: October 15, 2002 @ 1:48 PM " id="23450">new genre sighting: NYTimes reported today of a new genre, electroclash, which "borrow heavily from 1980's hits, with synthesizer bass lines, simple beats and deadpan vocals."
NeoFlash	Date: October 15, 2002 @ 4:37 PM Usually I'd have more to say, but some music needs sub genres. rap good music -useless makes no sense talentless sh*t pop, r&b -good music -sluts with practically nothing on that sound like hos rock - good music - people screaming senselessy Now who can guess which ones the R.I.A.A. supports. yes, genres do suck. There aree many different types of classical music, rap music, rock music, etc. When I listen to music I never look by genre, never. Because I know I will have shose the wrong one for the songs I want.
dach	Date: October 22, 2002 @ 4:45 PM Okay, I digress, but you get my point right?" id="24070">OK so genres have their pros, but maybe the problem comes in when we ask how msicians have been classified. Is there a difference between the musical styles of B2K, Backstreet Boys, IMX, and NSYNC? Of course there is. What is it? Well ... uh ... B2K and IMX are black and Backstreet Boys and Nsync are white. So B2K and IMX are R+B and Backstreet Boys and Nsync are pop. Duh! I have a friend who "just doesn't like rock." Has she listened with an open mind to every rock musician in the world and failed to find something she liked? Or does she know that the mojority of rock musicians are white (at least the ones you see on MTV) and, feeling insecure about her herritage, feel that she can't 'be black' unless she listens to music by black people? Okay, I digress, but you get my point right?
shoshidge	Date: October 23, 2002 @ 1:15 AM The song follows an AABA song form with an extended middle section for guitar and organ improvisations. The lyrics are more of a chant, praising the virtues of forgetting your worries and gyrating your buttocks in time with the music. The vocal melody is puntuated with unison horn lines." Or I could say it's a funk song. Sure genres are imperfect, most generalisations are but that doesn't make them any less necessary. Genres are especially effective descriptive tools when combined, jazz-funk, psychedelic blues rock, etc. In regards to techno, that music is evolving so quickly that one needs to 'genre-fy' it in order to distinguish the sujective good from the bad. For example, we will use my tastes. I know right away that I don't like anything labeled 'hard-core' or 'electro'. For the most part, i don't enjoy 'drum n' bass, 'jungle' or 'trance', although there are exceptions. Anything labeled minimal, IDM, jazzy house, nu-jazz or broken beat will probably appeal to me. Adding the sub-genres "jazzy" or "dub" increase the likelihood of me liking the track. If it wasn't for the genres, I would not be able to figure out where to look for the music I like, especially because the makers of techno are notorious for being frustratingly minimal in their promotion and packaging. It's not like in the jazz days when the artist's life story was in the liner notes on the back, even techno websites often don't tell you shit. Some bands and artists transcend genres, they ARE genres, but that leaves the rest of the more conventional music still needing a way to quickly identify itself." id="24115">Genres exist as a way of summarizing musical styles as a way of saving time and breath. If i was trying to describe a funk song to someone who had not heard it I could say... " The song is about four minutes long. It features two guitars, drums, bass, hammond organ, vocalists and a horn section. The musical style is an evolved form of American black folk music, amplified and played to a slightly swung 4/4 beat at about 120 beats per minute to facilitate dancing. The bass and drums emphasize beat one, the guitar plays a syncopated repeatative rhythm line and the organ plays long chords. The song follows an AABA song form with an extended middle section for guitar and organ improvisations. The lyrics are more of a chant, praising the virtues of forgetting your worries and gyrating your buttocks in time with the music. The vocal melody is puntuated with unison horn lines." Or I could say it's a funk song. Sure genres are imperfect, most generalisations are but that doesn't make them any less necessary. Genres are especially effective descriptive tools when combined, jazz-funk, psychedelic blues rock, etc. In regards to techno, that music is evolving so quickly that one needs to 'genre-fy' it in order to distinguish the sujective good from the bad. For example, we will use my tastes. I know right away that I don't like anything labeled 'hard-core' or 'electro'. For the most part, i don't enjoy 'drum n' bass, 'jungle' or 'trance', although there are exceptions. Anything labeled minimal, IDM, jazzy house, nu-jazz or broken beat will probably appeal to me. Adding the sub-genres "jazzy" or "dub" increase the likelihood of me liking the track. If it wasn't for the genres, I would not be able to figure out where to look for the music I like, especially because the makers of techno are notorious for being frustratingly minimal in their promotion and packaging. It's not like in the jazz days when the artist's life story was in the liner notes on the back, even techno websites often don't tell you shit. Some bands and artists transcend genres, they ARE genres, but that leaves the rest of the more conventional music still needing a way to quickly identify itself.
implicit	Date: October 23, 2002 @ 6:14 PM mp3.com all the time, since it's hard enough trying to force fit a given song into [b]any[/b] genre hierarchy no matter how much you expand it. How about this for an idea: let the listeners vote on genre. God knows I have no idea, someone please tell me! But please, from what I've read so far this site is supposed to be about freedom and letting artists get their music out without being forced into a system. I understand that classifications can make things easier for listener (which is why it's the listeners that should ulimately decide them), but I really don't want to do what mracky does and split my personality. I'm already mentally fragmented enough as it is, and I don't want to limit myself to two genres either!" id="24225">Aaah! I just found this site, registered, and this thread caught my eye on my way over to upload songs. What do you mean I can't pick a genre for each song??!??! That sucks even worse than genres! I have very few songs that fall into the same genre as any other of my songs, and absolutely no overarching theme that I can pick as my "artist" genre. I bitch about it on mp3.com all the time, since it's hard enough trying to force fit a given song into any genre hierarchy no matter how much you expand it. How about this for an idea: let the listeners vote on genre. God knows I have no idea, someone please tell me! But please, from what I've read so far this site is supposed to be about freedom and letting artists get their music out without being forced into a system. I understand that classifications can make things easier for listener (which is why it's the listeners that should ulimately decide them), but I really don't want to do what mracky does and split my personality. I'm already mentally fragmented enough as it is, and I don't want to limit myself to two genres either!
Fenderbenders	Date: October 23, 2002 @ 6:36 PM Although my music would be country I am more bluegrass than country and bluegrass IS a stand alone genre (mho)
mtbatol	Date: October 23, 2002 @ 8:47 PM Dammit, I had something really important to say!!! It was about.. ummmm.... ooh who cares, I forgot because of all the excitement of nabbing post #100
RandomToxy	Date: November 1, 2002 @ 7:50 PM Yes genres suck, but imagine an internet full of 'music' lists, and no clues as to what you're about to stream. I'd climb over a hundred country/rock tracks to get to one 'electronica' track if I had to. But I'd rather not. A lot of the genres that get us all so wound up are just filing really. God I hate my office job. I am truly sorry for this insight.
RandomToxy	Date: November 1, 2002 @ 7:52 PM http://random-toxy.dmusic.com/" id="24985">102 - my luck number. I do like my logo. check my sounds at http://random-toxy.dmusic.com/

~~Previous 100~~

Page: [ 1 2 ]

Next 100

Post A Reply
From:	guest	(Icons - Linking)
Post: