Genres- not worth a lot, are they?

Continuiing a post I took a topic off subject with in the new users forum, I was considering that most genres don't really exist.

Pop for example, or even rock. I can't really define them, I don't believe they are a genre of music.

Most true "rock" cd's take something from many styles of music- in fact, its one of the ways "rock" evolved.

Discuss.

You still rule out hip hop as a genre. I agree though, truely decent bands can take elements from all styles and use it to make good songs. Each genre is broken into subplots though, don't even get me started on Nu Metal. What the was so Nu about it? They spelt badly? That has been done for years.

'Pop' and 'Indie' are definitely misleading as genres. They're abbreviations that have been twisted in genre form by lazy journalists. 'Heavy Metal' makes no sense as a genre any more, as the formula has been diluted too many times, same with 'Dance'. 'Rap' is a vocal style, not a genre...

...Yeah, you're right then. Journos invented them to save on word counts when writing about music. Beyond that, they're too restrictive to do any good for anyone. I'd hate to even attempt to divide my CD collection into 'genre'; it'd be an impossible task.

Agreed, they're usually used in negative ways either A) grouping many artists together to insult them or B) in elitist ways to say that a group of artists someone likes are better than another group, etc...

Then you get invented genres that develop and end up being used even if that were not the original purpose, like Neo Classic Metal for MUSE, although I quite like the name it's kind of obscure and misleading

A good example of this meaninglessness is my iTunes collection - half of The Beatles is in Pop, while the other half is in rock. A similar thing has happened to Incubus. Nirvana is rock, but The Smashing Pumpkins are Alternative/Punk. The Flaming Lips and the Yeah Yeah Yeahs are both in Alternative/Punk. It's all meaningless.

Last time I reordered my Cd's I was going to go by genre.. I ended up changing my mind though, as I wanted all the CD's by the one band next to each other.

Porcupine Tree alone defy genre- their first cd- almost electronica, then dance, prog (or what we know as prog, as progressive music is something that takes music in new directions IMO)...

Hearing terms like "Neo Classical Metal" makes me cringe.

Edit- reminds me, in responding to critism of his bands as "concept album" makers, and "emo", Omar of The Mars Volta and formally at the drive-in responded asking how any album that has taken years to make can not have a concept, and how any music can't have emotion.

< Edited by msenyszak on 2005/4/6 20:03 >

Radiohead have performed a similar feat of genre defying. From UK Grunge to almost electronica to the current bizzarre rock. Though probably very staid and mainstream compared to your oddities, Martin

Well, yeah, but I still really love Radiohead.

Its funny though, apart from Creep, Pablo Honey doesn't have a lot to differentiate itself from other so-called "Indie" bands..

I hate the idea of genres especially as we are seeing groups mixing different styles of music but also as music changes as well as tastes a single song can travel between genres making a mockery of the rules imposed on music.

There are so many mixes of style nowadays in order to generate something fresh that it's entirely pointless to sort artists into groups. To do so just restricts peoples' tastes. If I seperated my CD collection meticulously into genres I'd probably have about 2 in each - it'd be utterly useless.

I have a select choice of personal genres.

Shit, bad, okay, good, great. Those are the only genres you'll ever need.

Can't see you merging rap with real music though.

Gastrian wrote:
I have a select choice of personal genres.

Shit, bad, okay, good, great. Those are the only genres you'll ever need.

I actually have some music in my media player with a genre of 'shite'.

Well I've actually get a genre called 'penis sucker songs'. Mainly backstreet boy stuff.