It seems (and it is not a problem) that there is always an eternal debate as to what style an artist plays in, be it the unfair perception of, say, Sonic Youth as mere noise rock merchants, or certain fringes of indie rock bands that have a pop edge to them being deemed as proper pop songwriters. It is a common thing that happens constantly, and it is only normal for people being confused by the constant contexualization that music in general is subjected to by the scribblers of this world, both on paper and on the internet. Do you generally attribute the right style to an artist, or are you just happy to be fed vague information without questioning it? Poll on the way.

Rant baby, rant.

[ALIEN ANAL]

how do we know whats right?

[PAULYBEE2656]

fuck art, lets dance....

there are 2 genres of importance..
good music and bad music. sit on the fence maybe but im not gonna break my neck trying to jump over it!

[nicfit]

I can distinguish just things i like and things I don't (which is probably a different thing from the "good music/bad music" distinction).
I mainly "label" stuff as pop if it's something I'd put on at a party.
Lots of stuff fits in the category.

Originally Posted by ALIEN ANAL

how do we know whats right?

Can you tell the difference from jazz to classical? Would you instantly describe the music of Mingus to someone as being pop? The other day this bloke told me that he loves Hip Hop and then mentioned Why? and a whole batch of names from the Anticon label. They aren't what I'd call Hip Hop to me, but he seemed to think that those names are what 'alternative' Hip Hop is all about.

How many times have you read posts on here that confuse noise for drone or vice versa?

[nicfit]

Originally Posted by sarramkrop

The other day this bloke told me that he loves Hip Hop and then mentioned Why?

I love why? I think he's a wonderful pop songs songwriter

Originally Posted by Nefeli

that hurt.


seriously, its not the end of the world. but it can get tiring since its a music board, we talk about music (too). what is really tiring, is the repetition combined with the unwillingness to learn.

Sure, that's why my initial post says that it is not a problem because it's a phenomenon that's never going to go away. Like you say, it is only the internet. What sometimes I find irritating is arrogance applied to poor knowledge. That happens both on the internet and elsewhere.

Originally Posted by nicfit

I love why? I think he's a wonderful pop songs songwriter

Good for you, I don't. I wasn't referring to my liking or disliking of Why?. I just don't consider that stuff to be hip hop, that's all.

[sonicl]

I'm not terribly good at distinguishing styles at a micro level, but it's not something that really bothers me. If other people want to compartmentalise music in that way, fine, but to me it's just music, and some of it I like and some I don't.

To carry on with the earlier example, noise and drone can be fairly difficult to tell apart to the non-afficianado, but with most genres you're going to find some blurring of the boundaries, aren't you? That's the whole point of the game, it stops us from getting stale.

[sonicl]

I agree with you Nefeli, but it is very easy to slip over from the divide between noise and drone just by the use of something as simple as frequencies. A drone at a harsh frequency has more in common with noise (to me) than with drone.

I'm thinking of Yellow Swans, by the way, if it helps to specify that.

[pantophobia]

when asked about musical tastes i tend to start babbling in a frequency that only mice and metalux can decipher, I hate being put on the spot of trying to describe music to people who like seether, green day, and have them look like umm ok "you're talking shit i have no idea or interest about",

the only thing i seem to think to distinguish is if they are real or fake

i think labels are best for canned food and personal assignment

Originally Posted by Nefeli

what i find completely pointless and really puts me off is to state the obvious. however i will now by saying that people shouldnt take it personally for example things said like your initial post. i see things like this said especially by you, as an alert, a reminder and a trigger to do smth on the related subject each time. many times people see it as an attack.
anywayz thats all and i better push enter now, before i break completely my work phone.

Yep, that's another good point. When someone points out the obvious in a humble manner, though, I don't mind at all because they are not being an annoying and misinformed prick. Let's keep in mind that this is all connected to the realms of an internet messageboard, and purely on a musical level, not a personal one. It is also true that music sparks the sort of passionate discussions normally reserved for politics, sports, money and sex. I generally dismiss continuous personal internet attacks by making even more fun of the attacker. One concept that I can't get my head around is 'internet bullying'. I can understand a 10 year old being offended by what they might read on some site, but an adult? Anyway, there are definite ways to describe music, the whole concept of good and bad music is another thing altogether and it lends itself more to notions of personal taste.

[andrei]

Like Nefely said music should be loved for personal reasons, not collective. A more complex band like SY is perceived by three different persons in three different different ways, and a generalization can ruin the interest for 2 of the 3 persons. Many times i avoided an artist because of it's tag, so why should i care about distinguishing different styles. Of course, the is a bridge between, let's say, Jazz and Hip-hop, but not to much to care about Math-Rock, Post-Rock, Garage-Rock Revival or any other stupid related term.
This morning i listened to many of Jim O'Rourke's recordings. How can this guy can be described in one word?

[nicfit]

genius .

Originally Posted by andrei

Like Nefely said music should be loved for personal reasons, not collective.

I totally disagree with this. So what would you make of the way certain traditional folk pieces are perceived in any given country? You're only mentioning styles of rock that aren't even that particularly complex and are tagged in a lazy way. The prefix math was put in front of rock to describe music that is more staccato-like in nature, even though there is very little of the complexity of calculations in most of its exponents (just a personal opinion). A lot of it sounds like soporiphic and slightly more lo-fi progressive rock, or better still, progressive rock ashamed of its own status. There is terminology that is there for a reason. Sub-genres, like you call them, are only variations of any given style. Garage rock is a good example in that it is such a formulaic style of rock that sometimes borrows from other genres (arabic scales, cacophony etc), still mantaining its garage rock stance. I am not saying that all music can be caged under the same umbrella that easily, but there is, mostly, a correct way to describe music even if it's not with a single term.

[Everyneurotic]

sorry but i have to say it...

the only one who should care about genres are label's marketing and sales people.

i use genres as a very general description "it's jazz but it's noisy and aggressive, it's free jazz!" stuff like that.

chances are, your definition of one subgenre is going to conflict with another one's definition. unless it's metal or power electronics, which invariably leads to bands that sound exactly the same.

Would you explain to me why you care to write about music, then? Metal and power electronics don't all sound the same to me.

[Everyneurotic]

let me explain.

to me ("TO ME") a genre is defined by common general characteristics in sound and style that are later to be taken into the hands of an artist for him to make sense out of it and give his/her own interpretation of it. but, once these genres are redefined into smaller categorizations (it doesn't help to be commercially successful), boundaries are erected and people are less willing to express themselves artistically and try more to belong to a certain group and be accepted.

like metal; sure, i'm the first one to say "not all metal is dumb and the same", but once you go into subgenres like death metal, you have thousands of bands who play an invariable style; granted there are artistic innovators that go one up and dare do something different (cryptopsy, and dissection to give you two examples) but then again, someone (probably journalists) gives it another name like "blackened death metal" or "brutal death metal" and there you have hundreds of bands trying to figure out how to not infringe copyright laws and still sound like the bands they try to copy. so why bother with something like "blackened death metal"? chances are, i'm going to steer away from something like that after hearing a couple of lame bands defining themselves that way and perhaps missing out on a band who are actually pushing the limits or are just plain good at what they do.

and that can be applied to a bunch of genres/styles/whathaveyou.

and power electronics, of course not everything sounds the same, listen to whitehouse then grunt and well they hardly sound alike, but there are elements to that style that are invariable like the synth tones and the
distorted mic screaming, it's not like there are guitar based p.e. bands...hell! there's people who debate whether a band is p.e. if the lyrical content (alone) is not about mysogeny, racism, violence, etc!