quote:

Originally posted by JGlass:

quote:

Originally posted by FragileKidA:
Good luck on your critiquing of music, don’t let a belittling, rude and tactless person tell you otherwise, you are on your way.

I think his shenanigans are cute.

What's the name of that restaurant you like with all the goofy shit on the walls and the mozzarella sticks?

Who do you think you are, bringing up Super Troopers when the adults are trying to have a serious discussion.

quote:

Originally posted by Maximum Jack:
My question may have gotten lost in the shuffle:

quote:

Originally posted by Maximum Jack:
So what are the "real" genres?

Not sure myself, since all of the "fake" genres listed by Scott I would consider "real" genres. Yeah, "indie" music means independent music, which means independent labels. But indie rock, indie pop, etc are valid genres since they describe a loose style of music.

Alternative, emo, electronica describe pretty broad styles of music, but are still useful for those not familiar with a particular band or sub-genre. Its all pretty subjective and open to debate. I mean, if we describe a band as shoegaze here, most of us will have a general idea of what to expect but anyone unfamiliar with shoegaze will just be scratching their heads. I personally think nu-gaze is the stupidest genre, but thats mainly because theres no need to differentiate between new bands playing shoegaze and older bands like MBV or Slowdive. Especially with so many negative connotations with the term "nu".

Not really sure what his problem is with ambient, unless its a problem with that style of music rather than what its called.

quote:

Originally posted by Maximum Jack:
So what are the "real" genres?

Well, technically, if I were to state what I really feel. I sort of agree with Borachon. Genres don't exist. I mean what defines "Pop" and before the 1930's wasn't "Rock" just a rock? And "Rap" is a lyrical style, not really a genre. But I digress on that subject.

On my iTunes, there exists only 10 Genres, these are in no way the be-all end -all for me. In fact, my category names are pretty broad in themselves.

Rock (for classic and soft rock)
Alternative Rock (for new and "genere bending" rock)
Punk Rock
Comedy (for funny songs)
Electronica/Dance (This includes "Trance" and "Rave" music)
Hip-Hop/Rap
Pop
World (my "Other" category)
Soundtrack (only because I have alot of soundtracks and I like to keep musics on the same CD in the same genre)
Poser (for bands that I don't care for [this is not a real genre, it's a label])

I file all CDs onto one of these genres. It's not always easy though.

In response to your question though MJ, I think "real" genres are whatever people want. I just made this thread for people to share genres they feel are false and for others to try to defend them.

In essence, the same reason all threads on this forum are created:
To make good conversation.

quote:

Originally posted by ScotttheStorm:
I... agree with Borachon. Genres don't exist.

Ha! I knew it... the day after Chamberk conceded a point to me and someone else (Peewee I think) said I was right in another thread, it appears acceptance of my word is spreading!

Sorry... was that too Hudson-like in terms of self-aggrandisement? Please don't start a poll!

"Genres don't exist" reminds me of the recent South Park episode Imaginationland, where Terrorists were attacking us "in our imaginations". At one point Stan said "Santa Claus and Luke Skywalker have had more impact on the world than all of us... doesn't that mean they're more real than us?". Perhaps the same could be said of genres...

...sorry, sleep deprived over here.

I guess you don't like "Country"?

I have 59 genres on my iTunes (no, I won't list them), but like you I usually alter the genre when I don't like the iTunes default genre. I have some very specific categories such as "Ska Revival" (not to be confused with "Reggae" or "Ska" or "Third Wave Ska"), "Brit-Pop", "C-86", "Garage", "Heavy Metal", "Hardcore", "Proto-Punk", "Post-Punk/No Wave", "Power Pop", "Psych Folk" and "Bluegrass" just to name a few. Why so many? Because I'm a music nerd. I don't get mad at anyone who doesn't adhere to my genres though, and I realize that many of those "genres" could fall into either the generic "Rock" or "Alternative & Punk" categories, but that is so boring to me.

BTW StS, you never clarified. Does Ambient Music piss you off or does the fact that some people consider it a viable genre piss you off?

quote:

Originally posted by Maximum Jack:
I guess you don't like "Country"?

I have 59 genres on my iTunes (no, I won't list them), but like you I usually alter the genre when I don't like the iTunes default genre. I have some very specific categories such as "Ska Revival" (not to be confused with "Reggae" or "Ska" or "Third Wave Ska"), "Brit-Pop", "C-86", "Garage", "Heavy Metal", "Hardcore", "Proto-Punk", "Post-Punk/No Wave", "Power Pop", "Psych Folk" and "Bluegrass" just to name a few. Why so many? Because I'm a music nerd. I don't get mad at anyone who doesn't adhere to my genres though, and I realize that many of those "genres" could fall into either the generic "Rock" or "Alternative & Punk" categories, but that is so boring to me.

BTW StS, you never clarified. Does Ambient Music piss you off or does the fact that some people consider it a viable genre piss you off?

Well, to answer your question, it pisses me off as a viable genre. Most of what I've heard of ambient music is as if someone went outside with a microphone and placed it up to things that made noises and spliced it together.

And, your right, I don't really listen to Country, I don't have any country CDs. But that doesn't mean I don't like it, it just all exists under my Soundtrack and Rock genres (The only country CD I do have is Country-Rock and my friends would take the piss out of me if they saw "Country" as one of my genres on iTunes, It sucks being a teen in California, your not allowed to like some stuff).

quote:

Originally posted by ScotttheStorm:
Well, to answer your question, it pisses me off as a viable genre. Most of what I've heard of ambient music is as if someone went outside with a microphone and placed it up to things that made noises and spliced it together.

But you do realize that some people enjoy it, right? So if someone liked Brian Eno's Music for Airports and went to a record store to try to buy something that sounded similar, they could use the term "Ambient" and they wouldn't walk out the door with Atari Teenage Riot.

quote:

Originally posted by FragileKidA:
And I am being completely serious when I ask but, what is “IRL”?

IRL = in real life. Sorry, I make an effort not to write foolish acronyms, but sometimes I fail. Heh.

quote:

Originally posted by FragileKidA:
Just the other day someone said they were listening to “drone rock,” what the heck is that?

That was me.

Sup.

Use the resources available to you or be subject to ridicule. This isn't hard and it's something you should have learned by now as a good Netizen. You know where to look this stuff up.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drone_music

I typed up something really cathartic and confrontational in response to your other points. I deleted it because I like you, Frag, but I'm getting seriously annoyed with you on these matters.

Why does it bother you so goddamn much when people use genres? Sheesh, you'd think shoegaze killed your parents or noise punk ran over your dog. I agree with JGlass here.

quote:

Originally posted by FragileKidA:
They want to get all definite and supreme when it comes to this kind of stuff. I just think, “Man, get over yourself.” These are people that take themselves too seriously I suppose. All I know is that I like a lot of different styles of music and maybe I don’t know the exact, definite, final genre for each album I own but then again, so what?

We also eat babies. You forgot that part.

I don't know anyone who quibbles with you not defining everything you own in microgenres. I know two people who think you're kinda dumb for using "Techno". That's it. Would you like to point out exactly where the horrible genre Nazis are harassing you and treating you like a second class member of Metacritic? Because I've missed that.

Shoegazing too long will untie the laces of your mind, man.

Did I precipitate this discussion or what?

Me one day before this discussion started:

quote:

Also, having a higher requirement might unfairly exclude albums that aren't pop/rock and therefore get less reviews. This is simply because there are fewer publications covering that type of music. This might include albums in the electronica 'genre', which seem to be dominating the best of list this year. Maybe it would be more useful to have the lists by genre. However, that would open up a completely different Pandora's box, especially given MC members tenacious opinions about genrefication Smiler.

Also, this has probably been linked to before but because I don't have anything else valuable to offer to this already dead discussion:

http://www.somethingawful.com/d/your-band-sucks/your-genre-sucks.php
and the follow-up:
http://www.somethingawful.com/d/your-band-sucks/your-genre-sucks-2.php

hehehe... fantasy death metal.

the only "genres" i dislike would be emo, alternative, and indie, because they do not describe the actual music at all. if a friend tells me that this new band he likes is 'emo', i have no idea what the hell that means. their music could be like Dashboard Confessional or like The Used or anywhere in between. the same goes for indie...

more specific genres are at least useful, even if they are a bit arbitrary.

i actually have no genre labels on my itunes, i find it to be much more work than its worth to try to categorise so many musicians. i tried once and gave up when i reached beck.

quote:

Originally posted by Dork:

quote:

Originally posted by FragileKidA:
Just the other day someone said they were listening to “drone rock,” what the heck is that?

That was me.

Sup.

Use the resources available to you or be subject to ridicule. This isn't hard and it's something you should have learned by now as a good Netizen. You know where to look this stuff up.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drone_music

I typed up something really cathartic and confrontational in response to your other points. I deleted it because I like you, Frag, but I'm getting seriously annoyed with you on these matters.

Why does it bother you so goddamn much when people use genres? Sheesh, you'd think shoegaze killed your parents or noise punk ran over your dog. I agree with JGlass here.

quote:

Originally posted by FragileKidA:
They want to get all definite and supreme when it comes to this kind of stuff. I just think, “Man, get over yourself.” These are people that take themselves too seriously I suppose. All I know is that I like a lot of different styles of music and maybe I don’t know the exact, definite, final genre for each album I own but then again, so what?

We also eat babies. You forgot that part.

I don't know anyone who quibbles with you not defining everything you own in microgenres. I know two people who think you're kinda dumb for using "Techno". That's it. Would you like to point out exactly where the horrible genre Nazis are harassing you and treating you like a second class member of Metacritic? Because I've missed that.

My overall point was that there are too many people who want to have a genre for every dang thing. If you feel the need to, then that is fine, I don’t care. I don’t have a problem with so many sub-genres—they seem pointless to me—but I don’t care. If you think it is so important to know that X band is “dreamy ambient, instrumental post-rock” then good for you. However, not everyone is like that. And yes, I do feel like the few people who are “Genre Nazis” tend to think they are simply superior because they have classifications for them. For example, these two people that think I am dumb for using “techno”—good for them. If they get a kick out of calling me dumb because I said something was “experimental techno”—even if that was what allmusic said—then good for them. I don’t think I am better than any of them because I choose not to be so definite, I just don’t care.

As for not being a good “Netizen” (that’s not a word!)—my bad. So I’m not hip with the cool, new internet lingo, oh well. I have no problem asking people for clarification because 1)I should be able to, 2)I really don’t know what it means and 3)I didn’t think it be a problem. By the way, I didn’t bother to read your wiki link so I might ask again, sorry!

quote:

Originally posted by FragileKidA:
My overall point was that there are too many people who want to have a genre for every dang thing. If you feel the need to, then that is fine, I don’t care. I don’t have a problem with so many sub-genres—they seem pointless to me—but I don’t care. If you think it is so important to know that X band is “dreamy ambient, instrumental post-rock” then good for you. However, not everyone is like that. And yes, I do feel like the few people who are “Genre Nazis” tend to think they are simply superior because they have classifications for them. For example, these two people that think I am dumb for using “techno”—good for them. If they get a kick out of calling me dumb because I said something was “experimental techno”—even if that was what allmusic said—then good for them. I don’t think I am better than any of them because I choose not to be so definite, I just don’t care.

If you didn't care you wouldn't be posting when you're obviously pissed off and then punctuating your posts with "I don't care!" If you really did not give a damn about microgenres and the people who use them you would not have even posted about them in this thread. Something about the whole mess clearly bothers you.

FYI, assuming that everyone who argues with you about "techno" has a superiority complex is pretty judgmental and uncharitable, not to mention a fairly inaccurate generalization. (Mike would also have a few words with you about it on one of his less-relaxed days.) I thought I knew you better than that.

quote:

Originally posted by FragileKidA:
As for not being a good “Netizen” (that’s not a word!)—my bad. So I’m not hip with the cool, new internet lingo, oh well. I have no problem asking people for clarification because 1)I should be able to, 2)I really don’t know what it means and 3)I didn’t think it be a problem. By the way, I didn’t bother to read your wiki link so I might ask again, sorry!

Intelligence is not knowing everything in the world. It's knowing who to ask and where to find out. You are dismissing genres about which you know absolutely nothing, i.e. your immediate bashing of "drone rock" when you don't even know what it means. Once you know what it means, I have no problem with you coming to me and saying you'd rather not use it. Or hell, do not look it up and simply live a happy life neither exploring its encyclopedia-defined boundaries nor dismissing it outright. But you ought to know what you're talking about if you're going to talk about it.

You should be a smart enough cookie to know where to find this information. If not, I've misjudged you and I apologize. I do think you're bright enough to figure this stuff out on your own. It's not hard.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=netizen

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Dork,

I'm in a pretty shitty (that rhymes!) mood at the moment, so I'm probably going to put too much time into this post of which I have no point.

Genres are shit. Language blows. Genres are words we use in order to put bands that sound similar or have similar influences into some category together. It's flawed logic, though. It's us, people, trying to describe the sounds that we here using abstract words that have no meaning beyond what we give them. If we wanted to be absolutely formal about it, maybe we should just put every band into it's own genre, or it's own time period. Actually, I'm not all that opposed to genres, I'm pretty apathetic to the concept, to be perfectly honest. If we are going to put Nirvana, Pearl Jam, and Soundgardent under "Grunge" it isn't that big a deal. When a genre is used to describe a particular movement in music it should be fine (Grunge, Acid House, Psy-Trance) but the problem comes when we try to associate musicians with each other using influence and style as the genres. Consider this, the all inclusive supergenre of "Rock" can describe pretty much anything with drums and a guitar. Then, you have more genres created to put Carcass and Cryptopsy, which could most certainly be consider rock, into the category of death metal. It all seems really redundant (Hooray for alliteration!) to me.

Techno...This ones is hard for me. "Techno" that was stolen by the media and now everybody who isn't familiar with electronic music decides to describe it all as "Techno." What's actually in the genre, is pretty debatable, but the general concept is that it's simple dance music. In general, I think that electronic music has too many genres that don't really mean anything because they were created hapharzadly by people who deem it necessary for anything that sounds remotely different than the norm to be in it's own genre (although a lot of electronic's subgenres have to do with particularly movements.)

I'm not really sure I have a point. If I do have a point, would somebody mind making it for me?

Oh and your "Netizen" defense was pretty weak, Dork. I mean the page you link had a link to the word "Netherboob".

I hate to ask, but do these same arguments apply for movie genres?

quote:

Originally posted by /\/\1X3:
I'm not really sure I have a point. If I do have a point, would somebody mind making it for me?

Something along the lines of:

"Writing about music is like dancing about architecture." ~ Frank Zappa

Also... for the picky ones amongst us.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Dork,

Working at HMV got me genre obsessed. I don't work there anymore, but I still see the damage it has done to me -,_ -.