you had your jazz, you had your pop, you had your rock, you had your country, you had your rap, folk, classical, dance, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera...
nowadays, though...oh my.
it seems that the list of sub-genres in the music industry keep getting longer and longer nd longer every single day.
it seems that almost every hour there is a new type of music being fused with other genres to make way to new sub-genres.
it may be getting a wee bit out of hand, perhaps?
i can understand bands that would like to be categorized as being different from others - especially, when they want to differentiate/disassociate
let us look at an example, shall we, to try to put this into some sort of perspective.
say, a new band comes into play...and they have to describe their sound. let's say that they would fall under the rock category.
now, what other category would they also be put under?
rock-pop? punk rock? country rock? electro-rock? prog rock? indie rock? classic rock? glam rock? soft rock?
or say they were a jazz group. what kind of jazz, then would they be? classic jazz, soul jazz, brass band, New Orleans jazz, rhythm & blues...
that is the trouble with genres and music, nowadays - there is just too many genres and sub-genres out there, which makes it even more difficult to place each artist or band into a certain category/genre.
at times though, it will be extremely obvious as to what genre a band would be put into though - like...Britney Spears. definitely pop.
but i am talking mostly about the other musicians out there that usually don't get enough airplay on the radios. bands that are usually unheard of by the general population.
experiment: pick an artist/band/group/whathave
(personally. i wish that music genres would be just simply "good", "bad", "fun", or "terrible".
but then that would bring about a large quantity of debates over subjectivity.
and thus would not work.)
No comments:
Post a Comment