Talk:Music genre/Archive 1

message: I've removed this paragraph:
:Most music lovers would agree that the quality of music is not in its estetics, it's sound and texture, but rather in the spirit and character that goes into its composition. Because genre classification ignores this important musical principle, it could be argued that it even encourages music of poor quality to be made simply for its esthetic qualities.
What it seems to be saying is that "most music lovers would agree that it doesn't matter what a piece of music sounds like so long as it's been created in the right spirit," - this is probably true in the case of certain live performances (particularly in punk, for example, where attitude counts) but I doubt that "most" music fans feel this way about music in general. --Camembert
----
Hi Camembert. I put that paragraph in. Hmm I think you're right, I went too far with generalizing the opinions of the creative community. But I still think that the fact that genre classification ignores the content of music is still a really valid point, and can be fit in there better. Pema
::Actually, genre by definition pays attention strictly to content and ignores both quality and intent.  That said, most of what's on this page is actually puiblicists' medial labels, rather than genres at all. dunerat 04:33, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Esthetics vs spirit

message: It seems this page is missing some fairly major genres like jazz and Classical Music, for example.  I understand that a complete list of genres isn't here, but these two deserve categories as least as long as "country" and "hip-hop". Will try and add when I get the time. -- Lexor 09:00, 11 Aug 2003 (UTC)
replies: text: I added these two genres, mainly cribbed from those articles just as a "stub" within the article.  Please reword/expand as appropriate. -- Lexor 06:19, 19 Aug 2003 (UTC)
thread_title: Missing Genres

message: Added this because it's probably the most unique type of genre out there.  It's defined by its media, but its not restricted to that.  I could hear a piece of music being played regardless of knowing its origin and be able to say "that sounds like video game music", as much if it tends to have a special melodic and instrumental style.  And yet, video game music has such a wide variety, that it can be described as everything from rock, to jazz, to electronica, to classical, and then some.  It warranted mentioning, but didn't fit anywhere else except in the paragraph at top, wherein genres were described to be vague.
--Kaleb.G 02:26, 2004 Jun 16 (UTC)
I think video game music is defined by being interesting without actually taking up people's attention. I mean, the point is make gaming less boring without taking away from the game.Sir Akroy 20:44, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Video Game Music 

message: As a result of a revert, Jazz has apparently been missing since Sept. 2004.  This is. . . . . embarrassing.  Please triple-check the whole article for differences when you revert, not just the section you want to get rid of.  Soundguy99 05:52, 6 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  PLEASE be careful reverting. . . . 

message: Has somebody seen list of music genres in allmusic.com? They have one of the best thought out categorisation of music genres in my opinion. They first divided all music genres in 2 major categories, namely "Popular" and "Classic" and defined main genres for these 2 categories.
Popular Genres
* Avant-Garde 
* Bluegrass 
* Blues 
* Cajun 
* Celtic 
* Comedy 
* Country 
* Easy Listening 
* Electronica 
* Folk 
* Gospel 
* Jazz 
* Latin 
* New Age 
* R&B 
* Rap 
* Reggae 
* Rock 
* Soundtrack 
* Vocal 
* World 
Classic Genres
* Ballet 
* Band Music 
* Chamber Music 
* Choral Music 
* Concerto 
* Electronic/Avant-Garde/Minimalist Music 
* Film Music 
* Keyboard Music 
* Musical Theater 
* Opera 
* Orchestral Music 
* Symphony 
* Vocal Music
The main genres are further divided in so-called "Styles". For example genre Jazz has the styles "Fusion", "Classic Jazz", "New Orleans Jazz", and many many more. Or the genre "Rock" has the styles "Heavy Metal", "Punk", "Rock & Roll", etc. Some styles can be cross-genre, like "Hip-hop", which can be found in "Rap" and "R&B" for example. I think this is very clever way to categorize music and really makes sense more than the categorization in this "Music Genre" article of Wikipedia.
--193.102.74.18 14:13, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Genres in allmusic.com 

message: In Germany we learn in school the classification of music is divided in 3 kinds i.e. Serious Music (Ernste Musik), Popular Music (Unterhaltungsmusik) and Functional Music (Funktionelle Musik ). 
Serious Music is basically all classical music from all eras.
Popular Music is modern popular music like Jazz, Rock, Electonic etc.
Functional Music is music for certain purposes, events or intentions like hymns (e.g. national hymn), dance music (e.g. Flamenco), elevator music, video game music etc.
:This is most certainly an interesting classification -- I think in North America we don't think so much in terms of 'Functional Music' but definitely the other two. I would argue on pedantic grounds that few genres of music could fit exclusively in one of these classifications. Tango or flamenco music, especially in a multicultural context, could easily fit all three. Just my 2 cents. 
:If classical music is the only "serious music," does that mean everyone else is just kidding around? I find this odd. Where did the trend of calling classical "serious" begin? Would this bear inclusion in the article?
--bleh fu talk fu June 30, 2005 13:53 (UTC)
:PS don't forget to sign your posts! --~~~~ --bleh fu talk fu June 30, 2005 13:54 (UTC)
The commercial pop music world doesn't, PERHAPS, think in terms of functional music.  The background music industry, church music, lounge bands, film composers, new age artists, jingle writers, and others certainly do.  It's just that its UNFASHIONABLE or UNCOOL in the world of popular music for one's music to be seen as functional.  And any bar band that doesn't understand an audience of non-drinkers is undesirable, regardless of the size of the audience, will fail economically because of their lack of understanding of functional music.
In a bigger sense, the article needs to discuss who finds genres useful and who finds them offensive, stifling, etc..  Someone could also add to the Arguments/Advantages section that genres contribute to musical creativity in that it is not uncommon (citations should be easy to find) for artists to deliberately change their music specifically so as to NOT fit into a genre.
re Serious vs Popular - it is my understanding this division has existed for many centuries in the West.  Whether it is more attributable to the Church, the rise of a middle class, or some other factors, I will leave for better historians than I.  Likewise whether other cultures with a long-established classical music (India, Indonesia, Iran/Persia) make the same distinction.
It might also be useful to note that a fair number of non-Western "classical" music genres are deeply rooted in improvisation, and for that matter, much Western Classical music was also, at the time it was created (Bach, Beethoven).
24.17.180.126 20:11, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Classification: Serious, Popular and Functional music 

message: Hey, see here:
http://www.hg11.com/genres_en/music_genres.htm
Who copyed? --212.34.235.44 12:20, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: they will have copied wikipedia; it's all in wikipedia style formatting, and all of wikipedia is gfdl'd anyway --MilkMiruku 00:21, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: who copyed?

message: It would be good to have a more specific discussion of the attributes of the "basic musical language" commonly used to distinguish genres.  This would be interesting in itself, and it would also enable more focussed discussion of particular genres, both in the article itself and on this discussion page. Countersubject 12:42, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Definition of Terms 

message: Hi, am one of the authors of the Tool (band) article, and have been facing some problems and debates during the past about genre definition myself. As I am currently trying to enhance the article, I stumbled upon an idea. There have been many arguments about the categorization of Tool and their fellow "progressive metal" bands. I wondered, if these debates are more common or if this was more of a specialty. IF there was enough material, I pondered we could create an entire article about this issue, which would basically incorporate Music genre#subjectivity and Tool (band)#Arguments about genre and categorization and include material of issues and debates of other musical genres. Then, we could link the main article and present a short summary at the related pages. Considering the debates that occur at many band-related articles because of genre categorisation (besides the nu metal debate, I recall a revert war about "comedy rock" and Tenacious D). After a quick research if there was any material about these discussions, I was able to come up with the following:
world music genre dispute
* a news item at the bbc about BBC Radio 3's first Awards for World Music in 2002
"The awards have also stirred up an ongoing debate about the nature of world music.
Some think it should be conceived as a style like pop or jazz, while others dislike the category - they say it keeps them on the margins without serious respect or attention. " bbc news item "Awards stir world music debate"]
country music's transformation in the 50s
* an essay from 1988 covering the evolving landscape of a well known genre, country music:
"My hope was that I could study the transformation of country music in the 1950s, and demonstrate how mass mediation works to trivialize and homogenize "authentic" culture. But recalcitrance, in Burke's sense, intruded.
What I found, when I went to Nashville, interviewed performers, producers and writers of the period, read the trade and fan magazines, and listened to the music of the time, was not an authentic music ruined by the forces of mass mediation. Instead, I found overwhelming evidence of a symbolic struggle to create a slightly different style of the same genre."
Genre and recalcitrance, Country music's move uptown by Joli Jensen Spring, 1988 University of Texas, Austin
black or urban music dispute
* a coverage of "debates at London’s City University with a debate entitled ‘Black Music Or Urban Music?" from 2004
"The Black Music Congress celebrated its second anniversary of organising debates at London’s City University with a debate entitled ‘Black Music Or Urban Music?’ on Saturday May 22. With the Prince’s Trust’s Urban Music Festival (see BBM/BMC’s open letter) having taken place a couple of weeks prior, the term urban music had been pushed further into the mainstream, and this added to an exciting debate." The Genre Report: Is It Black Music Or Urban Music? by BritishBlackMusic.com or Black Music Congress
:* another bbc news item quoting joss stone about the term "urban music" dated 11 February, 2005:
:"I'm not really comfortable with the word urban. It's a word that's been manufactured in this country and America to describe black music. The word urban seems to cover such a broad range of black music that it's wrong." Brits debate over 'urban' music
I propose writing a new article — Music genre debates — that covers some of these debates. I would begin with the "black music" or "urban music" and the progressive metal debate (incl. the pieces of information from the Tool article). Any thoughts? --Johnnyw 00:35, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: i'd argue that it's not really nessacery to have a new article about it. one would normally class a band or artist by the style that the majority of their tracks are closest to although it's very much possible for bands/artists to span more than one genre (which should be obvious ;). world music and urban music are umbrella terms and disputes about what they refer to should be delt with on their respective article pages. reading comedy rock, it's obvious the term refers to rock with comedy elements so it seems natural that Tenacious D fit into that description; the question here should be is 'comedy rock' a real term that people actually use in rl rather than something made up by a few people online. --MilkMiruku 01:17, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for your feedback milkmiruku! Due to the 'overwhelming' response that I received I probably just let this idea disappear like a flurry of smoke... --Johnnyw 17:04, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  New article "Music genre debates"? 

message: This page only mentions the largest, most important genres. I don't think a paragraph about punk rock is necessary, as it is only a subgenre of rock. If we mention punk rock, why not progressive rock and heavy metal? The large genre of "rock" is enough for this page, I think. Can someone delete the paragraph about punk rock and add a few of its elements under "rock"?
--Ryusenshi 17:06, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: And what about "grime"? Is it really a big, important genre? (it is the first time I have heard this word, by the way) It seems to me that it is rather a subgenre of electronic music. Besides, the paragraph does not have a single link, not even to the "Grime" article... --Ryusenshi 09:50, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, as nobody has defended the inclusion of grime, I have deleted this paragraph. I have also rewritten large parts of the paragraph about rock, but there is still work to do.--Ryusenshi 09:47, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I have finally deleted "punk rock". The "rock" paragraph has been changed, too -- but it's still too long...--Ryusenshi 10:34, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Is "punk rock" necessary on this page?

message: Hello, this article needs heavy re-edition. I am working on it, before reverting it, please read my user info.  Thank you for your patience.  Brian W 02:52, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What needs to be changed and how so? It seems more appropriate that other editors revert or not based on the merit of your edits, not your user info. Hyacinth 06:10, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

text: For information on how to indicate references see Wikipedia:Citing sources. Hyacinth 21:38, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: A lot to change

message: PUNK, FOLK AND Oi!?????????????????? THESE ARE JUST 3 GENRES THAT COULD THINK OF AT THE MOMENT, THERE ARE MANY GENRES THAT ARE NOT IN THIS ARTICLE Mitsos 10:01, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What happened to not writing in Caps? — Mütze 12:04, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  WHAT HAPPENED TO 

message: Shouldn't acepella have a page?  Or at least be listed on this page?
: No.  A Capella (it's two words, by the way, and should be Italicized to boot) is a style of music, not a genre.  You could sing any genre of music in a capella style.  A good example is rap, which is a genre, and has a fairly even split between songs in both accompanied and a capella styles.  dunerat
----
Where the hell is rock music??? --Λeternus 12:38, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Acepella 

message: These page is far to broad! like it hardly covers any genres of music...what about Hardcore, Emo, Punk, Chrstian, we must update this page to explore all the genres in the world and all of there sup-genres, ex. Alt Punk, and so on. Whos with me!?
:No, I think it would actually be more productive to reduce the number of genre headings, and instead use somewhat lengthier discussions of much more general overall genres (e.g.: art music, folk music, popular music, electronic music?). This article should not (and cannot!) hope to cover all or even most genres of music. That's what List of music genres is for. This article should describe what is meant by "genre" in music, and cover a few overarching categories which in turn link to more specific articles. —ptk✰fgs 06:38, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  This page just does not cover it all!