Music Banter - View Single Post - Pointless sub genres
View Single Post
Old 11-24-2014, 06:06 PM   #17 (permalink)
sidewinder
Engorged Member
 
sidewinder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 5,536
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dylstew View Post
Also, how the hell is k pop and j pop a seperate genre? The country where it comes from is..the country where it comes from. I know the sound can be different, But that shouldn't be in the genre, the country is a seperate thing. Whats next, Afghanistan pop?
Or Britpop? Sheesh.

One subgenre that I think has failed to split off into something more descriptive is post-rock. Initially it separated bands that used rock instruments in more inventive ways than traditional, such as Stereolab for example. Electronics were also a big part of the mix. Then post-rock was adopted for bands playing moody, atmospheric instrumental rock. Now you can't even call Stereolab post-rock because people will think they're atmospheric instrumental rock. And many of those bands aren't really experimenting or doing anything particularly innovative. It's fucking atmospheric instrumental rock! Why don't we have such a genre? There are many more recent bands that I think the label post-rock would apply to, but because they're not instrumental atmospheric rock, I don't and neither does anyone else.

On RYM, there are hundreds of metal subgenres and sub-subgenres yet we don't have anything to separate stuff that was originally called post-rock from the more recent post-rock. If anything, people have retroactively started calling original post-rock indietronica, which I think is bullshit.

No genre name should end with an 'a' anyway.
__________________
last.fm | my collection on RYM | vinyl instagram @allthatyouseeandhear
I'd love to see your signature/links too, but the huge and obnoxious ones have caused me to block all signatures.
sidewinder is offline   Reply With Quote