Rock music is said to be going thgrough a transistion by many experts. Well, I wish it would finish, because right now most mnew music is sucking heavily. A lot of people think techno is the next new thing, like grunge in 91. The success of the prodigy and U2's new techno turne (it's not really that techno, just an occasional sample) would seem to verify that. Is Rock music going to get out of the doldrums?16 responses total.
like the item, steve.. I'd say "pop" music is changing.. as all "pop" means is popular, rock to me is a definate type.. usually involving guitar.. Techno does seem to be getting more recognition these days tho, with the sucess of the trainspotting sound track, and other things that you mentioned, like Prodigy, and the Chemical Brothers... I for one think it's kinda weird, since "Rock" music has been around for so long, and Techno is semi-new. It's hard to explain, but i can't see the whole of america loving it, like some people consider America the home of rock and roll. Techno to me seems to be more british, as it is more popular there, and liked by more people than it is in the US, in general. Hope that all made some kind of sense.
All right, somebody explain this to me. What is the deal with all these damn genres? Back in the '60s, there was rock, like Hendrix or the Beatles, and a couple of other things--R&B, folk, etcetera. And those I can tell the difference between. Then we got Disco, whose stench I can detect a mile away. Then came the '80s, and there was heavy metal and pop, and you could tell the difference because pop didn't involve having a tongue that stretched down to your ankles. But what is this 'alternative' thing. I have seen a single band be classified as 'alternative' in one store, 'rock' in another, and 'pop' in a third. It gets worse. Will someone please explain the difference between Techno, Ambient, Industrial, Trip-Hop, Hip-hop, Rap, Ska, Reggae, Grunge, Punk, Punk-pop, Rock, Roots-Rock, Folk-Pop, Gospel, Soul, Christian, R&B, Funk, Jam-Rock, Heavy Metal, Death Metal, Thrash, Blues, Latin, New-Age, New Wave, World, Country, Jazz, Acid Jazz, Acid Rock, Stadium Rock, College Rock, Prog Rock, Art Roc Trance, Soundscape, Folk-Rap, Garage-Rock, Garage-Punk, Techno-Thrash, Hardcore, Dancehall, Rasta-core, Surf-rock, Ambient Art-pop, prog-pop, Dub, Rockabilly, Ska-punk, Jungle, Trancescape, Country Punk, Guitar-pop, Power-Pop, Kitch-Pop, Psychobilly, Synth-Rock, Noise-Rock, Punk-Funk, White-trash Garage Rock, Power-Punk-Thrash-Metal-Pop, Aggro-Punk, Oi-Punk, Agit-Funk, Punk-politico, Rave, Space-Rock, Psychedelic, Aggro-Pop, Cyber-Rock, Funk -n- Roll, Glam-Pop, Art-Jazz, Folk-Pop, Thrashcore, Doom-Metal, Alterna-Twang, Honky-Tonk, Country-Pop, and Tex-Mex in five minutes or less? All of these inscruitable genres showed up in just one Columbia House catalog. I don't get it. Can I please have some genres I can understand? Sorry. I'm done ranting, now, I promise. Return to your topic.
like i said before, pop to me means popular, which is where it came from... therefore, pop music isn't really a genre of music... "alternative" on the other hand, i think is a sub-category of rock... but the label alternative really bugs me, but i won't rant about that... i could describe all the things you listed above, but i don't think you really want me to... or maybe you do? anyways, i will if you want me to... in the end, i think you can really but things into a few categories, well, fewer than this colombia house thing.. rock, ska/punk, rap, r&b, country, raggae, and techno/industrial/electronic music categories are such a queer thing.
I second that. I mean, as I see it, what does it matter if the Next Big Thing is grunge, techno, ska, or even polka for that matter, as long as it's good music? Of course, for those who belive that polka is beyond redemption, genre might matter :)
Categories have been around for many years. We just don't see much detail in hindsight.
It's really hard for me to get out of my perspective from the middle of the baby boom (born 1957). I've kidded about for quite a while about giving up rock music now that I'm 40. A serious review of things I have loved in the last few years shows that I have to go back to 1990 to find the last time I really loved a rock band -- that was The Walkabouts from Seattle, who have since lost their magic. So I can't tell if rock is less interesting, or if I've just moved on. Some academic folklorists with whom I briefly shared a mailing list argued that rock's place in the culture is declining, according to the Serious Academic Research. As for the categories which orinoco found in the Columbia House catalog: the scary thing is, I know what most of them mean!! Many critics have written about how popular music has splintered into hundreds of narrow subgenres. We don't have any "universal" pop artists these days: folks like Stephen Foster, Glenn Miller, The Beatles, CSNY, Elvis Presley, Elton John. REM or U2 might have made a run at the position, but I'm not sure that it's an attainable thing any more.
I think the existance of all those categories is a good thing. It means that we aren't all stuck listening to one type of "popular" music. A really good rock album does turn up every now and then. Pearl Jam's "Ten" has a lot of excitement to it. Reminds me why rock was so popular once upon a time! ;)
Re: Steve's intro. Ironically, Bono himself said rock is undergoing fundamental changes (in an interview on A&E's The History of Rock 'n Roll). I think Tom Petty said in the same program that rock itself is a very limited genre, and this is why you now have so many sub-genres. You also have many, many ethnic influences coursing through the music. For example, Tex-Mex (tejano) is a mixture of German polka (hence the accordion elements) and Mexican folk music. Folk and country have roots in Irish and European folk. African America brought us funk, blues, jazz, and the rhythm and blues that was the basis for rock and roll itself..and oh yes, soul, and the spirituals which eventually became gospel. New Age came primarily from Indian ragas and other such music-- the title coming from "New Age" philosophy, or Eastern religions and ways of life. Now many genres like these are trading elements-- I mentioned that different areas of the world have had different bases for music-- but many brilliant musicians have spread them around. I'd have to wsay there's more intermixing of the world's music than of its races! So to finish answering my response to Steve, and orinoco, I'll say that music has become quite diverse in modern times, and yet they all borrow heavily from each other. Mind you, guys, this isn't new-- i.e., ragtime and military marches were influencing each other. John P. Sousa and Scott Joplin were contemporaries. Jazz itself grew in complexity over the years it's been with us (and indeed it's an American institution). Besides acid jazz, there's swing, be-bop, funk (yes, funk!)r(;u,,$$?~?~?~?~?~? cool jazz, oJ!"MH~~}}}}}and fusion, to name a few, and quite a few jazz genres were created by one man, Miles Davis. Katy, to set the record straight, the term "Alternative" is a marketing rip-off. Alternative music was just what it was called-- an alternative to the popular music scene. It was the underground of music, or whatever music was underground to the location. The second British Invasion started out from the underground and MTV. To use the term alternative as it is now is an oxymoron-- most music that the label is applied to is no longer the alternative, really. It's better to define it as "progressive," "punk (yes, it has been resurrected)," or "ska." "Grunge" is a dicey term-- most insist the term applies to the fashion, and not the music. However, it can be applied to the Tacoma sound (I say Tacoma and not Seattle because most of the musicians are not from Seattle itself but from nearby Tacoma). I can also tell someone hasn't been reading the funk item. Yeah, there was some really bad disco music, but a lot ofwhat was called 'disco' was really funk. If it wasn't, it was just overly machinated. Most working musicians hated it because disco put so many of them out of a job (and I'm quoting from the A&E program again). Mind you, disco hasn't really gone away, either. They call it 'dance club' music now, and the quality of the music varies just as much as the old disco did-- from fairly good to positively rotten.
By the way, Ken, I noted that pop music has had so many infusions from so many different cultures-- Indian, Jamaican, British, Japanese (mostly during the 80's, it seems), Irish, African, German, etc., etc. that I doubt there's going to be a universal sound for a while. And I said so many genres were trading elements-- so many musicians keep mixing up the pot. I'm glad I'm going back to study music, because this is really exciting!!
Grunge and alternative are indeed hard to classify. Whatever it is or was seems to be on the way down, however. The talent pool has thinned noticeably, and grunge mainstays like Stone Temple Pilots have reinvented themselves. One of the things I think most signifies change in music is that old popular groups such as R.E>.M. and Pearl Jam had less than successful alsbum releases last year, giving way to such new artists as No Doubt and Alanis Morissette (neither of them actually new, but they've been popular for a relatively short time). Who's going to step up to fill in the talent gap? Music has never been one or two bands... But right now there aren't many sure things in music today.
Re#7: If everybody was really listening to everything, we wouldn't need the damn categories. The reason we have all those categories is so those who don't know any better can say "I don't like that because it's rap; I like that because it's techno; etc..." Re#8: I'll grant you that alternative music isn't an alternative to anything, but I call it that because that's the term people understand.
Think: "new wave" :)
Re#11: Well, cultures do maintain some sort of distinction no matter how much they meld together (or mix like a tossed salad). People still have their own musical tastes, and I would suggest there is a sociological link. If somebody really likes urban music, I suppose he or she will show urban cultural influences. Music and culture go so hand in hand. Or, in other words, the musical aspects of a culture will follow other elements of that culture around-- or possibly lead. I was never sure if musics in different cultures mixed faster than say, fashion, or dialect. I think the categories are fine, just to illustrate the diveristy of music-- but I do agree that you should judge a book by its cover nor music by its label. But again, if you want to be technical, we should track music by its cultural heritage rather than any commerical-imposed category.
I'd say that rock music is definitely getting a face lift. Until it's finished we get things like Hip Hop and other such things to listen to.
Another thought. Musicians play a lot and experiment a lot, so I suppose it's natural that they will borrow from or be influenced by styles other than their own. Since the explosion of telecommunications in this century, music has become more diverse, mixed around, and rearranged than ever. Studio technology should be given some credit for this. It's easier to mix old and new music simply by multitracking (Gregorian chant, pygmy tribal songs, and Englebert Humperdink tunes, to name a few, have been mixed or remixed into dance music), and it's possible for living artists to perform with those who have passed away. Commerical music is a huge, huge industry and I suppose the categories are there to help people find the kind of music they're likely to enjoy. As I said, it's a marketing thing.
Well, now that this item's more than 2 years old, it's kind of interesting to see how the prediction's turned out. The general consensus of the item - that techno may influence things, but it won't take over - seems to have been right. "Everybody" isn't putting out remix albums, the way some rock critics were predicting they would, but they're another option now, the way live albums or cover albums are an option. The radio isn't playing much techno, except for a few late-night special shows, but the pop that's playing is swinging back towards the electronic end and adopting some of the language of techno. One thing that surprises me, looking back, is the fate of rap music. As far as I remember, nobody was heralding rap as the next big thing - in fact, most critics seemed to wish it would go away - but as a separate style it's been much more successful than techno was: pure techno faded back into the underground and left its influence behind, but rap is succeeding on its own and not as a hybrid. And now, Latin music and Rock En Espanol are supposed to be the next big thing, and the rock critics are digging up all sorts of old Brazilian psychedelia. I guess in two more years we'll see how that one turns out...
You have several choices: