Are there too many, different styles, in music, or not enough?

[charlie brown]

This is obviously NOT a "scientific" question, and a matter of opinion,

but...what do you all think? Too much, of any one type, too much diversity,

so as to be missed, all too often? Or, not enough?

 

CB

[L5Larry]

There's only two kinds of music, GOOD MUSIC and BAD MUSIC.

[charlie brown]

There's only two kinds of music, GOOD MUSIC and BAD MUSIC.

 

True....but, OK...which is in evidence, more. Good Music,

or Bad. People here, and other places, are always going on,

about how "Bad" music is, now. Is it, really? Or, just not

what "They" like?

 

I, for instance, don't think today's "pop" music is any worse,

really, than it's ever been, necessarily. Some is, of course,

but overall, it seems about the same. "Manufactured" to outright

silly. But, that's always been the case. I think, as we age

(or "mature" if you like), our tastes change, sometimes drastically.

And, bands too, can mature, as well...if they're lucky enough, to

last long enough, to do so. "The Beatles" would be a perfect example,

of that. Yet, they...all along, kept the bar up, pretty high, overall.

But, that's only one (past) example. How about now?

 

CB

[DAS44]

Well, I'm of the belief that if you like a certain genre, then that's alright. I'm not one to say too many, too few, I find it an odd question to be honest. I do believe however that some genres have far to many subgenres that could be grouped together somewhat, it seems to get a bit unwieldy to me.

 

I think there should be no limit on the number of genres, might that in a way be limiting what we can do with music?

[vincentw]

Music is like language...it will always continue to evolve and morph. This is good if you value freedom.

[charlie brown]

Well, I'm of the belief that if you like a certain genre, then that's alright. I'm not one to say too many, too few, I find it an odd question to be honest. I do believe however that some genres have far to many subgenres that could be grouped together somewhat, it seems to get a bit unwieldy to me.

 

I think there should be no limit on the number of genres, might that in a way be limiting what we can do with music?

 

Agreed, but isn't that what we tend to do, or...the "power's that be" tend to do,

mostly for "money" reasons, in their case? I think, too...a lot of players, can

sometimes be complicit, in those limitations, by only learning/playing one, or a

very few, genre's...even, if unwittingly, so.

 

CB

[DAS44]

Agreed, but isn't that what we tend to do, or...the "power's that be" tend to do,

mostly for "money" reasons, in their case? I think, too...a lot of players, can

sometimes be complicit, in those limitations, by only learning/playing one, or a

very few, genre's...even, if unwittingly, so.

 

CB

That is a huge problem nowadays in my mind. At the gym, they're always playing the teenagers' radio station (and my cheap headphones do nothing to drown it out!). The fact of the matter is, I have heard the same song played four times in an hour. It's become more about fitting the mold than expanding it sometimes. So many of the songs tend to blend together to me, they have no dominant characteristic that hits me as intriguing. While the money does control it, I figure I'll do as I have always done, look to the past for inspiration, and sit tight for a brilliant, refreshingly new, artist to come about. While the big "money" may control a lot of it, let's hope some slip through the cracks eh?

 

On the musicians culpability I have to agree too. Some musicians truly hone in on a genre, so finely that the distinction between songs blurs, the characteristics repeat, the style, all of it. While I'm not condemning that, I am trying to encourage broadening those horizons. I have a very eclectic taste in music (by my own estimation), varying from Led Zeppelin, to Thelonious Monk, Beethoven, etc. While my music taste, when compared to those of others (many from this here forum come to mind) is not so extraordinary, it has helped change my play style, simply listening to everything I can get my paws on. I enjoy the variety, it gives me a reason to keep playing and listening. I am always delighted to hear an artist dipping into foreign territory, if only slightly.

 

Variety colors our world, and those who learn to use all of those colors, tend to capture me the most.

[The RandyMan]

I personally think that, as far as styles, there will never be a definitive number that is either good or bad. Music will always evolve. The current iterations may or may not please an individuals ear, but there will always be a desire by someone to listen to previous particular styles, as well as a yearning for "something new" that no one has tried before. Evolution of all things, including music, is an inevitability of time. I think that what I'm trying to say is that no matter how much some things change, others will always stay the same. And in music, there will always be an audience for both.

[ChanMan]

I'd say, in certain genres, yes. (*cough cough*metal*cough cough*)

 

Not nearly enough distinction between the various genres to warrant the subdivisions. Deathcore, Death, Grindcore,Speed, Thrash, ad nauseum.

 

 

Heavy metal, hard-core, punk, pop, or thrash.

You can call it anything it don't matter to me.

Call it what you want.

It's all music to me.

 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gAq5dbz45gM

[charlie brown]

Good stuff, guys...keep it coming! ;>)

 

CB

[rocketman]

I think this question is valid even 100 years ago. Study Arnold Schoenberg and you'll see what I mean. I don't think there are too many styles. I do believe that there too many narrow minded people though. I try to be open to all kinds of music (e.g., both Country and Western...he he he). I hope that I've become a better player and person because of studying eveything from classical to jazz to blues to country to rock, and everything in between.