Boundaries around Musical Genres

Cafe Society
1

This is not all that new of a topic, and I suspect we could link to other threads that have dealt with it, but the recent discussion in Difference between a musical and an opera makes me curious how Dopers draw lines between various musical categories.

As a start, what is the key distinction for you between:

  1. Rock and Pop
  2. Rhythm and Blues and Rock and Roll
  3. Rockabilly and Country
  4. Country and Bluegrass
  5. Country and Western
  6. Jazz and Pop
  7. Elevator Music and Easy Listening
  8. Classical and “Art Music”
  9. Latin and World

If you have some genres that are blurry as to distinctions between them, by all means add them to the list.

Even if your own distinction defaults basically to bands or artists who perform in that style, if that’s how you distinguish them, say so.

This is more for general information and fun than it is for anything super serious.

Just curious, mostly.

2

Neat question.

One I think about often is the division between “Rock and Roll” and “Rock” (or other permutations).

I’d say “Rock and Roll” is exemplified by musicians such as Bruce Springsteen, Huey Lewis, and Tom Petty (at times), to name a few. I’m not sure what it is that sets them apart stylistically, but it’s clear to my ears that they’re playing something that’s different than Led Zeppelin-derived rock.

3

[QUOTE=Zeldar]
8) Classical and “Art Music”
[/QUOTE]

I refuse to use the term ‘art music’. It is a very explicit statement of self-importance, i.e. that all other musics are not art. I’m quite happy with the fact that ‘classical’ can have two different meanings, depending on the context (either referring to a specific period of musical history, or to the vast body of western European-influenced musics)

4

[QUOTE=GorillaMan]
I refuse to use the term ‘art music’. It is a very explicit statement of self-importance, i.e. that all other musics are not art. I’m quite happy with the fact that ‘classical’ can have two different meanings, depending on the context (either referring to a specific period of musical history, or to the vast body of western European-influenced musics)
[/QUOTE]

Well said. “Art music” is maybe the height of snooty. I feel about as strongly about “Serious Music” as if you have to be wearing a tux or evening clothes before you can take some music seriously.

I believe the least snooty term I’ve heard so far for that genre is “Symphonic Music” or “Orchestral Music” even though not all of the “classical” genre is either symphonic or orchestral. At least I have a feel for the type of music I’d be expecting to hear.

5
  1. Rock and Pop – not much difference. Pop is a little slower and softer.
  2. Rhythm and Blues and Rock and Roll – R&B is performed by Black musicians; R&R is the same song performed by white musicians
  3. Rockabilly and Country – rockabilly is more uptempo
  4. Country and Bluegrass – Bluegrass is more fiddle oriented
  5. Country and Western – that’s one category. Sort of like the distinction between rock and roll.
  6. Jazz and Pop – Jazz is not popular; pop is.
  7. Elevator Music and Easy Listening – synonyms
  8. Classical and “Art Music” – don’t know what you mean by “art music”
  9. Latin and World – rhythm, I guess. I don’t really listen to either.
6

1) Rock and Pop- Rock is guitar- and drum-intensive, often with more technical, intricate melodies; pop is lighter and generally simpler and repititious.
2) Rhythm and Blues and Rock and Roll- R&B is more black-oriented (think Motown). Rock & Roll is the roots of rock (Elvis, Buddy Holly, et al).
3) Rockabilly and Country- Rockabilly would more uptempo and not so twangy like country music would be.
4) Country and Bluegrass- Bluegrass is folksy; country is about gettin’ drunk and havin’ a broken down pickup truck and a cheatin’ wife.
5) Country and Western- Western is about life on the range, the life of a cowboy. See above for country.
6) Jazz and Pop- Jazz is technical and improvised, often experimenting with unconventional chords and melodies. See above for pop.
7) Elevator Music and Easy Listening- Elevator music is a badly done rendition of a popular song; easy listening is original material, often with vocals.
8) Classical and “Art Music”- Classical is symphonic or orchestral; “art music” could be just about anyone whose music is not a Top-40 or “Best hits of the xx’s” CD compilation staple.
9) Latin and World- World music is a dozen different kinds of percussion and flutes; Latin is more guitars, trumpets and steel drums.

7

[QUOTE=RealityChuck]
8) Classical and “Art Music” – don’t know what you mean by “art music”
[/QUOTE]

‘Art music’ (or ‘western art music’ / ‘European art music’) are terms used by some people who are troubled by the dual purpose of ‘classical’, or regard terms such as ‘modern classical music’ as problematic. It’s used to cover a wide variety of genres, periods and styles, from medieval motets to opera to the standard symphonic repertoire to twentieth-century compositions.

8

[QUOTE=RealityChuck]

  1. Rock and Pop – not much difference. Pop is a little slower and softer.
    [/quote]

**RChuck **- I agree with most of your music posts and respect your perspective with regards to music, but feel like you are being too glib here - no offense intended.

Rock: Takes Rock n’ Roll - which is a fusion of blues, rockabilly/country, soul and pop - and increases the heaviness of the guitars, the overall volume at which the music is played or recorded and basic aggression of the performance.

Pop: Popular music of any genre - typically, this means “rounding off the edges” of the genre so the music is more accessible, either by making the rhythm more standard, putting a pop-style melody on top of a genre-derived rhythm or arrangement, or playing a standard pop verse/chorus/bridge structure in a genre style.

Rock can be Poppy, and Pop can be Rock, but each can veer far afield from the other. Green Day is Punk Rock with a Pop sensibility because their stuff is highly melodic and structured in a standard pop way, but with a Punk-type of instrumentation, rhythm and loudness aggression. But Sinatra is Pop - as is Abba or that awful Crazy Frog - and none of them are Rock

No, no, no, no - NO! :slight_smile:
Rhythm & Blues has FAR less of a country/rockabilly influence.
The beat is much looser - the drummer is far more likely to play behind the beat or swing it. Tempos in RnR are more likely to be faster and less likely to be syncopated.
The delivery is much easier with R&B - technical prowess is valued vs. rock and roll choosing energy and aggression over technical skills if forced to choose.
You are far more likely to encounter complex arrangements involving strings and horns in R&B - with RnR, you only find that with Phil Spector type arrangements or rock songs really targeting to have a pop sensibility.
I find myself using far more complex chording with R&B vs. RnR - more simple 3 major chord songs for RnR - lots of 7ths and 9ths and II-V-I changes in R&B

Rockabilly is stripped-down, with typically an electric guitar, standup bass and drumset - maybe keyboards if you’re The Killer. Add a sax for solos if you can afford to carry the band member.
Country usually has more complex arrangements with far more instrumentation.
Rockabilly has a rock 4-beat; Country is more likely to have a Country two-beat - listen to the chugging oom-pah bass line of most of Johnny Cash’s early hits and contrast that with Summertime Blues or Rock this Town - very different feel

  • Country is more likely to be electrified; Bluegrass is acoustic.
  • Bluegrass usually is a mandolin, banjo and guitar with bass and drums - and often a fiddle; Country can have much wider variation
  • Bluegrass values super-fast, highly technical note-runs; Country doesn’t require this nearly as much
  • Vocals for Bluegrass are normally high and plaintive - I don’t know if “high lonesome” truly applies, but that is the phrase that comes to mind. Country Vocals have much more variety

I think of C&W as a name for Country used in the 60’s and 70’s

Snarky and to a certain extent true, but there is so much more here. Pop is about making accessible music. Jazz is about understanding the rules that define music and intentionally, selectively, breaking with - or at least exploring the boundaries of - those rules. The many different sub-genres of jazz are usually characterized by why rules they are choosing to break.

No real comments here.

My $.02

9

Excellent post, WordMan. I appreciate the thought you put into the expansion of those notions.

10

[QUOTE=WordMan]
Country is more likely to be electrified; Bluegrass is acoustic. … Bluegrass usually is a mandolin, banjo and guitar with bass and drums - and often a fiddle; Country can have much wider variation … - Bluegrass values super-fast, highly technical note-runs; Country doesn’t require this nearly as much … Vocals for Bluegrass are normally high and plaintive
[/QUOTE]

Bluegrass is often mainly a vehicle for instrumental improvisation; in country it’s incidental.

[QUOTE=WordMan]
I think of C&W as a name for Country used in the 60’s and 70’s
[/QUOTE]

In the 20s and 30s they were different genres – “country” was Appalachian music (think Carter Family) and “Western” was cowboy songs (think Sons of the Pioneers).
7) Elevator Music and Easy Listening
I think of “elevator music” as Muzak – no vocals, weirdly robotic arrangements of familiar tunes. “East listening” is more like what those “Lite FM” stations play – light inoffensive pop songs, but the original recordings.

  1. Latin and World
    Latin music is a subset of World Music from a Spanish-speaking culture. Unless you live in that culture, then it’s just music.
    How about those artists who really fall between the cracks or move back and forth – these genres are never that rigid. For instance:

  2. Rock and Pop – Paul McCartney

  3. Rhythm and Blues and Rock and Roll – Little Richard

  4. Rockabilly and Country – Sleepy LaBeef

  5. Country and Bluegrass – Ricky Skaggs

  6. Country and Western – Bob Wills & The Texas Playboys

  7. Jazz and Pop – Kenny G

  8. Elevator Music and Easy Listening – I’ll bet the “Chariots of Fire” thing would work in both

  9. Classical and “Art Music” – dunno

  10. Latin and World – Juan Luis Guerra

11

[QUOTE=Ichbin Dubist]

  1. Jazz and Pop – Kenny G

[/QUOTE]

Great post – except for this. I challenge any jazz fan at SDMB to endorse the inclusion of Mr. Gorelick in any serious discussion of Jazz. Pop, maybe. Jazz, no.

12

[QUOTE=Zeldar]
Great post – except for this. I challenge any jazz fan at SDMB to endorse the inclusion of Mr. Gorelick in any serious discussion of Jazz. Pop, maybe. Jazz, no.
[/QUOTE]

Fair enough – can’t stand the guy myself. How about Louis Armstrong, then?

13

There seems to be some confusion among radio music programming hacks that the term “oldie” is one that is appropriately applied to a song which was recorded a certain minimum number of years ago. Thus, we have such abominations as cuts from the Saturday Night Fever soundtrack being played on “oldies” stations such as K-RTH 101.

I’m posting this to notify everyone that “oldies” is a genre of music which began to exist when Rock Around the Clock hit #1 on the Billboard top 40 chart, and the last song of which was recorded the week that “American Bandstand” allowed the males on the dance floor to appear on camera without wearing neckties.

Please pass the word among any oldies radio station programming hacks of your acquaintance, so we can get this matter straightened out and end the desecration of the airwaves.

14

I try not to draw distinctions between musical genres. What do you call something like David Grisman Quintet, Bela Fleck and the Flecktones, Wilco, Medeski Martin and Wood, Phish? In other words, “Good music is good music; everything else can go to hell.” - Dave Matthews.

But —

[QUOTE=WordMan]

  • Bluegrass usually is a mandolin, banjo and guitar with bass and **drums **- and often a fiddle; Country can have much wider variation
    [/QUOTE]
    Sweet Baby Jesus, Bill Monroe would spin in his grave. No drums in Bluegrass. That’s one of the steadfast rules. If you can’t pluck it, it ain’t Bluegrass - except maybe hambone.
15

[QUOTE=Ichbin Dubist]
Fair enough – can’t stand the guy myself. How about Louis Armstrong, then?
[/QUOTE]

Much mo betta! I buy that no question.

You might also find a decent percentage of jazz fans who would allow singers like Tony Bennett, Rosemary Clooney, and Frank Sinatra to be considered. Nine out of ten would accept Ella Fitzgerald and Joe Williams, though.

The fuzzy zone for most jazz fans I know is the vaguely identified Fusion area. Most rock fans can accept the rock component, but most jazz fans dismiss it as such. I happen to like it as well as most (minus Kenny G) of the Smooth Jazz subgenre.

Also, the Free Jazz and Avant Garde movements of the late 60’s on leave many Bebop fans cold. I’m one of them. But then I’m not big on Dixieland either. In fact, the styles that were in vogue in the 40’s and 50’s are my primary interest, although some of the more recent subgenres like Bossa Nova and Funk are also appealing to me. It’s hard to be a true Jazz fan who embraces all that falls under that umbrella. I suspect that’s true of most major categories.

If you can honestly say you appreciate every subgenre in your favorite category, I’d really like to hear that. I just don’t think discerning listeners can be that broad in their tastes. I’d like to know, though, either way.

16

[QUOTE=Crawlspace]
I try not to draw distinctions between musical genres. What do you call something like David Grisman Quintet, Bela Fleck and the Flecktones, Wilco, Medeski Martin and Wood, Phish? In other words, “Good music is good music; everything else can go to hell.” - Dave Matthews.

But —

Sweet Baby Jesus, Bill Monroe would spin in his grave. No drums in Bluegrass. That’s one of the steadfast rules. If you can’t pluck it, it ain’t Bluegrass - except maybe hambone.
[/QUOTE]

Glad you pointed this out, as I had meant to myself.

As to the Grisman and Fleck area, I liked Grisman’s “Dawg Grass” name for the portion of his work that’s obviously jazz flavored. Fleck can play by god anything! Can’t really comment on the others you mention although I have heard MMW on the radio a few times. As a blanket statement, new acts (those less than 20 years in the spotlight) that play in the “straight ahead” or “mainstream” bags are usually okay with me.

Bottom line: I agree with the sentiment you expressed from Dave Matthews, and I believe I first heard that attributed to Duke Ellington. It’s the real test.

I’ve been tempted to start a new thread, and if you think it’s a good idea maybe somebody else will: Which Musical Artists Did You Used To Hate But Now At Least Appreciate? Under that heading I would try to include the “Good Musicians” who play in genres I generally dislike as a group.

17

Due to another recent thread I was inspired to find a torrent for How Music Works with Howard Goodall and download it. Not only is it a superb bit of television but Goodall is a human encyclopedia of music. Having seen him explain how musical ideas regenerate and cross pollinate over sometimes hundreds of years, the idea of musical classifications seems rather silly.

I highly recommend the series which has 4 45 minute episodes; Melody, Rhythm, Harmony and Bass, covering an impossible variety of musical styles.

18

Ironically, Dave Matthews is, for me, one of the main examples of that dictum. I like the light alternative / jam band genre, I like his style of singing, I just hate everything about most of his repetitive, boring, sloppily-written songs.

19

[QUOTE=Crawlspace]
I try not to draw distinctions between musical genres. What do you call something like David Grisman Quintet, Bela Fleck and the Flecktones, Wilco, Medeski Martin and Wood, Phish? In other words, “Good music is good music; everything else can go to hell.” - Dave Matthews.

But —

Sweet Baby Jesus, Bill Monroe would spin in his grave. No drums in Bluegrass. That’s one of the steadfast rules. If you can’t pluck it, it ain’t Bluegrass - except maybe hambone.
[/QUOTE]

:smack: see what happens when you type too fast? I have only myself to blame and thank you for correcting that!

I certainly don’t see any of these genres as hard and fast - what’s the line “a tool is only useful until it isn’t” and having a handful of genre descriptions reflects that. The joy of truly good music is often its ability to confound conventional wisdom of the day.

Kenny G ain’t no jazz - show me one rule that Kenny G has ever considered challenging! He is smooth jazz’s bitch and only follows rules - t’aint no jazz.

I am not a Dave Matthews Band fan - “he’s a lot better than he sounds!” - but deeply respect the musicianship of the players in the band. But all those folks listed definitely fall between the cracks, which is why there are always new categories being coined - e.g., jam bands, alt.country, psychobilly, etc. - so we have to see which, if any, really last as enduring genres…

20

[QUOTE=WordMan]
:smack: see what happens when you type too fast? I have only myself to blame and thank you for correcting that!

I certainly don’t see any of these genres as hard and fast - what’s the line “a tool is only useful until it isn’t” and having a handful of genre descriptions reflects that. The joy of truly good music is often its ability to confound conventional wisdom of the day.

Kenny G ain’t no jazz - show me one rule that Kenny G has ever considered challenging! He is smooth jazz’s bitch and only follows rules - t’aint no jazz.

I am not a Dave Matthews Band fan - “he’s a lot better than he sounds!” - but deeply respect the musicianship of the players in the band. But all those folks listed definitely fall between the cracks, which is why there are always new categories being coined - e.g., jam bands, alt.country, psychobilly, etc. - so we have to see which, if any, really last as enduring genres…
[/QUOTE]

“But all those folks listed definitely fall between the cracks, which is why there are always new categories being coined - e.g., jam bands, alt.country, psychobilly, etc. - so we have to see which, if any, really last as enduring genres…”

If it’s not obvious to you, this is my main motive behind the thread and the OP. My years working in a record store back in the 60’s and priding myself on knowing in which bin every record we carried was located (and we were one of the biggest, if not the biggest, record stores in town in those days) but having no say how the bins were labeled (that duty fell to the owner) and being asked by confused customers a) if we carried such-and-such a performer’s records; and b) if so, where to find it, I could direct them to the right bin or else tell them a) no we don’t have that artist’s records; b) we’re out of stock at the moment, let me call you when it comes back in; c) never heard of him/her/them. Choice C was how I was introduced to The Beatles, FWIW!

Even back then there were way too many genres to keep track of, what with Folk, Country, Pop, Jazz, Classical, Opera, Spoken Word, Comedy, Stereo Demonstration, Broadway Shows, Movie Soundtracks, Male Vocalists, Female Vocalists, many others I’m forgetting now. Mind you, as I’ve suggested, this was right around the onset of the British Invasion, so “Rock” (if the term even existed as such) was most likely not labeled that way. Since then that genre has become nearly synonymous with Music for a large portion of the buying public.

Our cable service includes DMX music channels. There are at least 30 of them. I don’t have a clue what some of them even mean, and don’t intend to find out since the names suggest an area I know I don’t care for.

But examining this list of genres which lexi was kind enough to provide in my Master List of Music Genres – got one handy? thread last month, it’s utterly staggering how many pigeonholes exist in Music today.

Do we really need that much precision?