Do any of you think you are good at, and have no problems categorizing music?

I’m terrible at it. I suppose there are a very few unambiguous, if not particularly useful, ways to sort it, like chronological order. And “classical” seem pretty cut and dry, but perhaps that is more a factor of my own ignorance than reality. But it seems no matter how I try to define my categories, there are always more songs at the margins than there are that fit cleanly into one or another.

I gave up on a “blues influence” category when it seemed half of all my music since 1950 would end up in it. And trying to find a more stringent definition is just as bad, because everyone is running around violating various conventions. So I started out with Robert Johnson and ended up with Creedence Clearwater and the Doors. Not all of their music, of course, but there is no single element or combination of them that defines the genre.

Or any other genre, maybe. Yet for some masochistic reason I am still driven to try. I want black and white, but I always end up with gray. Seriously, the most useful category I have is a “high energy” category of music most applicable to driving long distance.

Anybody have suggestions?

Yes. Would you put this and this in the same category?

Music that requires a penguin suit to play?

This is for sorting your musical library?

The way I do it is by starting with very broad genres like classical / electronic / rock, and then within each of them I sort by subgenre, e.g. Baroque / dubstep / punk, respectively. From there, I sort by country or distinct region, depending on the genre, and then alphabetize.

Google can help with the genre of individual bands.

Edit: Before anyone calls me out, yes I know Baroque and Classical are actually two different eras, but I’m using classical as a blanket term.

I think the whole idea of genres is fundamentally flawed, for the reasons you describe: a musical piece can fall into more than one genre; there is no clear dividing line between genres; and even without those problems, genres are subjective. No two people would divide music into the same categories. Some people will have fifteen types of heavy metal, but lump all dance music together in one category.

I’ve got my CDs divvied up into World; Jazz & Standards; Classical; Christmas; Everything Else (rock, folk, singer-songwriter, R&B, blues, etc.).

To what uses would these categories be put? I have a finely crafted system that works well for home use but would probably be useless on an iPod (never owned one).

I found it useful to define albums rather than artists. The Rolling Stones were at various times Blues, British Invasion, Disco, etc. Similarly, Elvis Costello may start out as New Wave, but then what?

I have a very large record collection that requires a database to keep track of. I use Allmusic.com to guide me in categorizing the music. My needs dictate the depth. I have little classical music, so I need only 5 subgenres (Baroque, Romantic…). I have many blues records, and use 37 different subgenres, 8 just for acoustic blues (mostly geographical). In total, there are 350 categories although probably only a hundred see much use.

AllMusic generally offers up many genres for each album entry. The topmost is usually very broad, so I often use the second. I try to stick to the 1st or 2nd entries just to make things easy on myself. Topmost for CCR is Rock & Roll, 2nd is Contemporary Pop/Rock; I’d use the second definition. Topmost for The Doors is Hard Rock. That works for me. After a while you work out a personal pattern.