Feeling patrician

Feeling patrician...

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=vE2osYzMG6A
youtube.com/watch?v=UaEaEIfKo70
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Music_genre#The_art.2Fpopular.2Ftraditional_distinction
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

>"organizing" music by genre

You're never gonna make it.

Ebin

There are only three genres, OP; classical, pop and traditional.

What is this "rock" bullshit?

10/10

Its ''Art, folk and popular'', idiot.

metal
rock
classical
other

I'll give you art but folk has been co-opted by the contemporary shit. Traditional works better.

Shitty guitar music thats done the same thing at slightly different speeds for 60 years

Only if you believe in bullshit marketing slogans.

Which ones? Where?

What are Arctic Monkeys, QoTSA or Weezer doing that The Animals, The Who and The Kinks weren't doing 50 years ago?

Metal is a subgenre of classical

teehee
epic thread!
hehe :)

Doesn't make it an accepted categorization.

Besides, those aren't "genres" anyway

Doesn't matter.

>music
>objectivity

>my 11 year old cousin actually thinks this

I mean that "rock" is in any way distinguishable from other pop genres.

The terms are art music, traditional folk music, and popular music, you fucking pedestrians.

>Its all bullshit marketing slogans.
>explain the differences
>i-i-it doesn't matter

lmao

You don't think metal is distinguishable from ambient?

>referred to by musicologist Philip Tagg as one of an "axiomatic triangle consisting of 'folk', 'art' and 'popular' musics."[9]

>not organizing things by genre, subgenre, artist, releases

It's like you're not autistic or something

>Doesn't make it an accepted categorization.
The "accepted categorisations" acknowledge bullshit like "atmospheric black metal", "alternative R&B" and "third stream".

In other words; fuck the "accepted categorisation"

Moron, I'm the guy who called it marketing and I'm Note the "I"

lmao

atleast try with bait dude.

>quotes a Wikipedia article that uses the word "traditional music" several times
Nice job disproving your point. "Traditional folk music" is the correct term. Folk music is used interchangeable in that case, but traditional is a better term to use due to contemporary folk existing, which is popular music.

Contemporary folk, like contemporary R&B are the correct names for the new styles, the simple label of folk or R&B automatically relate to the original style of music.

"art music" is a terrible definition, it's not like pop/folk music isn't art... Classical is way better.

Ideally. But most people have the same opinion I do about your bullshit accepted terms.

Unless you're autistic enough to bring up Philip Tagg in every conversation.

''Most'' people use dubstep or electro for all electronic music, ''most'' people are fucking idiots.

>In other words; fuck the "accepted categorisation"
fuck your personal interpretation of music

"art music" does not refer to the fact that that music is art, it refers to art music. It's just a name desu

Agreed.

Gonna ignore the examples I used and just focus on that bit, eh? Why don't you just admit you were wrong?

The "new styles" of folk refer to people like Bob Dylan and Nick Drake, who made commercial music. The "original style" of folk refers to music that exists more or less for the sake of traditions and culture.

The point is that you can't organize by genre. It's impossible. Take an example as simple as Radiohead. Are you going to stick their first albums under Rock and their later albums under Electronic or a subgenre thereof? That's stupid because now you have one artist's work spread across far away directories. The only viable way is Music/Artist/Release. The only place for genre is in the ID3 tags if desired.

Just put it into the subgenres, the directories don't matter if you just put the root folder put into say something like foobar and organize by artist.

Why I don't go further with organizing the music on foobar, idk

atmospheric black metal exists. There is a difference between, say
youtube.com/watch?v=vE2osYzMG6A
and
youtube.com/watch?v=UaEaEIfKo70

The first example is not "atmospheric", in the sense of having a "wall of sound", as the second example does. The first example is more agressive (with a faster tempo and more prevelant drum work). The second has slower drum work (less blastbeats). These are important distinctions between atmospheric black metal and black metal

this. Those artists are popular.

agreed, but that doesn't mean genres don't exist or are impossible to define

Well the name should be somehow related to the music itself otherwise what's the point

radiohead = alternative rock

Electronic is not a genre.

THIS

Just because they ripped off Aphex once doesn't change anything.

>Using shit examples of modern 'rock'

It was originally based on an interpretation of music that said folk was mainly for entertainment, popular was heavily commodified, and art music was made purely for art

>folk was mainly for entertainment.

Literally no. The complete and total opposite.

Organizing by year released is the only way.

I'm aware of that. That was the original interpretation, and that's what the names based on. Modern musicologists usually put the three on equal standing

>the original interpretation
Where?

Traditional folk music has been defined in several ways: as music transmitted orally, or as music with unknown composers.

The terms folk music, folk song, and folk dance are comparatively recent expressions. They are extensions of the term folklore, which was coined in 1846 by the English antiquarian William Thoms to describe "the traditions, customs, and superstitions of the uncultured classes."[2]

Traditional folk music also includes most indigenous music.

apologies for the incorrect statement on folk music; I was going off bad memory

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Music_genre#The_art.2Fpopular.2Ftraditional_distinction