Genre/subgenre labels - absolute truth or not?

[WildRanger]

When we talked about 'quality' in music we determined that ratings of bands, albums and songs are mostly subjective and not the absolute truth. But how about labeling music with genres and subgenres? Are they objective facts or not?

For example, most people would consider Black Sabbath heavy metal, but some people would call them just hard rock. Similar thing when it comes to Motorhead.

[Nekov]

Well, tons of bands would hate it if you label them, Steven Wilson being the first. I think there are some bands that fall under 1, maybe 2 clear genres however there is a big amount of bands that explore different avenues when it comes to music and trying to label those bands is trickier and I'm not sure if it does any good. I personally wouldn't know how to label Anathema for example.

[The Walrus]

They're only objective on the broadest of levels. Iron Maiden is not rock, but they are metal, which in turn is a subset of rock music. Lady Gaga is very clearly not rock, she is pop. Enya is not jazz, she is new age. Those are facts. Once you go down the rabbit hole, things get more and more subjective. Wintersun on Metal-Archives is listed as "symphonic melodic death metal" - uh, okay then, you could also just go with "folk metal."

Overall, subjective terminology is subjective. But there is, at some level, objectivity to it - again, Katy Perry is pop, not classical. J.S. Bach is baroque era classical, obviously not rock music. The more you get into subgenres, the more annoying it becomes, the more subjective the terminology gets, because not everyone will agree, and sometimes it just gets to be way too much, at some point you start getting to labels that only apply to a handful of bands or even one artist.

[ariich]

Interesting that you've used the phrase "absolute truth". Unlike quality, descriptors such as genre/sub-genre labels are undoubtedly objective. But they're also not absolute truth, because there is plenty of room for interpretation. I completely agree that the more specific the sub-genre, the more subjective and open to interpretation. High-level classifiers such as pop, rock, metal, classical (as the umbrella term, rather than the specific period, which is confusing in itself), electronic, etc. are, perhaps not absolute truth, but still defined by some pretty clear parameters and the majority of music will sit primarily within one.

[Stadler]

I honestly couldn't give a shit whether Sabbath is "metal", "heavy metal", "classic metal", "blues metal", or whatever the f***. I still like it.

[TAC]

I honestly couldn't give a shit whether Sabbath is "metal", "heavy metal", "classic metal", "blues metal", or whatever the f***. I still like it.

They are Like It Metal!

[King Postwhore]

Sounds change, labels adjusted, not a big deal.

[WildRanger]

Also many people consider Rush to be prog rock but some don't. Same with Jethro Tull and Pink Floyd.

[Elite]

Also many people consider Rush to be prog rock but some don't. Same with Jethro Tull and Pink Floyd.

and who gives a shit, honestly?

Genres change through time, as do the sounds we associate with genre. There is no 'absolute truth' at all.

[cramx3]

Definitely not absolute truths on genre labels.  Very few bands can be fit perfectly into a genre hole.  There's lots of room for interpretation of the genre as well as a band's music.  Even at the broadest level, there can be a grey area for music to be more than one genre. 

[Shadow Ninja 2.0]

WildRanger is Yo-Yo Ma and we are his cello.

[ChuckSteak]

Maybe you should stay with your MA MA. She could do your laundry and cook for you. Maybe you should stay with your MA MA. You're really kind of stupid and ugly too.


But now seriously.. there is no absolute truth. Genres and subgenres are just a way to organize things. Of course you wouldn't call classical music "hip-hop". But there are some instances when every person has their own definition of what style a certain band plays. There is no absolute truth!

[pg1067]

how about labeling music with genres and subgenres? Are they objective facts or not?

I think there are some objective facts -- e.g., that Iron Maiden and Metallica are metal bands.  However, there are few things sillier and more subjective than the seemingly infinite number of sub-genres that folks have concocted to label give to metal bands.

[Samsara]

I enjoy all these sub-genres like I enjoy pointless polling - very little. 

Had to, WR. Just a little friendly ribbing to get Monday moving.