Genre Extravaganza REDUX Preliminary Discussion Thread - Music

RoundTheBend
I miss the comfort in being sad

Location: Ground Control

Hmmm... maybe I'm boring for the likes of most of you, but I'd love to talk about the time periods/genre's listed below. I think the original post was more let's discover things and learn about things that most people don't talk about. My tastes are about 10% that. I just get bored with discovering new music most of the time... but when I do find something new, I'll admit it gets me going.

The Birth of Rock N' Roll (1950s to early 1960s), how blues, country, R&B, Motown melded together
1960s Psychedelic Rock (From Beatles to Iron Butterfly) and maybe the Hippie movement? (Beatles music, for example is often associated with this, but they stated themselves in the Anthology that they didn't associate themselves with it)
1960s Birth and huge influence of the Big Bands (Beatles, Stones, Zeppelin, Pink Floyd, etc.)
The History of Alternative Rock (from Talking Heads to Nirvana?)
Hip-Hop/Rap
The World of Electronic Music

I am not a musicologist and don't get anal with Genre so I don't really separate Motown from Ray Charles... it's a similar feel for me, so maybe I'd frustrate someone with talking about them at the same time.

Anyone talking about the history, your favorites, why etc. or is it like, well dude, who doesn't know that stuff... that's boring?

Also, I remember band threads every now and then and those died out.

Is there only so much that can be said?

Last edited by RoundTheBend on 01/30/2016 19:26; edited 1 time in total

RoundTheBend
I miss the comfort in being sad

Location: Ground Control

[quote="Kool One complaint I had of other GEs is that many were a brief intro into the history and key players, and then a list of key albums; I can go to a site like allmusic for that. I'd like a brief discussion of each musician/group, their evolution in sound, an in depth discussion of history, synopses of key labels that housed those genres, as well as mentioning the user's favorite albums on the genre, and then key albums that might not necessarily be favorites. It's a lot to ask, but it's what I'd like to see. I'll come forward when I have something. I totally agree on redoing it all as well[/quote]

I kinda feel wikipedia does an ok job of this as well. I mean, how do we make this a discussion instead of people just writing their own wiki articles?

RockyRaccoon
Is it solipsistic in here or is it just me?

Gender: Male
Age: 33
Location: Maryland

Moderator

Personally, I think GE should stick with genres, but doing periods could work, just reframing it in the context of the genre. For example, instead of doing the psychedelic movement of the 60s, you do, as part of a psych-rock thread, the 60s.

I will say though, that a sure-fire way to make sure no one is interested in this is by writing up a bunch of stuff we all already know. Like, if you're writing about psych rock in the 60s, don't write "Hey The Beatles were pretty good here's some albums by them you should listen to" because we know that already. Go more in-depth, recommend something more obscure, maybe you really like the Edgar Burroughs Band or really think that The Pretty Things made some lost psych classics, go with that. People are coming to this for recommendations ultimately, I don't think we're looking for a wiki page on a genre. I think some history is important to provide context, but the threads should be a nice balance between history, recommendations, and discussion.

Now, I would say with the more specialized or obscure genres, you can't really assume any recommendations is too obvious. Like, with psych rock (to keep using that as an example), we all know The Beatles, we all know Cream. Mentioning them off-hand is fine, but I think it's safe to assume we're all well-aware of these bands. But in a genre like, say, black metal, there are likely many people on this forum who have zero knowledge of the genre, and therefore it should not be assumed that any recommendation is obvious.

I think we also want to avoid going to broad. A thread about "Rock music" might as well be a thread called "Describe the universe and give examples". It's too broad. I think the point of the GE is to bring to light some lesser-known genres and give a good foundation for people to get into those genres. If we want to expand this to well-known genres, that's great, but I think it should be more focused on in-depth recommendations, rather than laying a foundation for the genre.

I don't know if any of that rambling post makes sense, hopefully it does.
_________________
2023 Chart

Early Psychedelic Rock

Electronic Chart

RoundTheBend
I miss the comfort in being sad

Location: Ground Control

RockyRaccoon wrote:

Personally, I think GE should stick with genres, but doing periods could work, just reframing it in the context of the genre. For example, instead of doing the psychedelic movement of the 60s, you do, as part of a psych-rock thread, the 60s.

I will say though, that a sure-fire way to make sure no one is interested in this is by writing up a bunch of stuff we all already know. Like, if you're writing about psych rock in the 60s, don't write "Hey The Beatles were pretty good here's some albums by them you should listen to" because we know that already. Go more in-depth, recommend something more obscure, maybe you really like the Edgar Burroughs Band or really think that The Pretty Things made some lost psych classics, go with that. People are coming to this for recommendations ultimately, I don't think we're looking for a wiki page on a genre. I think some history is important to provide context, but the threads should be a nice balance between history, recommendations, and discussion.

Now, I would say with the more specialized or obscure genres, you can't really assume any recommendations is too obvious. Like, with psych rock (to keep using that as an example), we all know The Beatles, we all know Cream. Mentioning them off-hand is fine, but I think it's safe to assume we're all well-aware of these bands. But in a genre like, say, black metal, there are likely many people on this forum who have zero knowledge of the genre, and therefore it should not be assumed that any recommendation is obvious.

I think we also want to avoid going to broad. A thread about "Rock music" might as well be a thread called "Describe the universe and give examples". It's too broad. I think the point of the GE is to bring to light some lesser-known genres and give a good foundation for people to get into those genres. If we want to expand this to well-known genres, that's great, but I think it should be more focused on in-depth recommendations, rather than laying a foundation for the genre.

I don't know if any of that rambling post makes sense, hopefully it does.

It did make sense, thanks.

I guess that means I'm out. I don't have any specialized knowledge of anything.

RockyRaccoon
Is it solipsistic in here or is it just me?

Gender: Male
Age: 33
Location: Maryland

Moderator

sethmadsen wrote:

RockyRaccoon wrote:

Personally, I think GE should stick with genres, but doing periods could work, just reframing it in the context of the genre. For example, instead of doing the psychedelic movement of the 60s, you do, as part of a psych-rock thread, the 60s.

I will say though, that a sure-fire way to make sure no one is interested in this is by writing up a bunch of stuff we all already know. Like, if you're writing about psych rock in the 60s, don't write "Hey The Beatles were pretty good here's some albums by them you should listen to" because we know that already. Go more in-depth, recommend something more obscure, maybe you really like the Edgar Burroughs Band or really think that The Pretty Things made some lost psych classics, go with that. People are coming to this for recommendations ultimately, I don't think we're looking for a wiki page on a genre. I think some history is important to provide context, but the threads should be a nice balance between history, recommendations, and discussion.

Now, I would say with the more specialized or obscure genres, you can't really assume any recommendations is too obvious. Like, with psych rock (to keep using that as an example), we all know The Beatles, we all know Cream. Mentioning them off-hand is fine, but I think it's safe to assume we're all well-aware of these bands. But in a genre like, say, black metal, there are likely many people on this forum who have zero knowledge of the genre, and therefore it should not be assumed that any recommendation is obvious.

I think we also want to avoid going to broad. A thread about "Rock music" might as well be a thread called "Describe the universe and give examples". It's too broad. I think the point of the GE is to bring to light some lesser-known genres and give a good foundation for people to get into those genres. If we want to expand this to well-known genres, that's great, but I think it should be more focused on in-depth recommendations, rather than laying a foundation for the genre.

I don't know if any of that rambling post makes sense, hopefully it does.

It did make sense, thanks.

I guess that means I'm out. I don't have any specialized knowledge of anything.

I don't think you necessarily have to have specialized knowledge, I mean we're not looking for a savant or something. It's more your take on the genre or whatever it is your doing. If you want to do some insanely obscure genre like monastic chants or something, that's cool, but if you wanna do something more mainstream, that's totally fine too.

Even if a person doesn't create the thread, discussion is something I think should definitely be encouraged, and a way to do that is including your own take on the genre or some of your own recommendations. I don't want anyone to feel excluded from this because they don't feel they have the musical knowledge to handle it.
_________________
2023 Chart

Early Psychedelic Rock

Electronic Chart

Romanelli
Bone Swah

Gender: Male
Location: Broomfield, Colorado

Moderator

Pentagonal wrote:

It looks interesting, but this is a small community, so it might be an uphill battle to keep it going. Definitely keep the OPs short. People are more likely to read and discuss if they don't have to devote a lot of time to it. Also, I've seen a lot of "discussions" here turn into personal attacks, and if these threads go the same way, it will obviously discourage participation. As far as I can tell, this forum appears to be unmoderated, so members of the community would have to be proactive in discouraging that kind of thing.

It's moderated. We just have a great group of people here.
_________________
May we all get to heaven
'Fore the devil knows we're dead...

RoundTheBend
I miss the comfort in being sad

Location: Ground Control

RockyRaccoon wrote:

sethmadsen wrote:

RockyRaccoon wrote:

Personally, I think GE should stick with genres, but doing periods could work, just reframing it in the context of the genre. For example, instead of doing the psychedelic movement of the 60s, you do, as part of a psych-rock thread, the 60s.

I will say though, that a sure-fire way to make sure no one is interested in this is by writing up a bunch of stuff we all already know. Like, if you're writing about psych rock in the 60s, don't write "Hey The Beatles were pretty good here's some albums by them you should listen to" because we know that already. Go more in-depth, recommend something more obscure, maybe you really like the Edgar Burroughs Band or really think that The Pretty Things made some lost psych classics, go with that. People are coming to this for recommendations ultimately, I don't think we're looking for a wiki page on a genre. I think some history is important to provide context, but the threads should be a nice balance between history, recommendations, and discussion.

Now, I would say with the more specialized or obscure genres, you can't really assume any recommendations is too obvious. Like, with psych rock (to keep using that as an example), we all know The Beatles, we all know Cream. Mentioning them off-hand is fine, but I think it's safe to assume we're all well-aware of these bands. But in a genre like, say, black metal, there are likely many people on this forum who have zero knowledge of the genre, and therefore it should not be assumed that any recommendation is obvious.

I think we also want to avoid going to broad. A thread about "Rock music" might as well be a thread called "Describe the universe and give examples". It's too broad. I think the point of the GE is to bring to light some lesser-known genres and give a good foundation for people to get into those genres. If we want to expand this to well-known genres, that's great, but I think it should be more focused on in-depth recommendations, rather than laying a foundation for the genre.

I don't know if any of that rambling post makes sense, hopefully it does.

It did make sense, thanks.

I guess that means I'm out. I don't have any specialized knowledge of anything.

I don't think you necessarily have to have specialized knowledge, I mean we're not looking for a savant or something. It's more your take on the genre or whatever it is your doing. If you want to do some insanely obscure genre like monastic chants or something, that's cool, but if you wanna do something more mainstream, that's totally fine too.

Even if a person doesn't create the thread, discussion is something I think should definitely be encouraged, and a way to do that is including your own take on the genre or some of your own recommendations. I don't want anyone to feel excluded from this because they don't feel they have the musical knowledge to handle it.

Ok cool. I'll pitch in where I can.

Pentagonal

Romanelli wrote:

It's moderated. We just have a great group of people here.

Seems to me like a lot of them are assholes, but then I already said some of my friends are assholes so what's it to me I guess.

undefined

Pentagonal wrote:

Seems to me like a lot of them are assholes, but then I already said some of my friends are assholes so what's it to me I guess.

I think you just happened to join at an odd time tbh where some emotions were running hotter than is the norm. In three years here I can safely say this community is largely supportive and civilized and our only real problem with discussions lies in our tendency to revert to a string of "listen to this! [insert album cover]" posts. It's the least assholeish forum I've been a part of in any case

RoundTheBend
I miss the comfort in being sad

Location: Ground Control

dividesbyzero wrote:

I think you just happened to join at an odd time tbh where some emotions were running hotter than is the norm. In three years here I can safely say this community is largely supportive and civilized and our only real problem with discussions lies in our tendency to revert to a string of "listen to this! [insert album cover]" posts. It's the least assholeish forum I've been a part of in any case

I'd agree, I'm a complete idiot and have disagreements with people, but even the highly opinionated Satie and I were able to say our piece, but then amicably understand each other. I respected his patience and I think he mine.