My thoughts on the matter is that the genre follows the music. Barring highly formulaic musical genres such as the blues, there are very few recent works or artists that easily fall into a certain genre. We just slap the genres on so it's a little easier to find similar stuff to what you like, so it does serve a definite function. But I don't think many people say "I want to create some post-punk industrial ambient pop that takes cues from early-70s prog and welsh folk" or whatever the fuck. They just make the music, and then they (or someone else) slaps the genre on there so fans of the genre can find them hot, esoteric tunes. This is pretty much the case for any form of media, of course. Not just music. It's important not to get too caught up in genres and just recognize music for what it is: a free expression of human creativity. If you let your music get restricted by genre (and the demand for it), you get shit like today's hip-hop and country (may allah forgive me for mentioning it).
I recently found an artist called Pajjama. They make some of the most enjoyably weird-ass music you could ask for.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3LwjRUC5F3ghttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oQE2gUCCF1c
You're completely right. When making this thread, I was in a more modern mindset where all media is freely available to everyone. So I didn't exactly think about the origins of the genres. But this worries me that the internet may be contributing to destroying these cultures.>>337
I guess in a way they follow each-other. When one makes something so original that couldn't be defined with a genre. People would get inspired to make something similar. And from there, a new genre is born.
Nice music, it's llike chiptune funk>>338>But this worries me that the internet may be contributing to destroying these cultures.
Maybe, but it also gives the possibility to the creation of many new ones