I believe it does. By having to conform to a certain "genre" bands are limited in what music they can produce.
And, is music being over-classified? Do we really need to define metal into nu, speed, thrash, goth black, death, etc. I'm just starting to listen to metal and I think all the different types seem a bit intimdating and I'm sure it scares off some listeners.
Anyway, thoughts?

I suppose classification can stifle creativity, but look at Wierd Al.

The metal up to today just kinda falls into those groups naturally. May as well not fight it.

------------------
I am Darth Slaw.
The Dark Lord of the Sith,
And part of the Nightfire mod team

[This message has been edited by Darth Slaw (edited March 02, 2004).]

I agree. People have thrown around the term "nu metal," but it seems to have been used simply for metal bands that person doesn't like, as though it'd kill them if those bands were somehow put in the same category as bands they like.

------------------
"LC Tusken: the idiot is the person who follows the idiot and your not following me your insulting me your following the path of a idiot so that makes you the idiot"
NMGOH || Jack Chick preaches it

But "nu-metal" really is a subgenre. It's rap combined with metal. Plus it has a tendency to be really whiny...

Of course, on the plus side, they don't have really awful long hair or jackets over bare chests, or have to be in the same general genre as "Manowar" which gives nu-metal some advantages...

I'm just amazed at how many bands go from the Alternative section, to the Popular, and back to Alternative at the record store.

------------------
The Massassi-Map
There is no spoon.

Well, it's simply human nature to categorize things; it just happens. Genres are not inherently good or bad. They can be useful because they allow someone to get a vague idea what a band is like without ever hearing the music. However, one should not limit oneself to a single genre, nor should a band be afraid to expand beyond "their" genre.

In fact, I find some of the best bands to be those that mix genres or are hard to classify.

------------------
"I am downright amazed at what I can destroy with just a hammer."
-Atom and His Package

I know it's our nature to classify, I'm just saying how far is to far?

Classification of music is a good thing as long as bands don't take it too much into concideration. What I mean by that is that a given punk band shouldn't hesitate to write a couple of soft rock songs just because they'd classify outside their designated sub-genre. Let the music be classified by the listeners after it's creation, not before.

------------------
When bread becomes toast, it can never go back to being bread again.

I agree. These are the bands thinking beyond the boundaries and creating new music beyond the genres that exist (so eventually a new genre name is thought up, this has happened a lot recently). My band don't really have a genre... we just write whatever sounds good to us, I always thought it was the best way.

I usually listen to a band then put them into a category using my own tastes as guideline, I just rate the music for what it is when I first hear it, I really hate the music press for crap like that.

------------------
Drugs & Stupidity, Tons of it.

Classifying a band into one category can hurt them as well. Some bands will try something in a new genre of music and the fans will jump down their throats for not staying true to their "roots". It really depends.

------------------
I'm not an actor. I just play one on TV.

So why is everyone calling SoaD nu-metal? Whatever the hell it is I friggin love it.

------------------
I’m not going to die, I’m going to see if I was ever alive. - Spike
It's not your right to decide whether they live or die. They deserve a chance! - Vash
BABIES EVERYWHERE!!!

Regardless, a band does have roots.

Even if they are not specific to a single genre, there are very few bands that can create an early album, and then have a second album which is completely different without getting shot at.

Plus, bands can't simply produce tons of different types of music. If one band produced a CD which had Techno elements on Track 3, Punk on Track 7, Metal on Track 2, Pop on Track 4, Orchestral on Track 9... Well they'd have to be the freaking Beatles, to be quite honest, and it'd have to be the white album, because no other album has really sucessfully covered a wide range of music to the degree of that album.

It doesn't harm creativity at all. Classification happens naturally, and its totally human nature. What is annoying is when these stupid sub-genres are created.. For example "Grunge" was just a totally ridiculous label (and in reality it was just some commerical thing for record labels/MTV to make money).

------------------
To myself I surrender to the one I'll never please.
But I still try to run on.
You know I still try to run on. But it's all or none.

Eddie Vedder

And now, the jazz perspective:

I don't think so. On a single album of "jazz" you could have say, a latin song, a swing tune, a bebop, a funk, a blues...the list is pretty much infinite.

------------------
Shut up. I'm GOING to do this whether you like it or not.

Yeah, that's the problem with all these genres... There's too many of them. When you have genres like pop-punk-rap-country-old-metal, it gets kinda weird.

With perhaps the exception of The Clash's Sandinista!

------------------
"I am downright amazed at what I can destroy with just a hammer."
-Atom and His Package

Hehe..I'd really like to see someone try to categorize The Clash into one particular genre...I don't think it'd be possible.