Music style most like of yourse

[Pogo]

Yeah as a matter of fact -- I am.
But not one who's trying to sell anything. I don't dabble in bullshit, period. You know that.

Just because some tin-ear huckster thinks he can make an extra buck by selling a term that is clearly unworkable bullshit --- doesn't mean you have to bend over for it. Use your head.

Then you must suck a your job. The music genre "dance" is fairly popular..

It may be. That's marketing. Marketing can sell a refrigerator to an Inuit.

But that doesn't make the term legitimate.

Music genres are bullshit. Fair enough.

Oh they absolutely are. This is all begat of a convenience tool for selling records. In the earlier days of recording we didn't have all these sections, which by definition limit what can be done within them --- we just had music. Some of that had elements of blues .... but also jazz .... but also country.... but it was also pop.... musical expression was a lot freer. Ralph Peer and those guys recorded Fiddin' John Carson, got surprised that he sold, and decided to call it "hillbilly music" and created a series with its own set of numbers. The Carter Family and Jimmie Rodgers showed up and the created the "Country" series. And of course the "race records". None of the musicians called what they were doing by any of those terms -- they thought they were just "playing music".

Some of my favorite recorded music of all time comes from the 1930s. Recording techniques were still primitive but they had vastly improved, and the record companies had not yet channeled all these genres into implying what this or that one "should" sound like -- they hadn't paved over the creative process yet. Hence you had vaudevillians and Klezmers and jazzers and fiddlers and crooners and bluesers unrestricted by the labels they'd all get hung on them later, all coming straight from the Heart.

What I do in my record libraries is simply for convenience in helping to find something when the library contains tens of thousands of recordings. There are always those that defy categorization, and as long as they're done well I celebrate them as a small victory.

Walked into Jim Russell's music store in New Orleans once (at least 20 years ago) and was scratching my head trying to figure out his pattern. I don't remember who the specific artists were but one was "over here" while another artist doing the same kind of music was way "over there". I couldn't make sense out of it to navigate. So I went to the proprietor and asked him how his shop was set up ------ turns out he's got his records sorted according to the customer, i.e. he wants his white customers to browse "over here" and his black customers to browse "over there".

Quit being such a snob, Pogo.

Not a "snob" --- a Populist. I *will not* allow Corporatia to abuse my language. Don't enable the slimeballs.

 

[ChrisL]

Then you must suck a your job. The music genre "dance" is fairly popular..

It may be. That's marketing. Marketing can sell a refrigerator to an Inuit.

But that doesn't make the term legitimate.

Music genres are bullshit. Fair enough.

Oh they absolutely are. This is all begat of a convenience tool for selling records. In the earlier days of recording we didn't have all these sections, which by definition limit what can be done within them --- we just had music. Some of that had elements of blues .... but also jazz .... but also country.... but it was also pop.... musical expression was a lot freer. Ralph Peer and those guys recorded Fiddin' John Carson, got surprised that he sold, and decided to call it "hillbilly music" and created a series with its own set of numbers. The Carter Family and Jimmie Rodgers showed up and the created the "Country" series. And of course the "race records". None of the musicians called what they were doing by any of those terms -- they thought they were just "playing music".

Some of my favorite recorded music of all time comes from the 1930s. Recording techniques were still primitive but they had vastly improved, and the record companies had not yet channeled all these genres into implying what this or that one "should" sound like -- they hadn't paved over the creative process yet. Hence you had vaudevillians and Klezmers and jazzers and fiddlers and crooners and bluesers unrestricted by the labels they'd all get hung on them later, all coming straight from the Heart.

What I do in my record libraries is simply for convenience in helping to find something when the library contains tens of thousands of recordings. There are always those that defy categorization, and as long as they're done well I celebrate them as a small victory.

Walked into Jim Russell's music store in New Orleans once (at least 20 years ago) and was scratching my head trying to figure out his pattern. I don't remember who the specific artists were but one was "over here" while another artist doing the same kind of music was way "over there". I couldn't make sense out of it to navigate. So I went to the proprietor and asked him how his shop was set up ------ turns out he's got his records sorted according to the customer, i.e. he wants his white customers to browse "over here" and his black customers to browse "over there".

Quit being such a snob, Pogo.

Not a "snob" --- a Populist. I *will not* allow Corporatia to abuse my language. Don't enable the slimeballs.

I like dance music, as do many, many people.

 

[Geaux4it]

Me and Mrs Geaux4it like Motown when working around the house. 80's New Wave when we are feeling our oats. And good ole Classic Rock when I remember my youth. And country when visit mom in Tennessee

-Geaux

 

[Pogo]

It may be. That's marketing. Marketing can sell a refrigerator to an Inuit.

But that doesn't make the term legitimate.

Music genres are bullshit. Fair enough.

Oh they absolutely are. This is all begat of a convenience tool for selling records. In the earlier days of recording we didn't have all these sections, which by definition limit what can be done within them --- we just had music. Some of that had elements of blues .... but also jazz .... but also country.... but it was also pop.... musical expression was a lot freer. Ralph Peer and those guys recorded Fiddin' John Carson, got surprised that he sold, and decided to call it "hillbilly music" and created a series with its own set of numbers. The Carter Family and Jimmie Rodgers showed up and the created the "Country" series. And of course the "race records". None of the musicians called what they were doing by any of those terms -- they thought they were just "playing music".

Some of my favorite recorded music of all time comes from the 1930s. Recording techniques were still primitive but they had vastly improved, and the record companies had not yet channeled all these genres into implying what this or that one "should" sound like -- they hadn't paved over the creative process yet. Hence you had vaudevillians and Klezmers and jazzers and fiddlers and crooners and bluesers unrestricted by the labels they'd all get hung on them later, all coming straight from the Heart.

What I do in my record libraries is simply for convenience in helping to find something when the library contains tens of thousands of recordings. There are always those that defy categorization, and as long as they're done well I celebrate them as a small victory.

Walked into Jim Russell's music store in New Orleans once (at least 20 years ago) and was scratching my head trying to figure out his pattern. I don't remember who the specific artists were but one was "over here" while another artist doing the same kind of music was way "over there". I couldn't make sense out of it to navigate. So I went to the proprietor and asked him how his shop was set up ------ turns out he's got his records sorted according to the customer, i.e. he wants his white customers to browse "over here" and his black customers to browse "over there".

Quit being such a snob, Pogo.

Not a "snob" --- a Populist. I *will not* allow Corporatia to abuse my language. Don't enable the slimeballs.

I like dance music, as do many, many people.

People all over the world do. And each culture has its own. Hey look --- here come some now....

We should prolly drop this before that old fart with the twerking to an instrumental version of "Light My Fire" sees this.

 

[ChrisL]

Music genres are bullshit. Fair enough.

Oh they absolutely are. This is all begat of a convenience tool for selling records. In the earlier days of recording we didn't have all these sections, which by definition limit what can be done within them --- we just had music. Some of that had elements of blues .... but also jazz .... but also country.... but it was also pop.... musical expression was a lot freer. Ralph Peer and those guys recorded Fiddin' John Carson, got surprised that he sold, and decided to call it "hillbilly music" and created a series with its own set of numbers. The Carter Family and Jimmie Rodgers showed up and the created the "Country" series. And of course the "race records". None of the musicians called what they were doing by any of those terms -- they thought they were just "playing music".

Some of my favorite recorded music of all time comes from the 1930s. Recording techniques were still primitive but they had vastly improved, and the record companies had not yet channeled all these genres into implying what this or that one "should" sound like -- they hadn't paved over the creative process yet. Hence you had vaudevillians and Klezmers and jazzers and fiddlers and crooners and bluesers unrestricted by the labels they'd all get hung on them later, all coming straight from the Heart.

What I do in my record libraries is simply for convenience in helping to find something when the library contains tens of thousands of recordings. There are always those that defy categorization, and as long as they're done well I celebrate them as a small victory.

Walked into Jim Russell's music store in New Orleans once (at least 20 years ago) and was scratching my head trying to figure out his pattern. I don't remember who the specific artists were but one was "over here" while another artist doing the same kind of music was way "over there". I couldn't make sense out of it to navigate. So I went to the proprietor and asked him how his shop was set up ------ turns out he's got his records sorted according to the customer, i.e. he wants his white customers to browse "over here" and his black customers to browse "over there".

Quit being such a snob, Pogo.

Not a "snob" --- a Populist. I *will not* allow Corporatia to abuse my language. Don't enable the slimeballs.

I like dance music, as do many, many people.

People all over the world do. And each culture has its own. Hey look --- here come some now....

We should prolly drop this before that old fart with the twerking to an instrumental version of "Light My Fire" sees this.

 

[ChrisL]

 

[Two Thumbs]

 

[ChrisL]

Pretty but not something I could sit and listen to for any length of time, TBH. I like to ROCK AND ROLL!!!

 

[Two Thumbs]

Pretty but not something I could sit and listen to for any length of time, TBH. I like to ROCK AND ROLL!!!

I still got it running.

 

[Pogo]

Nice -- if a bit overproduced.

I like more bare-bones.....

​

Just saw this band last weekend in Asheville...

​

 

[Militants]

Country music are best of manny american humans ????

 

[ChrisL]

Country music are best of manny american humans ????

What? What's a "manny?"

 

[Pogo]

Country music are best of manny american humans ????

What? What's a "manny?"

I KNOW you know, Manny!?

​

What I find more chuckling is his strange connection of "country music" with "humans".

 

[ChrisL]

Country music are best of manny american humans ????

What? What's a "manny?"

I KNOW you know, Manny!?

​

What I find more chuckling is his strange connection of "country music" with "humans".

Ohhhhh, that Manny! He was pretty good when he played for the Sox.

Even those of us who don't listen to country are all Umans.

 

[FJO]

The choices in the OP are limited and geared for the taste of the uncultured.