rec|use wrote:the internet is a good tool
online zines
paper publications
maybe a music history class
those would be usefull
I'm going to dispute part of this just because I feel it's needed.
In the observation of the various "genres" out there and the various online zines, paper publications, etc. I've only noted a penchant for adding more barely definable labels and creating more useless terms than for any attempt at classification.
While not going into any specifics, it's fairly common and reasonable to expect that "band A" will be declared by one group to be EBM, another to be IDM, and yet another may call it Electroclash, while yet a fourth will pull out some other "genre" to dump a band into.
Or the desperate attempts to legitimize a "genre" by rewriting history and labeling a variety of older groups as belonging to the new "genre" that has in reality no history or definable characteristics.
Essentially, I view "genres" as frequently used today as a form of hair-splitting.
Not to say that there aren't some genres out there. However, if you can't define something successfully and clearly, it's most likely a subset of something larger and actually definable, not an independent beast in it's on right.
I can say Country and most people will think of a country artist.
I can say Lounge and most people will have a clear impression.
I can say Pop and people will have a clear impression.
I can say IDM, and people will just scratch their heads.
I personally think people have been getting to happy with coining new "genre" labels. And most internet material is an excellent example of this chaos that is being created.