I was thinking, and I concluded: it would be more difficult to redefine rock music at this point than electronic music.

Mmmm i think i agree with you there glako-fahn

Hmmm... It really depends. There has been so much done in the name of rock. But if we got another Zepplin or Beatles...



But I do agree, electric would be easier to reinvent than rock

DELETED

im not sure what you mean - :?



explain!

I didn't fukin get it either, I was just too embarressed to say :-//

I think what they mean is, Take rock/electronica nd put a whole new tiwst or image on it. Like some one/group comes out with a new record that's still clearly in its genre but does something completely new and opens up the door for more of that genre's music to move into.



Have you ever listened to a song and expected ok i know that there are going to be guitars drums singing yada yada but it does something completely different than your expectations. You're like "Wow! I never new that (insert genre here) could do that.



When synth first came into wider use, rock groups began to incoporate them more. There was kinda a mini era in music where synths were actually part of the "rock orcestra". I tihnk we're seeing a rebirth of that today. Groups today are merging lots of genre's in a move that is making their sound something uniquely theirs (before everyone starts doing it). One example of this genre merging, synth pop. A mix of rock, emo, and electronic.

I think you're right EBW, good explanation.



Fusion of the genres has been around for quite a while, but it's more evident in (all sorts) of music nowadays - the world seems to be smaller because, in a way, our knowledge of it is greater and we have wider access to be influenced by all kinds of music from anywhere in the world if we open our ears. I also think technology and the ease of use in terms of electronic mediums plays a big factor in this. If you have the tools, then use them I say. To me, fusion between genres has always meant that it is possible to transgress musical boundaries and I think this is a good thing.



I think there will always be records or bands that will "reinvent" certain genres - but the word "reinvent" isn't one I'd through around casually...

That's the one, thanks EBW. :)

So we could say that redefinition is when someone does things differently and succeeds? (and it's progressive when it doesn't work out X-D )



The electronic music genre (which is a term for awfully different kinds of music already) is easier because people expect electronic music to be groundbreaking. You are not bound by any rules with it. Unless, of course, if you want to advertise yourself as being for an example nu-skool breaks artist. Then people will expect those basslines and everything. And the same thing with trance, it's quite as (or even more) nonexceptional as rock.



Speaking of rock, the problem is that if some artist/group wants to do something differently, for an example add those synths, then all sorts of purists will come and say that what you do is not rock, it's electronic music. Some will say it's random button-pressing and refuse to listen to it, but even those who are more open-minded are more happily going to place the music into electronic music genre.



The question is how can you redefine rock music without being put into another genre ?



(even more so today than in the past, because as they say, every chord and line has been used already)