>>If someone say "This shit ain't real hip-hop, it sucks!",
>>that statement IMO means that that person have certain sonic
>>expectations for Hip-Hop that the piece of music fails to
>>reach.
>>
>>I guess you think it's wrong to have that but what if those
>>sonic expectations contribute to the concept of *quality* in
>>the Hip-Hop genre for said person? Is that wrong?
>
>you're not doing much to sway me in my view that genre
>concepts differ from person to person.

There are lots of things where the concepts differ from person to person. That the concepts differ from person to person has nothing to do with those things relevancy or existance IMO... If a lot of people-including the artists themselves-believe that genre (=a form of classification) X exist and they all have different definitions, the very fact that some vague (and the vagueness is up for debate, it's really only for some fringe-acts where the definition becomes a problem) idea of what it constitute even exist is enough for me.

to answer your
>question, no, i don't think it's wrong, people can listen to
>music however they please, but just because someone says a
>song "sucks" because it's not hip-hop enough *to that person*
>doesn't mean the song failed and doesn't live up to the
>supposed "real hip-hop" standard, which wildly differs
>depending on who you ask.

But if he/she said "it's not catchy enough", would that be OK? If the person is looking for catchiness (more abstract of a concept than genre IMO), that's a perfectly valid criticism that may be interesting to hear for other people looking for catchiness, regardless of how their definitions might vary.

Same for people looking for "real" Hip-Hop (and yes, I don't think the concept of "real" Hip-Hop is that vague; when people say that, I have an idea of what they mean and I suspect at least most people here on OKP do too, regardless of whether we agree about the definition or not)


>what the listener is really bringing is what they like and
>don't like to hear. you can assign that to genre if you want,
>but i think it's clear everyone has their own understanding of
>a genre.

Yes. However, if you consider how many people that stick to music in a few genres and even use the genre-classifications themselves to describe what they are listening to, I find the concept very real, regardless of its vagueness.


>i agree, but i'm opposed to treating genre like it's objective
>and rigid when it isn't at all. furthermore, the more i
>listen, the less use i have for genre overall. i think some
>people genre themselves right out of enjoying something.

I know people who only listen to one genre that are more openminded to certain musical concepts (heard across genres) than people who listen to "everything". If you chose to limit yourself to your perception of a genre (=generally a set of sonic attributes, most genres are more "wide" than people give them credit for) on one hand or only music that's sad or funky or esoteric or whatever on the other, does it really matter? In the first case, what we are looking for fits into a perceived genre, in the latter, it could be described/classified in a different way. So what?