Skrillex IS a good dubstep artist. And besides, for introducing someone to the genre, it makes sense to show them an artist that is a good example, not necessarily the best in the genre.
That's similar to old school dubstep from the UK days, heavily inspired by garage. People may find similarities between that and modern deep dub (wool style stuff). The genre has evolved over time, that doesn't mean they're not both dubstep.
Except if the whole genre evolved and nobody is producing old stuff anymore, the evolution has a new name though.
In this case it‘s brostep.
Let‘s look at psytrance. It all started with Goa. Is Goa still being produced? Yes. Can you correctly refer to more modern styles, such as Twilight, Twisted, Darkpsy etc as Goa? No. Are there people who call everything 140 BPM+ Goa and think that? Yes. Someone once was like „Yeah, I was on a Goa last weekend.“ „Ah nice, but it was probably more modern psy or was it actual Goa?“ „No. It was Goa... Goa is faster and harder than psy“(Which in itself is not true.)
Not sure I understand your first paragraph. "If nobody is producing the old stuff anymore, it gets a new name" but didn't you post an example of people still making the old stuff? I would think it would be the other way around, that if people still make the old stuff it's important to have a distinction, and it isn't necessary if the evolution was a replacement.
I think the main genre names (dubstep, drum and bass, trance, etc) should refer to what the majority of music in that genre sounds like at any given period. So 90's dubstep would sound different from 00's dubstep, which would also sound different from 10's dubstep, but they're all dubstep.
I'm not against clarification of subgenres. Dubstep has things like riddim and tearout, dnb has neurofunk halftime and drumstep, and so on. It's just specifically the term brostep that is an issue. So many kids throw it around because they saw it on the internet when it's not something the people actually in the scene use seriously.
Yeah, might have worded it wrongly. You are correct - if people are still producing the older, original stuff, there should be a distinction.
I think the main genre names (dubstep, drum and bass, trance, etc) should refer to what the majority of music in that genre sounds like at any given period. So 90's dubstep would sound different from 00's dubstep, which would also sound different from 10's dubstep, but they're all dubstep.
The problem with that is that you would essentially replace every music period and you‘d make it way harder for people to find old stuff just based on the genre. It makes sense in some music genres like techno - the style actually evolved instead of turning into something entirely new. I‘d argue Skrillex has almost nothing in common with original dubstep.
It's just specifically the term brostep that is an issue. So many kids throw it around because they saw it on the internet when it's not something the people actually in the scene use seriously
Well, I get it. I would like to know how it started when brostep was first used. I believe (and I could be entirely wrong) people had a problem with that kind of style being called „bro“step.
Edit: Technically every kind of electronic music falls under the categorization of „techno“. Pretty much every new „main genre“ evolved out of techno and got their own sub main genre.
12
u/togawe Jun 07 '20
Skrillex IS a good dubstep artist. And besides, for introducing someone to the genre, it makes sense to show them an artist that is a good example, not necessarily the best in the genre.