"band" as the catch-all term for a musical entity

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

It bothers me that "band" is often used as the catch-all word for every kind of musical artist -- bands, singers, DJs, MCs, etc. I'm filing this post under "Rockism" and I think it's an apt choice of category; "rockism" as I interpret it is a habit of being so ensconced in the rock 'n' roll culture that you start believing rock is this default form of music and all else is secondary.

(Yes, I know "band" can refer to jazz ensembles and other non-rock groups. But when someone asks "What bands do you like?" that's usually not what he means.)

(Also I'm sorry if this post is REALLY FUCKING OBVIOUS but I've seen the "band" thing waaaay too much on ILM lately and I'm compelled to speak out.)

― Jody Beth Rosen (Jody Beth Rosen), Wednesday, 5 March 2003 08:56 (twenty-three years ago)

If I remember I try to put in 'artist' or 'act' which makes me sound like a bad variety show promoter but if I'm posting in a hurry I usually forget.

― Tom (Groke), Wednesday, 5 March 2003 09:05 (twenty-three years ago)

what tom sed

― weasel diesel (K1l14n), Wednesday, 5 March 2003 09:11 (twenty-three years ago)

I'm pretty used to using "artist" etc. b/c I write about electronic music so much, but it will never roll off the tongue like "band".

― Mark (MarkR), Wednesday, 5 March 2003 13:43 (twenty-three years ago)

It's just that the other options are annoying too. "Artist" is both too flowery and too generic (yes, they're artists, but they're a specific kind of artist). "Recording artist" is more accurate, but even more flowery. "Performer" is awkward and isn't even accurate sometimes -- not everyone who records is a performer. And I never liked "muso" even when I lived in the U.K. I usually try to avoid the issue altogether by using specific IDs: rocker, rapper, singer-songwriter, DJ, Icelandic chamber droner, etc. But that doesn't solve the problem of talking about music in general ("the best bands in the world," "the most important artists of 2003," etc.).

― Jesse Fox, Wednesday, 5 March 2003 15:54 (twenty-three years ago)

"What creative pools of overwhelming talent do you adore via iconophilism?"

"None."

"Never mind then."

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Wednesday, 5 March 2003 16:13 (twenty-three years ago)

I usually call Automat a band, just because calling it "my four-track project" sounds too pretentious.

― mike a (mike a), Wednesday, 5 March 2003 16:21 (twenty-three years ago)

what about "musicians" or "musician" that seems to catch-all.

― A Nairn (moretap), Wednesday, 5 March 2003 16:41 (twenty-three years ago)

I was just booking a show over the phone and used "artist" and the club booker started laughing and went on this weird rant about how hip-hop groups refer to themselves as artists. It was sort of odd (but that's the Midwest for you I guess).

― Aaron W (Aaron W), Wednesday, 5 March 2003 17:21 (twenty-three years ago)

The problem is A Nairn that if someone sez who are your favourite band at the moment and I say Sugababes then that's fair enough but if someone sez who are your favourite musicians and I say Sugababes it might look like I'm baiting them.

"group" is always better than "band" I think for describing multiple performers/musicians/whatever.

― Tom (Groke), Wednesday, 5 March 2003 17:27 (twenty-three years ago)

This strikes me as an extremely insignificant and tiny thing to get irritated about.

― Nick A. (Nick A.), Wednesday, 5 March 2003 17:32 (twenty-three years ago)

I prefer to use "artist" as a catch-all term that works with everything. However, most of the best music since 1963 has been made by bands rather than solo artists or "projects".

― Geir Hongro (GeirHong), Wednesday, 5 March 2003 17:34 (twenty-three years ago)

Remember when people used to refer to the songs on albums as "bands"? Maybe it was just the nuns at my grade school. "Children, I am now going to play side 1, band 3-'He's Got the Whole World in His Hands'. Please sing along with the mimeographed sheets I have distributed."

― Arthur (Arthur), Wednesday, 5 March 2003 17:45 (twenty-three years ago)

yeah group is def better than band; it has more vitality and zest attached i think

― schnell schnell, Wednesday, 5 March 2003 19:47 (twenty-three years ago)

my co-editor once got so sick of the word that he consulted a thesaurus for alternatives, the least reasonable of which was 'clump', which he threatened to use out of spite

― mark p (Mark P), Wednesday, 5 March 2003 20:36 (twenty-three years ago)

"the dave matthews clump"

― mark p (Mark P), Wednesday, 5 March 2003 20:36 (twenty-three years ago)

Well, I've never heard of a Rap "Band"
Also, what word would you use to replace "band" with? Quartet, Quintet and Orchestra are all too pretentious a way of describing four or five guys banging away in a garage.

― Lord Custos Epsilon (Lord Custos Epsilon), Wednesday, 5 March 2003 20:37 (twenty-three years ago)

"posse" is clearly the superior choice

― J0hn Darn1elle (J0hn Darn1elle), Wednesday, 5 March 2003 20:38 (twenty-three years ago)

clump sounds reasonable.

this is a pet peeve of mine, too, JBR. I especially remember being asked about my favorite band during all of the bland meet-and-greets and the beginning of college. It is hard to not sound pretentious saying "well, i listen to techno and there are no bands, and most of the artists are solo, but, if we have to talk about groups, i like various artists, which is actually the name of a group of people who recorded for the chain reaction label out of berlin, and this question is totally rockist" i just usually say pulp and get it over with.

― Aaron Grossman (aajjgg), Wednesday, 5 March 2003 20:42 (twenty-three years ago)

def! "cru", "posse" and "massive" are the only examples of a self-explanatory moniker actually being cool

― schnell schnell, Wednesday, 5 March 2003 20:42 (twenty-three years ago)

group or "those guys" is usually what I use unless its blatantly a band.

― Anthony Miccio (Anthony Miccio), Wednesday, 5 March 2003 20:42 (twenty-three years ago)

I have no problem with "artists" -- and given that people who make music ARE artists, I don't see why it's pretentious or flowery.

I like "musicians" if it includes non-instrumentalists. It should.

― Jody Beth Rosen (Jody Beth Rosen), Wednesday, 5 March 2003 22:34 (twenty-three years ago)

Sure they're artists. And I use the word sometimes. I dunno, I guess I've just always had a little aversion to artists who referred to themselves as such. I don't mind people saying, "I play in a band," or "I write books," or "I paint," but people who say "I'm an artist" always make me wary. Probably because my dad's a potter who always refused to call himself an "artist"; he preferred "craftsman." Tho I suppose there can be a certain kind of pretense in modesty too... Not a major issue, true, but something anyone who writes about music runs into.

― Jesse Fox, Thursday, 6 March 2003 01:39 (twenty-three years ago)

Tho I suppose there can be a certain kind of pretense in modesty too

There sure can.

― Jody Beth Rosen (Jody Beth Rosen), Thursday, 6 March 2003 01:42 (twenty-three years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.