Entertainment desk
< March 27	<< Feb \| March \| Apr >>	March 29 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Entertainment Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

March 28

Opposite of math rock?

What is the opposite of math rock? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.42.31.250 (talk) 05:33, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Humanities gas? —Tamfang (talk) 07:28, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Tamfang: I was going to say softcore pornography. Math rock, for those who don't know about it. It's descended from Prog rock, and the opposite of that is punk rock, but math rock incorporates elements of punk. It could be considered Prog rock responding to punk. Maybe New Wave, then? Where Math rock focuses more on advanced technicality even if it ends up being discordant, distorted, and generally an acquired taste; New Wave focuses more on being simple and catchy. Ian.thomson (talk) 07:38, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

In that case I'd consider folk music to be the opposite of math rock, or a capella music: something completely untechy. --TammyMoet (talk) 09:09, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Despite the possible conceptual problems, I think New Wave and Folk are both pretty good suggestions. On a whim I googled looked in to who does both and I found this [1] page describing the best New Wave Folk acts, e.g Old Crow Medicine Show (performing their semi-famous "Wagon Wheel" cover of Dylan here [2]). That is probably the most opposite of math rock I can imagine :) SemanticMantis (talk) 14:30, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I would maintain that it is not possible to describe one type of music as being the opposite of another type. All music lies on a spectrum - meaning that there are some common factors to all muysic, and an enormous range of variation between different types. It is like asking if one type of cheese is the opposite to a different type. 109.150.174.93 (talk) 13:40, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Right. People often ask questions about these vague "opposites" but we (as yet) have no over-arching theory of oppositeness. We do have an article on opposite. Things mostly make sense on a linear spectrum. Beyond that, we have to specify what types of traits or attributes in our schema can be inverted, and how many of them we require to be so to consider two things opposite. Anyway, I think OP would do much better posting this question at this forum, which is specifically designed for discussion of math rock and related music. SemanticMantis (talk) 14:23, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Music doesn't even lie on a spectrum. Music contains many different elements, various combinations of which result in the various genres. If there is a rule 34 of music; if you can think of it, there's some band who fits that genre. Folk Hip Hop. Acoustic funk. Rap metal. Pop Punk. Etc. --Jayron 32 14:30, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Right, I was trying to say opposites only work well when considering things that do lay on a simple spectrum, and music is certainly not that :) SemanticMantis (talk) 14:45, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

But some of its characteristics do. Complex, atypical, irregular, odd, angular, extended, dissonant...whatever music is characterized by the other things is the opposite of math. Doo-wop, by my calculations. InedibleHulk (talk) 22:55, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The lowest common denominator? Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 19:49, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I was going to suggest Grammar Rock --LarryMac | Talk 20:50, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe in other languages, but someone tried to reform English to be based on Calculus or something. That's why we don't use no double or triple negatives.

The way to find the opposite of a genre works like this:

But first, when talking specifically about the math rock genre, there are 2 ways of checking the opposite of math rock, this depends of what the person meant when he said "the opposite of math rock".

Before we talk about opposites, look at this:

Rock = X

Math Rock = X + Y = Z

On the first method of finding the opposite of math rock, you list ALL the characteristics that form Z and then find their opposites, and then look for a genre or album or song that has ALL those characteristics.

The second method (that produce a different thing) would be to list down all the characteristics of Y and find their opposites, then find a genre or song that has ALL the opposite characteristics you found, PLUS all the characteristics of X.

This (well those) is/are the only reliable method of finding the opposite of some genre, when you try to find the opposite of some genre by guessing you will probably do it wrong.

Another positive thing about this idea, is that allows you to invent new genres without eureka moment or imagination or huge musical exposure/background(well you need to think about the idea I am proposing here or at least read my text).

PS: No pun intended on the X + Y = Z part. 201.79.76.191 (talk) 17:06, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Here is a precursor from the 1960s to math rock. MarnetteD|Talk 19:05, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

So by your logic, and using the first method, a rabbit's foot is the opposite of a slab of granite. Because the former is small, light weight, soft, fuzzy, and light colored, while the latter is large, heavy, hard, smooth, and dark colored. Some might say this is a reasonable claim, others might disagree. This is sort of off topic for the thread, but if anyone wants to discuss opposites in more detail my talk page is open :) SemanticMantis (talk) 14:42, 30 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

http://everynoise.com/engenremap.html "is an ongoing attempt at an algorithmically-generated, readability-adjusted scatter-plot of the musical genre-space." from this, a notional "opposite" of math rock appears to me to be something close to swedish reggae, but others might come to different conclusions. Note that clicking each name will play a representative sample. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195) 90.199.208.67 (talk) 21:29, 2 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]