Quick question:

[jennythereader]

Would you consider Bluegrass to be a sub-genre of Country music, or of Folk music?

Comments

[tx-cronopio.livejournal.com]

I vote folk.

[dwarven-brewer.livejournal.com]

Yes. I'd say it crosses boundary lines for both styles.

[shannon730.livejournal.com]

I vote folk, although I see it listed and considered part of country quite often...although my opinion could be based on liking country but not bluegrass...

[nounsandverbs]

I've only ever seen it listed as an adjunct of country: country/bluegrass. But I think it could also safely be considered its own style.

[stefka.livejournal.com]

I vote for separate genre; it can fit into either country or folk, but since it's always designated as bluegrass-flavored when it does, and since there are bluegrass-specific music festivals in the world, I think it's got enough of an identity to stand on its own.

[stonetimber.livejournal.com]

It is a completely separate genre, with its roots in gospel, Irish/Scottish music, and actually is a leg for blues.

[lamiagirl.livejournal.com]

I vote neither. I don't see (hear?) it as a proper subset of either.

Music

[(Anonymous)]

What came first? Folk, Bluegrass, Country! I think that what we know as bluegrass emerged after the advent of recorded music from folk music. What we know as country is entirely the product of the recording industry. Bill Monroe could look to folk. Modern bluegrass artists are more hevily influenced by electrified country music. There, clear as mud!!
Dad

Re: Music

[jennythe-reader.livejournal.com]

Thanks Dad, you're a big help. :-)

That actually does fit with my thoughts on the question. Older bluegrass feels more folky, while the newer stuff feels more like country.