what do you consider experimental music?

[u/92jonn]

What do you guys consider experimental music? just "weird" music in general?. I've been experimenting fusing elements of various genres, is that considered experimental music? This is my latest track, but i don't really know in what genre if fits because it has elements of DSBM, some elements of Ambient and Shoegaze. I always say DSBM because it's inspired on it, but i don't really know where this fits. Can it be "experimental"?

[u/jefrab]

I think of experimental music as music where the composer is experimenting with a concept or technique, probably without certainty of the outcome.

The opposite might be genre music, in which the composer is trying to achieve a much more specific or established style, and is a lot more certain about what they'd like to see as an end product.

[u/Cyan_Light → u/jefrab]

I think this is the most useful definition here so far, but would also add that experimentation within a genre is valid too. I don't think it's too useful to think of "Experimental" as a genre in itself but more of an approach that you bring to creating music which can sometimes lead to new sounds weird enough that it warrants an "experimental X" label to distinguish it from more traditional music in the category X.

[u/Standard_Cell_8816]

I think anything different, weird or unexpected within the many templates we have for making music can be considered experimental. It doesn't have to be extreme or way out of left field weird. Anything that shakes up the formula of "this is how you make a [...genre...] song" and changes the perception of what a specific genre or mix of genres can be.

[u/roaminjoe]

I listened to the Disconnect track which you've shared. It's a beautiful lilting piece with some edge and dissonance which fits very well within your tags inserted in the youtube clip.

I wasn't stuck by its experimental foundation. The instruments are predictable, the music is metric. The same riff at the opening recurs and reprises like theme and variation. At 6 minutes and 28 seconds, it still perseveres rather enduringly.

I think you're spot on however on picking up the populist vein that "anything weird is experimental". Music which is weird, noisy, clueless can indeed be experimental (for the performer trying to get to grips with himself). Is this all that experimental is?

I think it can be more (although it certainly can be descended to the level of being anything which does not fit convention). Fusing different influences may certainly be - although then, is it world music, or is it ..purely derivative?

I see experimental music as a process rather than just the results: what is the process in which the music made?

[u/RepresentativeForm79]

personally I find 3 main categories within experimental music (which are all quite broad definitions). They are:

-(1) abnormal sounds with normal structures -(2) normal sounds abnormal structures -(3) abnormal sounds with abnormal structures

Again, these are very broad, and I think the other people in the comment section can help you define what ‘abnormal’ and ‘normal’ is in relation to sound or structure.

[u/davethecomposer]

Coming from the classical music side of things, I tend to agree with John Cage's definition which roughly states that experimental music is music where we don't know what the outcome will be. There's an important second part to his definition where, just like when doing a scientific experiments scientists accept whatever the outcome will be, likewise, we should accept whatever happens with our experiments with music.

I think that second part is important because when we decide if something works we almost always base that on judgments based on older musical ideas which can limit what experiments make it to the rest of the world. In other words, what's the point of experimenting if you're only going to use the stuff that is similar enough to existing ideas.

Outside of this particular classical definition, I think experimental music is when someone takes an existing form or genre and does something to it (add, subtract, whatever) that is significant enough that the average fan of that genre will find the result quite jarring and will not be positive that the piece still belongs within that genre.

[u/Emceegreg]

I feel like you know experimental when you hear it because it's either a sound or structure not commonly used in mainstream productions. But also I consider like the wind and field recordings experimental. Anything improvised, void of structure

[u/Snuff_Enthused]

I wouldn’t call this experimental, because you’re not really taking chances or playing with new forms, in fact you’re not breaking any tradition but celebrating existing musical traditions - executing what’s been done many times by others to your taste.

I think you would like this experimental work. It might inform your process: https://youtu.be/DjGOX8ZCaWg?si=-3JDX7Cm6wB3UZoC

[u/92jonn]

Thank you everyone for the feedback and responses.

[u/soundisloud]

I don't think it's possible to pin down a definition of this, but a few ideas I'd suggest would be lacking a consistent metric pulse and/or lacking any kind of traditional harmonic progression. Or, having those but using a non traditional form (like 6 hour pieces). But I'm sure there is experimental music that doesn't fall in these categories.

Edit: For those downvoting me, I am curious why and how you would define it differently.