"Pop-Punk" Labeling Should End

I have to defend the bands I like. I have to explain what the music to which I constantly listen means to me. I have to explain why the bands I like are really more punk than what most people would consider.

First, I don't like genres of music; classification of bands is an ambiguous process leading to a debatable outcome. However, grouping music together has its obvious practical benefits. Labels provide the medium for expressing similarity among bands, which only allows for increased exposure to the masses. But there is one such labeling problem that needs to be addressed.

Today, people believe that punk rock is dead, that all current commercial punk bands are really pop punk bands, which in their eyes, is less than punk. To expect that the punk of the 70's, or any category of music from any time period, will be replicated today is unrealistic. Music undergoes changes.

The underpinnings of a genre can shift over years, but usually, the core characteristics of that genre are repeated and remain constant, thus sustaining the suitability and applicabililty of a genre. While the punk rock of today does not all mimic the sound of The Ramones, generally it should still be labeled as punk and not given the demeaning label of pop punk.

Many people give too much weight to a couple of noticeable changes in today's punk music but ignore the majority of factors that would support a label of punk, and would therefore reject a label of pop punk.

Primarily, if a supposed punk band's lead singer has a whiny voice, the band is dubbed a pop punk band. This stems from the fact that many people sometimes confuse a male singer with a high voice as resembling a female singer. In turn, they view the band as being softer, without the edge of an apparent punk band.

Stereotypes lead people to dismiss punk bands capable of being led by a female. Rather, they think of females as more likely to lead pop outfits, given the success of female popstars contrasted with the obscurity and dearth of popular female punk rockers. If anything, the whiny voice of some punk singers is a unique aspect of the punk genre that should enhance rather than detract from the band's punk status. The pitch of the singer's voice is not reason enough to view these bands as not truly being punk.

If the band has catchy, slower choruses, the band is wrongly labeled as pop punk. Admittedly, some punk bands do craft choruses that are very similar to the feel of the choruses in pop songs. However, the subtlties of a punk chorus, as well as those present throughout�the song as a whole, are overlooked. Having a chorus with a hook is part of all genres of music, and is not a right solely possesed by pop artists. Punk bands of today should be recognized for sustaining several key dimensions of the original punk sound.

The primary reason that the punk of today deserves no other label than punk is because of the tempo of these songs. By nature, punk music has a quick, flurried pace. Punk songs are short because they represent the genre that crams more beats per minute into their songs than any other style of music.

What , The bands people classify as pop punk, such as Blink 182, Sum 41, and Simple Plan, for instance, actually, for the most part, create songs with a very fast tempo, with over 100 beats per minute. In addition, many punk bands today play in a double-time feel that is characteristic of punk rock. Blink 182's, Josie, probably called pop punk by many, is an excellent example of the double-time feel drumming embraced by punk rock. Punk music started out with a fast pace, and the bands today honor that tenet.

Many of the punk bands today play songs ripe with simple power chords, as did their punk forefathers. Some would say that the simple chords played by the rhythm guitarist represents more of a pop sound. However, punk was founded on simple chords. Further, what distinguishes the chords from pop is the driving sound of the guitars, full of disortion and effects. Moreover, not always obvious but easily recognizable if removed, is the lead guitarist harmonizing over the rhythm guitar. This other guitarist usually adds a sharp, punctuating pattern that adds depth to the song.

The guitar sounds generated by a punk band are conspicous. Punk bands today commonly play the chords of a verse muted, giving the music a chunky sound. The timing within songs is unique to today's punk band. Sudden stops, jarring guitars halting without notice, and choruses with half guitar rests are anything but poppy. The second guitarist can infiltrate a song with a rapid solo, or complement a song with a tight, high pitched, melodic pattern. What most people don't appreciate is how punk bands, the ones they believe are pop, infuse dual guitar sounds that run away with speed and intricacy.

The overall energy and sound of these bands make them punk. It is not a mistake that the drummers pound on crashes during choruses or open up their hi hats on the verses. It is not unplanned that fills are combos of thirty second notes that alternate between snare and toms in a syncopated blitz. Given its speed and winding flow of some its songs, punk allows creative, disjointed guitar, bass, and drum fills. Punk albums bring out the strenghth and volume of each instrument on the recording, and blend them to form a powerful, wild energy.

I dislike the label of pop punk because I believe it discredits the talent of punk musicians. When one does not value a band to be true punk rock, they are assuming that the bands are not skilled enough to be worthy of the true punk label. If one must accept the label of pop punk as not disappearing anytime soon, one must also recognize the real value of these punk bands.

Perhaps one day this pop punk label will be dropped. In the meantime, to label a band as pop punk for convenience is one thing, but to label a band as pop punk because one decides it is�not punk enough, or worse, not punk at all, is a questionable judgment.