Verified answer

I think you're generalizing a little bit too much.

Of course, labels like the ones you're using are entirely pointless anyway. Stop worrying about labels. Just shut up and listen to music.

If it is what classical musicians participate in and what classical song audiences anticipate to listen to, then it is classical song. Sure, that' covers centuries and dozens of extraordinary patterns. But there is nonetheless an identifiable repertoire that's cut loose widespread song. People have tried to blur the strains. Gershwin wrote classical jazz portions for symphony. Result? Now we have now a pair new portions within the symphonic "classical" pool, that occur to make use of jazz chords and rhythms. Groups just like the Kronos Quartet pass style strains, gambling song from the classical pool and the non-classical pool. But after they do this, I feel audiences simply say "oh is not that first-class, they are now gambling a non-classical piece to lighten matters up." It does not relatively blur the strains any.

I'm guessing you've heard about three modern 'punk rock' bands and decided that they're all crap. Listen to The Offspring, great punk rock band.

Then that's obviously not your taste in music. Go listen to something else. Why write a question just to rant about something?

Not all punk is bad,I'm sure if you go to last.fm or something you'll find something you like..And are you referring to "pop punk",or something like Dead Kennedys?