West Coast Connection Forum
DUBCC - Tha Connection => Outbound Connection => Topic started by: Shallow on November 26, 2004, 12:56:23 PM
-
I don't get it. Rhythm and Blues was a direct descendant of the Blues. It was a faster, funner, slightly more juvenile version of the Blues. It started getting popular among blacks after WWII. Alan Freed became one of, if not the, first DJs to play it to the masses, taking it out of the black neighborhoods and into the suburbs. He soon changed the name to Rock n Roll, or Rock and Roll. Artists like Ike Turner, Ray Charles, and Little Richard emerged into the national scene. Elvis Presley came a long and introduced rockabilly (rock and roll hillbilly) to the masses. This made everyone associated with Rock n Roll a bigger star. While Elvis's rockabilly blended the rhythm and blues that had been a big part of the Memphis life he came from, and Country Western, many of the black artists didn't adopt the country sound and were still considered Rock n Roll. Chuck Berry being a prime example. Jackie Wilson was a huge influence on Elvis and many other rockers. Many of his hits came from a song writing team that included Berry Gordy, who later founded Motown Records. Barret Strong, another rocker, joined Motown as a key song writer, yet history looks back at Motown as RnB and not Rock. By the late 60s the British Invasion and Bob Dylan had already changed Rock n Roll drastically. Led Zeppelin turned traditional blues songs into hard rock anthems and Black Sabbath took that hard sound to another extreme. Neither Zeppelin nor Sabbath are looked at as RnB, and neither Marvin Gaye nor the Temptations are seen as Rock n Roll, but both sets of artists come from the same genre. Why is Elvis Rock n Roll and Marvin Gaye RnB?
-
I don't have the answer, seriousily. :-\
-
This has been bugging me too. If you're a white singer than you're pop/rock. If you're black then you're R&B. Makes no sense.
-
you got a point Shallow, but the obvious part of the answer should be clear to you, too: People associate a certain sound with a certain style and it is of course not really the easy way to take in account the whole history of the music a band plays every time in order to say what genre they are, you'll just listen to it and, going from what it sounds like, match it with the word commonly used for such music. You won't say Snoop Dogg is Rock'n'Roll if somebody asks you what kinda music he does, yet you could argue that he is
-
This has been bugging me too. If you're a white singer than you're pop/rock. If you're black then you're R&B. Makes no sense.
-
you got a point Shallow, but the obvious part of the answer should be clear to you, too: People associate a certain sound with a certain style and it is of course not really the easy way to take in account the whole history of the music a band plays every time in order to say what genre they are, you'll just listen to it and, going from what it sounds like, match it with the word commonly used for such music. You won't say Snoop Dogg is Rock'n'Roll if somebody asks you what kinda music he does, yet you could argue that he is
I understand, but it still doesn't make sense some times. B2K can sing the same songs N' Synch do and they'll be on BET and called RnB. George Michael songs aren't any different than Michael Jackson, but you'd never see George Michael on BET, or being called RnB. I wasn't applying to musics that sound different. Obviously there is no confusing the sound of Iron Maiden with Tribe Called Quest, but Michael Bolton isn't too different than Luther Vandross, but Vandross fans would say so, just because he's black. I just don't like that RnB automatically means black. If a white guy does RnB it's soft rock or pop, but all three are the same. Rock n Roll (or Rhythm and Blues) is all the same thing. I just wish people realized. Sure Snoop and Elvis don't do the same thing, but neither doies Peyton Manning and Ray Lewis, but they both play football, just different positions. You should categorize to help people identify, but you should also realize the bigger picture. I don't mean you specifically.
-
i dont really have a reply to this topic....but damn shallow....you know a lot about music
-
^he def does..
-
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Trauma might have something to say about that.
Luke, that wasn't sacrastic was it? I don't think it was but we've argued before.
To be honest I don't know a lot about music. I know a little about a lot of different types of music. Well the history of them anyway. The actual music part? Well that's not in my realm of knowledge. You put me in front of a piano and tell me to play blues chords, followed with jazz chords, and finish it off with classical progressions, and you'll hear nothing but noise because I can't play for shit, and I wouldn't know what notes to press. Some guys can sit in front of one and play every single style. That's knowing a lot about music.
Thanks for the compliment though.
-
no it wasnt sarcastic....but yeah i meant more about music history and such....
-
The answer is that since Rock & Roll began, there's been a reluctance on white america's part to embrace it, because it represented a largely black-led invasion into white teenager's living rooms via television and the radio. Rock & Roll on a largeeee level began because White artists (read Pat Boone) took black songs, and made them available to a white audience. I guess it's racism, but you can almost understand the reluctance of a white family to let their teenagers watch Little Richard on television screaming and sweating in front of a piano.
Now, i'm not saying Blacks started Rock, I'm just saying that the face of Rock, (rock, being fascinating to America in the 50's) was largely Black. I wouldn't take a thing away from Elvis, and call him you know, a watered down version of a black rock & roll star, because he wasn't, he was there to help start Rock... but even though he had the same moves or worse as Little Richard and Chuck Berry, he was WHITE, and thereby partially more acceptable to white America on their televison. Even Elvis was censored, though.
Anyways, what you had was R&B, and Doo Wop groups in the 40's and early 50's, that were respectful, and sang what America considered 'decent' music at the time. Even sultry songs about love and romance were alright to white America, because they considered them at the time to be 'decent'. Along with this, there is a rising movement among the black artists, and among blues artists, etc. to make more exciting and more sexual music, with throbbing bass and fast beats... Whites like Elvis come along for the ride, and Rock & Roll is born.
The easiest thing for these families to do was to just blame it on the blacks... they couldn't come up with an excuse to tell their little girl not to listen to Elvis, but they sure as hell could make sure she didn't listen to a black man, Little Richard.
So a divide arose, down racial lines, even though Rock was founded by black, and white men. So flash to today, and you've got black rockers cast into an R&B mold, and white R&B artists considered Rock and roll.
There are genre busters, though. The greatest Rock & Roll guitarist of all time was Jimi Hendrix, a black man. Lenny Kravitz would be considered nothing but Rock, and he's black. Etc.
-
The answer is that since Rock & Roll began, there's been a reluctance on white America's part to embrace it, because it represented a largely black-led invasion into white teenager's living rooms via television and the radio. Rock & Roll on a large level began because White artists (read Pat Boone) took black songs, and made them available to a white audience. I guess it's racism, but you can almost understand the reluctance of a white family to let their teenagers watch Little Richard on television screaming and sweating in front of a piano.
Now, I'm not saying Blacks started Rock, I'm just saying that the face of Rock, (rock, being fascinating to America in the 50's) was largely Black. I wouldn't take a thing away from Elvis, and call him you know, a watered down version of a black rock & roll star, because he wasn't, he was there to help start Rock... but even though he had the same moves or worse as Little Richard and Chuck Berry, he was WHITE, and thereby partially more acceptable to white America on their television. Even Elvis was censored, though.
Anyways, what you had was R&B, and Doo Wop groups in the 40's and early 50's, that were respectful, and sang what America considered 'decent' music at the time. Even sultry songs about love and romance were alright to white America, because they considered them at the time to be 'decent'. Along with this, there is a rising movement among the black artists, and among blues artists, etc. to make more exciting and more sexual music, with throbbing bass and fast beats... Whites like Elvis come along for the ride, and Rock & Roll is born.
The easiest thing for these families to do was to just blame it on the blacks... they couldn't come up with an excuse to tell their little girl not to listen to Elvis, but they sure as hell could make sure she didn't listen to a black man, Little Richard.
So a divide arose, down racial lines, even though Rock was founded by black, and white men. So flash to today, and you've got black rockers cast into an R&B mold, and white R&B artists considered Rock and roll.
There are genre busters, though. The greatest Rock & Roll guitarist of all time was Jimi Hendrix, a black man. Lenny Kravitz would be considered nothing but Rock, and he's black. Etc.
Well my question was kind of a rhetorical one. I didn't flat out say it was because of racism, but I was hinting at it. I posted the question more for discussions sake and to let all those hiphop/RnB only fans out there that they're listening to Rock, the music they hate, and don't even know it. :laugh:
You pretty much got it though. Any black artist that records music that isn't hard rock is RnB or rap, and any white artist that records music that isn't rap is rock, pop, or soft rock. Why can't more people see it's all the same thing.
I'll use my football analogy once more. Every non classical genre makes up Rock N Roll. Whether it is the predecessors like Country, Blues or Jazz, or the current ones like metal, punk or rap. If Rock and Roll is football then Jazz and the others would be Rugby. You don't have to watch rugby to appreciate football, but you should watch more positions in football. It's like only watching the quarter back, and not paying any attention to the half back. Obviously it is hard to pay attention to ever line man, but the, major players deserve recognition and appreciation, by me anyway. Some people can just watch the QB and be fine with it. I choose to watch a little bit of every position, and I'll even tune into a Rugby game if it's on. I know this didn't seem to make much sense, but it does relate to music, metaphorically.
-
Genre's are pointless and meaningless anyways, anyone who's a fan of music or who's paid any attention to it all will attest to that.
For instance, don't like Country? O.K., but wouldn't you gladly listen to Johnny Cash, or Willie Nelson? Fuck yeah, you'd recognize both of them as legends and superstars with excellent music.
Don't like Rap? O.K., but wouldn't you listen to Roscoe's "The Brother" (one of the greatest songs in years, in my opinion)? Anybody would like that song, grandmothers would like that song.
The only people that neatly fit into a genre are those that TRY to.
-
so basically what you are saying shallow is that you dont like how rock n roll was broken up into several sub genre's (punk, indie, r&b, rap, country, etc....)
i agree and disagree in some ways.....
i agree that i dont like when music is broken down too much....but really breaking rock n roll down wasnt necessarily a bad thing....i mean rap & country are obviously 2 totally different sounds....they stem from the same genre but are not now the same genre....i agree with the whole racism thing too...
the thing is that now genre's are starting to break down even more.....you have it goin like this:
Rock-
punk
indie
emo
grunge
soft rock
heavy metal
death metal
nu metal
etc...
Rap-
backpack/nerd rap (atmosphere, eyedea, etc..)
gangsta rap
and then of course you got east, west, and south, midwest, etc...
techno-
drum n bass
trance
electronica
etc...
R&B-
neo soul
its getting to be broken down too much
trauma....that was a dumb statement....no...if i dont like country i wont listen to johnny cash or willie nelson...and no if i dont like rap i wont listen to roscoe
-
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I don't mind that its been categorized. Much like in Football, playing quarter back and corner back are two very different things, and it's nice to be able to distinguish. However, it's all football. Much like all the sub divisions of Rock are all Rock. You shouldn't have to concentrate on everything but it's nice to give everything some of your time. You may come to appreciate it if you give it a chance. When I used to watch football I would only pay attention to the QB, receivers and running backs, because I thought they were the most important. After a few years I realized how important the offensive center is to the play. If he fucks up then the whole play is over, no matter how good the QB is. I learned that there is more to the game than what first appealed to me. This doesn't mean if you listen to all musics you will love them, but I guarantee you'll like a song here and there, even if you hate the genre, and it's always nice to explore.
-
I DONT UNDERSTAND HOW INDIE IS A GENRE IF ALL IT MEANS IS INDEPENDANT.. INDIE IS LIKE A SUBCATEGORY OF OF DIFFERENT GENRES
-
I DONT UNDERSTAND HOW INDIE IS A GENRE IF ALL IT MEANS IS INDEPENDANT.. INDIE IS LIKE A SUBCATEGORY OF OF DIFFERENT GENRES
thats what i was saying....its just a sub genre....just like gangsta rap....its still hip hop.....just like punk....its still rock....just like drum n bass...its still techno
-
Jon B and Joss Stone are considered R & B.
-
Jon B and Joss Stone are considered R & B.
Just like Jimi and Lenny are considered rock. When an artist does a music too "black" or too "white" then it's hard switch them and say they aren't. Calling Lenny RnB would sound stupid, and calling Joss Stone rock would sound stupid too. Even though it's the same thing in essence. I thought Joss Stone was jazz?
-
She's R & B to me.
Justin Timberlake's solo was R & B, but N Sync shit is Pop. Why? The beats/vibe and the direction.
There is a difference, if you ask me. It's not color-based, it just so happens, that most white's will make Pop and most blacks will make R & B.
-
She's R & B to me.
Justin Timberlake's solo was R & B, but N Sync shit is Pop. Why? The beats/vibe and the direction.
There is a difference, if you ask me. It's not color-based, it just so happens, that most white's will make Pop and most blacks will make R & B.
So than what is Marvin Gaye, or B2K. Pop isn't a genre, it's a status. When you are popular or perform a popular sound it is pop. In 94 Snoop was pop. In 2000 Eminem was pop. In 92 Nirvana was pop. Puddle of Mudd who basically ripped of Nirvava a couple years ago, but they were never pop.
-
Marvin Gaye is Soul. FUCK THE BULLSHIT! LOL. B2K is the borderline of R&B and Pop. Pop is a style, IMO. Being Pop and making Pop Music are two different things. Lil Jon, Snoop and Jay-Z are Pop, but they DO NOT make Pop Music.
-
Marvin Gaye is Soul. FUCK THE BULLSHIT! LOL. B2K is the borderline of R&B and Pop. Pop is a style, IMO. Being Pop and making Pop Music are two different things. Lil Jon, Snoop and Jay-Z are Pop, but they DO NOT make Pop Music.
So what do you call "Can I Get A witness", Heard It through The Grapevine", "Ain't No Mountain High Enough"? They were all catchy songs written by other people and sung by Marvin Gaye in order to make record sales. Isn't that your definition of pop?
I like pop. I just don't like second rate artists singing second rate songs. When Motwon or Elvis did it, it was great. When the Righteous Brothers did it it was great. The current artists and songs just aren't that good.
If you think What's My Name or Hard Knock Life wasn't put out with the intention to become popular and make money, then I don't know what to say.
-
There is a definite difference between RnB and Soul. To be fair, if you look at most of the artists that are considered to be rnb, they are just black pop artists, i.e. Usher, B2K, 112, etc. Some would now call people like Bilal, and Anthony Hamiliton RnB, but they to me are Soul, as would Joss Stone or Alicia Keys be. And, going by that Soul and Rock N Roll are too seperate things. They started off as one, back with Little Richard, and that generation, and then split with the whole british invasion of rock n roll, and labels like Motown putting out loads of soul music. They both came from the same place, but are now two seperate entities.
-
There is a definite difference between RnB and Soul. To be fair, if you look at most of the artists that are considered to be rnb, they are just black pop artists, i.e. Usher, B2K, 112, etc. Some would now call people like Bilal, and Anthony Hamiliton RnB, but they to me are Soul, as would Joss Stone or Alicia Keys be. And, going by that Soul and Rock N Roll are too seperate things. They started off as one, back with Little Richard, and that generation, and then split with the whole british invasion of rock n roll, and labels like Motown putting out loads of soul music. They both came from the same place, but are now two seperate entities.
As far as I know soul music basically RnB with Gospel elements. Ray Charles was a big part of it. A soul song is basicallly an RnB ballad. "My Girl" certainly shouldn't be considered soul, and if it is then most Elvis songs should be as well. I can't see how soul and rock ballads are so different. I mean what is Unchained Melody by the Righteous Brothers ? (featured in Ghost). Is that song so different than the Barry White stuff. Like Billy Joel said "It's still Rock n Roll to me". I'd include Reggae in that too, since it was heavily inspired by the 50s rock, as well as the calypso, etc. Go find out what kind of bands Bob Marley was in when he was younger, and see how he dressed.
-
man Motzart was pop. but its all about the feel of a song. you have a soulful song its rnb . you got a song with ALOT of guitars and acid induced lyrics its rock
-
just about all popular music except for country muisic falls underneith the umbrella of Rock music
Rock just went somewhere else totally got rid of almost all blues characteristics where as r and B (real r and B) stayed within the characteristics
but the name change thing has always happened
blues is basically the root of almost all popular music (well european classical is but in terms of pop music it's blues)
Blues became R and B (but was still the blues essencially)
R and B became Rock and soul (but was still the blues)
soul became funk (but it was still the blues)
funk became disco (but it was in many ways still the blues)
disco became rap (but still blues)
my music professor explained it best American Popular music is like a Rubix cube there's a million different colors all mixed up (million genres) but it's shape is still a cube (the music is still in the blues form)
-
So what do you call "Can I Get A witness", Heard It through The Grapevine", "Ain't No Mountain High Enough"? They were all catchy songs written by other people and sung by Marvin Gaye in order to make record sales. Isn't that your definition of pop?
I like pop. I just don't like second rate artists singing second rate songs. When Motwon or Elvis did it, it was great. When the Righteous Brothers did it it was great. The current artists and songs just aren't that good.
If you think What's My Name or Hard Knock Life wasn't put out with the intention to become popular and make money, then I don't know what to say.
Making music with intentions to sell and become popular is NOT Pop music. Pop music is like Britney Spears, N Sync, 98 Degrees. That's Pop MUSIC.
-
So what do you call "Can I Get A witness", Heard It through The Grapevine", "Ain't No Mountain High Enough"? They were all catchy songs written by other people and sung by Marvin Gaye in order to make record sales. Isn't that your definition of pop?
I like pop. I just don't like second rate artists singing second rate songs. When Motwon or Elvis did it, it was great. When the Righteous Brothers did it it was great. The current artists and songs just aren't that good.
If you think What's My Name or Hard Knock Life wasn't put out with the intention to become popular and make money, then I don't know what to say.
Making music with intentions to sell and become popular is NOT Pop music. Pop music is like Britney Spears, N Sync, 98 Degrees. That's Pop MUSIC.
C'mon man, if you think Ain't No Mountain High Enough and Crazy by Britney Spears fall under different genres then you're wrong. The only reason Marvin Gaye (the early ones) songs sound any different than N'Synch is because of the different eras. The Jackson 5 were no different than the Backstreet boys, except they could play instruments. They weren't very good but they could play.
-
There is a definite difference between RnB and Soul. To be fair, if you look at most of the artists that are considered to be rnb, they are just black pop artists, i.e. Usher, B2K, 112, etc. Some would now call people like Bilal, and Anthony Hamiliton RnB, but they to me are Soul, as would Joss Stone or Alicia Keys be. And, going by that Soul and Rock N Roll are too seperate things. They started off as one, back with Little Richard, and that generation, and then split with the whole british invasion of rock n roll, and labels like Motown putting out loads of soul music. They both came from the same place, but are now two seperate entities.
As far as I know soul music basically RnB with Gospel elements. Ray Charles was a big part of it. A soul song is basicallly an RnB ballad. "My Girl" certainly shouldn't be considered soul, and if it is then most Elvis songs should be as well. I can't see how soul and rock ballads are so different. I mean what is Unchained Melody by the Righteous Brothers ? (featured in Ghost). Is that song so different than the Barry White stuff. Like Billy Joel said "It's still Rock n Roll to me". I'd include Reggae in that too, since it was heavily inspired by the 50s rock, as well as the calypso, etc. Go find out what kind of bands Bob Marley was in when he was younger, and see how he dressed.
Man, there is a difference, what does rhythm and blues actually describe? I wouldn't say that described soul music. Plus if we go by your line of thought that all music is rock n roll, then technically every single song is a hymn or tribel chant, as these were the first real forms of sung music, and I think if someone suggested that say Bob Dylan was RnB you'd find that stupid, yet you are quite happy to label Marvin Gaye rock n roll?
-
There is a definite difference between RnB and Soul. To be fair, if you look at most of the artists that are considered to be rnb, they are just black pop artists, i.e. Usher, B2K, 112, etc. Some would now call people like Bilal, and Anthony Hamiliton RnB, but they to me are Soul, as would Joss Stone or Alicia Keys be. And, going by that Soul and Rock N Roll are too seperate things. They started off as one, back with Little Richard, and that generation, and then split with the whole british invasion of rock n roll, and labels like Motown putting out loads of soul music. They both came from the same place, but are now two seperate entities.
As far as I know soul music basically RnB with Gospel elements. Ray Charles was a big part of it. A soul song is basicallly an RnB ballad. "My Girl" certainly shouldn't be considered soul, and if it is then most Elvis songs should be as well. I can't see how soul and rock ballads are so different. I mean what is Unchained Melody by the Righteous Brothers ? (featured in Ghost). Is that song so different than the Barry White stuff. Like Billy Joel said "It's still Rock n Roll to me". I'd include Reggae in that too, since it was heavily inspired by the 50s rock, as well as the calypso, etc. Go find out what kind of bands Bob Marley was in when he was younger, and see how he dressed.
Man, there is a difference, what does rhythm and blues actually describe? I wouldn't say that described soul music. Plus if we go by your line of thought that all music is rock n roll, then technically every single song is a hymn or tribel chant, as these were the first real forms of sung music, and I think if someone suggested that say Bob Dylan was RnB you'd find that stupid, yet you are quite happy to label Marvin Gaye rock n roll?
Bob Dylan takes American folk elements and and adds Rock and Roll to it. So you could say he isn't RnB but you could say he blends RnB with folk. Marvin Gaye's early songs aren't any different than Little Richard's music. Can I Get A Witness is the same type of song as Tutti Frutti. That is why Marvin Gaye is considered Rock n Roll. When the Beatles and Stones showed up anf brought a very different sound, someone decided to change the name of original rock n roll, and call it RnB again. I just don't get why. Metal and Punk are nothing like 60s rock but they still call it Rock. So why can't traditional rock and roll with a polished appearance, Motown, be called Rock n Roll too?
-
There is a definite difference between RnB and Soul. To be fair, if you look at most of the artists that are considered to be rnb, they are just black pop artists, i.e. Usher, B2K, 112, etc. Some would now call people like Bilal, and Anthony Hamiliton RnB, but they to me are Soul, as would Joss Stone or Alicia Keys be. And, going by that Soul and Rock N Roll are too seperate things. They started off as one, back with Little Richard, and that generation, and then split with the whole british invasion of rock n roll, and labels like Motown putting out loads of soul music. They both came from the same place, but are now two seperate entities.
As far as I know soul music basically RnB with Gospel elements. Ray Charles was a big part of it. A soul song is basicallly an RnB ballad. "My Girl" certainly shouldn't be considered soul, and if it is then most Elvis songs should be as well. I can't see how soul and rock ballads are so different. I mean what is Unchained Melody by the Righteous Brothers ? (featured in Ghost). Is that song so different than the Barry White stuff. Like Billy Joel said "It's still Rock n Roll to me". I'd include Reggae in that too, since it was heavily inspired by the 50s rock, as well as the calypso, etc. Go find out what kind of bands Bob Marley was in when he was younger, and see how he dressed.
Man, there is a difference, what does rhythm and blues actually describe? I wouldn't say that described soul music. Plus if we go by your line of thought that all music is rock n roll, then technically every single song is a hymn or tribel chant, as these were the first real forms of sung music, and I think if someone suggested that say Bob Dylan was RnB you'd find that stupid, yet you are quite happy to label Marvin Gaye rock n roll?
Bob Dylan takes American folk elements and and adds Rock and Roll to it. So you could say he isn't RnB but you could say he blends RnB with folk. Marvin Gaye's early songs aren't any different than Little Richard's music. Can I Get A Witness is the same type of song as Tutti Frutti. That is why Marvin Gaye is considered Rock n Roll. When the Beatles and Stones showed up anf brought a very different sound, someone decided to change the name of original rock n roll, and call it RnB again. I just don't get why. Metal and Punk are nothing like 60s rock but they still call it Rock. So why can't traditional rock and roll with a polished appearance, Motown, be called Rock n Roll too?
I can see what you are saying in a way, but when the Stones, The Beatles etc became seen as the famous rock n rolls stars, guitars became synonymous with rock n roll, and that is where the split came. Several Motown artists, such as Marvin Gaye, started moving away from the labels successfull "polished rock n roll" sound, towards a more spritual soulful sound, and became something entirely different from what was originally rock n roll. Therefore a split formed between the two forms of music, as they evolved from what they had both come from into new different types of music, which is why you now see the split.
-
There is a definite difference between RnB and Soul. To be fair, if you look at most of the artists that are considered to be rnb, they are just black pop artists, i.e. Usher, B2K, 112, etc. Some would now call people like Bilal, and Anthony Hamiliton RnB, but they to me are Soul, as would Joss Stone or Alicia Keys be. And, going by that Soul and Rock N Roll are too seperate things. They started off as one, back with Little Richard, and that generation, and then split with the whole british invasion of rock n roll, and labels like Motown putting out loads of soul music. They both came from the same place, but are now two seperate entities.
As far as I know soul music basically RnB with Gospel elements. Ray Charles was a big part of it. A soul song is basicallly an RnB ballad. "My Girl" certainly shouldn't be considered soul, and if it is then most Elvis songs should be as well. I can't see how soul and rock ballads are so different. I mean what is Unchained Melody by the Righteous Brothers ? (featured in Ghost). Is that song so different than the Barry White stuff. Like Billy Joel said "It's still Rock n Roll to me". I'd include Reggae in that too, since it was heavily inspired by the 50s rock, as well as the calypso, etc. Go find out what kind of bands Bob Marley was in when he was younger, and see how he dressed.
Man, there is a difference, what does rhythm and blues actually describe? I wouldn't say that described soul music. Plus if we go by your line of thought that all music is rock n roll, then technically every single song is a hymn or tribel chant, as these were the first real forms of sung music, and I think if someone suggested that say Bob Dylan was RnB you'd find that stupid, yet you are quite happy to label Marvin Gaye rock n roll?
Bob Dylan takes American folk elements and and adds Rock and Roll to it. So you could say he isn't RnB but you could say he blends RnB with folk. Marvin Gaye's early songs aren't any different than Little Richard's music. Can I Get A Witness is the same type of song as Tutti Frutti. That is why Marvin Gaye is considered Rock n Roll. When the Beatles and Stones showed up anf brought a very different sound, someone decided to change the name of original rock n roll, and call it RnB again. I just don't get why. Metal and Punk are nothing like 60s rock but they still call it Rock. So why can't traditional rock and roll with a polished appearance, Motown, be called Rock n Roll too?
I can see what you are saying in a way, but when the Stones, The Beatles etc became seen as the famous rock n rolls stars, guitars became synonymous with rock n roll, and that is where the split came. Several Motown artists, such as Marvin Gaye, started moving away from the labels successfull "polished rock n roll" sound, towards a more spritual soulful sound, and became something entirely different from what was originally rock n roll. Therefore a split formed between the two forms of music, as they evolved from what they had both come from into new different types of music, which is why you now see the split.
I feel where you're coming from, but Chuck Berry was very guitar driven, well before the Stones and Beatles showed up. Elvis was almost never guitar driven, yet he was still considered Rock n Roll. Listen to Elvis's version of In The Ghetto (by Mac Davis), and tell me anything Marvin Gaye did was more "soul" than that. What I'm trying to say is that if Marvin was white, he'd be another Roy Orbison, or Joe Cocker, but since he's black they give him the title RnB or Soul. I can't think of one white guy from that era who is considered "soul".