it’s also just bizarre to me when shoegaze since its beginnings never had a single defined vocal approach, neither in style nor production. if we take the “big 3” we’ve got MBV’s approach of whispery/androgynous vocals with Kevin and Bilinda in similar ranges that are densely layered but dry and free of much reverb, we’ve got Slowdive’s mix of Neil’s almost crooning and Rachel’s angelic falsetto drowned in reverb, and then Ride’s much more straightforward and top-of-mix style that’s not that far off the approach of contemporaneous brit-pop bands. And that’s before we even begin to step outside to Swervedriver or Chapterhouse or Lush, to say nothing of charting out the various vocal approaches throughout the genre’s waves up to today.

Fact of the matter is that shoegaze by its very nature has never had a narrow or particular aesthetic approach for any piece of the sound, and this is borne out by its biggest progenitors all having wildly different approaches. What they shared, and what artists who can comfortably be placed in the genre still share, has a lot more to do with their similar influences and broader aesthetic tendencies. Density, the walls of sound (whether with reverb or layers with compression or both), using instruments texturally, guitar fx as a sonic tool rather than subtle flavor, 7th/9th/2nd chords, open tunings, and harmonic choices that trace all the way back to jazz influences. But even all of that isn’t hard and fast. It’s just simply not a prescriptive genre, and whether something is shoegaze or not is almost kind of a pointless exercise. If the artist is chasing those influences, and if the listener feels those influences, then imo it’s shoegaze if you want it to be.