This paper seeks to explain the empirical puzzle why between 1985 and 2005 electronic/dance music remained a “scene-based” genre in the US, whereas it developed as a successful “industry-based” genre in the UK. We use Fligstein and McAdam’s general theory of fields to show how opportunities for growth were influenced by developments in several “proximate fields”. More concretely, a combination of qualitative and quantitative data analysis shows that (1) the US electronic/dance music field was built out of the crumbling of the disco music field, which, in combination with an incumbent-controlled settlement in the mainstream music field, and the reluctance of some key actors in the electronic/dance music field to form alliances with these incumbents, restrained its transition as an industry-based genre in the US; (2) peripheral US-bred electronic/dance music genres were adopted in the UK and developed as an industry-based genre due to destabilizations in several proximate fields, such as the field of mainstream music, and music journalism; and (3) these two genre trajectories—one failed and one successful—were interdependent, as electronic/dance music’s peripheral position in the US formed a precondition for the legitimation and adoption by actors in the UK. With this comparative case study, we hope to demonstrate how Fligstein and McAdam’s field theory can be helpful for sociological studies of culture aiming to comprehend genre dynamics and changes in cultural classification systems.