This is a MUSIC forum. Irrelevant or disrespectful posts/topics will be removed by Admin. Please report any forum spam or inappropriate posts HERE.

All users can post to this forum on general music topics.

Moderators: bandmixmod1, jimmy990, spikedace

#5604 by Rock n Roll Pipes
Fri Mar 09, 2007 2:16 am
Forgive me for asking this question... its probably going to sound stupid... but.. just what the hell is Indie music? Jave I been away for that long?

Mike

#5605 by gexclamationpoint
Fri Mar 09, 2007 3:40 am
indie really isnt a music genre, its the mentality that your band is, in essence, supporting itself. hence "independant"


the problem is the ignorant bands who arent doing anything original, but want to be considered original, so they describe their music as "indie" when in reality its nothing new. usually just some form of pop rock.

#5611 by Irminsul
Fri Mar 09, 2007 8:29 pm
Originally "indie" meant you were on an independent label (i.e. not one of the big boys like Geffen). But as with any term, 100 people have now given it 100 different meanings.

#5685 by Casey of Black Santa
Tue Mar 13, 2007 1:30 am
Irminsul wrote:Originally "indie" meant you were on an independent label (i.e. not one of the big boys like Geffen). But as with any term, 100 people have now given it 100 different meanings.


on the contrary, Sonic Youth is on Geffen and they are most definatly indie. The Butthole Surfers were on Warner Brothers for a time and so were Husker Du. the Boredoms have allways been on various labels owned by Warner and are now on Warner's Japan-based label. the Melvins even had a short deal with Atlantic in the early 90's but were dropped after 2 or 3 albums because Atlantic wasn't making enough money off of them. after all, that's what major labels care about right?

however, all of these bands and quite a few others were at one time or another on indie labels in the begining of their careers.

alot of indie labels today are not indie at all actually, but may have been at one time. the record label Sub Pop (who nearly went bankrupt before they released Nirvana's Nevermind) began as an indie label out of Seattle, Washington in the 80's and released great albums by many of the first grunge bands such as Green River, Babes in Toyland, and Mudhoney as well as many other bands that were not grunge. Sub Pop is now 49% owned by Warner brothers which, technically, is enough to classify them as a major label, but they are kind of in the grey if you ask me.

any way, there's a little indie label info for you.

if you want to know the real scoop behind indie labels and indie artists and all that then read Our Band Could Be Your Life by Micheal Azarrad. it's bassically the history behind indie music and the founding fathers of today's indie music from 1981 - 1991.
#5687 by Rock n Roll Pipes
Tue Mar 13, 2007 1:56 am
So "Indie" is more of a reference to label as opposed to style....per se...?
#5704 by Irminsul
Tue Mar 13, 2007 8:47 pm
Rock n Roll Pipes wrote:So "Indie" is more of a reference to label as opposed to style....per se...?


It can be both. But as you can see by this thread, the usage of the term is not always agreed upon.

#5712 by liquid_embrace
Tue Mar 13, 2007 9:51 pm
I always thought of the term as applying more to the labels than to the bands themselves. The definition of an "indie" label is absolute and not really open to interpretation. Any label that is not one of the "Big 4" labels is considered indie. However, as is fairly common within subcultures, there is often debate between the "bigger" indie labels and the "smaller" indie labels.

Bands that practice an "indie" approach to music, sort of a DIY kinda of approach, can often be picked up by major label, yet still maintain the indie approach and sound they had in their origins.

The biggest benefit to indie music is that it does not focus heavily on album sales. The indie community is generally more accepting of musical styles that would be shunned from a mainstream point of view. However, this is not always the case.

My wife, or rather, soon to be ex-wife, is so hardcore indie that she is convinced if anyone other than herself has heard of the band, they aren't "indie"; at least that is how it seems to me when she and I debate music. I am surprised at how often I find this attitude in the indie community. She'll like a band until I say I like them, then she doesn't like them anymore.

She is still mad at me to this day because I told her The Cure were commercial.

She'll probably never forgive me for that one.
#5719 by Rock n Roll Pipes
Wed Mar 14, 2007 6:56 am
Wow ..... so it seems that within the radical parts of "indie" music... welll its popular to be "not popular" which in and of itself is a contradiction... It would seem to me who can be the most unpopular band... doesnt that defeat the purpose? If your the most popular at being unpopular, by defintion your now popular and lost the very thing you were trying to be...... Almost as if to say... our goal is to be the biggest unheard of band... LOL..

I'm being facecious of course but thats almost how it sounds to me. When I think whats really happening is its the non conformist movement of today. however, I can also see why many bands wouldnt want to get caught up in the mainstream.... it would seem that in order to maintain your own creative direction you would almost have to go that route and since major labels are money motivated, they want to dictate your sound, style, etc..... Hmmm. Interesting. I really dig this kinda discussion, thanks guys..

On a side note... I have buddy whos sister inlaw was very "non conformist" very anti society and government, they didnt have much...which is fine if thats what one chooses, but it always cracked me up how she would rip the government apart, society...and coincidently anything mainstream..... all while she was holding her foodstamps and wic checks.

Not saying indie guys are that way........ sometimes that whole non conform thing can be just as bad as the thing they're trying to avoid.

thanks again guys for the good info.

#5738 by Irminsul
Wed Mar 14, 2007 7:27 pm
No kidding.

I have to laugh when I see the Iron Law of Oligarchy continue to rear it's head. Renegade movements soon become the norm and then the NEW establishment. I am old enough to remember when MTV was some underground upstart thing, chewing at the ankles of the big music industry. Now, it IS the big music industry.

I think The Who put it the best...."Make way for the new boss - same as the old boss"

#5742 by gexclamationpoint
Wed Mar 14, 2007 7:58 pm
i find it funny how many of the bands that DO use indie as a genre and consider themselves indie are the groups that have full lines of merch, and then theres the underground punk bands that accept no help other than theyre own, and theyd rather die than be called indie

#5804 by Pawpa-Dawg
Fri Mar 16, 2007 7:21 pm
well I will be slapped down and ran over by a train !!!!! ...all this time I thought that when You saw somwone's pic be a solo artist or group and the term "indie" was used thought it meant they were"INDEPENDANT" and goingalone it without help of "THE MAN" . promo thier own albums,shows,line up thier own gigs,printing up fliers and such all on thier own,

well thanks for clearing it up as now I am REALLY CONFUSED ..... :shock: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?:...LMAO

#5809 by Nicod3mus
Fri Mar 16, 2007 7:48 pm
There are two definitions of the term but the "independent lable" definition is the most widely known and the original meaning.

Indie music has also become a genre of sorts. When referring to sonic youth you are definately talking about the style or genre of music. Most bands that are referred to as indie even tho they are on major lables started on indie lables.

In short the term is used looslely but be completely sure.....if a band is on a major lable they aren't truly indie anymore no matter how much they talk about sticking it to the man or anything else.

#5826 by djmistat
Sat Mar 17, 2007 11:03 am
actually finding an independant label for those choosy muicians is proving to be much harder than it ever used to be.


for example; a few people into the punk/ska scene view record labels like "i used to to f**k guys like you in prison Records, and Hellcat records as "indepent, in reality they both are owned by epitaph which is owned by warner brothers and sony.

#6107 by Casey of Black Santa
Sun Mar 25, 2007 5:15 pm
independant basically means Do it Yourself. don't rely on a big money-hungry label to sell you and don't let anything get in the way of your music/art. it's usually less benifiting in the business sense but, if you don't mind going through a lot of tough times, more benifiting in the artistic sense.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests