Go  |
New |
Find |
Notify |
|
Reply |
|
Admin |
New PM! |
Jedi
|
Generally, I get pretty suspicious about this sort of stuff. But the only thing I found out via searching is that someone in your band frequents the John Mayer forum...You're clean, welcome to the site.  I'll check out the tunage sometime soon. ---------------------------------- Employee of the month awards are the opiate of the masses. For the potheadsGang Starr |
| |
| Posts: 3808 | Location: ZZ9 Plural Z Alpha | Registered: 18 October 2004 | |
|
Know-It-All
|
quote: Originally posted by Rickenbacker: At least twice, I'd read that indie, at least the original intent & purpose of it in the 80s & 90s, is dead & that today, indie is the new mainstream. I guess this is to suggest that major labels are now turning their sights to indie bands much in the same way they did when grunge was big. (though since major labels are quickly going the way of the dinosaur, I'd doubt it'll be on as big a scale) So I had to chuckle when I read that the "new" indie is "indie indie".  & that even some indie labels are showing signs of behavior of the majors. Your thoughts?
I think everything you've posted is just a rare glimpse at the obvious. This is a trend in music that has been observed by the most elitist indie kids to the most commercial consumers. I don't think there's really a conversation surrounding this.
|
| |
|
Guru
|
quote: I don't think there's really a conversation surrounding this.
I agree! Also, If Indie isn't dead, how would I go about killing it? |
| |
| Posts: 652 | Location: kentucky | Registered: 02 October 2007 | |
|
Jedi
|
quote: Originally posted by DFelon204409:
This is a trend in music that has been observed by the most elitist indie kids to the most commercial consumers. I don't think there's really a conversation surrounding this.
How is this a trend in music? Like he said, bands have been intentionally keeping themselves independent from the majors (as a statement) since the late 70s (starting with some punk but mainly post-punk)... I wouldn't consider something so consistent over a thirty year period to be "just a trend".
|
| |
| Posts: 2826 | Location: Drug induced coma. | Registered: 01 December 2006 | |
|
Apprentice Guru
|
quote: Originally posted by mymindsblank:
Also, If Indie isn't dead, how would I go about killing it?
Shoot it in the face. Pulp Fiction anyone?
Market fresh
Stand by me
Where will it ever land?
|
| |
| Posts: 362 | Location: the moon. | Registered: 27 June 2007 | |
|
Jedi
|
God damnit. I'm surprised it took 2 pages to get to this point. I'll avoid addressing the rest because it's a very tired discussion, but re: alternative How is it easier to define alternative? Have you listened to the radio in the past 10 years? Anything that IS mainstream rock is called Alternative. Nirvana bringing Grunge to mainstream consciousness made Alternative the Rock standard.
|
| |
| Posts: 2826 | Location: Drug induced coma. | Registered: 01 December 2006 | |
|
Upwardly Mobile Participant
|
quote: Originally posted by JGlass:
God damnit.
How is it easier to define alternative? Have you listened to the radio in the past 10 years? Anything that IS mainstream rock is called Alternative. Nirvana bringing Grunge to mainstream consciousness made Alternative the Rock standard.
Well I believe that you class alternative music as the rock movement that developed at the start of the 90's it was phrase adopted by the press from a statement made by Perry Farrell when he described the music of Jane's Addiction and the music scene they belonged to "we are the Alternative nation" I don't have the article at hand but you can google it, now you can argue about whether an Alternative band can still be part of the alternative while been signed to a major label, examples R.E.M, Nirvana and Sonic YOuth. I think that saying that Nirvana made "Alternative the Rock standard" is guided and is ignoring the impact and lets say the commercial success of bands such as Janes Addicton, Pearl Jam (sold between 15-20 million copies of Vs) and much more.. |
| |
| Posts: 71 | Location: Ireland | Registered: 01 August 2007 | |
|
Apprentice Guru
|
quote: Originally posted by tomwaits4noman: quote: Originally posted by JGlass:
God damnit.
How is it easier to define alternative? Have you listened to the radio in the past 10 years? Anything that IS mainstream rock is called Alternative. Nirvana bringing Grunge to mainstream consciousness made Alternative the Rock standard.
Well I believe that you class alternative music as the rock movement that developed at the start of the 90's it was phrase adopted by the press from a statement made by Perry Farrell when he described the music of Jane's Addiction and the music scene they belonged to "we are the Alternative nation" I don't have the article at hand but you can google it, now you can argue about whether an Alternative band can still be part of the alternative while been signed to a major label, examples R.E.M, Nirvana and Sonic YOuth. I think that saying that Nirvana made "Alternative the Rock standard" is guided and is ignoring the impact and lets say the commercial success of bands such as Janes Addicton, Pearl Jam (sold between 15-20 million copies of Vs) and much more..
you aren't responding to his assertion at all. jglass is saying that "alternative" is no more an easy way to define music than saying "indie". you don't establish this in your response at all. also, what does this mean and how does this have anything to do with what jglass said: "Well I believe that you class alternative music as the rock movement that developed at the start of the 90's"? how was he ignoring the "impact and lets say the commercial success of bands such as Janes Addicton, Pearl Jam"? he mentions nirvana as representative of the grunge revolution in rock music, is that really such a crime? |
| |
| Posts: 513 | Location: San Diego | Registered: 26 November 2007 | |
|
"Forum Moderator"
Super Bad-Ass Jedi
|
The implication in the last few posts is that this has been discussed around here before. Examples 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and many others. All those threads have something to say about where this thread is turning and why.
"Naked Woman, Naked Man
Where did you get that nice sun tan?"
|
| |
| Posts: 12918 | Location: Behind the Orange Curtain | Registered: 14 May 2004 | |
|
Apprentice Guru
|
There must be someway that the forum developers can implement some software/format change to include automatic censoring of choice words/phrases/etc. right (ie. if a user uses in any way/shape/form the string "indie" then it will be automatically changed to ***** or some other nonoffensive substitute upon submission - after hitting post now). I have no idea how that would work or if it is possible to do that on a forumn, though I've seen it work in online gaming chats (in game). I think it would only be appropriate to make that the first five letter word banned on the metacritic forum. Otherwise, let the discussion continue. After all, *cf. my signature to complete the sentence*.
====
What has been is what will be, and what has been done is what will be done; there is nothing new under the sun.
|
| |
| Posts: 507 | Location: Care-a-lot | Registered: 16 July 2007 | |
|
Apprentice Guru
|
I had always assumed that indie defined a band on an independent label. However, I've found it a lot easier to define a band as being indie rock or indie pop if they don't fit into a category.
Market fresh
Stand by me
Where will it ever land?
|
| |
| Posts: 362 | Location: the moon. | Registered: 27 June 2007 | |
|
Know-It-All
|
I would say I'm more pet peeved to see a Major label artist being labelled as "indie rock". An example I noticed was We Are Scientists who I'm a fan of. They are listed as "indie" on their myspace page but if you scroll below you see that they are signed to Virgin Records and explicitly list themselves on a major label. WAS has like 1.8 million myspace hits so they definitely don't need any "respect" from the hipsters. Granted the word "indie" shouldn't even matter. As long as a band/artist is actually good is all I care about it whether it's an indepedent/major label. Most of the stuff I like just happens to be indie.
|
| |
| Posts: 226 | Location: Toronto, Ontario | Registered: 16 September 2007 | |
|
Jedi
|
quote: Originally posted by eggtweedyegg:
Until all the musical artists sign all their albums with major labels, indie music will still exists. End of discussion.
Like I said earlier: quote: There's a huge difference between a band not going major because they just to stay with the independents and a band not going major because they can't get a deal.
|
| |
| Posts: 2826 | Location: Drug induced coma. | Registered: 01 December 2006 | |
|
Jedi
|
quote: Like I said earlier:
quote:
There's a huge difference between a band not going major because they just to stay with the independents and a band not going major because they can't get a deal.
Yeah, there are those two kinds of indie artists, i think that there will always be a lot of bands in both category. What is called "indie" music (or my own expression: mainstream indie) by the big medias becomes more and more mainstream, but this kind of "indie" music (like most of the bands discussed on MC) is not the only indie music that exists. There are a lot lot lot more indie artists. Indie is far from being dead. If what is called "indie" is dead and is now considered mainstream, fine, we shouldn't care, except if your popularity is build on being the indie guy who listen to Of Montreal, etc., then there would be a new cool thing....like....listening neo-jazz......*goosebumps*
|
| |
| Posts: 1477 | Location: Quebec, Canada | Registered: 16 November 2005 | |
|
Jedi
|
quote: Originally posted by bdam:
I'll be wondering around hitting you guys up randomly...
Posts: 3*equips banhammer of +4 pwning* |
| |
|
Enthusiast
|
quote: Originally posted by eggtweedyegg: quote: Like I said earlier:
quote:
There's a huge difference between a band not going major because they just to stay with the independents and a band not going major because they can't get a deal.
Yeah, there are those two kinds of indie artists, i think that there will always be a lot of bands in both category. What is called "indie" music (or my own expression: mainstream indie) by the big medias becomes more and more mainstream, but this kind of "indie" music (like most of the bands discussed on MC) is not the only indie music that exists. There are a lot lot lot more indie artists. Indie is far from being dead. If what is called "indie" is dead and is now considered mainstream, fine, we shouldn't care, except if your popularity is build on being the indie guy who listen to Of Montreal, etc., then there would be a new cool thing....like....listening neo-jazz......*goosebumps*
I agree with what you're saying.... but don't say "there would be a new cool thing..." We don't listen to independant music because it's "cool" (at least we shouldn't). We listen to it because the music the much deeper than money and of much richer quality. Listening to independant music because it's "cool" could be what dilutes the genre, so to speak.
It pays to kill anyone who has information.
|
| |
| Posts: 118 | Location: London, ON, CANADA | Registered: 12 October 2007 | |
|
Upwardly Mobile Participant
|
I knew there was a reason why I stopped posting here. *sigh*
Would you like lies with that?
|
| |
| Posts: 63 | Location: Perth | Registered: 13 November 2006 | |
|
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
©2006 CNET Networks Inc. All rights reserved.
|
