I always tell my friends that there is a different feeling when you listen to indie music. In my opinion, mainstream artist/bands don't really sound that creative or "independent" because they are so much into "showbusiness". To entice friends, I tell them to listen to this and that band just to get them to appreciate indie. If you were to introduce someone to indie, what artist or band would you tell them to listen first as a good starting point? For me, i would definitely recommend Arcade Fire's Funeral or Modest Mouse's The Moon and Antartica

Good topic!

In high school, I thought that the only good music was classic rock, and my collection backed up that philosophy. One day I bought Elephant, by The White Stripes, and loved it, but for different ways than I loved my other favorite music (i.e I loved guitar solos). From there I bought records by The Shins and The Walkmen. The Walkmen are now one of my top 10 favorite bands. I like The Shins and The White Stripes a lot too, but they are very nostalgic for me to listen to, almost too nostalgic.

I would, therefore, recommend The White Stripes for those who are into classic rock, and The Shins for those who are into modern pop-rock. The Walkmen have proven to be a bit of a tough sell for me.

For people who really like country, I have had good luck with Wilco and My Morning Jacket recommendations.

I got a girlfriend of mine (now an ex) into indie by way of Jeff Buckley.

Death Cab For Cutie is a popular starting point, and Radiohead was the start for most of my closer friends.

The Strokes are a good start for some, and one of my close friends, who was into pop-rap, got into indie rap through MF Doom.

Snap, I'm getting all nostalgic now, sorry.

I've tried to get a lot of my friends into indie music, so I'll tell you what worked for me:

The White Stripes go over really well, and so do the Strokes. Or maybe Beck. Yeah Yeah Yeahs are a good follow-up to this, if they can handle Karen O's vocals. (I actually started listening to indie music because of The White Stripes' Elephant and some Beck CDs.)

If they like "emo music", try Explosions In The Sky, Cursive, or Death From Above 1979, or maybe Death Cab For Cutie.

Modest Mouse would be a fairly good place to start, as you said. I think Arcade Fire wouldn't go over to start with, but depends on their taste, I guess.

Sufjan works sometimes. But only if they're in to a lot of acoustic songs.

Since last year, whenever I make a new friend, I burn them The Glow pt. 2 by the Microphones. Everybody I've given it to has fallen in love and started exploring indie on their own; they still tell me how much they love it all the time.

I don't understand the importance of "easing" someone into a vaguely defined virtually all-encompassing genre such as indie. What I believe you meant to say is: "mainstream music is not nearly creative enough or artistic enough. What is a good starting point for accessible derivative indie rock?"

@couldbanyone
you can be wordcrafty all you want but the question is really simple. rocket scientist are not needed to answer the question.

Ok I make simple word for you:

Built To Spill
Spoon
Guided By Voices
Pavement
Pixies

Radiohead is the best starting point, as every album excepting 'Pablo Honey' is wonderful. They are one of the few bands that can sell out an arena and still make meaningful music these days. I guess they aren't really indie, but they touch on so many genres on their various albums that they will certainly raise interesting ideas in the listener's head, and perhaps cause them to seek out new music.

the strokes? the white stripes? RADIOHEAD?!?

...none of these bands are independent. I think you would have to be more specific when talking about "indie" rock vs "good" rock.

Although I haven't had complete success in getting people into indie, I have at least gotten people to enjoy bands such as:
Spoon
The New Pornographers
The Shins

Even though Radiohead (specifically OK Computer) was what I would consider my starting point for getting into indie, I'm not sure that I would give it to someone for that purpose. It took me a lot of listens to come to enjoy all of the songs (some, like "Karma Police", were more immediately likeable), and I don't know if a lot of people would be willing to put in that amount of time. If it's a person who's into Top 40 music, they're probably expecting something more immediate, and the ones I listed above tend to be. However, it depends a lot on what type of music the person listens to. I definitely wouldn't give one of those to someone who's into metal!

How many times are we going to have this thread?

This is one of my biggest issues. INDIE defines nothing. People say "oh, I like INDIE music"...what does that mean? You like your artists to get paid little for recorded output? You like artists with very little exposure? If you answered yes to either or both of those questions, you are officially a poseur.

Good, creative music can come from anywhere at any time. It's true that more "adventurous" or "difficult" bands are on independant labels, I suppose, because bigger labels think they may not "sell". I get it.

Just say something like "how do I get my friends into more interesting music? What's a good starting point?"

If those are the real questions and your friends like Rock/Classic Rock, then Spoon and Wilco, for sure. If they think that computers + rock music can't coexist...start them with Radiohead's The Bends, and then move them on to the intermediate album (OK Computer) before moving them into advanced (Kid A).

Radiohead is big time, I know, but if you can get into Kid A, then that's a great starting point for bands like Broadcast, Animal Collective, Four Tet, etc.

I had a girlfriend once who claimed to hate "indie music"....which was probably the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard because it does nothing to describe any kind of music. Neko Case and Animal Collective are both "indie" artists, but does that make them in any way similar at all? No.

Sorry, my bad for the rant. Had to get that out....serenity Now!

I generally wouldn't do this but I have to. I am sure that I have mentioned ad naseum how I feel about the usage of genres. Yes it is great having the ability to say that something is Drum N Bass, but if you are speaking with someone who either does not know enough about the topic to understand what that means or simply wants to through it into a supergenre it should be fine.

Indie means several different things and trying to decide who is right is like attempting to determine which of your two (hopefully) ears is larger.

When I speak of genres I generally just put it into a supergenre and leave it be. Why the hell do we need 50 different types of rock? I am sure that we can all determine what is 'rock' than we can what is indie.

To put this in context to 'indie', Radiohead may have signed with a large label, but they sound similar to and can be acceptably called indie.

Really, the only thing that matters is if it is 'good' music.


In summation, I give you Wikipedia.

Double post:

I started out with Wilco, but quickly found that the most accessable indie is:

Spoon
Pavement
The Strokes
Beck
Muse
Franz Ferdinand

quote:

Originally posted by Mike:
I generally wouldn't do this but I have to. I am sure that I have mentioned ad naseum how I feel about the usage of genres. Yes it is great having the ability to say that something is Drum N Bass, but if you are speaking with someone who either does not know enough about the topic to understand what that means or simply wants to through it into a supergenre it should be fine.

Indie means several different things and trying to decide who is right is like attempting to determine which of your two (hopefully) ears is larger.

When I speak of genres I generally just put it into a supergenre and leave it be. Why the hell do we need 50 different types of rock? I am sure that we can all determine what is 'rock' than we can what is indie.

To put this in context to 'indie', Radiohead may have signed with a large label, but they sound similar to and can be acceptably called indie.

Really, the only thing that matters is if it is 'good' music.


In summation, I give you Wikipedia.

Couldn't agree more, Mike. As someone coming back into new music after a considerable break, I find all of these genres like splitting hairs and, as you say, only useful if the other person shares your definition.

If it's guitar, bass, drums, vocals (essentially), you're talking "rock" music, in all its gloriuos forms.

quote:

Originally posted by Sideshow Bob:
If it's guitar, bass, drums, vocals (essentially), you're talking "rock" music, in all its gloriuos forms.

YES!

I'd start with one of these fine albums:

The Delgados – Hate
Aimee Mann – Bachelor No. 2
Radiohead – The Bends

All of these are major label except The Delgados, so technically speaking I suppose these are not indie.



On the question how to define what actually is indie music, author Benjamin Nugent gives a nice theory in Elliott Smith biography "Elliott Smith and the Big Nothing".

Nugent explains how the grunge breakthrough in the ninenties in fact meant that huge number of bands got pulled from underground to mainstream. What was left in the undeground were bands such as Pavement and Tortoise that were just too hard to market because they were regarded "too academic" by the masses. It's no suprise the musicians of this first breed of indie bands as their core audience actually had academic backgrounds (in general that is of course). Later on some already established rock bands such as Radiohead got labeled indie as well.

Why indie, why not alternative rock, even if they have a huge following their music clearly isn't main stream? As Il Mago puts it: "indie defines nothing" - nothing about music that is. The common nominator here is is the audience. Radiohead shared its core audience with original indie artists. The different between indie and alt.rock is that the latter is for the blue collar. People listen to "indie artistis" (sic.) to segregate themselves from the average joe.

I bet the record labels love it too – all these people building their identities by consuming their products.

Here it is - like it or not. Calling music "indie" is all about social segregation. A sad thing really.

quote:

Originally posted by VHemmila:

The common nominator here is is the audience. Radiohead shared its core audience with original indie artists. The difference between indie and alt.rock is that the latter is for the blue collar. People listen to "indie artists" (sic.) segregate themselves from the average joe.

That's kind of an interesting way to look at it, VHemmila.

I got into indie through minus the bear, and the shins; then arcade fire, radiohead, neutral milk hotel, joe magnum, sonic youth, deerhoof, and animal collective (a friend introduced me to pitchfork and I ate it up -- still do).

quote:

Originally posted by less_success:

quote:

Originally posted by VHemmila:

The common nominator here is is the audience. Radiohead shared its core audience with original indie artists. The difference between indie and alt.rock is that the latter is for the blue collar. People listen to "indie artists" (sic.) segregate themselves from the average joe.

That's kind of an interesting way to look at it, VHemmila.

Yeah... got a bit carried away trying to provoke a conversation. Sorry.

What I meant to say is: calling an artist “indie” serves a purpose, it tells us that the artist has an indie following. If it was about music (and only about music) wouldn't it be more convenient to describe Radiohead say... experimental rock?