Bloc Party Breaking Up ?

[thomasowen]

To be honest I don't even know which ones Scouting for Girls are

The bottom line is I see the current UK indie scene as nothing but a fad that will eventually run it's course. Much in the same way UK garage did when it was the in thing 10 years ago.

Most of the better bands in the Indie scene are American, largely because you don't have to put up with the horrificly exaggerated regenal accents. Yes it's a generalisation that doesn't apply to all of the uk bands, but most of them seem to idolise the likes of the Stone Roses, who themselves only released one credible album before releasing a torrent of crap, splitting up and leaving us with a god awful solo project for their (going by this year's Reading performance) talentless frontman. Hardly something to be proud of.

[Im_in_a_tent]

It's really funny that you take this high minded stance that the music you like is better than the type of music you've listed... I mean if you read real culture magazines, or respected publications the type of music you like is laughed at whilst acts such as Morrissey, Franz Ferdinand and British Sea Power are very respected. Just accept that because you don't like something doesn't make it bad.

[Lithium05]

And I don't know why you keep mentioning scouting for girls

Edited October 27, 2009 by Lithium05

[thomasowen]

I mentioned them once

I knew it!

[Lithium05]

In this thread yes but you seem to compare everyone to scouting for girls!

[tomisnothere]

To be honest I don't even know which ones Scouting for Girls are

The bottom line is I see the current UK indie scene as nothing but a fad that will eventually run it's course. Much in the same way UK garage did when it was the in thing 10 years ago.

Edited October 28, 2009 by tomisnothere

[biscant]

If "indie" continued to be popular for years to come wouldn't that mean that it's mainstream? ...Deep

[Sandy767]

Wouldn't be much of a loss in my mind. They're part of a large groups of bands that sound pretty much the same

[tomisnothere]

If "indie" continued to be popular for years to come wouldn't that mean that it's mainstream? ...Deep

[Im_in_a_tent]

It's been mainstream for years!

[thomasowen]

i dont think tom here understands the traditional meaning of indie

[Im_in_a_tent]

Most people don't seem to on here.

[tomisnothere]

We've been talking about the genre. You can argue about semantics as much as you like, but indie is now also a name for a music scene. The genre has been mainstream for years.

But heck, the term "indie" can be mainstream anyway, disregarding the genre argument. Indie doesn't have to be contained to a specific audience. A modern example is Enter Shikari - sorted their own record label, pretty much set their whole career up themselves and built on it. They're still mainstream though because they still manage to sell well - but that doesn't mean their methods are not "indie"

Same with Radiohead - not signed, sorted out everything concerning In Rainbows themselves. #1 album, massive critic and fan favourite.

NIN - not signed, released one album for sale and one for free. Still mainstream!

Indie (term) is a way of doing things, nothing more. So the "indie" methods and approach can be viewed as mainstream because it is also used by big acts, and has been for years.

Nice one for jumping the gun though

Edited October 30, 2009 by tomisnothere

[thomasowen]

We've been talking about the genre. You can argue about semantics as much as you like, but indie is now also a name for a music scene. The genre has been mainstream for years.

But heck, the term "indie" can be mainstream anyway, disregarding the genre argument. Indie doesn't have to be contained to a specific audience. A modern example is Enter Shikari - sorted their own record label, pretty much set their whole career up themselves and built on it. They're still mainstream though because they still manage to sell well - but that doesn't mean their methods are not "indie"

Same with Radiohead - not signed, sorted out everything concerning In Rainbows themselves. #1 album, massive critic and fan favourite.

NIN - not signed, released one album for sale and one for free. Still mainstream!

Indie (term) is a way of doing things, nothing more. So the "indie" methods and approach can be viewed as mainstream because it is also used by big acts, and has been for years.

Nice one for jumping the gun though

Edited October 30, 2009 by thomasowen

[tomisnothere]

Firstly there is no genre called indie - it is a word that people have adopted to describe bands that don't fit into an easier catagory such as pop, rock or metal comfortably.

Edited October 30, 2009 by tomisnothere

[thomasowen]

Yes - it's a genre in the same way pop-rock, nu-metal etc is. I never tried to say it was more than that (or less, so I understand what you mean.)

People say it all the time -

"what music are you into?"

"oh you know, indie stuff"

It's become fairly common language for a number of years, and if someone says they listen to indie you normally know what bands they mean, because most people group that music as "indie" rather than deeply thinking about the specific meaning of the term. That's the point I was making. As a term for describing bands and music into a specific grouping (also known as a genre!) it has been used for a long time, and these bands can also be mainstream.

Besides, if you want to be really fussy then you can go back into the depths of independent underground music. Much of it eventually became successful, thus making it mainstream.

[tomisnothere]

There is an "indie" genre these days which is used and discussed. A genre is just a certain grouping of similar music, all labeled under one defining word. A populous uses it, so its use as a genre is relevant, because people typically understand something from the context the word is used in.

It's as vague as saying a band is "metal" or "jazz" - it's just a word.

You're attaching the standard meaning to it too much to see my point. The "indie" which is categorised by how a band does things isn't what I'm discussing. The way it's used to describe the contemporary guitar bands from the 80s onwards influenced by punk, garage, art rock etc is completely different to the indie you're describing. It's the same word, just with a different meaning. Music fans and journalists have been using it this way for a while now.

Edited October 30, 2009 by tomisnothere

[thomasowen]

A genre is just a certain grouping of similar music, all labeled under one defining word.

Edited October 30, 2009 by thomasowen

[Im_in_a_tent]

But it isn't, a musical genre has conventions - you used the example of Jazz, well we all know the musical conventions of Jazz - but again I ask what are the musical conventions of indie? My point is that there are none, and everything that defines an indie band is to do with aspects other than the music. Why do we call Franz Ferdinand an indie band rather than a pop band? It's because of things outside the music - where we hear them, what magazines they're in, what record label their on, their influences etc etc. Almost subconsciously people understand these things make a band indie.

I see your point that people now use indie to describe something else - this is what we were saying in the first place, that the real meaning of indie has been lost, that it's become a vauge and easy term to describe 21st century popular guitar bands.

I think we're going to have to agree to disagree cos I just think you're absolutley missing the point, and you probably think I am.

[rexclark]

this IS what indie music is no matter what you seem to think: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indie_rock

the crap music is indie pop http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indie_pop

[thomasowen]

this IS what indie music is no matter what you seem to think: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indie_rock

the crap music is indie pop http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indie_pop

[Im_in_a_tent]

Funny how it backs up what I'm saying then...nowhere in there is there mention of what indie is supposed to sound like, read this

Indie rock artists are known for placing a premium on maintaining complete control of their music and careers, releasing albums on independent record labels (sometimes self-owned and operated) and relying on touring, word-of-mouth, airplay on independent or college radio stations and, in recent years, the Internet for promotion. Musicians classified as indie rock are typically signed to independent record labels, rather than major record labels, although there are many examples of indie musicians switching to major labels mid-career. This practice blurs the lines between indie and mainstream music and is often the subject of debate amongst fans. Indeed, some bands that have spent most of their careers on major labels are still occasionally referred to by the press as indie rock because of their sound or aesthetic.

That is my point that indie bands can not be lumped together on what they are supposed to sound like - it's their ideals that make them indie.

Edited October 31, 2009 by Im_in_a_tent

[Im_in_a_tent]

Going by that list there's some cracking "Indie Pop" bands, Belle & Sebastian, Pulp, Arcade Fire, MGMT and Lightspeed Champion to name a few.

[thomasowen]

indie has no set sound you can get indie rock, indie dance hell you can even get indie music.

that quote you made summarises what indie music is like you said in your summary at the end its more a ideal

now we got our definitions out the way what makes bands like bloc party and the killers indie?

if you wanna hear some proper indie bands i'll post you some bands to look in to

Edited October 31, 2009 by thomasowen

[jonnyisRFC]

Went to a BLOC PARTY. gig last night in Reading, and they said that they have 2 more shows left on there tour but will be back soon with plenty more shows ...