Madchester

Nailz

Just a simple question here, does it appeal to many people on this particular fora? I was told if I'd ever want to talk about Madchester on boards, Alt & Indie would be the best place to do it. But as I have very little love for Alt & Indie I'm rather reluctant, are you all spoilt, whinging little English twats who wear shìte clothes or are you just fans of the music?

Personally I hated when a mod of this particular forum said that all the bands I highlighted as Madchester, despite it including bands like 808 State, FSOL (CSOM), A Guy Called Gerald, Utah Saints, MC Tunes & Shaman, could be spoken about here. I was infact rather insulted by his comment, didn't like it one bit, I don't think such descussions belong here;
Prove me wrong...

Dudess

I see what you're saying Nailz. This might explain things:
At the time in the music press, it was always being noted how the music that made up Madchester was "crossover" - i.e. combining elements of indie with dance. But the main Madchester players were groups with a (mostly) indie sound and/or on indie labels: Roses, Mondays, Inspiral Carpets, Charlatans. You may argue the Mondays didn't have an indie sound but they were on Factory and they weren't exactly comprised entirely of synth players.

I don't recall Utah Saints or The Shamen ever being considered part of Madchester. And certainly not Future Sound of London (the irony). Sure, they brought out singles that one would associate with that era all right, and they would no doubt have been played at the Hacienda, but the bands weren't part of the scene.

Sure 808 State and A Guy Called Gerald and MC Tunes were from Manchester and churning out the tunes at the time, but if you were to start a Madchester thread over in the Dance forum, you'd probably be advised to move it to Indie. Why? Because the main Madchester players were indie. So it had a foot in both camps - indie and dance, but leaning more in the direction of indie.

You might associate indie with posh arty sensitive types from Oxfordshire but that's inaccurate. Some of the greatest indie acts were from working class and even tough backgrounds - The Jesus & Mary Chain and Primal Scream were from Glasgow, The Smiths were from hard-as-nails parts of Manchester/Salford, as were some Joy Division/New Order (sure they could be dancey, but they could also be very, very indie) members. Echo & The Bunnymen were from a tough part of Liverpool.

stovelid

The indie dance thing was always a press-led misnomer, and really annoyed fans of black music (including me) at the time. I think it arose because the Stone Roses were the most copied band, and they had a genuinely groovy, soulful drummer and bassist that definitely injected a sly, black feel into the music. Also, madchester happened in parallel with acid house, which meant a lot of crossover in people's musical tastes and clubbing. When the sound went overground, a lot of the bands adopted that 'whey-faced' shuffle beat as a result.

I would place the principal madchester bands firmly within the indie family too. If you're talking about madchester as a wider phenomenon, basically the entire yoof culture of the late 80s - Factory, house, drugs, fashion and clubbing, then the premise is bit more shaky.

Nailz

Those two posts were hard hitting blows on my lobido.
I know I'm just using a stereotype for those kids, but it's almost accurate. It doesn't matter were those people are from, sure the Smiths came from a tough arse part of Salford, but I've never met one person who doesn't think Morrissey's a fruit! And I've also yet to see are hard-as-Nailz (thank you) lad who has a voice like Morrissey's. I rather see it as a crossover between soft rock/house (I'm aware I'm a stubern cùnt). I'd honestly rather have my Madchester thread locked on dance, than moved to indie. I've a hate for indie bands too, I think they're shìte (many apologies), and I don't think the Mondays, Roses, New Order ect. deserve to be talked about beside the like of the Artic Monkeys, the Kook, Razorlight, the Zutons, Reverend and the Makers or any other T4 promoted bands. It angers me to imagine it!

I agree on the black side of the Roses' music though, the bassline to 'I Wanna Be Adored' was quite blaaaack in that sence. Stovelid, who is that chap in your avatar??? He looks rather like the artwork for Black Grape's "It's Great When You're Straight... Yeah"!

Dudess

Nailz wrote: »

I know I'm just using a stereotype for those kids, but it's almost accurate. It doesn't matter were those people are from, sure the Smiths came from a tough arse part of Salford, but I've never met one person who doesn't think Morrissey's a fruit! And I've also yet to see are hard-as-Nailz (thank you) lad who has a voice like Morrissey's.

Well that's just being a bit narrow-minded. So what if Morrissey's gay and not blokey? (It's possible to be gay and blokey btw). He grew up in a hard estate in a tough area and was obsessed with Oscar Wilde, Diana Dors and 60s female singers and was considered the local weirdo. And yet he never backed down, no matter how much ostracisation (and no doubt violence) he faced. That to me makes Moz one tough bastard.

I've a hate for indie bands too, I think they're shìte (many apologies), and I don't think the Mondays, Roses, New Order ect. deserve to be talked about beside the like of the Artic Monkeys, the Kook, Razorlight, the Zutons, Reverend and the Makers or any other T4 promoted bands. It angers me to imagine it!

You're only looking at what's labelled "indie" now. None of the bands I mentioned are/were anything like the ones you've just mentioned. There was a time when "indie" meant good, and the Roses, Mondays, Jesus & Mary Chain, Primal Scream, Pixies, The Breeders and so on were given that label long before the Kooks etc.

stovelid

Nailz wrote: »

He looks rather like the artwork for Black Grape's "It's Great When You're Straight... Yeah"!

That's cos he is..

Monkey61

Nailz wrote: »

than moved to indie. I've a hate for indie bands too, I think they're shìte (many apologies), and I don't think the Mondays, Roses, New Order ect. deserve to be talked about beside the like of the Artic Monkeys, the Kook, Razorlight, the Zutons, Reverend and the Makers or any other T4 promoted bands. It angers me to imagine it!

All those recent bands you mentioned are chart pop-rock bands btw. The label "indie" doesn't apply and is only applied by people who don't really like music and the under sixteens.

nyarlothothep

when I think of good indie I think of artists like The Stone Roses, Primal Scream, The Pixies, Pulp, The Breeders and so on.

But I can't relate to any of this popular indie right now or 90% of anything a particular indie rock radio station has ever played. Graham Coxon, Interpol and Charlotte Hatherley are the only indie artists right now that I really like, well to qualify I only like Interpols first 2 albums and they are very similar to Joy Division but I like the atmosphere of despair they evoke. I guess Yeah Yeah Yeahs too mostly from their second album on when they developed more of a rock edge and I like the dont give a fck aura they convey. I haven't listened to their third album but I did moderately like their second, some cool songs on it.

But the image obsessed 80s aspect really p1sses me off, and all the critical lauding for it too. Its the ubiquity of these bands that seems kind of unfair, as a lot of music just gets ignored. Basically the same thing with britpop which tbh was similarly lame if not moreso imo with the whole lad culture wooah beer thing. Theres no progression in this type of music, I read gang of 4 saying it was totally decadent because they were basically just lampooning 80s bands and this was back in 2004. I expect the next big thing will be grunge for a while followed by more britpop and then a revival of some ignored genre from the 00s by 2020 or a reformulation of what we have now except with rap-Nu Indie.

Affable

Dudess wrote: »

Well that's just being a bit narrow-minded. So what if Morrissey's gay and not blokey? (It's possible to be gay and blokey btw). He grew up in a hard estate in a tough area and was obsessed with Oscar Wilde, Diana Dors and 60s female singers and was considered the local weirdo. And yet he never backed down, no matter how much ostracisation (and no doubt violence) he faced. That to me makes Moz one tough bastard.
.

To come from that background, to go his own way and be so driven to produce all those sheer genius lyrics. He does take himself very seriously but I guess he's earnt it.

Moz is just a legend.

Dudess

Yeah, Marc Bolan got awful grief but nobody was gonna stop him from dressing the way he did.

Nailz

Dudess wrote: »

You're only looking at what's labelled "indie" now. None of the bands I mentioned are/were anything like the ones you've just mentioned. There was a time when "indie" meant good, and the Roses, Mondays, Jesus & Mary Chain, Primal Scream, Pixies, The Breeders and so on were given that label long before the Kooks etc.

Dudess, I understand that I'm being a tad narrow-minded, but that's how I see things! I hate what Indie has become, therefore I'd rather shoot myself in the foot than speak of Madchester here! And now, since you've mentioned "the Roses" and "Mondays" I'm rather pissed off.

stovelid wrote: »

That's cos he is..

Awesome!! Grand Central Station made him look really funky, didn't they!!

Dudess

Nailz wrote: »

Dudess, I understand that I'm being a tad narrow-minded, but that's how I see things! I hate what Indie has become, therefore I'd rather shoot myself in the foot than speak of Madchester here! And now, since you've mentioned "the Roses" and "Mondays" I'm rather pissed off.

But forget about what indie has become. This is actually why I pitched a classic indie forum last year, due to the difference of the meaning now.
Indie meant something entirely different in the late 80s/early 90s. And the Happy Mondays and Stone Roses were very much indie back then.

Nailz

Dudess wrote: »

But forget about what indie has become. This is actually why I pitched a classic indie forum last year, due to the difference of the meaning now.
Indie meant something entirely different in the late 80s/early 90s. And the Happy Mondays and Stone Roses were very much indie back then.

I know, but isn't easy when you have to listen to Today FM everyday at work with that shìte Kooks song constently being braised on it and then coming home, only to throw on some Mondays, Roses & Black Grape (even though I think they should be categorised as Soft Rock), could you believe how hard it is for such a person like me to put them in the same genre?! Unbelievably difficult, is the answer to that retorical question!

What happened to the classic indie suggestion, the same as what happened to my Madchester suggestion??? I would love to see such things happen, but the way things go on boards, it ain't gonna happen.

KrazeeEyezKilla

From the Dance Music thread in the Music Forum.

Talentless?? It depends... Basshunter, Scooter (and other such forms of Euro-scum) are utterly talentless and crap. But, Aphex Twin, for one example is a very experimental talented man, some of the stuff he does with his music it unreal! But in all fairness, he is not really a dance artist, his music more so hits the barriers of an Avent-Guard style. I suppose more suitable examples of "Dance" would be such artists as Pendulum, 808 State, Daft Punk, FSOL (CSOM), Gerald Simpson, Xpander, Audio Bully, Underworld and maybe Faithless (depending on your opinion).

You have no problems liking Dance music even if the genre contained really crap music like Basshunter. I think it's the same with indie (Although I wouldn't compare The Kooks to Scooter. I think they had a couple of decent songs in 2006 or maybe I'm imagining it). Look at Metal. Most Metal fans hated Nu-Metal while Hip-Hop fans generally hate 50 Cent and others like that. You don't have to like everything in a genre to be a fan. The T4 Bands are only liked by a small number of posters on this site anyway and the moderator of this forum is even more obsessed with the late 80's/early 90's than you. There seems to be no chance of the Madchester Forum being approved.

Dudess

Nailz wrote: »

I know, but isn't easy when you have to listen to Today FM everyday at work with that shìte Kooks song constently being braised on it

This isn't intended at all to be patronising and wise old womanish but if you actually remember the time, it's easier to compartmentalise the two types of indie. Hell I was only 11 or 12 in 89/90 but I was becoming aware of indie, reading bits and pieces in NME, watching the ITV Chart Show Indie Top 10 (YouTube it - quality) etc. The Mondays and Roses were DEFINITELY indie back then

Mondays, Roses & Black Grape (even though I think they should be categorised as Soft Rock)

:eek: Shaun Ryder would choke on his cough syrup with extra codeine if he ever saw something categorising the Mondays as soft rock. Bryan Adams is soft rock!
Black Grape were more like funk in my opinion.

could you believe how hard it is for such a person like me to put them in the same genre?! Unbelievably difficult, is the answer to that retorical question!

Again, and I stress this is not intended as patronising and condescending, but if you don't remember the time when indie meant something different and you only view it as a dirty word in light of what you associate it with now, well yes, of course you're gonna dislike it. Think of it this way: The Mondays, Roses, Pixies, Breeders, Primal Scream, Jesus & Mary Chain - these were all the original indie acts before Britpop came along and ****ed it all up.

What happened to the classic indie suggestion, the same as what happened to my Madchester suggestion??? I would love to see such things happen, but the way things go on boards, it ain't gonna happen.

It was rejected and I understand why now (having moved to the other side ): there are too many music fora already and a lot of them aren't frequented often enough. This is the Alternative & Indie forum - a place for discussing ALL types and eras of Alternative/Indie.

KrazeeEyezKilla wrote: »

the moderator of this forum is even more obsessed with the late 80's/early 90's than you.

Oh wow! Which moderator is that? They sound well cool and I'd love to meet them!

IanCurtis

Let's keep this thread as the 90s one.

The moment I heard "The Only One I Know" I knew my life would never be the same again.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aZI1BQzY-nU

Heads up for Ride's "Leave Them All Behind"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Q0QV1iv-Nw

KrazeeEyezKilla

Dudess wrote: »

Oh wow! Which moderator is that? They sound well cool and I'd love to meet them!

Lucutus, of course. He always posting about New Order and Slush or Swerve or some some other band from 1991.:)

Nailz

KrazeeEyezKilla wrote: »

From the Dance Music thread in the Music Forum.

You have no problems liking Dance music even if the genre contained really crap music like Basshunter. I think it's the same with indie (Although I wouldn't compare The Kooks to Scooter. I think they had a couple of decent songs in 2006 or maybe I'm imagining it). Look at Metal. Most Metal fans hated Nu-Metal while Hip-Hop fans generally hate 50 Cent and others like that. You don't have to like everything in a genre to be a fan. The T4 Bands are only liked by a small number of posters on this site anyway.

I get what you mean, you don't have to dislike Ireland because Monaghan, Meath & Limerick is in it. But the different types of them have huge gaps, very hard to see them as all the same.

KrazeeEyezKilla wrote: »

...and the moderator of this forum is even more obsessed with the late 80's/early 90's than you. There seems to be no chance of the Madchester Forum being approved.

Hehe, now... I wouldn't say that!!!

Dudess wrote: »

This isn't intended at all to be patronising and wise old womanish but if you actually remember the time, it's easier to compartmentalise the two types of indie. Hell I was only 11 or 12 in 89/90 but I was becoming aware of indie, reading bits and pieces in NME, watching the ITV Chart Show Indie Top 10 (YouTube it - quality) etc. The Mondays and Roses were DEFINITELY indie back then

:eek: Shaun Ryder would choke on his cough syrup with extra codeine if he ever saw something categorising the Mondays as soft rock. Bryan Adams is soft rock!
Black Grape were more like funk in my opinion.

Again, and I stress this is not intended as patronising and condescending, but if you don't remember the time when indie meant something different and you only view it as a dirty word in light of what you associate it with now, well yes, of course you're gonna dislike it. Think of it this way: The Mondays, Roses, Pixies, Breeders, Primal Scream, Jesus & Mary Chain - these were all the original indie acts before Britpop came along and ****ed it all up.

It was rejected and I understand why now (having moved to the other side ): there are too many music fora already and a lot of them aren't frequented often enough. This is the Alternative & Indie forum - a place for discussing ALL types and eras of Alternative/Indie.

Oh wow! Which moderator is that? They sound well cool and I'd love to meet them!

Aw yeah I seen the top 10 indie chart before, and it was quality. And I was only implying Black Grape were soft rock, but I agree Funk is more plausable. Sorry, if I'm only being passionate, but I'll give your offer of giving my discussion of Madchester! (only to see though)

Morgans

OP, I think you have to remember what the scene was like before Britpop to understand the difference between "indie" now and "indie" then.

Of course, the lines have become blurred since indie was short for independent label, labels without strong marketing machines and all that entails.

Maybe it began to change with the stone roses but few indie acts were allowed or able to make it into the mainstream. The charts mattered then, with bands and labels wanting appearances on Top of The Pops to increase sales. The Smiths have one top ten hit, the Pixies had one top 40 hit. If you grew up when I grew up, where SAW/NKOTNB dominated the few radio stations, with one hour of "indie" music maybe.

It may have been happening at a small level, but once Oasis and Britpop came along, "indie" music was targeted by record companies and their marketing men. Any band with promise now is quickly signed up has wheelbarrows of cash to neuter their originality and churn out blah bland guitar pop.

My two cents.

Irjudge1

Nailz wrote: »

I get what you mean, you don't have to dislike Ireland because Monaghan, Meath & Limerick is in it. But the different types of them have huge gaps, very hard to see them as all the same.

Fantastic Analogy:D

Affable

Morgans wrote: »

The Smiths have one top ten hit, the Pixies had one top 40 hit..

The Pixies should not be mentioned in the same breath as The Smiths.:pac:

thegeezer

OK - tell me if this thread not apprpriate but would like to know if there are some bands I have missed. I ADORE Roses, Ian Brown, Charlatans, Mondays but wanna know what other Madchester bands had similar vibes ? Also love Massive Attack, Morcheeba but guess have to find the Trip-Hop forum for that :-)

First appearance here so feel free to set the rotweilers free !!

whatawaster

Nailz wrote: »

I know, but isn't easy when you have to listen to Today FM everyday at work with that shìte Kooks song constently being braised on it and then coming home, only to throw on some Mondays, Roses & Black Grape (even though I think they should be categorised as Soft Rock), could you believe how hard it is for such a person like me to put them in the same genre?! Unbelievably difficult, is the answer to that retorical question!

What happened to the classic indie suggestion, the same as what happened to my Madchester suggestion??? I would love to see such things happen, but the way things go on boards, it ain't gonna happen.

The Kooks are no more Indie than Girl's Aloud, no point even discussing them.

whatawaster

Nailz wrote: »

are you all spoilt, whinging little English twats who wear shìte clothes or are you just fans of the music?

Yes to both questions.

This thread is confusing me.

thegeezer

whatawaster wrote: »

The Kooks are no more Indie than Girl's Aloud, no point even discussing them.

Famously described as [censored] at Oxegen last year by the Revernd Jon McClure :-)