Indie music died in the 1990's?

iamhunted

Earthhorse wrote: »

specifically grunge, in the early 90s that hasn't been seen since. For starters, there was Nirvana ....

I could have swore the pixies where doing the same kind of stuff in 1987

EoghanWalsh

em, all those bands mentioned weren't really that indie, wouldn't you say? Like, I'd say there were lots more real indie bands around then. And there are tons of indie bands around now. This is prob just dragging out the what is indie debate, but the Stone Roses aren't indie, they're just rock. Indie rock is something kinda specific, I suppose the best way to define it is to ask "is this band tough?" If the answer is no then you may have yourself an indie band. And tons of bands fit that description, just most of them are, by their nature, under the radar, and it's almost always a British radar, cos Irish indie bands are almost all complete ****.

iamhunted

sometimes peopel just find it handier to tag music with genre labels.

personally I think theres more independent music around now than ever before. it's not on the radio and its not in hotpress but normally is in the best place where real alternative, independent music should be - somewhere where you have to go looking for it.

tech77

Decuc500 wrote: »

Looking at what 'indie' music is now I'm glad I came of age in the late 80's, early 90's. Alternative music back then really was an alternative to what was being played on daytime radio. You'd discover bands like Husker Du, Sonic Youth or Superchunk on some obscure radio station or in some magazine.

Indie meant being signed to an independant record label, now it's a certain look or sound.

Back then alternative rock music was just kids in t-shirts turning up their amps and rocking out, now it's all poxy Franz Ferdinand bands in slacks, skinny ties and pretentious videos and synths!

Maybe I'm just getting old and cranky.

I find it hard to disagree with this.

Things just seemed more organic in the late 80s and 90s compared to today- i like Earthhorse's confluence description btw.

Valmont

I would say that the music considered to be "indy" today seems to be a lot more homogenous than the indy music of the '80s and '90s.

A Disgrace

Re: Babybird.. forget 'you're gorgeous' and listen to any of their albums.. the most alternative of all the britpop bands..

damone

indie or alternative labels mean nothing now and havnt done since the early to mid eighties ,indie music and alternative music came from the independant charts which used to have most of the early punk bands ,a few goth bands and genuine alternative bands {think half man half biscuit},basically it was all on REAL alternative independant record labels {rough trade,chiswick,crass rec,stiff rec }then suddenly stock aitken and waterman s chart **** was in the independant charts cause it was released on offshot labels of majors,you wud literally see #1 the smiths #2black flag#3 kylie .from then on alternative became more a musical style rather than a lifestyle ,how can a band genuinely be an ALTERNATIVE or INDEPENDANT if they are on major labels or playing the industry game ,what are they then the ALTERNATIVE to or INDEPENDANT to???

lionel ritchie

Earthhorse wrote: »

However...how...ever, I do think there was something about music and the movement, specifically grunge, in the early 90s that hasn't been seen since. For starters, there was Nirvana and Kurt Cobain, who, love him or loathe him is now a music icon, a fact sadly cemented by his suicide, but which would have happened anyway.

Not sure I can agree with you there Earthhorse. I suspect his iconic status has endured because he topped himself not neccessarily because he was going to continue to be an high profile, influential creative force. There are indicators there that his star was starting to wane before his sad passing and I suspect that by now he'd be remembered with about as much fondness as lesser lights like Soundgarden if he was still chugging away. For example Geffen were deeply, deeply disappointed with sales of In Utero pretty much everywhere in the second half of 93 and into 94. MTV were scarcely @rsed with the Unplugged Show and seriously considered binning it.

whiterob81

Decuc500 wrote: »

Looking at what 'indie' music is now I'm glad I came of age in the late 80's, early 90's. Alternative music back then really was an alternative to what was being played on daytime radio. You'd discover bands like Husker Du, Sonic Youth or Superchunk on some obscure radio station or in some magazine.

Indie meant being signed to an independant record label, now it's a certain look or sound.

Back then alternative rock music was just kids in t-shirts turning up their amps and rocking out, now it's all poxy Franz Ferdinand bands in slacks, skinny ties and pretentious videos and synths!

Maybe I'm just getting old and cranky.

You are old and cranky.

People are still out there discovering music by bands on independent labels. A lot of the time, they're using the internet more so nowadays, discussion boards and the like. Even amazon is a great source for finding out about independent music even though it's a huge multinational corporation. But because of them, I've discovered more independent bands that i genuinely like over the last 4 or 5 years than i ever have from reading the NME. I've discovered bands like isis and kylesa that just don't get regular press coverage

It's true that bands promoted by the NME as indie are more often than not not genuinely indie, but that doesn't mean genuine interesting independent music is not being made. I've actually found that music magazines are the last place to discover decent music because (i) music journalists are tools who can't write who like music by bands that can't play (ii) a lot of the reviews read like edited press releases rather than genuine opinion pieces. If every mediocre indie is getting an 8/10 review everytime they bring out an album with 4 decent songs I start to become suspicious

I get the impression that the main problem you have is that people are not discovering the same bands that you did and that things have moved on

also Franz Ferdinand haven't been popular for a while now

and husker du and sonic youth were signed to majors

and superchunk sucked

jill_valentine

This idea is bizarre and frustrating.

All that's happened is that the nature of Indie music has changed. The centre of it, and it's defining characteristics, moved away from Britain and British influences to an extent. It's centred mainly around North America now, and that's fine. There is amazing stuff coming out of the US and Canada if can afford the time and patience hunt around for it, and fair enough maybe it doesn't appeal to you, but it's there.

What complicates the matter is that nowadays, a load of pop has been re-branded as Indie. Stuff like The Killers is consciously marketed as "indie", complete with lo fi guitars and fakey Britishy sounding vocals, while at the same time, actual independent music has caught up and surpassed traditional label output in terms of production values. So pop is trying to turn into what it thinks Indie is, while actual independent music is getting free of the restrictions that confined it to that sound in the first place.

Back in the 80's and 90's indie bands couldn't really afford to make any other music than they did. They just didn't have the production resources to make anything other than shouty guitar driven tracks or distortiony grunge or whatever, but things have changed now and the music has changed with it. To give examples that are in fresh in my mind, Final Fantasy probably couldn't or wouldn't have made the music he makes if he'd been doing his thing back then. His music doesn't necessarily give it away on first listen, but it's entirely dependent on the man himself having access to the production and looping software he uses.

Arcade Fire recorded the bulk of their first album in their apartment. They just couldn't have done that in the 80s or 90s, not with the music they make. They are signed to a label - Superchunk's label, incidentally - but they put their own money in, they own their own masters, and they picked Merge over half a dozen majors that offered them far more money for far less control. They were and are fiercely independent, and no less so just because they were successful in spite of that. There's a whole network of bands that have grown up around them too, that have benefitted from the momentum they've generated and the resources they've made available, without conforming to any particular sound or genre.

In the meantime, the internet totally flattened the playing field in indie's favour. Digital music sales have made it affordable for teeny tiny little bands to get their stuff to an audience, and the advent of internet word-of-mouth offers good music an audience to get to. Bands like Land of Talk or Sunset Rubdown or Beirut and so on, giddyingly good stuff that doesn't have any singular sound and would have toiled away in total obscurity - rather than just uh... near total obscurity even if they had been able to commit anything to disc without label help.

It just seems absurd to me to suggest that "indie music died", all this considered. There is still plenty of great independently made and independently minded music out there, really exciting stuff that you never would have heard, nevermind heard of, even a decade ago - it just covers a far broader spectrum than it used to.

whiterob81

Excellent post Jill, you put it far more eloquently than I could have hoped. Especially the part about commercial indie bands being produced to sound like old indie records. You can see the same thing in cinema where romantic comedies are dressed up as independent films by putting all the characters in charity shop clothing rather than prada.
Often what happens is that a band will come up something unique and original on their own terms and become a surprise success. The bigger studios and labels will steal certain elements from it come up with a watered down version to try and tap in to the same demographic. Hence, authentic sounding indie records by the view etc.
If you look beyond what mtv2 and nme has to offer, there is still a lot of amazing stuff being produced out there

Decuc500

whiterob81 wrote: »

I get the impression that the main problem you have is that people are not discovering the same bands that you did and that things have moved on

also Franz Ferdinand haven't been popular for a while now

and husker du and sonic youth were signed to majors

and superchunk sucked

I can't disagree with anything Jill Valentine says.

In truth I'm not qualified to comment about the current state of 'indie' music because I don't tend to seek out new and interesting bands like I used to. I'm sure there's loads of great stuff out there. There always will be.

I just get annoyed with the fact that the word 'Indie' has entered pop culture to describe a particular sound or look.

I'm well aware that Husker Du and Sonic Youth signed to major labels. Sure, Husker Du made possibly their best record after leaving SST.

But Superchunk doesn't suck. No band could write Slack Motherf***er and suck.

whiterob81

Decuc500 wrote: »

I can't disagree with anything Jill Valentine says.

In truth I'm not qualified to comment about the current state of 'indie' music because I don't tend to seek out new and interesting bands like I used to. I'm sure there's loads of great stuff out there. There always will be.

I just get annoyed with the fact that the word 'Indie' has entered pop culture to describe a particular sound or look.

I'm well aware that Husker Du and Sonic Youth signed to major labels. Sure, Husker Du made possibly their best record after leaving SST.

But Superchunk doesn't suck. No band could write Slack Motherf***er and suck.

I apologise if I was out of line. I can see the frustration at having incredibly weak bands sullying what was once a by word for a great ideolagy.

I suppose i just get annoyed at people moping about the current state of music when it's actually pretty healthy (record sales aside). It's depressing to listen to, and frustrating when a lot of fantastic music is still being created under the radar.

Do yourself a favour, check out meanderthal by torche and static tensions by kylesa. It might give you a bit more hope for alternative rock music

Decuc500

whiterob81 wrote: »

I apologise if I was out of line. I can see the frustration at having incredibly weak bands sullying what was once a by word for a great ideolagy.

I suppose i just get annoyed at people moping about the current state of music when it's actually pretty healthy (record sales aside). It's depressing to listen to, and frustrating when a lot of fantastic music is still being created under the radar.

Do yourself a favour, check out meanderthal by torche and static tensions by kylesa. It might give you a bit more hope for alternative rock music

It's cool, you weren't out of line. I was feeling nostalgic for the pre-Brit Pop years when alternative American rock bands were getting coverage and Superchunk made the cover of NME. (really wished I kept that issue!)

When you get older and look back at the bands that introduced you to an alternative to what was in the charts, you tend to think there's nothing that cool out today. But of course there always will be...

whiterob81

Decuc500 wrote: »

It's cool, you weren't out of line. I was feeling nostalgic for the pre-Brit Pop years when alternative American rock bands were getting coverage and Superchunk made the cover of NME. (really wished I kept that issue!)

When you get older and look back at the bands that introduced you to an alternative to what was in the charts, you tend to think there's nothing that cool out today. But of course there always will be...

aye, actually britpop kind of ruined music in the 90s imo. Bar the manics and some blur, it was pretty much all terrible. I think that was one of the things that helped start the trend for bad fake indie.

The music scene seemed to shift focus from all these interesting underground bands to swaggering lager lout oasis wannabes

Things have recovered nicely since!