The Fat el Hombre
Well-Known Member
Come on n_mcfc, if you´re into indie music and you´re from leigh you obviously have to abide by darren the rag adams´ facebook status updates to keep you updated on whats going on in the world surely?
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
'Indie Music'
- Thread starter n_mcfc
- Start date
I hate the use of the word 'indie' and I hate the association of fashion with musical taste. I like Oasis, Libertines, Arctic Monkeys, The Strokes, Kings of Leon (KoL 1st and second album were quality, after that is when they sold out and went mainstream), etc but I don't wear skinny jeans or have shit indie hair. I've got a mate who's in to 'emo' music but he's perfectly normal and has no intentions to cut himself. I don't know where this idea came from that people should synchronise their dress sense with their musical taste but I find it embarrassing.
BoyBlue_1985
Well-Known Member
Oasis and Blur although they both could be classed as rock bands they defined what has become Indie
David Silva 2010
Active Member
- Joined
- 13 Jul 2010
- Messages
- 29
My understanding was that 'indie' was just short for independent. Meaning the artist was signed to an indpendent record label and it was not necessarily related to any genre of music, although over the years a certain type of music has just become known as 'indie'
Could be wrong though.
Could be wrong though.
gaudinho's stolen car
Well-Known Member
David Silva 2010 said:My understanding was that 'indie' was just short for independent. Meaning the artist was signed to an indpendent record label and it was not necessarily related to any genre of music, although over the years a certain type of music has just become known as 'indie'
Could be wrong though.
You're not wrong.
My thoughts on indie is that it refers to bands who were signed to an independent record label. Oasis made the term what it is today by being signed to Alan McGhee on Creation records.
Once their time with creation ended they then went onto the big commercial label 'Sony' and then formed their own 'Big Brother' label.
The Roses, The Charlatans, Happy Mondays, Joy Division to me aren't 'indie' bands although they are labelled with this sort of 'daddy's of indie' tag. They were part of the movement during the late 80's early 90's where the music was 'secondary' in favour of taking pills, trips and having a massive rave rather than be musically talented to perform a live gig.
Bands nowadays are thrown into this bracket of indie just as a reference because nothing about their existence was independent. KOL, Bloc Party, The Killers, The Strokes etc etc were just bands who caught the limelight and were instantly signed to a big label. The Arctic Monkeys are the only band to come close to what Oasis had as they used Myspace as a big part of their marketing back when they first started.
The Strokes incidently are 4 rich kids from NY who parents funded them all the way through until they got signed. For me personally whilst some of their music is decent, it was more about being caught smoking a fag and dressing like a tramp rather than creating something that was truely groundbreaking. It was fashionable to like them rather than them actually being a decent band.
Just my opinion though.
Once their time with creation ended they then went onto the big commercial label 'Sony' and then formed their own 'Big Brother' label.
The Roses, The Charlatans, Happy Mondays, Joy Division to me aren't 'indie' bands although they are labelled with this sort of 'daddy's of indie' tag. They were part of the movement during the late 80's early 90's where the music was 'secondary' in favour of taking pills, trips and having a massive rave rather than be musically talented to perform a live gig.
Bands nowadays are thrown into this bracket of indie just as a reference because nothing about their existence was independent. KOL, Bloc Party, The Killers, The Strokes etc etc were just bands who caught the limelight and were instantly signed to a big label. The Arctic Monkeys are the only band to come close to what Oasis had as they used Myspace as a big part of their marketing back when they first started.
The Strokes incidently are 4 rich kids from NY who parents funded them all the way through until they got signed. For me personally whilst some of their music is decent, it was more about being caught smoking a fag and dressing like a tramp rather than creating something that was truely groundbreaking. It was fashionable to like them rather than them actually being a decent band.
Just my opinion though.
gaudinho's stolen car
Well-Known Member
nevilletogoater-in said:My thoughts on indie is that it refers to bands who were signed to an independent record label. Oasis made the term what it is today by being signed to Alan McGhee on Creation records.
Once their time with creation ended they then went onto the big commercial label 'Sony' and then formed their own 'Big Brother' label.
The Roses, The Charlatans, Happy Mondays, Joy Division to me aren't 'indie' bands although they are labelled with this sort of 'daddy's of indie' tag. They were part of the movement during the late 80's early 90's where the music was 'secondary' in favour of taking pills, trips and having a massive rave rather than be musically talented to perform a live gig.
Bands nowadays are thrown into this bracket of indie just as a reference because nothing about their existence was independent. KOL, Bloc Party, The Killers, The Strokes etc etc were just bands who caught the limelight and were instantly signed to a big label. The Arctic Monkeys are the only band to come close to what Oasis had as they used Myspace as a big part of their marketing back when they first started.
The Strokes incidently are 4 rich kids from NY who parents funded them all the way through until they got signed. For me personally whilst some of their music is decent, it was more about being caught smoking a fag and dressing like a tramp rather than creating something that was truely groundbreaking. It was fashionable to like them rather than them actually being a decent band.
Just my opinion though.
How old are you mate?
gaudinho's stolen car said:nevilletogoater-in said:My thoughts on indie is that it refers to bands who were signed to an independent record label. Oasis made the term what it is today by being signed to Alan McGhee on Creation records.
Once their time with creation ended they then went onto the big commercial label 'Sony' and then formed their own 'Big Brother' label.
The Roses, The Charlatans, Happy Mondays, Joy Division to me aren't 'indie' bands although they are labelled with this sort of 'daddy's of indie' tag. They were part of the movement during the late 80's early 90's where the music was 'secondary' in favour of taking pills, trips and having a massive rave rather than be musically talented to perform a live gig.
Bands nowadays are thrown into this bracket of indie just as a reference because nothing about their existence was independent. KOL, Bloc Party, The Killers, The Strokes etc etc were just bands who caught the limelight and were instantly signed to a big label. The Arctic Monkeys are the only band to come close to what Oasis had as they used Myspace as a big part of their marketing back when they first started.
The Strokes incidently are 4 rich kids from NY who parents funded them all the way through until they got signed. For me personally whilst some of their music is decent, it was more about being caught smoking a fag and dressing like a tramp rather than creating something that was truely groundbreaking. It was fashionable to like them rather than them actually being a decent band.
Just my opinion though.
How old are you mate?
26 pal
gaudinho's stolen car
Well-Known Member
nevilletogoater-in said:gaudinho's stolen car said:nevilletogoater-in said:My thoughts on indie is that it refers to bands who were signed to an independent record label. Oasis made the term what it is today by being signed to Alan McGhee on Creation records.
Once their time with creation ended they then went onto the big commercial label 'Sony' and then formed their own 'Big Brother' label.
The Roses, The Charlatans, Happy Mondays, Joy Division to me aren't 'indie' bands although they are labelled with this sort of 'daddy's of indie' tag. They were part of the movement during the late 80's early 90's where the music was 'secondary' in favour of taking pills, trips and having a massive rave rather than be musically talented to perform a live gig.
Bands nowadays are thrown into this bracket of indie just as a reference because nothing about their existence was independent. KOL, Bloc Party, The Killers, The Strokes etc etc were just bands who caught the limelight and were instantly signed to a big label. The Arctic Monkeys are the only band to come close to what Oasis had as they used Myspace as a big part of their marketing back when they first started.
The Strokes incidently are 4 rich kids from NY who parents funded them all the way through until they got signed. For me personally whilst some of their music is decent, it was more about being caught smoking a fag and dressing like a tramp rather than creating something that was truely groundbreaking. It was fashionable to like them rather than them actually being a decent band.
Just my opinion though.
How old are you mate?
26 pal
That's why you think the term Indie was coined in 1995 then.
Lost Pilot
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 12 Aug 2010
- Messages
- 1,583
Very harsh on the Mondays and Joy Division as Factory records was about as indie as indie gets.
To me Indie is Independent bands on independent labels i.e Black Flag, Husker Du, The Replacements, Pavement, Elliott Smith, The Brian Jonestown Massacre etc. all of which make different styles of music.
This is a documentary (<a class="postlink" href="http://www.indierockdoc.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.indierockdoc.com/</a>) which is looking at the concept behind the term and the guy behind it is releasing it independently, asking for donations from anyone who is interested in it in order to distribute it.
To me Indie is Independent bands on independent labels i.e Black Flag, Husker Du, The Replacements, Pavement, Elliott Smith, The Brian Jonestown Massacre etc. all of which make different styles of music.
This is a documentary (<a class="postlink" href="http://www.indierockdoc.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.indierockdoc.com/</a>) which is looking at the concept behind the term and the guy behind it is releasing it independently, asking for donations from anyone who is interested in it in order to distribute it.