Music Banter - The Actual Definition of "Indie"

Music Banter (https://www.musicbanter.com/)

- Indie & Alternative (https://www.musicbanter.com/indie-alternative/)

- - The Actual Definition of "Indie" (https://www.musicbanter.com/indie-alternative/39206-actual-definition-indie.html)

The Actual Definition of "Indie"

So I need to explain the definition of the "Indie" genre to my best friend's mom.

I need to give her an good few examples of the music and everything so that she'll have a good idea of it. And maybe then I'll be able to understand the genre myself.

Anybody want to help? :D

indie is not a genre really, it just means that a band is independent from major labels

So any band independent frommajor labels in considered an Indie band?

Yeah, but the term has become kinda perverted over the past five or so years and now pretty much includes any eccentric, skinny, glasses wearing band of college-agers who voted for Ralph Nader.

The "Indie Education Thread" may prove useful to you. Check that forum.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alfred (Post 632146)

[its] now pretty much...any eccentric, skinny, glasses wearing band of college-agers who voted for Ralph Nader.

this is what it is now.

Technically: Indie = independent music, the way "prog" is progressive music.
example:

Quote:

ndie is not a genre really, it just means that a band is independent from major labels

Colloquially: Any band with a certain appeal, attitude, and approach. Any band with the "independent attitude" is indie, even if they're on a major label. Example: Flaming Lips (often considered "indie" though they're on Warner Brothers)

Example 2:

Quote:

Yeah, but the term has become kinda perverted over the past five or so years and now pretty much includes any eccentric, skinny, glasses wearing band of college-agers who voted for Ralph Nader.

Quote:

Indie rock takes its name from "independent," which describes both the do-it-yourself attitudes of its bands and the small, lower-budget nature of the labels that release the music. The biggest indie labels might strike distribution deals with major corporate labels, but their decision-making processes remain autonomous. As such, indie rock is free to explore sounds, emotions, and lyrical subjects that don't appeal to large, mainstream audiences -- profit isn't as much of a concern as personal taste (though the labels do, after all, want to stay in business). It's very much rooted in the sound and sensibility of American underground and alternative rock of the '80s, albeit with a few differences that account for the changes in underground rock since then. In the sense that the term is most widely used, indie rock truly separated itself from alternative rock around the time that Nirvana hit the mainstream. Mainstream tastes gradually reshaped alternative into a new form of serious-minded hard rock, in the process making it more predictable and testosterone-driven. Indie rock was a reaction against that phenomenon; not all strains of alternative rock crossed over in Nirvana's wake, and not all of them wanted to, either. Yet while indie rock definitely shares the punk community's concerns about commercialism, it isn't as particular about whether bands remain independent or "sell out"; the general assumption is that it's virtually impossible to make indie rock's varying musical approaches compatible with mainstream tastes in the first place. There are almost as many reasons for that incompatibility as there are indie-rock bands, but following are some of the most common: the music may be too whimsical and innocent; too weird; too sensitive and melancholy; too soft and delicate; too dreamy and hypnotic; too personal and intimately revealing in its lyrics; too low-fidelity and low-budget in its production; too angular in its melodies and riffs; too raw, skronky and abrasive; wrapped in too many sheets of Sonic Youth/Dinosaur Jr./Pixies/Jesus & Mary Chain-style guitar noise; too oblique and fractured in its song structures; too influenced by experimental or otherwise unpopular musical styles. Regardless of the specifics, it's rock made by and for outsiders -- much like alternative once was, except that thanks to its crossover, indie rock has a far greater wariness of excess testosterone. It's certainly not that indie rock is never visceral or powerful; it's just rarely -- if ever -- macho about it. As the '90s wore on, indie rock developed quite a few substyles and close cousins (indie pop, dream pop, noise-pop, lo-fi, math rock, post-rock, space rock, sadcore, and emo among them), all of which seemed poised to remain strictly underground phenomena.

Got this from a good music site I like to use. I think it's pretty accurate.
allmusic

There are those who would argue, however, that in order for an artist to be considered underground in the true sense of the term would entail remaining outside all established modes of media and communication. In other words, an underground artist would shun record labels of any description, even those considered to be indie, along with any significant following; fans. Which is rather paradoxical, since the moment an artist achieves any kind of prominence, or has any group of people communicating about him/her, he/she can no longer be considered underground in the strict sense of the term.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Neil Loots (Post 632339)

Well I'm sure a band can stay underground to a certain extent.

not really a genre............................................. ....

lol