Dotoar

I think that it's about established by now (in this thread, I mean) that indie is quite established by now (as a genre, I mean). Just as pop != popular music, rock != rock'n roll and electro != electronic music, I'm sure that most people would agree that indie != independent music. Thus the whole discussion of the artists relation to the market is redundant and not at all indicative of the sound itself.

I'd say that, if one were to pigeonhole it once and for all, indie is a modern development of artrock, occasionally peppered with punk and/or new wave, but (thankfully) not necessarily.

__________________

TockTockTock

Throbbing Gristle is considered to be one of the first indie bands ever. Lol... and I am pretty sure none of you would ever relate them to that "indie sound" that people are talking about. Hell, Crass was indie, too. So basically, there is no indie sound (although I could probably make a better argument but, oh well).

Dotoar

If so, then every second garage band of the 60's was indie. I think you could define the 'indie' sound as associated with certain bands, albeit not with the notion of them being necessarily 'independent artists'.

__________________

TockTockTock

Please give me a few examples.

Dotoar

Of indie bands that have made it somewhat big? Flaming Lips, Mew, Phoenix, MGMT, Arctic Monkeys, Belle&Sebastian, Mercury Rev, Sígur Rós, Radio Dept. to name a few.

__________________

TockTockTock

I mean those with that "indie sound."

Dotoar

Any of the above. No, they don't sound alike but then again, neither do Yes and Meshuggah although both can be classified as 'progressive'. Maybe I should have said something like "approach" instead of "sound" as there is not one single sound that depicts 'indie'. But they can all be considered indie nonetheless and at least I can hear that common streak in their music as well, all residing underneath the indie umbrella.

Say, would you subscribe to my previous statement?

__________________

TheBig3

Smart man.

Can someone tell me why whenever this question is asked people have to talk about what it meant once upon a time?

__________________
I've moved to a new address

Screen13

History.

Indiependent labels in the US were, as far back as The 50's, the main source of most of the Rock, Soul, and everything else that moved the music forward, no questions asked. In Rock's early years, the majors hardly played any part except for finding the occasional winning band or Producer, but usually were damn lost in how to promote the music most of the time. It started to catch on by The Late 60's with the majors, but once they started to get too big during the Disco era, the maverick spirit was shown the door (or, really, booted through the door). Of course, there were some good Indies in The UK as well, usually those (usually Manager-based) who connected to the majors in The States and other places around the world predating the Rough Trades and Creations by a couple of generations of music who knew who to sell the music without diluting the power of it (The Who and Jimi Hendrix were on Track). Also, it's important to note that Island was once an Indie back in The 60's as well (I think Virgin was also one in The 70's).

Of course, it was sometimes risky to go that way, and there have beensome interesting stories to come out of those early years, but when it came to the sound and the effect it had on the people, it was important.

In the Punk era, many viewed the majors as a possible way to sell the music at first before Sire and others tried to sell the New Wave (again, a term that's hardly new...Mercury sold Late 60's music under that name from what I remember). Once the music turned harder, into Hardcore and Second Wave Punk, they knew right away that the majors were not going to touch it, so an underground decided to spring up fast. this obviously led to other Indie scenes, the most notable being those from the Industrial world (Industrial, Mute) and from what some may consider the first wave of Indie as a style of music during the Post-Punk era (Rough Trade).

Through The 80's, it was getting clear that it was important to find ways of selling music without having to deal with suits who hardly understood what was going on. It was a pain to see once-good bands going into a period of getting neutered through the majors although of course you knew that they were going to take a chance anyways. To me, at least, it's important to know the term as it once meant before it went onto become a "Genre" as such. If the Internet Age is going to have to move into more Independent ways of producing music as the majors stick to the old tried and true forms of shoving Bubblegum into the Pop Charts, it should know why it is important to view going Indie as an alternative to sell your music without having to go through a wall of Suits who decide who's going to Produce the sound and Direct the video.

For Metal, the Independent scene was very important to some of it's most innovative scenes after The 70's. Usually, this would lead to some Major attention, especially for the Hair Metal and more commercial-approved Hard Rock sounds, but in the end it usually goes back to Indies thanks to a strong suppoprtive fan base once a trend is viewed as passed the sell by date by the business.

The history of Independent companies is a lesson in getting your music out to people, and of course it does not come out great all of the time. It's good to learn the lessons both good and bad of Indie's past, if it's either a step into the buisness or sticking to an Underground as either way, it is the Indies that spark most of the interesting new sounds in any generation from Garage Punk to Bedroom Techno and everything else inbetween.

To brand Indie as a "Genre" or a "Sound" limits things in my view...and as a term for business, it should not be stuck in "Once Upon a Time," either.

TockTockTock

Fair enough.