Official Indie Starter Kit Thread (Calling all hipsters... sorry euro)

[Jack of Arcades]

[ QUOTE ]
You mean like this gem?

[ QUOTE ]
The word "indie" is sometimes used as a synonym for alternative, a word which often bears the stigma of being associated with cynically manufactured mass-market teen-rebellion music from major labels.

[/ QUOTE ]

The term "indie" is a lot like Intelligent Design, "n/m", or the re-election of George W. Bush, I'm less concerned with what people think it means, than what it actually does mean.

Then again, I'm not a big fan of things like "new math" or linguistic descriptivism.

[/ QUOTE ]

Okay, go ahead and list all the "indie" bands you know of. The problem is that you're talking even more arbitrarily than normal genres and the distinction is absolutely useless in terms of describing what the band *sounds* like. Indie came to refer to a bunch of bands that were roughly musically similar or shared some common traits. These apply to pretty much all the bands we listed.

[fluxrad]

[ QUOTE ]
the distinction is absolutely useless in terms of describing what the band *sounds* like.

[/ QUOTE ]

LOL. Yes, yes it is useless in desribing what the band sounds like!!! That's why rational people don't use the term Indie to describe what a band sounds like. They use the term to describe a band on an independent label.

Out of curiosity, what term do you use to describe bands on independent labels, being that indie is already taken?

Also, if you think the four "Indie" bands I quoted above sound musicially similar then you, sir, fail it.

[CallMeIshmael]

[ QUOTE ]
Out of curiosity, what term do you use to describe bands on independent labels, being that indie is already taken?

[/ QUOTE ]

"Band on independent label" sounds good.

[Jack of Arcades]

[ QUOTE ]
LOL. Yes, yes it is useless in desribing what the band sounds like!!! That's why rational people don't use the term Indie to describe what a band sounds like. They use the term to describe a band on an independent label.

[/ QUOTE ]

You misunderstand me. The size of a label doesn't do a very good job in telling us what the band sounds like. At the very least most of the bands typically given the label "indie" have similar fanbases.

[ QUOTE ]
Out of curiosity, what term do you use to describe bands on independent labels, being that indie is already taken?

[/ QUOTE ]

I describe how they sound like, because it's stupid to designate based on the size of the label. Aside from that, I hardly ever describe any band as indie - it's a broad spectrum, similar to goth music (which has tons of subsets like post-punk, industrial, darkwave, etc).

[Soul Daddy]

There are a lot of essential albums included in the lists above, so I won't give an entire list. I'll just chime in on some earlier debates and add a couple of suggestions.

Elliot Smith - Either/Or is my selection. XO is amazing, no doubt. But Either/Or is catchier as a whole, a much better starter album. Plus, as CMI stated, it has "Say Yes" and that is enough.

Modest Mouse - Lonesome Crowded West. I'm guessing someone who wants to get into Indie rock has listened to them. Their older stuff is an absolute must and this is the cream of it.

Pretty Girls Make Graves - Good Health. No reason, other than I am fascinated with this album. A little harder than most singer/songwriter material.

Arcade Fire - Funeral. I don't see how this isn't on everyone's list. Along with YFH, Illinois, and Aeroplane, I'd think this would be an almost universal choice.

Spoon has to be in there somewhere. I prefer Series of Sneaks if the Laffitte songs are included. Otherwise Kill the Moonlight is the choice.

I'll lay off of my New Pornographers and National fetishes for now because they are not really starter bands. Also, Radiohead should be considered above Indie status.