• Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
  • Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!

I don't give a darn about your indie bands

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
DontHateOState;1643152; said:
The point is, once good indie music comes out, it hits the mainstream and becomes popular. Thus, it is no longer indie.
Click to expand...

Mainstream music fucking sucks, for the most part.

I hate to be that guy, but in this situation I'm going to be that guy.

EDIT: I now realize that what I said doesn't really relate to what you said. But there is a lot of good music that's not popular. A lot.
 
Upvote 0
DontHateOState;1643152; said:
The point is, once good indie music comes out, it hits the mainstream and becomes popular. Thus, it is no longer indie.
Click to expand...

Actually, 'indie' music can still be hugely popular, and still be 'indie'.

All that makes music 'indie' is the fact that it's recorded for an 'independent' label (i.e. not one of the big labels, Columbia, RCA, Warner Bros, etc), no more, no less.

Technically, the Beatles were an 'indie' band.

:p
 
Upvote 0
RLA_1.jpg
 
Upvote 0
FCollinsBuckeye;1643181; said:
Actually, 'indie' music can still be hugely popular, and still be 'indie'.

All that makes music 'indie' is the fact that it's recorded for an 'independent' label (i.e. not one of the big labels, Columbia, RCA, Warner Bros, etc), no more, no less.

Technically, the Beatles were an 'indie' band.

:p
Click to expand...

Yea, I guess we're getting into semantics now, as, in my opinion, the term "indie music" has morphed into something more than a mere reference to the abscence of a major music label, but I digress.

Your REM example is a good one because I guess they eventually jumped to Warner Bros, if I'm not mistaken. Often, it seems like a jump to a major label precipitates a decline in the quality of the music. Honestly though, I would say the exact opposite of what DontHateOState said is true: most typically, a jump to a major label precipitates a decline in the originality and often quality of the music. JMO.
 
Upvote 0
FCollinsBuckeye;1643181; said:
Actually, 'indie' music can still be hugely popular, and still be 'indie'.

All that makes music 'indie' is the fact that it's recorded for an 'independent' label (i.e. not one of the big labels, Columbia, RCA, Warner Bros, etc), no more, no less.

Technically, the Beatles were an 'indie' band.

:p
Click to expand...


Yes, that it a faux pas on me. I was associating the indie trend with the "misunderstood, we really know music, popular music isn't good" crowd.

Although, I don't think I'm particularly far off. Even though the strict definition of indie is independent, many "indie fans" like indie music because it allows them to be different.
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top