The Punk bands that were doing TOTP did it on their own terms.. Same with Joy Division on their legendary TV appearance on Tony Wilson's show.... It also has to be stressed that Tony Wilson was a completely different sort of record label boss as well, same with Alan McGee and the blokes who run Rough Trade and Mute, hell, even Richard Branson who had the guts to take on The Sex Pistols when they rather acrimoniously left EMI.... Personalities like this dont really exist in the mainstream record industry anymore.....

 

bands have always 'sold out' to make money... right back to the fabled 60's when inovation, experimentation and creativity were buzzing in the new world of pop music. do you play what YOU want to play and hope it sells or do you use music to make money?... the point is, they have to live! most of the great groups of the 60's managed to balance the two... the beatles, stones, kinks, small faces (all guitar based pop/blues forerunner to 'indie') in particular managed to be creative and commercial. thats why groups like this are still seen as influencial. other 'lightweight' groups may have had greater chart success, but were under the control of the music moguls.

 

even REAL 'indie' soon sold out to commerce... independant record labels started in the punk (do it yourself) era created to promote local bands to express their individuality free from music companies like emi, (sex pistols referance there), were soon bought up by the very companies they were formed to fight.

 

so real music id suggest hardly exists, i think they are all 'in it for the money'. modern indie has nowhere else to go... it has to re-cycle 'retro' sounds as its all been done before.

 

tbh though i dont mind the recent 'indie' explosion (although its NOT 'indie' its good old fashioned traditional pop music played by pop groups!), as its bringing back my favoured style of music. its the style that has dominated pop for 40 years plus, it has given us a variety of incarnations and has made our music the best in the world.

 

Brilliant! :lol: Same goes for most of those 'Indie' bands on MAJOR LABELS -_-

 

Reading quite a few of the threads in this 'Rock' section now and again that indie snobbery against major label signed ( indie-rock ) bands raises it head again...

 

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/3/36/Echo_dek_album_cover.jpg/200px-Echo_dek_album_cover.jpg

 

however not only does the Creation Records album above feature the words Distribution Sony Music on the back cover - but it turns out that the first Primal Scream album in the hits book was not a proper 'indie' album after all but actually came out thanks to Warner Music...

 

http://i30.photobucket.com/albums/c314/capasculto/PrimalScream.jpg

 

...I didnt know this till reading a feature about Edwyn Collins in Mojo the other night...which mentioned that Alan McGee also had a label deal with Warner Music - Elevation - just like Geoff Travis from Rough Trade who also had a label deal with Warners called blanco y negro (with acts like EBTG from Cherry Red - an indie label who you might have read about in the independent yesterday)

 

on the other hand Rough Trade - after many years being owned by Sanctuary - is now owned by the Beggars group [Martin Mills] - another indie label and one that turns out also used to be marketed by Warner Music - which as its a major label is suppposed to be damned (tho run by the Gin and Tonic Seagram people who used to have Universal rather than Time Warner)

 

and also where does this leave all the labels taken over by Warners along the way? are pre-punk labels like Jac Holzman's Elektra records (Love, the Doors, Phil Ochs, Tom Paxton) and David Geffen's Asylum Records (Laurel Canyon siner-songwriters and country-rock stuff, J.D. Souther) - equal to post-punk labels like above? even tho they might be part of some bohemian counter-culture of the late 60s and early 70s?

 

and when thinking internationally - how about bands who have gone through Warners anyway in the states like New Order (Quincy Jones' Qwest Records) and Depeche Mode (Seymour Stein's Sire Records)

 

and Depeche Mode's label Mute who is now under EMI.

 

Mute Records - is that any less indie than The Echo Label - even tho the Echo Label is thought as an indie label as its mainly got indie distribution even tho its the Chrysalis Group (their main label got sold to EMI like Virgin) and some acts are licenced to other major like Warners.

 

and where does Sony BMG's Zomba Records fit in - which could be seen as the biggest indie label seeing as they owned Pinnacle Distribution but obv Maratone assisted R&B funk-pop on Jive would not be equal to the Stone Roses on Silvertone but with Jive acts like A Flock of Seagulls licensed to Cherry Red - an indie label who you might have read about in the independent yesterday - it could be said that some stuff the majors dont want to be bothered about :lol: - and so it's on an indie label as its commercially worthless

 

so 'INDIE' and these anti major vibes that most indie snobs have - is this mentality just bollocks?? and is indie the most over-rated word in the whole lexicon of pop?

well 'indie' means independent meaning they should be differnt but there are plenty of indie bands that are all the same.

well 'indie' means independent meaning they should be differnt but there are plenty of indie bands that are all the same.

 

obv the etymology of the word has come about becuase of independent.

 

but theres a difference between people having a 'DIY ethos' and just being on an independent label - tho some people seem to have this mantra of 'indie label good, major bad' even when some of the indies are as big and commercial as the minor-majors, and seeing as there seem to have been fake-indies like forever.

 

 

and where does the punk and post-punk acts fit into this?

I think McGee was managing bands like JAMC and Primal Scream as well as running his label. Creation at that time probably wasn't big enough to give them the distribution they needed. All these labels needed some backing to supply the demand without going under.

 

In these days of digital I guess you could have a big hit without a huge outlay on hard copies, but things have changed now where the money goes more on promotion - full time PR bodies, billboard advertising, wall to wall radio and TV spots and it's this that indie labels - now more indie than ever - can't afford. I should know, I run one.

Genres in general are pretty stupid and I don't get caught up on them. I think arguing about them is actually extremely ridiculous. It's all music in the end.

 

Labels in general are kinda c**p. I feel the way about labelling books fiction and non-fiction when non-fiction is completely selective and biased and there is always some level of truth/fact to fiction books.

Genres in general are pretty stupid and I don't get caught up on them. I think arguing about them is actually extremely ridiculous. It's all music in the end.

 

Labels in general are kinda c**p. I feel the way about labelling books fiction and non-fiction when non-fiction is completely selective and biased and there is always some level of truth/fact to fiction books.

 

but it shouldnt be like that....

 

the point is that when major record labels get their teeth into an act then musical credibility and innovation goes out the window. 'indie' came into being because musicians wanted to create their own music, in their own style in their own way. major record labels just want a commercial success so theres barely any room for creative self expression/innovation.

 

music should be diverse and not the watermanesque hit factory production line, and history shows that the 'best' times in pop music were the ones where artists were given leeway for self expression.

 

let the musicians play the music the musicians want to... not what the major record labels want them too

 

as for genres.... theres always been an argument against 'pigeonholing' different styles of music, and it still goes on, get used to it because different music WILL always be labeled in different ways.

In these days of digital I guess you could have a big hit without a huge outlay on hard copies, but things have changed now where the money goes more on promotion

 

That's the whole problem with music nowadays - too much emphasis on the marketing and the promotion, the "next big thing" blah, blah, blah.... No one actually seems to concentrate on asking what should be the most important thing - Is the music any good...? We've just seen Nine Inch Nails up the ante considerably in the past 6 months as far as Internet music distribution goes, first with "Ghosts" and now with "The Slip".... Trent hardly needs to spend money on "promotion" when all the internet chatter is doing the job for him, he has quite possibly orchestrated the greatest musical coup in moden times, far bigger than Radiohead or Smashing Pumpkins achieved...

 

I think that this is proof that the "independent" spirit does still actually exist, although it seems incredibly rare these days....

 

 

but it shouldnt be like that....

 

the point is that when major record labels get their teeth into an act then musical credibility and innovation goes out the window. 'indie' came into being because musicians wanted to create their own music, in their own style in their own way. major record labels just want a commercial success so theres barely any room for creative self expression/innovation.

 

music should be diverse and not the watermanesque hit factory production line, and history shows that the 'best' times in pop music were the ones where artists were given leeway for self expression.

 

let the musicians play the music the musicians want to... not what the major record labels want them too

 

as for genres.... theres always been an argument against 'pigeonholing' different styles of music, and it still goes on, get used to it because different music WILL always be labeled in different ways.

Fantastic post, I agree with every word of that!

I prefer to use the word Indieverse or Alterniverse (and i hate the word "alternative", which i class as soft rock, and includes KT Tunstall, The Feeling and Snow Patrol and Elliot Minor. But what do it know...

Alterniverse? Nah, alternative bands change by nature - something can only be alternative if it's different to the norm. Of the bands you mentioned only Snow Patrol USED to be alternative. The other three have always been mainstream - even if both KT and Elliot Minor think differently.

but it shouldnt be like that....

 

the point is that when major record labels get their teeth into an act then musical credibility and innovation goes out the window. 'indie' came into being because musicians wanted to create their own music, in their own style in their own way. major record labels just want a commercial success so theres barely any room for creative self expression/innovation.

 

music should be diverse and not the watermanesque hit factory production line, and history shows that the 'best' times in pop music were the ones where artists were given leeway for self expression.

 

let the musicians play the music the musicians want to... not what the major record labels want them too

 

as for genres.... theres always been an argument against 'pigeonholing' different styles of music, and it still goes on, get used to it because different music WILL always be labeled in different ways.

Fantastic post, I agree with every word of that!

 

well except the bit about 'music should be diverse and not the watermanesque hit factory production line' because it might have been better used against production line indie (indie = 4 guys with guitars only!!!) rather than having the usual yawnful go at Pete Waterman....and i guess also since Rob thought those Pete Waterman (with Peter Collins) productions of Tracey Ullman were so bloody decent :lol: (anyone watched the Stiff documentary on BBC Four then??? and thinking about it is stiff punk, indie, pub-rock or just an offshoot of ZTT?!?!? )

 

this strange little comedienne turned her talents to music (before going to america and discovering 'the simpsons'...lol). in 83-4 she scored 6 hits all of which i thought were bloody decent! my fav was 'they dont know' (a cover????) which i rate very highly. her cover of doris days 'move over darling' was a cover that i rate higher then the original, thats rare!

 

anyone else a fan?

 

Alterniverse? Nah, alternative bands change by nature - something can only be alternative if it's different to the norm. Of the bands you mentioned only Snow Patrol USED to be alternative. The other three have always been mainstream - even if both KT and Elliot Minor think differently.

 

but I guess Snow Patrol will be still thought as indie and alternative by the masses and KT pop even tho KT is as mainstream as snow patrol and also kinda folky/rootsy because of the usual phallic nature of music jounolism that dictates that pop = female and rock = male (i will exclude metal at this moment out of mainstream context) and it would be good that if indie did mark some creative self expression and/or innovation - whether it was rock 'upbeat twee pop' or electronic music - but largely as far as the indie snob is concerned it seems these ideals been mixed up with the 'cynicism of the age' to produce a mainly competive male act of superiority which have filted down thru pop society to validate the conservative notion that rock is a better form of artist expression than pop (even tho the 'pop' thing it might be a better) as pop will always be seen to be lightweight throwaway and cheesy

well except the bit about 'music should be diverse and not the watermanesque hit factory production line' because it might have been better used against production line indie (indie = 4 guys with guitars only!!!) rather than having the usual yawnful go at Pete Waterman....

 

whats wrong with 4 guys with guitars?... alot more inovative then anything watertwat has done (just for the record imho watertwat made 90% utter carp whilst 10% of his productions were ok)..

 

4 guys with guitars....erm.... the beatles anyone? :lol:

 

the kinks, led zep, :lol: sex pistols, etc etc.... guitar music IS diverse, s.a.w. hit factory production line wasnt.

whats wrong with 4 guys with guitars?... alot more inovative then anything watertwat has done (just for the record imho watertwat made 90% utter carp whilst 10% of his productions were ok)..

 

4 guys with guitars....erm.... the beatles anyone? :lol:

 

the kinks, led zep, :lol: sex pistols, etc etc.... guitar music IS diverse, s.a.w. hit factory production line wasnt.

 

but what does S.A.W. really have to do with the price of "HOW MUCH IS THE FISH?" :lol: - its totally irrevelvant - if you dont like that style of music you dont like that style of music - full stop - so keep to your popular conservative guitar music and dont bother with something thats not your thing (tho i could be wrong as you could be readying "Mushymanrob's big gay disco extravgaaanza" in the retroarea where you obsess about CC Catch, Alexander Bard, Amanda Leer and Man 2 Man - but i doubt it :lol: :lol: think something about the Moody Blues would be more likely)

 

- ok - some of the late 80s S.A.W. productions are awful with that dreadful nasty synth-sax - but that would be my criticism of 80s pop music in general for you - generally 80s productions are perhaps the most vomiting awfulness of any era you could get - and actually is in keeping other awful stuff you can see on that Smash Hits advert from the hits (Go West, Bros) - however as far as their earlier club stuff / Hi-NRG - thats actually not as bad as some of the things you could get on the 12" 80s album (12" mixes of the Thomson Twins, Duran Duran, the Liebrand mix of INXS' Need you tonight :puke2: :puke2: :puke2: justify this), OK S.A.W. maybe their was some lapses in quality control now and again and obv they're not in the league of Jam & Lewis and Cherion/Maratone - but theres much much worse 'pop-disco' things....tho everything in the 1st place would be seen as inferior to the guitar music snob - which is the only valid form of artistic expression.

 

and anyway if your gonna bring PWL as an 'indie label' into play you might as well just talk about some eurobeat/eurodance band from Germany's Edel Records or Japan's Avex Records as that prob would be more suitable in comparison

 

you cant really equate the two of them - tho i guess if you happened to have a late 1990s album of second divison indie-rock/britpop and a pete waterman album that featured T Ullman, Roadblock and Divine - then actually the later would be more diverse - tho tbh the late 1990s indie/britpop album would more likely have the prodigy, underworld, PWEI, the shamen, Carter and the Divine Comedy among its track listing

 

and the kinks, led zep, sex pistols - thats not that diverse when you just think in rock terms and think that they would easily go together on a friday night riffs countdown on the hits...but obv not as bad as any American compliation that might feature OneRepublic, the Fray and Remy Zero.

 

and going back to PWEI, the divine Comedy - as far as the Indieverse or Alterniverse is conserned maybe its all the indie-dance, tweepop, chamber-pop, weird orchestral noodlings, techno-rock, folky stuff, nu-rave that makes it interesting as everything else is conservative

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This is a fantastic thread, with some differing, but very good views & opinions, exactly what Buzzjack should be about.

 

But I personally think Scott is nearest the mark:

 

That's the whole problem with music nowadays - too much emphasis on the marketing and the promotion, the "next big thing" blah, blah, blah.... No one actually seems to concentrate on asking what should be the most important thing - Is the music any good...? We've just seen Nine Inch Nails up the ante considerably in the past 6 months as far as Internet music distribution goes, first with "Ghosts" and now with "The Slip".... Trent hardly needs to spend money on "promotion" when all the internet chatter is doing the job for him, he has quite possibly orchestrated the greatest musical coup in moden times, far bigger than Radiohead or Smashing Pumpkins achieved...

 

I think that this is proof that the "independent" spirit does still actually exist, although it seems incredibly rare these days....

 

 

This is a fantastic thread, with some differing, but very good views & opinions, exactly what Buzzjack should be about.

 

Well i think indie snobbery is something that should be discussed - ive got quite a few mates who are v much indie snobs who think bands are alright when they are underground but once they sign to a major - or in the case of someone like alex turner or Pete Doherty get #1s and a celeb g.f's - then are v critical of their work and disregard them moving onto the next big new thing that nobody but them knows (tho when it comes to old music its the obv stuff of Scott Walker, VU etc)

 

tho yeah Scott's view does fit into this

yeah the word is bollocks...if the band isnt backed by a major then its indie and they have to do a lot of stuff on their own which also gives them the freedom to play whatever they feel like

 

take the peoples party for example www.myspace.com/thepeoplesparty they have to tour around on a big truck and get their exposure like that......if they had a major then im not sure if they would need to do that but its cool none the less

yeah the word is bollocks...if the band isnt backed by a major then its indie and they have to do a lot of stuff on their own which also gives them the freedom to play whatever they feel like

 

take the peoples party for example www.myspace.com/thepeoplesparty they have to tour around on a big truck and get their exposure like that......if they had a major then im not sure if they would need to do that but its cool none the less

 

but going back to PWL again - this makes early Kylie Minogue records on PWL/Mushroom Records an indie artist and Kylie Minogue - the Indiekylie version hanging out with the Manics and using large chunks of Ed Barton/Jane on de/construction/SONY BMG - not an indie artist...

 

and i guess in a few years time it will turn out that only the big acts with huge fanbases leaving Parlophone/EMI can survive on their own true indie label (not the one who end up on Cooking Vinyl)

but going back to PWL again - this makes early Kylie Minogue records on PWL/Mushroom Records an indie artist and Kylie Minogue - the Indiekylie version hanging out with the Manics and using large chunks of Ed Barton/Jane on de/construction/SONY BMG - not an indie artist...

 

No, it doesn't... PWL stuff was far more concerned chiefly with what I consider to be the poison of all "great" music, Marketing and Promotion, something that was not the chief concern of the likes of Mute, Rough Trade, Sub-Pop, Creation, Factory, Wiiija etc... The actual music came very far down the list of priorities at the PWL factory, and the "artists" were all so bloody interchangeable, Christ just about anyone could've been picked from a fukkin' hat to be the dancing marionette for these "songs", something you could certainly NOT say about any of the artists on the rosters of the other Indie labels I mentioned, ALL of whom had their own distinct sound and personality...

 

...And "factory" was pretty much what PWL was... Production-line bollocks.. Music basically turned into a soul-less, gutless, bloody manufacturing process.... Yeah, like that's gonna create something that's worth anything.... Call us all "snobs" if you want Alex (and frankly, I reckon you're guilty of a little inverted snobbery yourself here tbh)... The fact is, we actually bloody CARE about music and most definitely DO NOT think that it should EVER be a product or a manufactured process like a fukkin' widget or a can of Spam...

 

The likes of PWL, Cowell, Louis Walsh, etc are the McDonalds or KFC of music.... Yeah, you can live on that sh!t for a while, but frankly, wouldn't you rather have a nicely cooked steak...?

 

And I aint like your bloody mates either... I was delighted when Nirvana became successful (not least because their success was instrumental in killing off the God-awful LA Poodle Rock of the mid-to-late-80s...), my chief problem with "Nevermind" was the crappy production that made the band sound too Poppy (something which was rectified when Steve Albini produced "In Utero").... The actual tunes bloody ROCKED when you heard them played live.....

A great point about Nevermind - but without the accessibility of Butch Vig's 'radio-friendly unit-shifting' production they may never have had the chance to destroy poodle rock and go on to work with Albini two years later.

 

I've been accused of indie snobbery myself, but it's only when I genuinely perceive a once-great artist to have gone off the boil that I'll turn. Great case in point is Oasis - the rot was beginning to settle in with 'Roll With It' but had shrivelled to nothing by the time 'D'You Know What I Mean' was out. Great counter-case is the Arctic Monkeys who have only become stronger.

 

It's actually exciting to share your music taste with those half your age, it just very rarely happens.

A great point about Nevermind - but without the accessibility of Butch Vig's 'radio-friendly unit-shifting' production they may never have had the chance to destroy poodle rock and go on to work with Albini two years later.

 

Well, that might be true mate, but it doesn't mean I have to like it... LOL. I just think Vig spoiled the great tunes on that album by making the production too glossy and poppy... It was honestly like Nirvana were two bands at that stage, cos when they played the "Nevermind" songs live, they were raw-as-fukk and rocked like b/astards, and bore little resemblance to how the album made them sound, "Territorial Pissings" probably being the most stark contrast...