Many bands present themselves as "indie", both to describe the style of music and the current status of their music careers. First, and most obviously, independent bands are just that: independent. They haven't been signed by a record label and are do-it-yourselfers when it comes to recording, promotion, touring, and distribution. The vast majority of all musicians, many of which (thankfully) reside here in Austin, are indie musicians. Austin has indie rock, indie pop, indie rap, indie electro, and about every other combination of indie genres. The indie tag is indicative of more than just the lack of a recording contract, but things get muddy when music genres come into play.
There is a vague consensus that "indie rock" is a broad musical genre. It is characterized by an alt-rock guitar-led style, with an increasing dependence on keyboards and synths. Austin is packed to the brim with musical acts that fall into this vague category. When in doubt, describe your band as indie rock. If indie rock is a genre of music, is it possible for a band signed to a major label to play music in the indie rock style? Since that doesn't jive, let's create sub-genres!
This chart doesn't help. At all.
To get around the possible confusion of an indie rock back that isn't indie, we start to create sub-genres and sub-sub-genres. Modest Mouse isn't indie rock any more, instead they are part of the "lo-fi" movement which brings back the low fidelity recording methods and equipment of the 1980s. Once they got signed to Epic Records, the indie tag didn't seem to fit. The music didn't change a whole lot, yet the genre did. So if you are a poor band in Austin, you can now safely describe yourself as lo-fi if you can't afford modern recording equipment. Want to present an even grungier attitude? Describe yourself as "no-fi". Eventually when that movement grows too large, you can be" post-no-fi" or event "no-fi revival". The possibilities are endless.
The sub-classification goes on and on, and occurs in every broad genre (Rap, rock, metal, etc). Alternative rock used to describe a counter-culture movement until it moved into the mainstream. Now "indie rock" and it's myriad sub-genres can show that a band is not interested in selling out to the mainstream, or maybe that they just haven't yet.
As humans, we like to find patterns and put things into categories. Music that spans multiple genres is confusing; we feel better if we are able to give it a label. Some of the best music in Austin is from independent bands who defy standard classification. Genre is not necessarily a good tool to determine whether or not you will enjoy a particular act. All of this is to say: explore Austin for it's variety of music and don't worry too much about the genre. Leave that up to the people with way too much time on their hands.
Comments
Tyler;
"Indie Rock", or "Indie" in general is not a genre....It is a status. I hate when you guys make up CRAP like this...giving people the impression that it is some form of sub-domian "not up to par", low-fi music. It is NOT. Most "Indie" bands produce better quality music than most Billboard charting crap.
If you were to look at your "chart" and not be aware of it "representing" indie or signed artists, you wouldn't know the difference. Do you know why? BECAUSE THERE IS NONE!
Stop being stupid.....it's people like you that keep indie music from taking over the mainstream.
Haha, thanks for the comment. It was good for a laugh. Not sure where I implied that indie music is less than mainstream. In fact, I believe the opposite.
It's the increasing number of genres and sub-genres that I find less and less useful.
Please explain what this sentence means???
To get around the possible confusion of an indie rock back that isn't indie, we start to create sub-genres and sub-sub-genres.
..And why would signed artists not fall under the same catagory genres?? Or is it that the labels tell them what they are?
If "Indie" refers to both a status and musical style, it would be hard to describe a signed band as having an indie rock sound. The same is true when "alternative" starts to go mainstream. Signed artists aren't indie and alternative isn't counter-culture anymore.
It becomes difficult when genre names carry connotations other than a musical style.
And you bring up a good question: Why wouldn't the same category apply regardless of being signed or not? I don't think labels assign genres (but I don't know) but they assert some creative control. That gives them the ability to move a band to one classification or another. The extent to which they exert that control, I don't know.
"Mr. Smithers, you really proved your point by saying "stop being stupid" lmao.
You know what since you both are daft, you guys would never get things right, congratulations on your moronic mutual admiration stupidity . Indie Music is a Genre, a Distinct Musical Style not a Status, can you please confirm , say for an example, those Norwegian Dark Metal Bands releasing independent records on there own, bands without any Contract with Major Music Labels . Cum on Metal never aint Indie!2+2=5, I hope that you choke.....
Leave it to the US of A(i am so bored of.....) to muck things up, Indie Rock is a genre as such music wise,and a status in the same instamce: DIY, Independent out of the mainstream,alternative whatever.
Britpop was guilty somewhat with Blur and the latest and worsest Coldplay , now it is the turn of the Yanks....bands under major Labels:The Shins,Death Cab for Cutie (BTW some wanker somewhere said they are Emo,cant remember, but i dont really care,and well another not so worser was like Taking Back Sunday is the other way,DUH!!!!!)
Now I aint Swazi or Nazi, got nothing against yanks; Sonic Youth,Pavement, Guided by Voices, they are simply swellerifik and truestic,they are gods and lords of the indie multiiverse
But then like Mr.Anonymous above mentioned metal never can be Indie,is All.....
Indy is short for independent, like pop is short for Popular. Here is the problem, you are trying to change the wrong side of the equation. Indie as a term for Independent artists is old hat. These days that community is better referred to as D.I.Y. Mostly because The term "indie" has been highjacked by the indie rockers.
Indie without a doubt is a genre in of itself. And a necesary one. Like you said, it has become a catch all for the majority of unknown bands most of whom are not developed enough to even know how to describe their own sound. So they call themselves indie.
Without this bastard child of genre, we would have to spend loads of time listening to the myriad bands who have such an "original" sound it takes 20 minutes to convey their greatness.
The defining feature of indie as a genre actually is that it is described by what it is not, not by what it is. Right before someone says they sound indie they will usually say something like this:
"Well it's not really rock... it's a bit twangy but not country... We have a synth but its not electro or lo-wave. Our singer has a sick growl, but we are DEFINITELY not metal, and we jam a bit ,but not in a jammy sort of way... You know, we're indie."
I know no one will probably read this year old thread, but I just got here from Seattle so I have a very soft, and hard spot in my heart, for indie rock.
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!