Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

I'm talking like bands like The Killers, The Kaiser Chiefs and all of those other bands who release music that sounds pretty much the same.

The reason I am making this thread is because I just watched a programme about The Arcade Fire and then some guy said that they were more indie because they really didn't change after they got their record deal, they didn't go overboard with publicising and that other "indie" bands you see today are really just manufactured.

No, bands like The Killers and Kaiser Chiefs aren't even indie.

Originally posted by Solo
No, bands like The Killers and Kaiser Chiefs aren't even indie.

Hence my "indie"... They are classed by indie as many people; the general concensus. I happen to agree with you.

People who think they're indie have no idea what indie is.

Originally posted by Solo
People who think they're indie have no idea what indie is.
I agree but that has little to do with my original question...

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
So we're to refer to them with the same label as idiots who don't know how to label, just because there's more of them?

No, they're pop bands. Well, The Killers most certainly are.

The Killers, Fall Out Boy, Panic! at the Disco etc; These are today's boy bands.

Nothing to do with indie.

-AC
But they are advertised as indie... That is my point. I'm asking if they are just the modern equivalent of the Backstreet Boys or Take That.

I know their not indie... The quotation marks sort of implied that.

Thanks for giving some input that is actually relevant to the discussion I was trying to start though AC.

They aren't 'the' modern equivalent, because boy bands are still around. They are similar phenomena, though.

The only boy band I know of that are around are Take That.... And they came back more as a gimmick than anything. What are the others?

I don't know. I don't read Smash Hits magazine.

However, whenever the radio is on, or I flick through the music channels, I see some shitawful collection of idiots singing summat.

The Backstreet Boys.

There are others.

-AC

The Backstreet Boys are still around? I've not seen anything by them in years. Is it just in the US mainly? Maybe I've just not been paying enough attention to them.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
I just heard from a girl I know who loves them that they had a new album out, cos she went to their show in NY or something. As in, lives in NY, not travelled to.

Also someone I know has a sister who is still stuck in that phase.

-AC That's amazing... I remember a few years back my Canadian cousins were still obsessed with them. That was a while after they stopped being big here. That was the last I'd heard of them until now.

i think the fact that none of the band's mentioned are on an independent label KIND OF gives a hint. kind of.

Originally posted by manorastroman
i think the fact that none of the band's mentioned are on an independent label KIND OF gives a hint. kind of.
I'm talking more of the sounds than what labels their on.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
I just heard from a girl I know who loves them that they had a new album out, cos she went to their show in NY or something. As in, lives in NY, not travelled to.

Also someone I know has a sister who is still stuck in that phase.

-AC

They haven't released an album in almost 2 years, Kevin Richardson left the group, and Brian Litrell's released or is releasing a solo album. Naturally there's a difference between being "around" and being relevant.

..but to answer the question at hand, no. Pop has always had a boatload of immulators. That's why it's pop. They'll all put out a compilation worthy single for their genre and disappear.

i guess its cuz most indie bands have a constant soundand slowly drift from the indie state of mind...thats whypeople call thosebands indie ...cuz they sound indie

this should have been named
Are Modern "Indie" Bands Just The Modern Equlivants of what was done better 25 or 30 plus years before

Originally posted by vintageSW77
this should have been named
Are Modern "Indie" Bands Just The Modern Equlivants of what was done better 25 or 30 plus years before

is this about the arcade fire copping born torun-era springsteen? because they arguably did it better than was done thirty-two years ago.

I like the Arcade Fire.

I like to tell everyone that I like the Arcade Fire too.

Originally posted by Solo
Bands like The Killers and Fall Out Boy are most definitely "boy bands", but in no way is any real indie artist one.

Fall Out Boy and The Killers aren't boybands (or Indie).

They're not even today's equivalent to boyband music because the music is completely different.

Popularity doesn't mean that they're the same as another popular genre.

They are base level pop that 13 year old girls listen to.

Boybands or not (Although Fall Out Boy etc are more applicable since they're actually a band.), they are pop bands. The only people who refuse to call them pop bands are usually the people who like them.

-AC

Originally posted by manorastroman
is this about the arcade fire copping born torun-era springsteen? because they arguably did it better than was done thirty-two years ago.
I never liked Springsteen all that much. That said, I think The Arcade Fire are great.

Originally posted by Solo
I never liked Springsteen all that much. That said, I think The Arcade Fire are great.

I like both.

I like to tell everyone that I like both too

springsteen's a tough nut to crack, but he's really good. and surprisingly hip. he has a song off of nebraska called "state trooper" that's very frankie teardrop-esque.

Originally posted by manorastroman
is this about the arcade fire copping born torun-era springsteen? because they arguably did it better than was done thirty-two years ago.

No
I never think of Bruce when i hear Arcade Fire
I have thought of Echo and The Bunnymen and Mercury Rev though during the odd track

Does it depend on how you define indie by sound or label these days?

Meh

Indie Rock is considered to be anti-pop...underground from what is popular in the mainstream...so I get how Spoony is saying there are bands that are being marketed as such...(although really aren't indie).

But, I think a better modern-day example of manufactured Boy Bands was with bands like Good Charlote and Simple Plan when they were at the height of thier popularity...(and how they were marketed).

yeah, modern boy-bands are definitely of the screamo/post hardcore ilk. red jumpsuit apparatus et al. man, those bands ****ing suck.

So do people who use genre tags like "screamo" and "Post-" anything.

Redundant.

-AC

Post Hardcore at least makes sense, to a certain extent. Screamo, on the other hand, is an abomination

I'd actually put that the other way around.

Though screamo is still highly idiotic.

When people try and define screamo they say something like "Dude, its any music with screaming." Which of course is a ridiculous definition for a genre.

Post-Hardcore, from what I understand, actually refers to a specific type of music.

Originally posted by RedAlertv2
When people try and define screamo they say something like "Dude, its any music with screaming." Which of course is a ridiculous definition for a genre.

Post-Hardcore, from what I understand, actually refers to a specific type of music.

Well, technically they both do. Screamo actually suggests 'emo with screaming' (as I said, highly idiotic), whereas post-hardcore just suggests music after hardcore. To me, that is lazier.

As I said though, both shit.

I dont particularly mind the term post hardcore, since its a reasonably simple and accurate way to describe bands that otherwise are tough to categorize. Its not a term I use, but at least I understand what people are talking about when I hear it.

It is lazier, though. It's not more specific than screamo, but they're both shit.

-AC

Just because its a simple term doesnt mean its lazy. Id prefer to hear a band called post hardcore than any of the millions of over-indulgent, fabricated genre labels out there right now.

Originally posted by RedAlertv2
Just because its a simple term doesnt mean its lazy. Id prefer to hear a band called post hardcore than any of the millions of over-indulgent, fabricated genre labels out there right now.

It is actually a lazy term in this case, though.

-AC

How so? Obviously it doesnt literally mean "every musical act after hardcore." The wording may be lazy in that sense, but the actual definition isnt.

Originally posted by RedAlertv2
How so? Obviously it doesnt literally mean "every musical act after hardcore." The wording may be lazy in that sense, but the actual definition isnt.

When people say post-hardcore, it implies everything after hardcore. Then people try to turn it around and say it was more of a reactionary movement than an all-encompassing genre of everything...well...post-hardcore, but it's still a lazy label, and so is the definition.

Rather than defining it what it is, "Eh, it came after/was a reaction to hardcore. So we'll just say post-hardcore.".

It's a lazy term.

-AC

Originally posted by manorastroman
yeah, modern boy-bands are definitely of the screamo/post hardcore ilk. red jumpsuit apparatus et al. man, those bands ****ing suck.
Definitely.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
When people say post-hardcore, it implies everything after hardcore. Then people try to turn it around and say it was more of a reactionary movement than an all-encompassing genre of everything...well...post-hardcore, but it's still a lazy label, and so is the definition.

Rather than defining it what it is, "Eh, it came after/was a reaction to hardcore. So we'll just say post-hardcore.".

It's a lazy term.

-AC
Fair enough, Im not gonna waste any more time defending a term I never use

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
Indie Rock is considered to be anti-pop...underground from what is popular in the mainstream...so I get how Spoony is saying there are bands that are being marketed as such...(although really aren't indie).

But, I think a better modern-day example of manufactured Boy Bands was with bands like Good Charlote and Simple Plan when they were at the height of thier popularity...(and how they were marketed).

But when you say "manufactured", neither of those bands really fall in that category. They had their looks and sound overhauled, yeah, but Joel and Benji (GC) are brothers, the rest of the band is comprised of friends, and they made music before they got the record deal.

With BSB and N'Sync, Lou Pearlman held auditions and literally handcrafted the acts. They gave each member an "identity", just like they did with NKOTB and dressed them up in matching outfits like they used to do with New Edition.

Yeah I know what you mean...I don't think any of these bands we're mentioning are manufactured in that sense...I thought its more obvious we've been referring to the look/image, sound and marketing of the bands.

I don't think Spoony actually thinks these bands we're disussing were hand-picked like boy bands...but that other parts of their marketing is manufactured.

Interesting.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Interesting.
Ok stalker...let's hear what's so interesting then.


...oh wait a sec, you're just trying to start stuff with your smart remarks again. Cool.


C'mon, tell everyone what's so interesting (or are you right now trying to think of something?)...or maybe you just said it 'cause you thought it was interesting...yeah....really sounds like you.

Actually I said it because I thought you were quite on point, that is exactly what the discussion is about.

Not so much straight equals, but modern day similarities or similar phenomena.

PS: Tick tock, tick tock.

-AC

I don't care what you think...you made the comment "interesting" after my post to be vague...and if I challenged you on it, you could say whataver...but would've achieved your goal at getting a rise out of me. Good stuff.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
PS: Tick tock, tick tock. It's coming...today.

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
Yeah I know what you mean...I don't think any of these bands we're mentioning are manufactured in that sense...I thought its more obvious we've been referring to the look/image, sound and marketing of the bands.

Manufactured can't mean anything else, to be honest. It's probably more logical to suggest that bands like that are what they are. Popular. Pop music reflects popular culture and people emulate pop music scenes. Avril Lavigne's a good example of an actual manufactured pop music artist. It can be contested that she's a pop culture Frankenstein, considering she was a bleach blonde, bob haired country-western singer before her "sk8er boi" days in the punk metropolis that is Canada.

Good Charlotte on the other hands didn't just go out and get tattoo sleeves and piercings to fit the pop punk persona. Besides, punk isn't mainstream. So people that like the punk look and the pop appeal automatically latch onto them. They make basic music with straight forward lyrics, which I think they write themselves.

When it comes to indie bands, the industry is full of them because they sell. Not everyone wants to be known as a bandwagon fan, so there's always that Modest Mouse or Bright Eyes knockoff to latch onto and praise for the sake of not wanting to be trendy, and eventually those bands come around to, almost all of which eventually fall to the wayside.

It's just the way of the pop culture beast. Conform to make those ends. But like I said, there are bands that get bad wraps because their music, unaltered, appeals to a younger fanbase.

There's no real "fault" in something being appealing if the musician really stands behind it.

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
Yeah I know what you mean...I don't think any of these bands we're mentioning are manufactured in that sense...I thought its more obvious we've been referring to the look/image, sound and marketing of the bands.

I don't think Spoony actually thinks these bands we're disussing were hand-picked like boy bands...but that other parts of their marketing is manufactured.
Exactly... I also agree with your post on the page before.

what's with the aversion to the prefix "post"? when i say hardcore, do you think husker du or hawthorne heights? when i say post-hardcore, do you think husker du or hawthorne heights?

Originally posted by manorastroman
what's with the aversion to the prefix "post"? when i say hardcore, do you think husker du or hawthorne heights? when i say post-hardcore, do you think husker du or hawthorne heights?

The fact that it's shit and lazy. You described it, previously, not to mean everything after, but just a reaction to, like post-modernism or what have you. It's still lazy, and I personally do not ackowledge it.

I think of rock when I think of Husker Du. I think of rock when I think of Hawthorne Heights.

Just entirely different parts of the genre. The Cure are a rock band, Led Zeppelin were a rock band, as were Pixies.

-AC

to tell you the truth, describing all of those bands as simply "rock" is a lot lazier than saying "post" anything.

It's better to be general and correct, by using a term that is applicable, since most bands can factually fit correctly into the rock genre, than it is to say "These bands were a reaction to...".

You tell me, right now, why Hawthorne Heights are considered to be the product of a reaction to bands like Black Flag.

Go.

-AC

I didn't see this reply before, so pardon me for it being late.

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
I don't care what you think...you made the comment "interesting" after my post to be vague...and if I challenged you on it, you could say whataver...but would've achieved your goal at getting a rise out of me. Good stuff.

I meant what I said, you were on point and I found that interesting seeing as you're usually about a mile off base.

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
It's coming...today.

You said that almost three days ago.

-AC

i'm not saying that hawthorne heights is a reaction to black flag. that was my explanation for post-rock and post-modernism, both of which i could explain. post-hardcore just happens to be what it's called. in this case, i imagine that it really does mean simply "hardcore after hardcore".

Originally posted by Cory Chaos
Manufactured can't mean anything else, to be honest.
Sure...tell that to the thread starter. I was just going along with the thread and how some others were discussing this as well. Are The Killers manufactured? Maybe we're all wrong. He agrees I knew what he meant though, so don't focus on me.


Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
You said that almost three days ago.
This'll have to wait...I'm on 9 pages...too busy now. It'll come. Wait.

Originally posted by manorastroman
i'm not saying that hawthorne heights is a reaction to black flag. that was my explanation for post-rock and post-modernism, both of which i could explain. post-hardcore just happens to be what it's called. in this case, i imagine that it really does mean simply "hardcore after hardcore".

Then there's no need. It's just SOME kind of music with a label lumped on it, rock fits best, however general. When you can't pinpoint, it IS better to be general.

I CAN go into all the different kinds of metal; black, death, power etc. I can define why each are different, I don't, because they're still all metal bands. I KNOW they are different, so it's not lazy, I'm not perceiving each as something they aren't.

Point being, post-hardcore is just a lazy label, in ANY case, even the more reaction-to explanations.

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
This'll have to wait...I'm on 9 pages...too busy now. It'll come. Wait.

9 pages of why music has an objective standard, which is a factually incorrect stance, unchangeable by any amount of pages. Possibly THE worse exercise in futility ever witnessed.

All for "This is my argument.", *We prove you wrong again.*, "Nah, you don't get it, you're blind.".

-AC

He couldn't resist to start talking about this in here could he? Unbelievable

No offense meant, EP, but this argument (Which is pointless anyway, as you're factually wrong.) has been almost four days coming. I could have wrote an ACTUAL novel from scratch, as in made up a story and everything.

It's taken three...approaching four days of writing 9 or more pages about something you are undeniably wrong regarding. It's just...baffling to me.

-AC

Dude...you're kind of obsessed with this...

I'm in no rush to finish...I'm in the middle of moving...

Stop asking me about it on this thread...and PM-ing every second day.


strange

It's been four days, in which time I have been informed by another reliable member of this site that you have spent time posting very frequently in other forums.

You have time to post there, it seems, why aren't you spending it finishing this ridiculous argument post that you have guaranteed for days? Simple question, many of us are curious.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
I have been informed by another reliable member of this site that you have spent time posting very frequently in other forums.
Dude...you're getting kinda freaky. I'm serious.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
many of us are curious.
...actually, I think you're just kind of obsessed.

No, really, what is taking you 4 days and 9 pages. Why would you keep saying almost done, and keep guaranteeing it, if it's taken you 4 days?

It IS a reasonable question, EP. Know what I think? I think you are scared, and I'll leave it there.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Know what I think? I think you are scared
AC. Please go away and stop trying to get a rise out of me by talking about unrelated thread topics.

Thank you

Well I did PM you civilly, and in a peaceful manner regarding this, and you wouldn't take the time out of moving and posting on KMC to reply to me.

I'm not content with letting you slither away from this, but I'll wait a day longer.

-AC

i think Ep is full of it!