What does the word "indie" mean anymore?

I wanted to bring up something that has bothered me for some time now. And that is, the use of the word "indie" when used to describe a genre or part of a genre, ie: "indie-folk". It had always been my understanding that an "indie" artist was someone that was independently making their way in the music business, on their own. Then as independent record labels started popping up, artists on these labels started calling themselves "indie" because technically they were on an independent label, so it was still okay to use that term. Now, "indie" has become part of certain genre's, as to say "this music is more hip, or sophisticated because it's "indie". Seems like it's just a cool word to use. So my question is, is there a certain element, a certain sound that makes a genre of music "indie"? I listen to some music labeled indie-folk or simply just "indie", and it doesn't really sound any different than say, a song by a top forty artist like Sheryl Crow. It seems like the word "indie" can mean anything, much like "singer-songwriter."
On the other side of this are the ex-major label artists, like for instance Counting Crows or Wilco. They have taken control of their own careers, thus making them true independent artists, and I have yet to see them labeling themselves "indie".
So what does this mean? What does the word "indie" stand for?

Tags: business, genre, indie, labels, music, record

Views: 521

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Joe Gorfinkle on January 18, 2012 at 4:49pm

hats with animal ears?

Permalink Reply by Independent Music Promotions on January 18, 2012 at 5:32pm

Ah, I should have said tuques with animal ears. Scour any popular music blog and you'll see photos of hundreds of bands either dressed like animals, named after animals, or wearing hats/cute animal tuques. The name of the game for the 'indie' moniker is cuteness. Many of you familiar will laugh because you know it's true!

I've never understood it myself - I always liked the badass and sometimes dangerous aspects of rock n' roll and it's affiliated genres. 

Permalink Reply by Ronn Miller on January 18, 2012 at 7:48pm

Hard to believe it takes so little to drive so many into total confusion.

Permalink Reply by Joe Gorfinkle on January 18, 2012 at 8:00pm

Guess I'm not "idie" after all..closest I can get is a chicken hat from an Oktoberfest several years ago..

Permalink Reply by Independent Music Promotions on January 18, 2012 at 7:58pm

Sorry to confuse! It's just a trendy image that is associated with the words 'indie', 'indie rock', and 'indie pop'. For example, when punk rose, there was a certain anti-establishment image, metal had it's "wear all black" aggressive image, classic rock with it's psychedelia, grunge had an edgy image, etc

That's all I meant. the word indie has become associated with 'trendy' bands who are decidedly not edgy in any way.  So you get promo shots of bands in t-shirts pushing their singer around in a shopping cart/etc

Check out the top music blogs in the world and you'll see lots of these type of shots (Large Hearted Boy, Stereogum, Aquarium Drunkard, Pitchfork). It's what the word 'indie' has turned into.

Permalink Reply by Joshua Sanders on January 18, 2012 at 8:06pm

hey btw what ARE (in your opinion) the top music blogs in the world? Are they the ones you listed above ie Aquarium Drunkard etc...?

Permalink Reply by Independent Music Promotions on January 18, 2012 at 8:02pm

Trust me, the more you don't know about the hipsters, the more authentic you're likely to be! It's the same reason I don't watch horror movies. Best not to take that stuff in!

Permalink Reply by Jack S on January 19, 2012 at 9:21am

I do not care for the term "indie" because almost everything nowadays seems to fit the category. It has become a meaningless label. If it means self-produced, then that is most of what is getting done out there and could be applied to any genre of music. Many years ago there were some artists that were self produced and may not have found much audience at home, but might have gained a following overseas. I saw this happen a handful of times where a small network of followers almost created a cult around an obscure artist and it grew into some measure of success for them. I saw it lead to tours, in particular, to Germany where this phenomenon occurred more often than anyplace else that I am aware of personally. These acts were in my opinion, real "indie" artists because they challenged the status quo for how music was produced and delivered at a time when it was breaking the mould. However, when everyone is self produced, and/or publishing then the term becomes so diluted to the point that it becomes meaningless.

Permalink Reply by Joshua Sanders on January 19, 2012 at 9:29am

I think the jist of these discusions comes to the conclusion that the term may have once stood for something against the "mainstream", and probably this was legit ten or 12 years ago when the internet was just beginning to change how we listen to and purchase music.  It is a term that, like "punk", has outlived its usefulness.

Permalink Reply by Independent Music Promotions on January 19, 2012 at 9:33am

Totally agree with the last two posts. 

Permalink Reply by Dirtsandwich Music on January 25, 2012 at 7:36am

Another phrase that has fallen prey to being misused and over-used, ML. I've been driven crazy by this for years as well. Indie no longer means DIY. And those of us who are DIY can no longer use the word "indie" to convey that fact. And even when an act produces and releases their own album- and books their own tour to promote it, if they hire radio promoters and tour publicists to hype it, they're not really DIY anymore, right? But they're still "indie" somehow.

 

Hmmm... damned English language and it's liquidity.

Permalink Reply by Hank Alrich on February 10, 2012 at 10:37am

It's not only that English is a liquid language (observe the chatter in bars!), but that the mainstream will co-opt any stray term that originates outside the boundaries of that stream in order to appear "with it" and have a short-term marketing edge. That works until ubiquitous application of a term no longer means doodly squat.

Is being "on a label" prohibitive for artistic independence? There's a big difference between WMG and ones like Armadillo Records in Austin TX which put out the album I recorded and produced with a daughter of mine. In the latter case the label will be lucky to make twenty-six bucks this year, while WMG lost $26 million in the last quarter of 2011. Economies of scale, you know...

Terms like "indie", "punk", "alternative" become meaningless the instant they are co-opted, but the industry cries out for catogorization. "Americana" seems to encompass damn near everything, and is meaningless as to genre, yet it's become an important handle for many of us who hope DJ's and reviewers might get a grip on our product(s), out of nearly eight-thousand new CD's produced annually.

RSS

Sponsors


If you enjoy this site please consider helping us with a small donation!

Don't like PayPal? Mail a check to: No Depression, PO Box 31332, Seattle, WA 98103

Notes

FAQ

Created by No Depression Feb 17, 2009 at 9:06pm. Last updated by No Depression Apr 9.