Music seems to be cyclical. Guitar-driven music came back in the early to mid 2000s until it became so weak and watery it shrunk back again. I have no doubt it will be be back - and I'm planning on riding that particular wave when it comes crashing in again.
I love guitar/indie/rock/dance genres and everytime I hear about a "guitar" revival in the charts I always prey its the bands who combine all of the above elements, bands like Shiny Toy Guns, ofVerona, rock based bands with equal amounts of electronica, but its usually always the awful style over substance bad attitude bands that infested the charts in the early 00's.
Maybe we'll get something different this time round
my thoughts exactly.... without a headline act to kick it up the arse all we will get is more generic 'indie'.
... but in saying what i just have, when generic indie is done right, it makes for good pop. i liked the kaisers, razorlight, hard fi, even the kooks...
I hate to be a cynic but the industry is now shrinking and labels are now no longer willing to take risks, they only want to go with what they know and follow the formulas they know that will result in things selling well which is why the same producers are used over and over by all the top commercial artists. It's about consistency rather than creativity. Look at all the cancellations/troubles with keeping commitments that occured as a result of Pete Doherty and Amy Winehouse. If Guns 'N Roses couldn't pull in the crowds they do, nobody would book them but the reality is they are a nostalgia act, not a current and relevant one.
They won't sign a vibrant if volatile new act and even if they do, the stylists and producers will get their hands on them and change them into something else nore commercially viable. There are lots of bands that are like that such as Bury Tomorrow, While She Sleeps, Parkway Drive and others however they are never going to get regular radio play because they don't dance in unison or want to do the chat show/panel show circuit to try sell their wares when they'd rather play loud and often to the crowds they do draw in off their talent alone.
Are record labels going to be that important in the future?
I believe this week will be the first time in chart history that an un-signed artist is going to get a UK #1 single. Maybe more unsigned artists will be able to do it after this.
Radio 1 has always played a bit of indie and rock amongst the garbage the rest of the radio station play. It's why it's the only station i can listen to.
I'd be interested to know what the figures are for bands of 2013 though. Possibly worse considering piracy is now about. Record companies take too much and producers are overpaid.
i'd take the kooks or the kaiser chiefs over 99% of the crap thats in the charts at the moment
That's not saying alot is it though
I'd like to know what music I've been playing since guitar music hasn't had the support / gone out of fashion with the mainstream media (at least since around about 2005).Guitar music has never gone away.There are are many more guitar bands around now than there was in the early to mid-seventies - a peak for guitar bands commercially.'So called' Indie rock bands have seen a slump in numbers / a big regression in musical quality generally - that is only a small part of guitar music though.Stop looking for the next new big 'corporate' indie band to arrive - it's not going to happen.
Just noticed Biffy Clyro is No.1 in the album charts.Not quite my type of sound, although am a fan of Mike Vennart (their touring guitarist - Mike who !!! I hear you mutter ).Biffy Clyro don't seem to be mentioned as leaders in this return to guitar music, none story though.Seems to be alot of reluctance to get behind this band from the mainstream, even though commercially they are very much climbing the ladder still - just an example of the hypocracy that exists in the mainstream press as regards the representation of guitar music / rock music.
Think you are confusing Indie-pop with Brit-pop & post brit-pop.They are mostly different areas of guitar music if you investigate it a little further.Indie pop has never really caught on, apart from the Smith's perhaps.It has had alot of backing by the Indie (& Major label subsidiaries) labels but has had very limited commercial successes.Even a band like Orange Juice I would describe as 'Sophisti-pop' - an early '80's genre term that doesn't get mentioned these days. Indie pop.
Indie-pop is a very vague genre / oxymoronic term anyway.Indie in general has become such a confusing area of music altogether.If I was a rock band I'd try to avoid being pigeon-holded as Indie as much as possible - it won't help their commercial developement at all these days i.e. Indie Schmindie / Hipsters / land-fill indie etc at least in the UK anyway, American bands still seem to have gained moderate success, still vaguely coming under the Indie umbrella.
Canada has been producing a ton of great indie rock bands for the past decade - lead in terms of success by The Arcade Fire, but you also have acts like Stars, The New Pornographers, Rural Alberta Advantage, Broken Social Scene, Metric, Land of Talk, Ben Caplan, Islands, The Arkells, Destroyer, The Besnard Lakes, Wolf Parade, Yukon Blonde and so on...
Think you are confusing Indie-pop with Brit-pop & post brit-pop.They are mostly different areas of guitar music if you investigate it a little further.Indie pop has never really caught on, apart from the Smith's perhaps.It has had alot of backing by the Indie (& Major label subsidiaries) labels but has had very limited commercial successes.Even a band like Orange Juice I would describe as 'Sophisti-pop' - an early '80's genre term that doesn't get mentioned these days. Indie pop.
Indie-pop is a very vague genre / oxymoronic term anyway.Indie in general has become such a confusing area of music altogether.If I was a rock band I'd try to avoid being pigeon-holded as Indie as much as possible - it won't help their commercial developement at all these days i.e. Indie Schmindie / Hipsters / land-fill indie etc at least in the UK anyway, American bands still seem to have gained moderate success, still vaguely coming under the Indie umbrella.
Yeah, I can't really tell the difference lol. I just mean like guitar-pop and piano stuff, things like James Blunt, Daniel Powter, The Kooks, Snow Patrol, things like that. Like I do think guitar music will make a comeback, but not that kind of really loud rock music.
Guitar, rock, dance and other decent music has never gone away. It's just Radio 1 has preferred to play rubbish, or what it thinks is "cool". They lost me as a listener a long time ago.
Yeah, I can't really tell the difference lol. I just mean like guitar-pop and piano stuff, things like James Blunt, Daniel Powter, The Kooks, Snow Patrol, things like that. Like I do think guitar music will make a comeback, but not that kind of really loud rock music.
But then "really loud rock music" has never been worried about the Top 40 Singles Chart. When the likes of Iron Maiden, Saxon, Mötorhead, etc, were having Top 40 hit singles 30-odd years ago it was more by accident than design.
However for the harder rock bands there could be a benefit because once guitar bands become more acceptable to the mainstream listener some of them might well go looking for music with a harder edge.
To be honest I'll believe it when I see it. It needs to be not just Radio 1 changing their opinion but the kids buying the records and getting the music to the top of the charts.
To be honest I'll believe it when I see it. It needs to be not just Radio 1 changing their opinion but the kids buying the records and getting the music to the top of the charts.
When theres a more mixed top 10..we'll see.
It is a vicious circle, though, isn't it?
The kids buy what they hear on Radio 1, which gets the music in the singles chart, so Radio 1 plays what's in the singles chart, the kids buy what they hear.... etc.
Guitar, rock, dance and other decent music has never gone away. It's just Radio 1 has preferred to play rubbish, or what it thinks is "cool". They lost me as a listener a long time ago.
We're takling specifically about in the mainstream/charts in this thread, where rock music isn't present. It has a large following, and always will do, but it's obviously not mainstream right now, like it was in the past.
Every genre of music still exists and has excellent music coming out of it constantly.
The kids buy what they hear on Radio 1, which gets the music in the singles chart, so Radio 1 plays what's in the singles chart, the kids buy what they hear.... etc.
Children are actually a small minority of the overall people counting towards the charts.
Trust me, it's definitely not 13 year-old boys that are buying all these Katy Perry, Adele, Maroon 5 songs that dominate the charts today.
Canada has been producing a ton of great indie rock bands for the past decade - lead in terms of success by The Arcade Fire, but you also have acts like Stars, The New Pornographers, Rural Alberta Advantage, Broken Social Scene, Metric, Land of Talk, Ben Caplan, Islands, The Arkells, Destroyer, The Besnard Lakes, Wolf Parade, Yukon Blonde and so on...
Non of those are going to set the singles charts alight though, like Brit-pop did (not that it concerns me personally) - Brit-pop was never really part of Indie even though it's confusingly quite often branded in with it.The 'so called' New wave / garage rock / post-punk revival (in many ways an extension of Brit-pop) that peaked from 7 to 10 years ago & also had some chart success.There is no way that type of music will make a comeback in the charts any time soon OR the more underground / indie ? type of bands you listed going to make any real break-through, similarly (again, not that I'm concerned).
My criticism of Indie is that it has become such a confusing tag, mainly due to the fact the more commercially minded record labels have tried to use it as a selling brand.In many ways Indie has lost its validity, in a similar way (not exactly) as Prog Rock did in the late '70's (although that's not a dirty word with music commentators so much these days).Think bands should try to distance themselves away from Indie - it generally doesn't do them any favours any more.Most of these 'so called' Indie bands around today have far wider influences anyway to be pigeon holed into it so much.
We're takling specifically about in the mainstream/charts in this thread, where rock music isn't present. It has a large following, and always will do, but it's obviously not mainstream right now, like it was in the past.
Every genre of music still exists and has excellent music coming out of it constantly.
Being mainstream doesn't necessarily equate to chart success.Especially singles chart success.Having a large following is more of a measure of whether something is mainstream or not conventionally - the mainstream press / media (are they so mainstream these days anyway, especially printed press) have seemed to mis-represent this quite often.There are some commercially massive rock bands still around who are still very mainstream in this conventional use of the term.In music 'mainstream' has seemed to have been redefined as not just a measure of popularity though - a major irritation with rock fans
Being mainstream doesn't necessarily equate to chart success.Especially singles chart success.Having a large following is more of a measure of whether something is mainstream or not conventionally - the mainstream press / media (are they so mainstream these days anyway, especially printed press) have seemed to mis-represent this quite often.There are some commercially massive rock bands still around who are still very mainstream in this conventional use of the term.In music 'mainstream' has seemed to have been redefined as not just a measure of popularity though - a major irritation with rock fans
For me I think of "mainstream" artists as those that are on the radio a lot, on TV a lot, etc.
Someone like Taio Cruz seems to not have any fanbase at all, but he's mainstream, for example. Whilst someone like Kendrick Lamar has a huge fanbase, but isn't mainstream (although he has gotten moreso in recent months). That's the way I see it.
Non of those are going to set the singles charts alight though, like Brit-pop did (not that it concerns me personally) - Brit-pop was never really part of Indie even though it's confusingly quite often branded in with it.The 'so called' New wave / garage rock / post-punk revival (in many ways an extension of Brit-pop) that peaked from 7 to 10 years ago & also had some chart success.There is no way that type of music will make a comeback in the charts any time soon OR the more underground / indie ? type of bands you listed going to make any real break-through, similarly (again, not that I'm concerned).
My criticism of Indie is that it has become such a confusing tag, mainly due to the fact the more commercially minded record labels have tried to use it as a selling brand.In many ways Indie has lost its validity, in a similar way (not exactly) as Prog Rock did in the late '70's (although that's not a dirty word with music commentators so much these days).Think bands should try to distance themselves away from Indie - it generally doesn't do them any favours any more.Most of these 'so called' Indie bands around today have far wider influences anyway to be pigeon holed into it so much.
Yup. The Arcade Fire last album went straight in at number one on the UK albums chart, had a metacritic score in the 90's and they headlined Leeds/Reading - yet the British radio stations still didn't play there music. What chance has good and interesting guitar music got if its ignored by the radio in favour of dreck like The Saturdays (whose albums fail to make the top ten, despict all the marketing!).
Comments
I remember the last Indie phase, I thought it would be like that forever. How wrong I was.
absolutely!
Maybe we'll get something different this time round
I hate to be a cynic but the industry is now shrinking and labels are now no longer willing to take risks, they only want to go with what they know and follow the formulas they know that will result in things selling well which is why the same producers are used over and over by all the top commercial artists. It's about consistency rather than creativity. Look at all the cancellations/troubles with keeping commitments that occured as a result of Pete Doherty and Amy Winehouse. If Guns 'N Roses couldn't pull in the crowds they do, nobody would book them but the reality is they are a nostalgia act, not a current and relevant one.
They won't sign a vibrant if volatile new act and even if they do, the stylists and producers will get their hands on them and change them into something else nore commercially viable. There are lots of bands that are like that such as Bury Tomorrow, While She Sleeps, Parkway Drive and others however they are never going to get regular radio play because they don't dance in unison or want to do the chat show/panel show circuit to try sell their wares when they'd rather play loud and often to the crowds they do draw in off their talent alone.
I believe this week will be the first time in chart history that an un-signed artist is going to get a UK #1 single. Maybe more unsigned artists will be able to do it after this.
I seem to recall an article written by Steve Albini on the problems with music. If anyone knows what he's talking about, it's him.
It was written around 20 years ago, but it's probably the same today but with different figures.
http://www.negativland.com/news/?page_id=17
I'd be interested to know what the figures are for bands of 2013 though. Possibly worse considering piracy is now about. Record companies take too much and producers are overpaid.
That's not saying alot is it though
I'd like to know what music I've been playing since guitar music hasn't had the support / gone out of fashion with the mainstream media (at least since around about 2005).Guitar music has never gone away.There are are many more guitar bands around now than there was in the early to mid-seventies - a peak for guitar bands commercially.'So called' Indie rock bands have seen a slump in numbers / a big regression in musical quality generally - that is only a small part of guitar music though.Stop looking for the next new big 'corporate' indie band to arrive - it's not going to happen.
Just noticed Biffy Clyro is No.1 in the album charts.Not quite my type of sound, although am a fan of Mike Vennart (their touring guitarist - Mike who !!! I hear you mutter
Think you are confusing Indie-pop with Brit-pop & post brit-pop.They are mostly different areas of guitar music if you investigate it a little further.Indie pop has never really caught on, apart from the Smith's perhaps.It has had alot of backing by the Indie (& Major label subsidiaries) labels but has had very limited commercial successes.Even a band like Orange Juice I would describe as 'Sophisti-pop' - an early '80's genre term that doesn't get mentioned these days.
Indie pop.
Indie-pop is a very vague genre / oxymoronic term anyway.Indie in general has become such a confusing area of music altogether.If I was a rock band I'd try to avoid being pigeon-holded as Indie as much as possible - it won't help their commercial developement at all these days i.e. Indie Schmindie / Hipsters / land-fill indie etc at least in the UK anyway, American bands still seem to have gained moderate success, still vaguely coming under the Indie umbrella.
Yeah, I can't really tell the difference lol. I just mean like guitar-pop and piano stuff, things like James Blunt, Daniel Powter, The Kooks, Snow Patrol, things like that. Like I do think guitar music will make a comeback, but not that kind of really loud rock music.
But then "really loud rock music" has never been worried about the Top 40 Singles Chart. When the likes of Iron Maiden, Saxon, Mötorhead, etc, were having Top 40 hit singles 30-odd years ago it was more by accident than design.
However for the harder rock bands there could be a benefit because once guitar bands become more acceptable to the mainstream listener some of them might well go looking for music with a harder edge.
the new album of the Virginmarys, is this one of the new
guitarbands from GB?
When theres a more mixed top 10..we'll see.
It is a vicious circle, though, isn't it?
The kids buy what they hear on Radio 1, which gets the music in the singles chart, so Radio 1 plays what's in the singles chart, the kids buy what they hear.... etc.
the kaiser chiefs first album was good, the kooks first album was ok, they both completely ran out of ideas after that
We're takling specifically about in the mainstream/charts in this thread, where rock music isn't present. It has a large following, and always will do, but it's obviously not mainstream right now, like it was in the past.
Every genre of music still exists and has excellent music coming out of it constantly.
Children are actually a small minority of the overall people counting towards the charts.
Trust me, it's definitely not 13 year-old boys that are buying all these Katy Perry, Adele, Maroon 5 songs that dominate the charts today.
Non of those are going to set the singles charts alight though, like Brit-pop did (not that it concerns me personally) - Brit-pop was never really part of Indie even though it's confusingly quite often branded in with it.The 'so called' New wave / garage rock / post-punk revival (in many ways an extension of Brit-pop) that peaked from 7 to 10 years ago & also had some chart success.There is no way that type of music will make a comeback in the charts any time soon OR the more underground / indie ? type of bands you listed going to make any real break-through, similarly (again, not that I'm concerned).
My criticism of Indie is that it has become such a confusing tag, mainly due to the fact the more commercially minded record labels have tried to use it as a selling brand.In many ways Indie has lost its validity, in a similar way (not exactly) as Prog Rock did in the late '70's (although that's not a dirty word with music commentators so much these days).Think bands should try to distance themselves away from Indie - it generally doesn't do them any favours any more.Most of these 'so called' Indie bands around today have far wider influences anyway to be pigeon holed into it so much.
Being mainstream doesn't necessarily equate to chart success.Especially singles chart success.Having a large following is more of a measure of whether something is mainstream or not conventionally
For me I think of "mainstream" artists as those that are on the radio a lot, on TV a lot, etc.
Someone like Taio Cruz seems to not have any fanbase at all, but he's mainstream, for example. Whilst someone like Kendrick Lamar has a huge fanbase, but isn't mainstream (although he has gotten moreso in recent months). That's the way I see it.
Yup. The Arcade Fire last album went straight in at number one on the UK albums chart, had a metacritic score in the 90's and they headlined Leeds/Reading - yet the British radio stations still didn't play there music. What chance has good and interesting guitar music got if its ignored by the radio in favour of dreck like The Saturdays (whose albums fail to make the top ten, despict all the marketing!).