"ChristianTC" <christofferthevikingNOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3e147c98$0$256$edfadb0f@dread12.news.tele.dk...
> Hej alle sammen!
Hej Christian
> Jeg undrer mig lidt over, hvordan man egentlig karakteriserer musik under
> genren indie. Jeg har fået fortalt, at det er det musik, man ikke helt kan
> genrebestemme.. Er det rigtigt?
Svaret står sådan set i vores udmærkede OSS/FAQ, hvor der står, at den slags
kan du læse meget mere om i allmusic.com's oversigt over genrer. Jeg har
været så rart at finde opslaget for indie rock til dig
" Indie rock takes its name from "independent," which describes both the
do-it-yourself attitudes of its bands and the small, lower-budget nature of
the labels that release the music. The biggest indie labels might strike
distribution deals with major corporate labels, but their decision-making
processes remain autonomous. As such, indie rock is free to explore sounds,
emotions, and lyrical subjects that don't appeal to large, mainstream
audiences -- profit isn't as much of a concern as personal taste (though the
labels do, after all, want to stay in business). It's very much rooted in
the sound and sensibility of American underground and alternative rock of
the '80s, albeit with a few differences that account for the changes in
underground rock since then. In the sense that the term is most widely used,
indie rock truly separated itself from alternative rock around the time that
Nirvana hit the mainstream. Mainstream tastes gradually reshaped alternative
into a new form of serious-minded hard rock, in the process making it more
predictable and testosterone-driven. Indie rock was a reaction against that
phenomenon; not all strains of alternative rock crossed over in Nirvana's
wake, and not all of them wanted to, either. Yet while indie rock definitely
shares the punk community's concerns about commercialism, it isn't as
particular about whether bands remain independent or "sell out"; the general
assumption is that it's virtually impossible to make indie rock's varying
musical approaches compatible with mainstream tastes in the first place.
There are almost as many reasons for that incompatibility as there are
indie-rock bands, but following are some of the most common: the music may
be too whimsical and innocent; too weird; too sensitive and melancholy; too
soft and delicate; too dreamy and hypnotic; too personal and intimately
revealing in its lyrics; too low-fidelity and low-budget in its production;
too angular in its melodies and riffs; too raw, skronky and abrasive;
wrapped in too many sheets of Sonic Youth/Dinosaur Jr./Pixies/Jesus & Mary
Chain-style guitar noise; too oblique and fractured in its song structures;
too influenced by experimental or otherwise unpopular musical styles.
Regardless of the specifics, it's rock made by and for outsiders -- much
like alternative once was, except that thanks to its crossover, indie rock
has a far greater wariness of excess testosterone. It's certainly not that
indie rock is never visceral or powerful; it's just rarely -- if ever --
macho about it. As the '90s wore on, indie rock developed quite a few
substyles and close cousins (indie pop, dream pop, noise-pop, lo-fi, math
rock, post-rock, space rock, sadcore, and emo among them), all of which
seemed poised to remain strictly underground phenomena. "
/Nikolaj