Confused by modern "Indie" folk music

[jjtrain]

Okay, let me start by saying that I am not a hater of Indie folk music. In fact, a lot of the music reminds me of music Paul Simon and Art Garfunkel, sometimes a bit of Gordon Lightfoot, the Chad Mitchell Trio, basically reminiscent of the 1960's when drug fueled music was it's most diverse. To me, having a three-four part harmony and a moderately fast tempo works quite well for small bands, and their lyrics aren't nearly as superficial and shallow as modern country or pop music. So all in all, contemporary folk is more appealing to me than most other recent genres of music

However, Indie folk confuses me a bit. To start with I thought the term "Indie" was meant to be different for the sake of keeping true to your identity. However, like most music tends to do, when one artist does something that works, many others follow in order to find success. That leads to the overuse of chord patterns, phrases, and even strumming patterns. So then, how can the term "Indie" be used when many musicians feed off of elements that made their colleagues successful, essentially indirect copying of songs?

Another confusing thing about Indie Folk music, excuse me, contemporary folk music, is that I'm having trouble seeing where their inspiration comes from. While the music sounds like the 1960's, it doesn't appear that the same ideals or purpose exists. Think of Bob Dylan, the embodiment of the protest musician. Now compare that to modern folk bands, it doesn't seem that anyone is trying to "slay dragons" with their music.

There are other elements I don't understand, but we can start with these two. I can't emphasize enough that I in fact like this modern folk music, but the whole premise is a little confusing to me. So can anyone enlighten me or at least provide some opinions about this new genre?

Thanks!

--James

[Davis Webb]

Can you provide an example or 2? One man's Indie is another's mainstream. For example, is Leslie Fiest Indie? Is Ron Sexsmith?

[perttime]

If it is called "contemporary folk music", it is supposed to be done in a contemporary context.

For the dragon slaying, I have a feeling that the way it was done in '60s and '70s isn't really working now. The preaching style is too direct. Sure, we can still listen to the old stuff - but much of it is bearable only because it is the old stuff that we grew up with.

[philjs]

To my mind, "indie" is a hold-over from "independent," meaning the artist didn't have a record company contract...in the large sense it had nothing whatsoever to do with the type of music being played except that "indie" artists tended to be outside the mainstream (ie. they wouldn't make a record company any money).

However, I think that the term is now meaningless because the "buy-tunes" model (instead of buy an album or a physical product) means that everyone is "indie." Very (very) few artists have record contracts these days and even many of those that do pay for their own recording in order to maintain control of their catalog. I'm sure, too, that in the minds of the record company's it's a case of "why buy the cow, when you can get the milk for free?" (why contract to pay for the recording when you can just take a slice of the releasing pie?)

Phil

[Flying Orca]

"Indie" means no big-label support - it has little to do with genre or style. As for the writing, well, the 60s were fifty bloody years ago, and things change in half a century. Judging today's outstanding songwriters by comparing them to Dylan (ugh) is about as useful as judging Dylan by comparing him to Tin Pan Alley.

[KevWind]

Originally Posted by jjtrain

Another confusing thing about Indie Folk music, excuse me, contemporary folk music, is that I'm having trouble seeing where their inspiration comes from. While the music sounds like the 1960's, it doesn't appear that the same ideals or purpose exists. Think of Bob Dylan, the embodiment of the protest musician. Now compare that to modern folk bands, it doesn't seem that anyone is trying to "slay dragons" with their music.

So can anyone enlighten me or at least provide some opinions about this new genre?

Thanks!

--James

First: Contrary to the penchant for trying to pigeon hole and labeling of genre's in the big scheme modern folk music is not really new..
Second while some thing's change some things do not.
Without getting to political lets just say that some of things that were issues in 50's and 60's are still problems and haven't changed all that much.
As far as "slaying dragons" perhaps it depends on where one looks or perhaps it has evolved into keen observation as opposed to "protest"


Here are couple pretty good examples of insightful "contemporary observations"

[Fatstrat]

Originally Posted by philjs

To my mind, "indie" is a hold-over from "independent," meaning the artist didn't have a record company contract...in the large sense it had nothing whatsoever to do with the type of music being played except that "indie" artists tended to be outside the mainstream (ie. they wouldn't make a record company any money).

Phil

Thanks for this. I don't know if it's true, but it makes sense to me. "Indie" has always confused me because to me it sounds like folk. And I never really got what the difference was.

[fazool]

Originally Posted by philjs

To my mind, "indie" is a hold-over from "independent," meaning the artist didn't have a record company contract...in the large sense it had nothing whatsoever to do with the type of music being played except that "indie" artists tended to be outside the mainstream (ie. they wouldn't make a record company any money).

However, I think that the term is now meaningless because the "buy-tunes" model (instead of buy an album or a physical product) means that everyone is "indie." Very (very) few artists have record contracts these days and even many of those that do pay for their own recording in order to maintain control of their catalog. I'm sure, too, that in the minds of the record company's it's a case of "why buy the cow, when you can get the milk for free?" (why contract to pay for the recording when you can just take a slice of the releasing pie?)

Phil

Nicely said. I was actually hoping to say this exact thing when I read Phil's post - and he said it much better so I'll just add "what he said!"

[El Diablo]

Originally Posted by philjs

To my mind, "indie" is a hold-over from "independent," meaning the artist didn't have a record company contract...

Originally Posted by Flying Orca

"Indie" means no big-label support - it has little to do with genre or style.

Those are accurate.

[Napman41]

Originally Posted by Davis Webb

Can you provide an example or 2? One man's Indie is another's mainstream. For example, is Leslie Fiest Indie? Is Ron Sexsmith?

And I'd also request your age....

[Larry Pattis]

Most of my closest friends are men & women that tour the country in their vans/minivans, primarily working the small club scene, "coffeehouses" (small independent venues that call themselves this...not actual coffeehouses) & house-concerts...with the occasional larger gig thrown in. IOW, they tour the regular folk-circuit.

All aspire to larger audiences, so that they can make a better living, and so that their music can reach out into the universe and have meaningful impact in more ways and for more people...and their talent-level is equal to (or greater-than) any singer-songwriter (or group) that the OP mentions.

They are all, of course, independent musicians.

They (my friends) write about what people have always written about, love, hate, war, peace, friends dying, friends leaving, friends appreciated...the full-spectrum of human existence, including social commentary that is pertinent to the issues of the day...

They write about these things quite well, and support their lyrics with some rather-fabulous musicianship.

Without these tremendously talented folks my life would be considerably less full, and with much less inspiration, as well.

A partial list of musicians whom I love can be seen on the "Links" page on my website.

[Fatstrat]

Originally Posted by Larry Pattis

Most of my closest friends are men & women that tour the country in their vans/minivans, primarily working the small club scene, "coffeehouses" (small independent venues that call themselves this...not actual coffeehouses) & house-concerts...with the occasional larger gig thrown in. IOW, they tour the regular folk-circuit.

All aspire to larger audiences, so that they can make a better living, and so that their music can reach out into the universe and have meaningful impact in more ways and for more people...and their talent-level is equal to (or greater-than) any singer-songwriter (or group) that the OP mentions.

They are all, of course, independent musicians.

They (my friends) write about what people have always written about, love, hate, war, peace, friends dying, friends leaving, friends appreciated...the full-spectrum of human existence, including social commentary that is pertinent to the issues of the day...

They write about these things quite well, and support their lyrics with some rather-fabulous musicianship.

Without these tremendously talented folks my life would be considerably less full, and with much less inspiration, as well.

A partial list of musicians whom I love can be seen on the "Links" page on my website.

So they are "Indie" musicians?

[jjtrain]

The concept that Indie just means there's no record label (aka, outside mainstream music) clears a lot up for me. So with that being said the "genre" is quite broader than I anticipated because it includes pretty much anyone who's not signed with a record company.

Then I have to start questioning what I've been listening to for the past few weeks?

I can't provide examples any better than a youtube search "Indie folk music":

https://www.youtube.com/results?sear...die+folk+music

Go down the list of search results, and this has been a good summary of what I've been listening to an what I thought "Indie folk" was supposed to be.

I guess that means that "Contemporary folk" would be a more appropriate and accurate term for me to use then.

As for the relation between Bob Dylan, the 1960's, and present day artists; I do expect change, music will always evolve. And yet, music can be compared for the purposes of measuring that change. I'm not saying one is better than the other, but it's quite clear that the music if the 60's was written for a different purpose than the folk music that evolved out of the 20th century.

As for my age, I'm not going to say exactly, but I will say that I am in college and soon to graduate, if that gives you an idea of how old I am. And for the record, I've been listening to Bob Dylan, Tom Petty, Gordon Lightfoot, John Denver, Willie Nelson, Waylon Jennings, Kris Kristofferson, Johnny Cash, Jonathon Edwards, Stan Rogers, Chad Mitchell Trio, the list can go on. I've only recently begun the long process of understanding the current music spectrum, and modern folk music for me is still a bit confusing.

--James

[RedJoker]

I'm really enjoying the current crop of what I would call indie folk. I'm a middle aged man that loves the Avert Brothers, Head and the Heart, Noah and the Whale, Decemberists, etc. No, it isn't the folk music of the sixties but that's what I like so much. I didn't and currently am not living in the sixties so that music doesn't really connect with me.

Having said that, my wife and I drove a few hours today reliving our childhood with the 80's Pop Pandora station. Sure, many of those song were bad but many were great and all of them brought back great memories for us. Evoking/expressing feelings is what music is all about. If it does that, its good!

As always, enjoy what you like. You don't need a label or a reason.

[Fatstrat]

Originally Posted by RedJoker

I'm really enjoying the current crop of what I would call indie folk. I'm a middle aged man that loves the Avert Brothers, Head and the Heart, Noah and the Whale, Decemberists, etc. No, it isn't the folk music of the sixties but that's what I like so much. I didn't and currently am not living in the sixties so that music doesn't really connect with me.

Having said that, my wife and I drove a few hours today reliving our childhood with the 80's Pop Pandora station. Sure, many of those song were bad but many were great and all of them brought back great memories for us. Evoking/expressing feelings is what music is all about. If it does that, its good!

As always, enjoy what you like. You don't need a label or a reason.

Me as well. Most of the new music I like is described as "indie". Although some of it sounds a lot like bluegrass to me.