the change to indie/obscurity

[Basstrap]

When i bought ATYCLB I really liked it. Whether I was choosing to like it because it was U2 remains to be seen.

Since then I have not bought another mainstream album (radiohead aside)
because it is around that time that I discovered Elliott Smith.

After spending some time at the ES message board I got recommended a lot of music by the likes of Modest Mouse, Black heart Procession, Dismemberment plan, flaming lips...etc..
They all warned me...getting into more obscure music will "ruin" you as you are right now.

Now all my fave bands are the likes of Elliott Smith, F. Lips, Hawksley Workman, Rufus Wainwright, Godspeed you black emperor...and on and on

and now...after going back to ATYCLB...I find it much more dissapointing...though I will never join the side that says it is COMPLETELY hopeless.

my question, therefore, is...
for those of you who have gone down the road of obscurity - how has this affected the way you look at U2?

U2 are still my fave band...ATYCLB is just a big big drop in the quality of their music. If they make another album that dissapoints me so...they may have to drop down from number one to make way for Elliott.....I hope that doesn't have to happen

 

[yertle-the-turtle]

I recently been discovering music like Neil Finn, Belle and Sebastian, Tom McRae, Saint Etienne, Mull Historical Society, the Verve, Cocteau Twins and so on, that may or may not be "indie" depending on what dictionary you have. However, because I listen to loads of mainstream music (cf. Radiohead, AFI, The Clash, Kylie, Oasis, Ash, Blur, Pulp) in addition to that, so on the occasions I do listen to U2, I have never noticed much difference. In the end, though, my opinion is that a good song is a good song, no matter who does it.

 

[meegannie]

I recently been discovering music like Neil Finn, Belle and Sebastian, Tom McRae, Saint Etienne, Mull Historical Society, the Verve, Cocteau Twins and so on, that may or may not be "indie" depending on what dictionary you have. However, because I listen to loads of mainstream music (cf. Radiohead, AFI, The Clash, Kylie, Oasis, Ash, Blur, Pulp) in addition to that, so on the occasions I do listen to U2, I have never noticed much difference. In the end, though, my opinion is that a good song is a good song, no matter who does it.

 

[MrBrau1]

One must always keep an open mind. If the song is all that matters you must be loyal to you ears, not labeling & posturing. It is possible for big, corporate artists to make great records (like U2), it's also possible for indie rock to be crap. If you open yourself up you'll be pulled in great directions. 10 Years ago I thought country music was horrid and couldn't understand how anyone could listen to it. Now I think Johnny Cash is the greatest thing since sliced bread and getting really interested in Willie Nelson.

 

[u2popmofo]

One must always keep an open mind. If the song is all that matters you must be loyal to you ears, not labeling & posturing. It is possible for big, corporate artists to make great records (like U2), it's also possible for indie rock to be crap. If you open yourself up you'll be pulled in great directions. 10 Years ago I thought country music was horrid and couldn't understand how anyone could listen to it. Now I think Johnny Cash is the greatest thing since sliced bread and getting really interested in Willie Nelson.

I completely agree with everything you've said.


Just dont get into the whole "Indie is great, mainstream is bad" thing. I dont know how many times Indie/Punk bands I like have gone to major labels and I have to hear people talk about the whole "selling out" thing. In my honest opinion, most any Indie band would do ANYTHING to get on a major label, it's just really difficult for most of them to be able to.

Regardless, music is music. It really doesnt matter at all what music label it's on. There are great and horrible bands on big labels and small labels.

 

[u2popmofo]

However, because I listen to loads of mainstream music (cf. Radiohead, AFI, The Clash, Kylie, Oasis, Ash, Blur, Pulp)

Yertle, AFI has only released one album on a big label, all of their previous efforts were on Nitrorecords and other little crappy labels. Even though their newest album was on Dreamworks, you're going to have a hard time convincing most people they're very mainstream, I doubt 97% of the general music listening public have ever even heard of them.

 

[u2popmofo]

*double post* sorry

 

[yertle-the-turtle]

Eh, cheers. I really really like them though.

 

[Basstrap]

believe me...I am not sucked into the whole "everything indie is good"

especially the "garageband" types like the Dandy Warholes and Thrush Hermit...I can't take bands where the lead singer can't actually hold a note

 

[Saracene]

Well, my taste changed significantly since I've started to listen to the lesser-known artists; I used to like big-voiced divas like Celine Dion and now I positively cannot stand most of them. I used to adore Sheryl Crow and Alanis Morisette, but even though I still enjoy their music it just doesn't seem anywhere as impressive as before. However I also discovered gazillions of "mainstream" artists whose music I found to be just as fiercely individual and captivating, so I guess in the end it doesn't really matter. Great song is a great song is a great song.