why do indie rock fans seem to have an allergy to electronics?

xpost

You must hang out with a lot of students, titchy.

being honest, a lot of radiohead fans *were* like that, but to given them credit, and i know we don't much, they did take 'okc' to heart *even though* they generally lived in abject fear of anything that wasn't, you know, geneva or placebo or whatever other post-bends monstrosities we were gifted with circa 1997. it was a big step for them.

but it's ultimately facile to compare music on the basis of the technology used to make it -- partly in this case because i suspect 'okc' used extremely up-to-date electronics.

That, and a lot of synthesizer-based bands tend to use the synthesizer as a license to play elaborate melodies that would either be impossible, or else take a lot of technical virtuosity, to produce on analog instruments. As a rule, I don't like that; I like simple, straightforward lines, the sort of thing which is catchy and fairly easily grasped. (This is also why I don't like a lot of prog, or metal, or anything of that nature.)

And then there's the fact that many styles of electronic music tend to omit or devalue vocals. I live for lyrics and vocal characterization; if a song doesn't have them, or if they are perfunctory, it's very difficult to get me to care about that song.

Just one man's opinion, I suppose -- and I understand what I am looking for from music is not what a lot of people are looking for from music. And I also guess I'm not a person who is especially betrothed to the notion of "rock". So maybe I don't count.

What music do you like, by the way? Cos your criteria seem so restricted. Not being snidey, I'm honestly intrigued.

someone on stylusmagazine.com should write it.

I'm entirely willing to admit my criteria for liking music are pretty seriously restrictive. I'm also willing to admit that I break them rather a lot. I can't say I'm especially proud of my taste in music; I've just about reached the point where I'm not embarrassed by it. (Maybe I should be.) Then again, that is kind of a silly thing to be proud of anyway. (Or maybe it isn't.) I certainly can't say that I know nearly enough about music; I didn't start listening to it until I went off to college (in 1999).

I guess this -- http://www.last.fm/user/mooseking/ -- represents some of the matter. Not all, though -- for example, Elvis Costello is my second-favorite musician. But I have all his albums on CD, and have never bothered converting most of them to mp3 format. As a result, I almost never listen to them at home, and the site doesn't track that. Or, you know, stuff I love but just haven't listened to much in the last year, because I haven't been in the mood, or I already know it.

And I guess you may have a point re: Moog, but I'd also say there's a pretty large difference between the synthesizers Moog was inventing and the modern devices.

(What's this documentary called?)

Agreed Moog fetishism is a bit lame, but they sure do sound kewl.

come come now, everyone that says indie fans and artists are all embracing of electronics is being a little kind, surely.

Personally I have nothing against electronics, but I prefer them to be combined with old-fashioned melodies and harmonies. Which is fully possible to do.

Honestly, I don't hear very much indie rock when I listen to The Postal Service; it sounds like synth-pop through and through.

that's how i feel after reading this thread.

Oh, and while on the rant, NOTHING makes me want to punch someone in any given direction than the sound of the Postal Service. The programming is horrid & wimpy, and the vocals are incredibly annoying.
I heard DNTEL once by accidentally downloading one of his tracks that was mislabeled...my ipod is still holding a grudge.
If y'all like that shit, I hope your a 13 year old girl who watches the OC.

Sadly, most DNTEL/Postal Service fans are probably college-age

No it's not

Yet the reviews at the time would have led you to believe it was some brave new dawn or something. And the reaction to Kid A? The same, but tenfold. Pitiable.

i dunno who said anything about synths, though: there's plenty of electronics involved in making a rock album! there's something weirdly theological about the idea that a synth is more futuristic than a guitar.

Sounds more like a typical metal fan to me. Also, metal is a lot more likely to be 100% organic these days than most indie rock.

Best description of ILM ever!

-- Geir Hongro (geirhon...) (webmail), May 17th, 2006 11:33 AM. (GeirHong) (link)

See here:

Heavy Metal and Electronica

synthpop -> new order -> joy division -> anything and everything on factory -> the mondays -> the NME -> baggy -> indie -> shoegazing -> guitars -> louder guitars -> even louder guitars -> metal.

so. synthpop got me into metal. via indie. proves nothing, i know, but hey.

and i didn't even mention carter USM. or the wedding present. shit. that'll have to wait for the 12".

I think that's pretty important though, especially in the context of this thread. It doesn't matter whether synths were particularly used on OK Computer, or whether the production si particularly different-sounding and heavily tweaked - what matters is that people thought it was particularly 'electronic', and still think that it is. I'm willing to believe that some indie rock fans find OK Computer offputting 'because it's too electronic', despite the fact that it actually isn't very. Not that the indie rock fan's 'allergy to electronics' is just a pose, but a lot of the time it's not reflected by what they're actually listening to.

As a child of the nu-metal revolution I can't really deal with the concept of this '100% organic' metal thing, some metal still has that crunchy industrial sound on the guitars, that's electronic surely! Maybe it is different in Norway eh. (actually maybe i just think of pedal effects as being 'electronics', that might be it)

(nb I think i mean a very different thing when i say 'indie rock' to when i say 'indie' but I can't quite work out where the lines are drawn, is it just that I associate the phrase 'indie rock' with the US (Pavement and that) and 'indie' with the UK (Heavenly and that)? indie fans and electronic sounds fit together in my head much better than indie rock fans and electronic sounds.)

And if there is in fact an element of pose to strawman indie rock fan expressing dislike of 'electronic' sounds in music... I'm still no closer to working out why. Because it creates an easily-grasped difference between the favoured indie rock and other music (where we may assume electronic sounds, whose logical extension might be considered pro-tools and equivalents)? Because it feels like a safe position to hold that's restrictive enough to look like discernment? Because dance music is gay?

In other words, it seems your a cultural supremist. Does pitchfork have any openings? Give 'em a shout...

"You're". "YOU'RE". YOU ARE. Get it?

This "100% organic" stuff is total BS. Most people record digitally anyway.

I think that's what the "organic" is about, more than the use of digital recording to create an arrangement and composite "performance" recorded for posterity.

With strings of eg catgut. Which wouldn't work.

That reminds me of an argument I used abt 20 years ago to tackle certain synth-bad-guitar-good people: "Contrarily to what you might believe, there are no microphones picking up actual physical sound on an electric guitar; the mics are magnetic sensors which, when metal vibrates in their vicinity, induce currents of the same frequency, which are then converted into physical sound."

This thread gives me a warm nostalgic feeling. I'd assumed that this "battle" had actually been "won".