Current Events > The Strokes dropped a new album

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o4qsjmLxhow

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1-W6whvn8Bs

Me gusta

I'm listening now and it's good.

As an aside, do you think an unknown band could drop an album like this right now and have it be successful? What's the context for the Strokes right now? They're rock, or maybe kind of proto indie, and I feel like that doesn't really exist anymore.

Ozovzk posted...

I'm listening now and it's good.

As an aside, do you think an unknown band could drop an album like this right now and have it be successful? What's the context for the Strokes right now? They're rock, or maybe kind of proto indie, and I feel like that doesn't really exist anymore.

Idk dude Julian is just amazing, I saw him live with The Voidz and boy

Is This It is still one of my few albums I consider perfect and can listen to all the way through any time

Ozovzk posted...

or maybe kind of proto indie

what does that even mean?

---

GhettoFlip posted...

what does that even mean?

It depends on how you define "indie," because it's pretty much been around since the 70s, but I just meant that The Strokes were very much a precursor to the indie scene of the 2000s. When they released their debut album there was some debate as to whether they were the saviors of rock but I think they ended up being part of something new.

Ozovzk posted...

but I just meant that The Strokes were very much a precursor to the indie scene of the 2000s

no they weren't lol

---

Hype

---

GhettoFlip posted...

no they weren't lol

Uh ok do you have any evidence against Is This It being one of the most influential albums of the decade?

Ozovzk posted...

It depends on how you define "indie," because it's pretty much been around since the 70s, but I just meant that The Strokes were very much a precursor to the indie scene of the 2000s. When they released their debut album there was some debate as to whether they were the saviors of rock but I think they ended up being part of something new.

They were never an "indie" band because they were on a major label.

---

so weird that there's only two Strokes songs in the entire Rock Band catalogue

---

indica posted...

They were never an "indie" band because they were on a major label.

I don't disagree but weren't most "indie" bands from the 2000s signed to a major label?

Ozovzk posted...

I don't disagree but weren't most "indie" bands from the 2000s signed to a major label?

I would say that once they're signed to a major label, they are no longer "indie." I'm a big fan of The Strokes, and their first album had that gritty "indie" rock feel but they are definitely a mainstream pop band

---

Ozovzk posted...

It depends on how you define "indie," because it's pretty much been around since the 70s, but I just meant that The Strokes were very much a precursor to the indie scene of the 2000s. When they released their debut album there was some debate as to whether they were the saviors of rock but I think they ended up being part of something new.

they helped usher in the garage rock revival of the 2000s but calling them "proto indie" makes zero sense

---

indica posted...

I would say that once they're signed to a major label, they are no longer "indie." I'm a big fan of The Strokes, and their first album had that gritty "indie" rock feel but they are definitely a mainstream pop band

they're indie rock you fool

---

GhettoFlip posted...

they're indie rock you fool

They're not "indie" for the obvious reason I describe you foolish person. I would say that Garage Rock revival would be a genre I would put their first two albums in, but then they went all 80s synth. Either way, they're a pop band. Deal with it.

---

indie is as much a sound as it is a descriptor for whether or not you're signed with a label

the protomen- for example- own their own label, and sign other indie bands, they're as far away from corporate commercialized music as i can imagine

---

GhettoFlip posted...

they helped usher in the garage rock revival of the 2000s but calling them "proto indie" makes zero sense

I agree with that sry I'm dumb. But that was essentially the point I was trying to make, they helped to usher in a scene that defined "indie rock" for people like me who grew up during that time.

I've liked every song I've heard from it tbh, easily their best album in years.

"Indie rock" as a label is kind of a bad one past a certain point since it doesn't really tell you anything about what type of music it really is, imo. Sort of like how people couldn't agree on what "classic rock" meant. Do you include bands like GNR even though they weren't around until the late 80's? Etc.

Indie music by definition is sort of meant to be something lo-fi that was recorded on tape in some dude's bedroom and posted to SoundCloud or some shit. Now it basically just means something that's less conventional than what's commonly played on the radio. Something alternative and less popular (IE: bands no one has ever heard of).

The Strokes are pretty well in the middle of the pack. They're no Imagine Dragons, but they're not some band on YouTube with 5k views either. They might be in a similar standing to The White Stripes or The Killers, neither of which I would consider "indie."

---

viewmaster_pi posted...

indie is as much a sound as it is a descriptor for whether or not you're signed with a label

the protomen- for example- own their own label, and sign other indie bands, they're as far away from corporate commercialized music as i can imagine

For clarity, it has nothing to do with being signed to a label, but has everything to do with being signed to one of the main industry labels. If it was signed to Alternative Tentacles, then it would be an "indie" band, because they are an independent label outside of the major industry--same as your example of the Protomen and their label. And yes, "indie" has come to be defined as a certain sound but I think it still remains much stronger as an anti-corporate ideology.

---

Ultima Dragon posted...

I've liked every song I've heard from it tbh, easily their best album in years.

"Indie rock" as a label is kind of a bad one past a certain point since it doesn't really tell you anything about what type of music it really is, imo. Sort of like how people couldn't agree on what "classic rock" meant. Do you include bands like GNR even though they weren't around until the late 80's? Etc.

Indie music by definition is sort of meant to be something lo-fi that was recorded on tape in some dude's bedroom and posted to SoundCloud or some shit. Now it basically just means something that's less conventional than what's commonly played on the radio. Something alternative and less popular (IE: bands no one has ever heard of).

The Strokes are pretty well in the middle of the pack. They're no Imagine Dragons, but they're not some band on YouTube with 5k views either. They might be in a similar standing to The White Stripes or The Killers, neither of which I would consider "indie."

I agree with what you say except The Strokes are at the top of the pack. Look at their record sales and their media endorsements. Shia LeBoef was wearing a Strokes T-Shirt in Transformers for Christ's sake.


---

that was okay

eternal summer and ode to the mets are definitely the stand out tracks tho

---

Reminds me of old strokes, I like it

---

really loving Ode to the Mets atm

---

Nice

---

indica posted...

I would say that once they're signed to a major label, they are no longer "indie." I'm a big fan of The Strokes, and their first album had that gritty "indie" rock feel but they are definitely a mainstream pop band

lmao what. indie is a genre/aesthetic thing. if Pavement signed to a major label, they would still be indie rock (unless they changed their sound). If Yo La Tengo signed to a major label, they would still be indie rock.

Ultima Dragon posted...

Indie music by definition is sort of meant to be something lo-fi that was recorded on tape in some dude's bedroom and posted to SoundCloud or some s***.

no you're thinking of lofi or bedroom pop


---

GodardOnGodard posted...

lmao what. indie is a genre/aesthetic thing. if Pavement signed to a major label, they would still be indie rock (unless they changed their sound). If Yo La Tengo signed to a major label, they would still be indie rock.

You're wrong. "Indie" is a social movement that became misaligned with a genre--it should in no way be considered a genre itself. Does your "indie" genre/aesthetic include hip-hop? Because there's "indie" versions of any music genre you can think of.

---

on my third listen

strong 8.5/10 tbh anthony fantano will agree with me

---

Freddie_Mercury posted...

on my third listen

strong 8.5/10 tbh anthony fantano will agree with me

Any favorite tracks so far?

---

Tag for later

---

Haven't seen an indie genre argument in years. Same people think djent isnt a sub genre lol
---

indica posted...

Any favorite tracks so far?

The Adults Are Talking, Eternal Summer, At The Door, and Ode To The Mets are all solid tracks

Selfless is the only track I would consider "weak"

---

Ozovzk posted...

It depends on how you define "indie," because it's pretty much been around since the 70s, but I just meant that The Strokes were very much a precursor to the indie scene of the 2000s. When they released their debut album there was some debate as to whether they were the saviors of rock but I think they ended up being part of something new.

The Strokes being saviors of rock? What is this bullshit.

---

Bands like The Strokes and Parcels fit into this sort of "alternative pop" genre where it's easy listening despite the bands having a background in something else

That's my reasoning for the appeal anyway. I first heard The Strokes on my Pandora playlist and the music just fit with all the other modern alternative stuff I was listening to at the time

---

clyde_frog posted...

The Strokes being saviors of rock? What is this bullshit.

The Strokes blew the fuck up

https://www.austinchronicle.com/music/2002-11-15/108291/

https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/the-making-of-the-strokes-101232/

---

Conflict posted...

And you'd be wrong in saying that

Nope

---

indica posted...

You're wrong. "Indie" is a social movement that became misaligned with a genre--it should in no way be considered a genre itself. Does your "indie" genre/aesthetic include hip-hop? Because there's "indie" versions of any music genre you can think of.

...does yours? you're the one arguing it's just a business thing of whether they're on a major or indie label

lmao this dude arguing if Maroon 5 decided to move to an indie label, they'd suddenly be classified "indie rock/pop"


---

Ode +1

---