Don’t think the underground is dead, but the underground has to go against the grain. Now that marketing is so much in the hands of the DIY bands, perhaps it is the marketing strategy of the band that will also have to go against the grain in addition to the music in order for fans to feel that loyal long-lasting attraction to a band.

hm, yeah, i understand why you used death cab, i just never ever considered them underground.

the underground has intrinsic value as a source of rebellion and innovation, but that’s not to discount the innovation in pop music as well. i don’t think you can really compare obscure stuff with popular stuff. they come from such different places. when i first heard timbaland’s production for missy elliot, “work it” in particular (if i remember correctly), i was blown away. minimal, distorted middle eastern percussion, some acid noises, and out-of-phase sections? amazing. it was just as amazing as the first time i heard all of those same sounds from muslimgauze in 1995.

we might start to hear some of the more out-there elements of the underground drift into popular music, i.e. drones, repetition, noise, aggressive/complex rhythms, minimalism, etc. i’d love that! a minimal, droning, bleak, catchy song i could sing along to in the car? i’ll buy two! i don’t care if the mainstream co-opts aspects of my underground culture. if it’s real and done with respect, the result will be successful to me; whether or not the public approves is irrelevant. if it’s done tastelessly and to make a dollar, well, then those who were there at the beginning will recognise it for what it is and not buy it, and that ensures the separation between underground and mainstream.

also, i wouldn’t say that innovation is stifled by recycling of work. if that was the case, then hip-hop and its derivatives would have never been innovative. juxtaposition and recontextualiztion are as important as new ideas (and it’s debatable as to whether or not we’ll ever run out of those). if artists try and pass of something recycled as new and fresh, it’s the duty of the critic to point it out (if it hasn’t already been called out). in this case, i wouldn’t blame the shortcomings of a lazy listening public on the disappearance (or not) of an underground. omar s is on the nose when he says “underground music is for people that’s not lazy”*, so, you know, without a lazy listening public, we might not have an underground.

* from an interview he gave to fact magazine, their site is down now, otherwise i’d give the link.

As for the fringes – your right, I’m really not talking about that here. Most of that stuff will never catch on because most people just don’t get “weird and extreme.”

But even the weirdest styles have a way of bleeding into more mainstream circles. Look at the punk movement. Some of the stuff they were doing and singing about and wearing were completely offensive to mainstream culture at the time. Look around now, just a few decades later. Dyed hair? Piercings? Aggressive music? That stuff is boring now.

As for your comment about the underground music I’ve experienced being somehow “shallower” than yours… I used Death Cab as an example because I figured everyone is familiar with their story. You may think that your underground music is down deep enough to be immune to these cycles, but if you just wait a few years I’d be willing to bet you’ll start to see what I’m talking about. I’d be interested to hear some examples that you’re thinking of.

as to a possible death of the underground, disagree disagree disagree. the musical underground is not dead, you’ve just had a shallower underground (no offense). a band like death cab, which writes catchy verse-chorus-verse songs with mainstream instrumentation and skill, is merely a popular band in waiting. underground music as never about shit that you could have heard on mainstream radio anyway — you gotta move out to the fringes, where things get weird and extreme.

And yes, even independent bands want to make enough to move out of their parents house.

It’s interesting that you should bring that up, actually. I just had a conversation with a band that is very wary of online buzz. They have seen too many bands get a huge wave of online press and blog love only to fizzle out shortly after.

The internet allowed these bands to reach a level of exposure that they really weren’t ready for yet. A couple of years of solid gigging were probably all that they needed, but instead they were thrust into the spotlight – headlining festivals, playing to huge audiences.

They release a second album that doesn’t live up to the hype and they’re history.

So these guys are playing it safe instead. They’re sticking to smaller venues and are considering holding off on a national tour until they get their sophomore record out of the way.

Of course, I’m not saying that promoting your new favorite band is going to hurt them. It’s not about the buzz itself, it’s about whether or not the band is able to handle it.