Throughout my career as "listener of music", I've never really known what "alternative" consisted of. I usually just lump the music I listen to into a general Alternative category, which is everything that isn't pop, unless it is obviously classical like Suzanne Ciani, or Celtic like Isle of Avalon. So what exactly is Alternative? Is there a fine line? Or is it all a matter of perception?



(And no, in the career of being a "listener of music" doesn't pay the bills. Artists should be paying us to listen to their music!)

I really dont know either, i always thought alternative was a branch of rock musique.

technically 'alternative' came about as a way to categorize all the new rock music that came out in the early 90s that didn't sound anything like what was currently being played on the tv and radio... it WAS a way of describing music that was an alternative to the mainstream... but as the bands it described gained popularity the name became part of our pop culture...

now it seems that 'alternative' is a banner for any band that plays less than conventional rock with some 'deep introspective lyrics'...

I don't know. To me, alternative is just a thing pop bands (who aren't succeeding to their wishes) would call themselves to seem somewhat different. I'm NOT saying all alternative bands are unsuccessful.

As far as I understand there are at least two definitions of "alternative":
1) as panbient mentioned: a kind of rock music but I think it started earlier (somewhen in the 80s). Guitarheavy, but not heavy-metal. Apart from that all styles "loud, quiet, fast, slow, etc" allowed.
2) everything that's not published by one of the major labels -> also known as "Independent". This "classification" obviously opens up an even bigger spectrum of music. Hence the confusion.

Personally I stick to the first description. I also can't help the feeling that bands who call themselves "alternative" (there are not that many) always sound a bit sad and moaning...

Happy new year, fizher

i think I am still confused, but hey thats me. My friend is into what he says is 'alternative' and he's in a band....they are kinda a mixture between Linkin Park, Limp Bizkit and The Calling....and yes it is a weird racket when they perform lol

If a band grows in popularity, to the extent that everyone likes at least some of their material (e.g. Oasis, Coldplay, U2 etc.), then are they no longer the 'alternative' contemporary genre? Are they then pop musicians?

my definition is one that is self-explanatory:

Music that is not of the norm; an "alternative" style of music than what most of the general population listen to, or at least "hear"...

But "Alternative" music is of the norm now. That was a bad catchphrase even 13 years ago. I agree with Ren. It's a confusing word to use to bridge the underground to normal listening venues. And there's many, many, creative bands now who you won't hear on the radio or MTV,but I wouldn't be so quick to call them alternative. The term "underground", I think relates more to the state of a given artist's day-to-day operations and aspirations.

I think alternative is like rock music but softer. It isn't like heavy metal and the emphasis is more on vocals. Also, alternative music usually has dark lyrics.

I think artists like Matthew Good are considered alternative. Yay new Matt Good CD!