Mumford & Sons Call Out Copycats: Acoustic Rock is Not 'a Formula to Go and Sell Records'

Wow narcissistic much??? Aren't they from BRITAIN?? They don't think America has a history of folk, folk, rock, etc. and that we never played that kind of music till their glorious washboard-playing selves came along? Please. They may have helped open the gates for other musicians but get over yourselves.

bad call Spinner, you took this article totally out of context and almost made me not like Mumford and Sons anymore. This is not at al what they said.

I think, what people have to recognise, and M&S are completly accurate in this, is no one mainstream was as big as they were doing Folk music. They made a success of this genre and put it out there for people who had never really thought about it/heard it before them - it was for the masses. And I heard 'The Cave' before LLM and that was what had me hooked - the words and the emotion in that song is what made people pay attention. All the American haters out there, going on about how folk music started in America and M&S stole that style blah blah, I call BS. The Irish were actually doing it before anyone. But music styles filter throughout the world - Italians play folk style music so the point is moot. Home was a great song and I love PP to be honest, and he will make an original artist because he also has his own thing going on. But it did sound like Mumford. And I love the Lumineers too. But some of the songs do sound like Mumford. TBH I see both sides, but noone can deny that Mumford have brought folk music into mainstream. And they did it, at that time, single handed.

The Avett Brothers were around before any of the bands mentioned in the article, so it's strange that they got left out of the discussion. I love all of these bands though, and I'm just happy that great music is finally making it back to the masses.

Funny that the two founding members of The Lumineers started 2 years before Mumford got together.

Beware: this quote was totally taken out of context, here's the actual Rolling Stones article: http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/mumford-sons-keyboardist-i-thought-philip-phillips-was-us-20130315

That sounds a lot different than what this author wrote about them

Music is not a formula for making money and ought not be approached with such a mindset (though, obviously, it is all the time)..and I do feel some remorse for folk becoming the "in" thing to do or like. However, while Mumford was a trailblazer in making the genre mainstream, the statement, "When we started it was quite fun doing what we were doing 'cause no one else was doing it. It was like our little secret" is total bologna I'm sorry. Earlier and superior versions of what Mumford is doing exist.

How is this even a complaint??? Mumford & Sons has a monopoly on folk rock? Virtually every genre of music started with trailblazers followed by "copycats". The Beatles, Sex Pistols, New Order, Nirvana, Run DMC, Bob Marley were all trailblazers (who actually were copycats of other lesser known bands) that started a genre. As the saying goes, "Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery". Be happy that other people are copying you and use it to inspire even greater music out of yourself.

Mumford & Sons (my new favorite band) is kinda like the Beatles were for rock back in the 60s, but for indie/ folk/ rock now. the Beatles gave inspiration for others to do something similar, and opened a gateway that gave a spotlight to others already doing the same, and they changed music forever. Just like Aerosmith & Rolling Stones are similar and have the same general lineup of instruments along with almost every other rock band. Also Lady Gaga & Madonna are similar/ One Direction and the Wanted as well, i could go on but it would take forever, the main message is all of these are within certain genres of music and not just one band defines a single genre, it takes many bands and singers. Indie/ fold/ rock is one of these genres that is now mainstream largely thanks to Mumford & Sons. Example: There was a first mainstream pop band that allot of people liked, than others already doing the same got popular or others were inspired by them. this is how music evolves. without the alleged "copycats" we would still be stuck listening to everyone around the camp fire clapping there hands and clashing rocks to make music like cavemen. I think Mumford & sons should be proud they were an inspiration and idol to others, and should also be proud they were one of the mainstream fathers of indie/ folk/ rock, they are now a part of the ever changing history of music.

Everyone makes mistakes with what they say. we sometimes just say what we think at the moment and don't give allot of thought on what it's impact might have. so i think we can all relate to similar mistakes.

Eh, we ourselves determine what music we like. Home became popular because its the kind of music that the audience likes, not the other way around. Granted, I thought exactly the same thing when I heard Home and for a while I thought it WAS sung by Mumford and Sons. But its what is liked right now, and lets face it, it is because of Little Lion Man that this particular genre rose to prominence.