and i have talked about this before but, for being one of the most political bands of our generation, their music is refreshing in its lack of sloganeering. RATM is great, and needed, and important, but I admire radiohead for their ability to describe the human condition and be political and pissed off, and not make songs that ask people to storm the barricades. These songs are political, but they are more multilayered than the average "lets throw the bums out" protest songs. The music itself, is one of their weapons. They dont have to say a word, and can let the instrumentation speak volumes on the state of the modern world.
Additionally, despite conan o briens plea for us all to NOT be cynical, my worldview tends to skew to the cynical. Radioheads songs, are cyncial, Thom certainly is cynical, just read his rants on that environmental conference the last month.
Cynicism from a band with a political agenda is refreshing as well. "you can scream, you can shout it, its too late now". No question, its easy to feel this way about any number of political issues.
I'm starting to regret that I got into this conversation. I'm telling you, I really am a BIG Radiohead fan. That still doesn't mean they never do anything wrong. For instance, Morning Bell/Amnesiac is complete garbage. Seriously.
And, I'm allowed to have my opinion that In Rainbows was kind of weak, aren't I? I still really liked it, and enjoyed the show that I saw, but I feel like they don't quite have that edge they used to have. Maybe they'll surprise us again and bring it back on the next album (if they make one) - we'll see.
Spectrum 10/27/09; New Orleans JazzFest 5/1/10; Made in America 9/2/12; Phila, PA 10/21/13; Phila, PA 10/22/13; Baltimore Arena 10/27/13; Phila, PA 4/28/16; Phila, PA 4/29/16; Fenway Park 8/7/16; Fenway Park 9/2/18; Asbury Park 9/18/21; Camden 9/14/22; Las Vegas 5/16/24; Las Vegas 5/18/24; Phila, PA 9/7/24; Phila, PA 9/9/24; Baltimore Arena 9/12/24
Tres Mtns - TLA 3/23/11; EV - Tower Theatre 6/25/11; Temple of the Dog - Tower Theatre 11/5/16
I'm starting to regret that I got into this conversation. I'm telling you, I really am a BIG Radiohead fan. That still doesn't mean they never do anything wrong. For instance, Morning Bell/Amnesiac is complete garbage. Seriously.
And, I'm allowed to have my opinion that In Rainbows was kind of weak, aren't I? I still really liked it, and enjoyed the show that I saw, but I feel like they don't quite have that edge they used to have. Maybe they'll surprise us again and bring it back on the next album (if they make one) - we'll see.
when did i say you couldnt have an opinion johnny? Just as you decided to get into this conservation, and on the post I just quoted, to react to my statements, and not just sit passively by, I choose to do the same. I didnt just start this thread so I could listen to others arguments and then not post my response to it. Thats silly. If you expect me to post my opinion, and then read others opinions and not comment on those, you have me confused with another person.
Your allowed to have your opinion about In Rainbows, but I am allowed to disagree with you. Just as you are free to disagree with me.
Not really sure what your point is, johnny.
I am a music obsessive. My username is not a joke. its the truth. And I know there are alot of other music fanatics on this board. To me, a more interesting coversation would have been people offering up other bands who are more important than radiohead, and who have pushed the genre as well, or maybe pushed the musical boundaries farther than radiohead if you are of that opinion.
You dont think Radiohead is as innovative as I claim, thats fine, but to my mind, few folks here have posited coherent statements on why that is the case.
If your gonna say In Rainbows is weak, back it up. I never really understood people on this board who post simple answers to these complex issues, or interesting issues. Telling me an album is weak, means nothing to me. Why is it weak?
Radiohead isnt the band every other band strives to be? Well back it up. What examples do you have to prove this?
I was under the impression this was a discussion board.
I have hinted at this in other threads and posts, but I want to sort of cement this. I would argue, that Radiohead is one of those bands that if you are in a rock band right now, this is the band you admire and emulate. I would argue Radiohead have most likely been the band that has pushed the musical envelope and the art form the farthest in the last 10 years or so.
I would argue that Radiohead has created the most challenging and experimental and musically rich and textured music of any bands in the current scene.
They have pushed the art form in ways that are mindblowing, and have forced listeners to reevaluate what a song even is.
In a fragmented music world, where alot of music scenes are niches, I would argue that Radiohead are the biggest band in the world, while that meant very different things 10 years ago, that mantle and that honor I think still belongs to radiohead.
While there certainly is alot of music we all are waiting for with baited breath, Arcade Fire's 3rd album, Bright Eyes's final record, whatever Trent Reznor does next, The national, Joanna Newsoms forthcoming triple album etc...
without a doubt, all eyes, including the bands i just mentioned are awaiting the next epistle that Thom and the guys create. Radioheads LP 8 is the most anticipated musical release.
Well I'll always give them credit for evolving their sound and experimenting. But as a fan, their last few albums haven't really grabbed a hold of me. I loved the Kid A/Amensiac stuff, but only like a few tracks here and there from the last two. A band whose sound changes so often is bound to have a few fans drop off here and there I guess. But they're still a band whose new album I'll always check out.
i would just like to point out one thing. not necessarily about radiohead but more about the current state of the music business and BIG radio. a little off topic i know but maybe this correlates in some form.
i live in dallas, tx, where there are a couple mainstream rock stations. i don't listen to them because they do nothing for me. but when i am at work some of the guys do have them on. when they play radiohead they play "creep". not "pyramid song", not "paranoid android", and certainly not "pulk pull". they play "creep" and only "creep".
this example to me makes me come to the conclusion that BIG radio is in a way still living in the past. they have not evolved with the times. and the times have changed. to only play "creep", a song that was put out over 15 years ago, and to ignore the evolution of a band like radiohead is HUGE and says a lot about the inept structure of current mainstream rock radio.
luckily we also have another station, 91.7 kxt, which plays everything from neko case to ella fitzgerald to local music to arcade fire. it is commercial free radio supported by its listeners. this to me is the future of radio. when they play pearl jam they do not play "evenflow". when they play new pearl jam music they do not play "the fixer". they play deep cuts which is so refreshing to hear.
"creep"? really? after all this time? again, sorry to be a bit off topic..
Used to live there. The rock stations suck ass there. Hell, radio is better out of Amarillo than Dallas.
I suppose, in one sense, the way Radiohead go about things - not giving much information away about the next album release and, as mr.pink pointed out hardly producing anything in seven years - can be off-putting.
Certainly, I've gone from an avid fan to showing very little interest in what they're doing. The key decision that the band have to make is which way their music develops on the next album. If it's The Bends/Ok Computer orientated then it'll be huge. If they follow the path of Hail To The Thief/In Rainbows, I believe they would lose a large part of their initial fanbase.
I'm starting to regret that I got into this conversation. I'm telling you, I really am a BIG Radiohead fan. That still doesn't mean they never do anything wrong. For instance, Morning Bell/Amnesiac is complete garbage. Seriously.
And, I'm allowed to have my opinion that In Rainbows was kind of weak, aren't I? I still really liked it, and enjoyed the show that I saw, but I feel like they don't quite have that edge they used to have. Maybe they'll surprise us again and bring it back on the next album (if they make one) - we'll see.
when did i say you couldnt have an opinion johnny? Just as you decided to get into this conservation, and on the post I just quoted, to react to my statements, and not just sit passively by, I choose to do the same. I didnt just start this thread so I could listen to others arguments and then not post my response to it. Thats silly. If you expect me to post my opinion, and then read others opinions and not comment on those, you have me confused with another person.
Your allowed to have your opinion about In Rainbows, but I am allowed to disagree with you. Just as you are free to disagree with me.
Not really sure what your point is, johnny.
I am a music obsessive. My username is not a joke. its the truth. And I know there are alot of other music fanatics on this board. To me, a more interesting coversation would have been people offering up other bands who are more important than radiohead, and who have pushed the genre as well, or maybe pushed the musical boundaries farther than radiohead if you are of that opinion.
You dont think Radiohead is as innovative as I claim, thats fine, but to my mind, few folks here have posited coherent statements on why that is the case.
If your gonna say In Rainbows is weak, back it up. I never really understood people on this board who post simple answers to these complex issues, or interesting issues. Telling me an album is weak, means nothing to me. Why is it weak?
Radiohead isnt the band every other band strives to be? Well back it up. What examples do you have to prove this?
I was under the impression this was a discussion board.
Like I said, overall I do like In Rainbows - Nude, Weird Fishes, All I Need, & Jigsaw are just amazing songs. On the other hand, 15 Steps doesn't really go anywhere, Faust Arp is incredibly boring, Reckoner seems to not have much backbone, and the outro of Videotape is rambling. Also, I was supposed to pay 40 pounds for 6 extra songs? This is a solid, not spectacular, album. Aside from the overhyped "Pay what you want" thing, it's not all that innovative either. I actually like Hail to the Thief more. I just get the feeling that this band is in their twilight. Believe me, I hope they prove me wrong!
Spectrum 10/27/09; New Orleans JazzFest 5/1/10; Made in America 9/2/12; Phila, PA 10/21/13; Phila, PA 10/22/13; Baltimore Arena 10/27/13; Phila, PA 4/28/16; Phila, PA 4/29/16; Fenway Park 8/7/16; Fenway Park 9/2/18; Asbury Park 9/18/21; Camden 9/14/22; Las Vegas 5/16/24; Las Vegas 5/18/24; Phila, PA 9/7/24; Phila, PA 9/9/24; Baltimore Arena 9/12/24
Tres Mtns - TLA 3/23/11; EV - Tower Theatre 6/25/11; Temple of the Dog - Tower Theatre 11/5/16
I have hinted at this in other threads and posts, but I want to sort of cement this. I would argue, that Radiohead is one of those bands that if you are in a rock band right now, this is the band you admire and emulate.
I have hinted at this in other threads and posts, but I want to sort of cement this. I would argue, that Radiohead is one of those bands that if you are in a rock band right now, this is the band you admire and emulate.
This is what every band (should) strives for. An audience that has grown, and healed with them.
The rest of your post is the same kind of dribble I hear from Floyd fans. Except... Dark Side Of The Moon>Radioheads catalog.
sure. I dont think ed is jealous of radiohead. But he has also called out thom by name as being one of the shining examples of class in the music industry, and we know that the band seriously considered doing a similar "pay what you what" thing ala In Rainbows, when they were talking about releasing Backspacer. I also think if you talked to Ed and the guys, they would say they admire Radiohead immensely, and that the reasons for their admiration, would be things along the line of what i outlined in my posts up above. Beyond that, I think the band hugely respects Radiohead for their political activism.
As far as you saying "this" is what bands strive for, Radiohead have struggled in similar ways to Pearl Jam. I dont think radiohead, luckily ever went through anything like the tragedy at Roskilde, but Thom and Ed are very similar, both politically, and in terms of what their persona is. Neither Thom nor Ed, really craved the spotlight, and when both bands broke into the mainstream, Thom and Ed had a very hard time dealing with this. Both bands obviously nearly split up because of this. You dont think Radioheads fan base has grown and healed with them?
Radiohead is music for people who think they are more intelligent than they actually are.
yep cause thom yorke is obviously not intelligent, and what he writes about is usually the standard rock star fare of girls, cars, money, drugs and drinking and groupies
thanks for pointing that out, it helps the conversation, friend!
Radiohead is music for people who think they are more intelligent than they actually are.
yep cause thom yorke is obviously not intelligent, and what he writes about is usually the standard rock star fare of girls, cars, money, drugs and drinking and groupies
thanks for pointing that out, it helps the conversation, friend!
Radiohead for me, are just alright. Only really like The Bends & OK Computer. Think they're cracking albums.
I always check out what they're doing & I have all their albums. But, like many have said already, there are dozens of other bands I prefer listening to.
Cymru Am Byth
PJ albums, at the moment!! -
1,Vs 2,Vitalogy 3,No Code 4,Yield 5,Ten 6,Backspacer, 7Pearl Jam 8,Binaural 9,Riot Act.
If you weren't moved the first time you heard OK Computer, then you have no right to voice an opinion about what Radiohead means or what good music is, because it's hopelessly over your head.
That is one of the most condescending statements I have ever read. Music, as an art form,is for more subjective than any other. This is akin to a pop fan saying you don't 'get' the brilliance of Umbrella by Rhianna. OK Computer is a brilliant album in my mind, but I know people, who's opinions I would have a great respect for, who don't like it and don't like Radiohead as a whole. Plenty of my friends don't like Pearl Jam. It doesn't mean it's over their heads. It just means they're not into it. I know a buttload of people who love Florence & the Machine, but I can't stand them. Does that mean I don't get it? Does it mean there's something wrong with my ears? NO! I just don't fucking like it, so don't presume that you are above anyone else because you like a certain band. It belies a snobbery and a stupidity within that is absolutely infuriating, and completely negates any stock I could have invested in your opinions before this.
If your gonna say In Rainbows is weak, back it up. I never really understood people on this board who post simple answers to these complex issues, or interesting issues. Telling me an album is weak, means nothing to me. Why is it weak?
I'm not going to say In Rainbows was a weak album, I enjoyed a handful of tracks, but it wasn't jaw dropping spectacular either, in my opinion. I think when the dust has fully settled and a decade has gone by people will remember this album for the "pay as you please" arrangement rather than the content of the work on the album.
If your gonna say In Rainbows is weak, back it up. I never really understood people on this board who post simple answers to these complex issues, or interesting issues. Telling me an album is weak, means nothing to me. Why is it weak?
I'm not going to say In Rainbows was a weak album, I enjoyed a handful of tracks, but it wasn't jaw dropping spectacular either, in my opinion. I think when the dust has fully settled and a decade has gone by people will remember this album for the "pay as you please" arrangement rather than the content of the work on the album.
what i am trying to get across here is, the reinvention aspect of radiohead. They change with every album. No album sounds the same, and they continually seek new sounds and new ways of expressing themselves.
In Rainbows is revolutionary precisely because it wasnt "jaw droppingly spectacular". Most of us, myself included, got the link via WASTE on Oct 10,2007 and expected to hear an album of bizaare sounds, of blips and bloops, of songs made mostly on protools, of an experimental, wierd sounding album. Instead we got the most accesible, and digestible radiohead album since Pablo Honey, and an album that doesnt focus on the despair in an technologically entrenched society like every Radiohead album since Ok Computer, but rather we all got an album mostly made up of love songs, relationship songs, personal songs.
That to me is revolutionary. Its what bands wish they were doing. Surprising their audience. The fact that the album was well recieved only sweetens that notion.
First they blow peoples minds and expectations by becoming this experimental, genre defying, bizaare sounding band. The change from Pablo to Kid A was unreal and unique and special. then they blow minds again as well as expectations, by not conforming to the prevailing idea of what radiohead should sound like.
In Rainbows is anything but weak. A great album. I don't know if I could ever rank the RH albums, because they are so different and great in their own way. Except Pablo Honey, which is very half assed compared to the rest of the albums. Musicismylife78 keeps trying to rationalize why they are the best, but that really doens't work in music. They are definitely one of the more popular bands, and I can absolutely hear why. But thats all you can do really, is "hear" their genius. Some people just aren't going to be able to accept music that sounds, "weird" to them. Some just haven't been able to hear it yet. I had an ex that called Radiohead "the wierd guys", but she actually did like some of their stuff I exposed her to. Especially The Bends, because that was easiest for her to digest... of course. People I've known that love all the Radiohead, are people who can really get deep into "deep" music, and are kinda weird enough to get "the weird guys".
Just cause something's 'different', doesn't mean it's automatically great!
Sure Radiohead push the boundaries, and maybe each album sounds different. But, I don't like most of their albums.
I've got them all, and I've given them all a chance. But, I'm not ashamed to admit that The Bends is by far and away my favourite Radiohead album.
If that means I can't get or understand 'deep' music, so what. I like what I like, and I'll conitnue to like it!
Cymru Am Byth
PJ albums, at the moment!! -
1,Vs 2,Vitalogy 3,No Code 4,Yield 5,Ten 6,Backspacer, 7Pearl Jam 8,Binaural 9,Riot Act.
If your gonna say In Rainbows is weak, back it up. I never really understood people on this board who post simple answers to these complex issues, or interesting issues. Telling me an album is weak, means nothing to me. Why is it weak?
I'm not going to say In Rainbows was a weak album, I enjoyed a handful of tracks, but it wasn't jaw dropping spectacular either, in my opinion. I think when the dust has fully settled and a decade has gone by people will remember this album for the "pay as you please" arrangement rather than the content of the work on the album.
what i am trying to get across here is, the reinvention aspect of radiohead. They change with every album. No album sounds the same, and they continually seek new sounds and new ways of expressing themselves.
In Rainbows is revolutionary precisely because it wasnt "jaw droppingly spectacular". Most of us, myself included, got the link via WASTE on Oct 10,2007 and expected to hear an album of bizaare sounds, of blips and bloops, of songs made mostly on protools, of an experimental, wierd sounding album. Instead we got the most accesible, and digestible radiohead album since Pablo Honey, and an album that doesnt focus on the despair in an technologically entrenched society like every Radiohead album since Ok Computer, but rather we all got an album mostly made up of love songs, relationship songs, personal songs.
That to me is revolutionary. Its what bands wish they were doing. Surprising their audience. The fact that the album was well recieved only sweetens that notion.
First they blow peoples minds and expectations by becoming this experimental, genre defying, bizaare sounding band. The change from Pablo to Kid A was unreal and unique and special. then they blow minds again as well as expectations, by not conforming to the prevailing idea of what radiohead should sound like.
You have basically just described Geffen era Sonic Youth. If I may borrow from your previous statement:
"Rather Ripped" is revolutionary precisely because it wasnt "jaw droppingly spectacular". Most of us...expected to hear an album of bizaare sounds, of blips and bloops, of songs made mostly on protools, of an experimental, wierd sounding album. Instead we got the most accesible, and digestible "Sonic Youth" album since "Goo", and an album that doesnt focus on the despair in an technologically entrenched society like every "Sonic Youth" album since "Washing Machine / A 1000 Leaves", but rather we all got an album mostly made up of love songs, relationship songs, personal songs.
Just cause something's 'different', doesn't mean it's automatically great!
Sure Radiohead push the boundaries, and maybe each album sounds different. But, I don't like most of their albums.
I've got them all, and I've given them all a chance. But, I'm not ashamed to admit that The Bends is by far and away my favourite Radiohead album.
Agreed. The tunes are just freaking great... And the three pack of The Bends>High and Dry>Fake Plastic Trees is one of the best all time!
Believe me, when I was growin up, I thought the worst thing you could turn out to be was normal, So I say freaks in the most complementary way. Here's a song by a fellow freak - E.V
Radiohead is the best band of our generation. This is why no other band talks shit about them. They realize they aren't a bunch of sellouts and they do great things by their own tune. They are the best band in the world, and they never do anything that make you question the motives they have preached for years. I wish I could say that about other bands I like.
They can sell out any stadium they want, yet they chose to stay away from corporate venues. They can charge $100-200 a ticket and sell out, but they charge $40-50. They can choose to change and make songs to be liked by the mainstream and get on the radio, but they don't, they stay true to their craft. They don't take corporate money to distribute albums. They are indeed what every other band wants to be. They practice what they preach. They are the best band in the world.
Radiohead is the best band of our generation. This is why no other band talks shit about them. They realize they aren't a bunch of sellouts and they do great things by their own tune. They are the best band in the world, and they never do anything that make you question the motives they have preached for years. I wish I could say that about other bands I like.
They can sell out any stadium they want, yet they chose to stay away from corporate venues. They can charge $100-200 a ticket and sell out, but they charge $40-50. They can choose to change and make songs to be liked by the mainstream and get on the radio, but they don't, they stay true to their craft. They don't take corporate money to distribute albums. They are indeed what every other band wants to be. They practice what they preach. They are the best band in the world.
Sorry, but none of the reasons you gave in the second paragraph make them the best band in the world. It just makes them decent human beings who don't screw their fans. A lot of bands do the same.
There is no "best band in the world" - that's the beauty of music. One man's meat is another man's poison. I love Pearl Jam, but they are only "the best band in the world" to me because of how powerfully their music affects me and because they give it 100% live, they play like they won't be satisfied if 1 person out of 15,000 goes away dissapointed. But they are not THE best band in the world.
While I disagree with 'Got a hard hard head' on Radiohead's music (particularly my affinity for their last two albums), I agree that claiming one band is the "best" is ridiculous, because it all depends on the person making the claim.
Also, The Bends is amazing. The only two songs I don't like too much anymore are "Black Star" and "Sulk," and even those are pretty good. "Street Spirit" is one of my favorite songs ever.
I think theyre incredible. I recommend that people check out (1) Thom Yorke's - Eraser , and (2) Johnny Greenwoods "There Will Be Blood" soundtrack, if they havent already done so.
I still love this music ... I am not keen on the stale, overrehearsed approach to live shows that these guys have fallen into, but its still nice to return to the albums and my bootlegs now and again.
I would argue that Radiohead has created the most challenging and experimental and musically rich and textured music of any bands in the current scene.
do you know a label called Warp records? Autechre? experimental music? IDM?
If you want experimental and challenging music you should check them out. The funny thing is there is nothing completely innovative in radiohead's music, Thom Yorke has acknowledged this many times and there are a lot of interviews from the Kid A period where he states that that record's sound was influenced by Warp artists.
and frankly when you're familiar with that label the notion that radiohaed broke new ground in music history is laughable.
Anyway it doesn't change one fact: radiohead are one of the best bands in the world period but I wish people would stop saying they've redefined what music is etc.
There's no doubting the brilliance of their earlier albums. I don't think we'll see a band release three successive albums to match The Bends/Ok Computer/Kid A for a long time.
Comments
Additionally, despite conan o briens plea for us all to NOT be cynical, my worldview tends to skew to the cynical. Radioheads songs, are cyncial, Thom certainly is cynical, just read his rants on that environmental conference the last month.
Cynicism from a band with a political agenda is refreshing as well. "you can scream, you can shout it, its too late now". No question, its easy to feel this way about any number of political issues.
And, I'm allowed to have my opinion that In Rainbows was kind of weak, aren't I? I still really liked it, and enjoyed the show that I saw, but I feel like they don't quite have that edge they used to have. Maybe they'll surprise us again and bring it back on the next album (if they make one) - we'll see.
Phila, PA 4/28/16; Phila, PA 4/29/16; Fenway Park 8/7/16; Fenway Park 9/2/18; Asbury Park 9/18/21; Camden 9/14/22;
Las Vegas 5/16/24; Las Vegas 5/18/24; Phila, PA 9/7/24; Phila, PA 9/9/24; Baltimore Arena 9/12/24
Tres Mtns - TLA 3/23/11; EV - Tower Theatre 6/25/11; Temple of the Dog - Tower Theatre 11/5/16
when did i say you couldnt have an opinion johnny? Just as you decided to get into this conservation, and on the post I just quoted, to react to my statements, and not just sit passively by, I choose to do the same. I didnt just start this thread so I could listen to others arguments and then not post my response to it. Thats silly. If you expect me to post my opinion, and then read others opinions and not comment on those, you have me confused with another person.
Your allowed to have your opinion about In Rainbows, but I am allowed to disagree with you. Just as you are free to disagree with me.
Not really sure what your point is, johnny.
I am a music obsessive. My username is not a joke. its the truth. And I know there are alot of other music fanatics on this board. To me, a more interesting coversation would have been people offering up other bands who are more important than radiohead, and who have pushed the genre as well, or maybe pushed the musical boundaries farther than radiohead if you are of that opinion.
You dont think Radiohead is as innovative as I claim, thats fine, but to my mind, few folks here have posited coherent statements on why that is the case.
If your gonna say In Rainbows is weak, back it up. I never really understood people on this board who post simple answers to these complex issues, or interesting issues. Telling me an album is weak, means nothing to me. Why is it weak?
Radiohead isnt the band every other band strives to be? Well back it up. What examples do you have to prove this?
I was under the impression this was a discussion board.
Well I'll always give them credit for evolving their sound and experimenting. But as a fan, their last few albums haven't really grabbed a hold of me. I loved the Kid A/Amensiac stuff, but only like a few tracks here and there from the last two. A band whose sound changes so often is bound to have a few fans drop off here and there I guess. But they're still a band whose new album I'll always check out.
Pearl Jam bootlegs:
http://wegotshit.blogspot.com
Used to live there. The rock stations suck ass there. Hell, radio is better out of Amarillo than Dallas.
Certainly, I've gone from an avid fan to showing very little interest in what they're doing. The key decision that the band have to make is which way their music develops on the next album. If it's The Bends/Ok Computer orientated then it'll be huge. If they follow the path of Hail To The Thief/In Rainbows, I believe they would lose a large part of their initial fanbase.
Like I said, overall I do like In Rainbows - Nude, Weird Fishes, All I Need, & Jigsaw are just amazing songs. On the other hand, 15 Steps doesn't really go anywhere, Faust Arp is incredibly boring, Reckoner seems to not have much backbone, and the outro of Videotape is rambling. Also, I was supposed to pay 40 pounds for 6 extra songs? This is a solid, not spectacular, album. Aside from the overhyped "Pay what you want" thing, it's not all that innovative either. I actually like Hail to the Thief more. I just get the feeling that this band is in their twilight. Believe me, I hope they prove me wrong!
Phila, PA 4/28/16; Phila, PA 4/29/16; Fenway Park 8/7/16; Fenway Park 9/2/18; Asbury Park 9/18/21; Camden 9/14/22;
Las Vegas 5/16/24; Las Vegas 5/18/24; Phila, PA 9/7/24; Phila, PA 9/9/24; Baltimore Arena 9/12/24
Tres Mtns - TLA 3/23/11; EV - Tower Theatre 6/25/11; Temple of the Dog - Tower Theatre 11/5/16
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a0lUDuWcn28
This is what every band (should) strives for. An audience that has grown, and healed with them.
The rest of your post is the same kind of dribble I hear from Floyd fans. Except... Dark Side Of The Moon>Radioheads catalog.
sure. I dont think ed is jealous of radiohead. But he has also called out thom by name as being one of the shining examples of class in the music industry, and we know that the band seriously considered doing a similar "pay what you what" thing ala In Rainbows, when they were talking about releasing Backspacer. I also think if you talked to Ed and the guys, they would say they admire Radiohead immensely, and that the reasons for their admiration, would be things along the line of what i outlined in my posts up above. Beyond that, I think the band hugely respects Radiohead for their political activism.
As far as you saying "this" is what bands strive for, Radiohead have struggled in similar ways to Pearl Jam. I dont think radiohead, luckily ever went through anything like the tragedy at Roskilde, but Thom and Ed are very similar, both politically, and in terms of what their persona is. Neither Thom nor Ed, really craved the spotlight, and when both bands broke into the mainstream, Thom and Ed had a very hard time dealing with this. Both bands obviously nearly split up because of this. You dont think Radioheads fan base has grown and healed with them?
yep cause thom yorke is obviously not intelligent, and what he writes about is usually the standard rock star fare of girls, cars, money, drugs and drinking and groupies
thanks for pointing that out, it helps the conversation, friend!
I always check out what they're doing & I have all their albums. But, like many have said already, there are dozens of other bands I prefer listening to.
PJ albums, at the moment!! -
1,Vs 2,Vitalogy 3,No Code 4,Yield 5,Ten 6,Backspacer, 7Pearl Jam 8,Binaural 9,Riot Act.
Awww shut up. Nancy Nice.
I'm not going to say In Rainbows was a weak album, I enjoyed a handful of tracks, but it wasn't jaw dropping spectacular either, in my opinion. I think when the dust has fully settled and a decade has gone by people will remember this album for the "pay as you please" arrangement rather than the content of the work on the album.
what i am trying to get across here is, the reinvention aspect of radiohead. They change with every album. No album sounds the same, and they continually seek new sounds and new ways of expressing themselves.
In Rainbows is revolutionary precisely because it wasnt "jaw droppingly spectacular". Most of us, myself included, got the link via WASTE on Oct 10,2007 and expected to hear an album of bizaare sounds, of blips and bloops, of songs made mostly on protools, of an experimental, wierd sounding album. Instead we got the most accesible, and digestible radiohead album since Pablo Honey, and an album that doesnt focus on the despair in an technologically entrenched society like every Radiohead album since Ok Computer, but rather we all got an album mostly made up of love songs, relationship songs, personal songs.
That to me is revolutionary. Its what bands wish they were doing. Surprising their audience. The fact that the album was well recieved only sweetens that notion.
First they blow peoples minds and expectations by becoming this experimental, genre defying, bizaare sounding band. The change from Pablo to Kid A was unreal and unique and special. then they blow minds again as well as expectations, by not conforming to the prevailing idea of what radiohead should sound like.
Sure Radiohead push the boundaries, and maybe each album sounds different. But, I don't like most of their albums.
I've got them all, and I've given them all a chance. But, I'm not ashamed to admit that The Bends is by far and away my favourite Radiohead album.
If that means I can't get or understand 'deep' music, so what. I like what I like, and I'll conitnue to like it!
PJ albums, at the moment!! -
1,Vs 2,Vitalogy 3,No Code 4,Yield 5,Ten 6,Backspacer, 7Pearl Jam 8,Binaural 9,Riot Act.
You have basically just described Geffen era Sonic Youth. If I may borrow from your previous statement:
"Rather Ripped" is revolutionary precisely because it wasnt "jaw droppingly spectacular". Most of us...expected to hear an album of bizaare sounds, of blips and bloops, of songs made mostly on protools, of an experimental, wierd sounding album. Instead we got the most accesible, and digestible "Sonic Youth" album since "Goo", and an album that doesnt focus on the despair in an technologically entrenched society like every "Sonic Youth" album since "Washing Machine / A 1000 Leaves", but rather we all got an album mostly made up of love songs, relationship songs, personal songs.
In other words, it's been done.
They can sell out any stadium they want, yet they chose to stay away from corporate venues. They can charge $100-200 a ticket and sell out, but they charge $40-50. They can choose to change and make songs to be liked by the mainstream and get on the radio, but they don't, they stay true to their craft. They don't take corporate money to distribute albums. They are indeed what every other band wants to be. They practice what they preach. They are the best band in the world.
Sorry, but none of the reasons you gave in the second paragraph make them the best band in the world. It just makes them decent human beings who don't screw their fans. A lot of bands do the same.
There is no "best band in the world" - that's the beauty of music. One man's meat is another man's poison. I love Pearl Jam, but they are only "the best band in the world" to me because of how powerfully their music affects me and because they give it 100% live, they play like they won't be satisfied if 1 person out of 15,000 goes away dissapointed. But they are not THE best band in the world.
Also, The Bends is amazing. The only two songs I don't like too much anymore are "Black Star" and "Sulk," and even those are pretty good. "Street Spirit" is one of my favorite songs ever.
Both very brilliant.
please?
do you know a label called Warp records? Autechre? experimental music? IDM?
If you want experimental and challenging music you should check them out. The funny thing is there is nothing completely innovative in radiohead's music, Thom Yorke has acknowledged this many times and there are a lot of interviews from the Kid A period where he states that that record's sound was influenced by Warp artists.
and frankly when you're familiar with that label the notion that radiohaed broke new ground in music history is laughable.
Anyway it doesn't change one fact: radiohead are one of the best bands in the world period but I wish people would stop saying they've redefined what music is etc.
Igot it in 1998 and i never get bored of it.