Anyone else prefer Radioheads's post OK Computer albums?

JWBusher wrote:

Radiohead started as indie darlings in America and their videos mostly appeared on Alternative Nation and 120 Minutes. The album that made them superstars here was "OK Computer" and it was because of the "Paranoid Android" and "Karma Police" videos that people went out and bought the album and the word spread far and wide that it was a fantastic album and their American cult swelled to massive, Grateful Dead-like proportions. "Kid A" was the most highly anticipated album of 1999, that's why it hit #1 when it was released. A lot of people, such as yourself, hated it and thought it was a pretentious load of shit. Americans hated it because it didn't sound like "OK Computer". They performed "National Anthem" on Saturday Night Live and it left people scratching their heads, and rightfully so.

And Thom's vocals don't sound like whining to me. You're obviously sour about Kid A and haven't gotten over it yet. I also don't buy into this shit about their songs not having melody. ALL of their songs have a melody, they just don't hit you over the head with an indie pop shit stick like The Bends does.

glasshouse wrote:

that my friend is the truth. the same goes for most music critics as well - most of them don't have their own opinions, they just play it safe. Radiohead will always be a safe bet - because of their (existing) universal critical acclaim.

for instance: http://www.metacritic.com/music/artists/radiohead/inrainbows?q=in%20rainbows

88% ???~ for fuck sakes! this album may have some moments, but in no way whatsoever will i rate this release as one of the best of the year.

Jeremy1012 wrote:

Johnny Greenwood sees himself as a musician, not just a guitarist, and he is one. A Consummate musician. who the hell are you to tell him what to play? It's his choice. I'm much more interested in the fact that someone better known for churning out mediocre riffs like Creep has gone on to experiment with a variety of instruments and sounds as obscure as the Ondes Martenot. Have you ever thought that the creativity-stifling attitude of 'fans' like you is what perpetuates this kind of experimentation?

facepollution wrote:

Like people have said in other threads, there are plenty of other artists who make music like Radiohead, what they're doing is not that original. But because it's THE ALMIGHTY RADIOHEAD, who can do no wrong, and who are so enigmatic and on such another level to everyone else, people lap it up as if it's the second coming.

Jeremy1012 wrote:

I said he's more well known for riffs like Creep, which is true. You seem to miss my point completely about the guitar thing. whether or not it is a waste of Johnny's talent for him not to play guitar more, I wouldn't wish for a second for him to keep churning out stuff that he doesn't want to play. I'd much rather see him challenge himself and do what he wants to do because an artist's music is far more likely to be passionate if their heart is in it. If he goes back to more guitar playing, good on him. I just don't like yearning for the past when the present is, to my ears, infinitely more interesting.

You say you aren't trying to tell them to do anything and yet you openly admit your resistance to change. you say you think they should have continued to make guitar albums. It's not really for you to say is it? bands evolve, you don't own them. move with it or move to something else. for as many fans like you who feel cheated by a band you like changing their sound until you don't recognise or even like them anymore, there are just as many fans who would have felt cheated if Radiohead kept making The Bends for 12 years.

facepollution wrote:

Wow, aggression issues dude, that aint cool. I'm only debating with you here. I'm not moaning, merely expressing my point of view just like you are. And cool you must have been a super advanced 9 year old to appreciate something as epic as OK Computer, I'm impressed you even understood the concept of sophistication at such a tender age.

PS, The new album isn't as accessible as OK Computer.

MapleTea wrote:

I think I might have said this once before in another thread...but as much as I love Radiohead, what they have done over the years really is not that impressive, experimentally.

Despite what the majority of critics think, i think Radiohead have made it easier for themselves to write songs and albums after moving into a more electronic direction.

Take Pearl jam for example, 8 guitar, bass and drum based records and they have managed to push boundaries along the way within that framework. Not easy to do. Especially when you consider the difficulty in making even the slightest attempts to be original and experimental within that framework. There is not a hell of alot that you can do that has not been done before.

Radiohead on the other hand have basically "downed tools" and picked up another set to work with, giving them much more room to "sound different", which, to the untrained ear, appears groundbreaking and hugely experimentally.
When in fact, the majority of their songs post OK Computer are very simple compositions that are, on the whole, less complex musically than alot of their earlier work. That said, it does not mean that this music is not brilliant or intelligent, just not really that complex or experimental when viewed as music. In other words, Radiohead's music post Ok Computer, when played within the traditional drum, guitar and bass format is really anything new or different musically, it's just played within a different format.

Long story short, it is lot more difficult IMO to write 8 albums within the traditional format and push boundaries and make subtle changes to the artform in the process than it would be to totally reininvent yourself and make music within a different format.

All Radiohead have done is create for themselves more room to move...Have they really been challenging themselves musically or making things easier for themselves...

Soupy wrote:

Radiohead are middle aged, middle class tossers.