Radiohead Tour?

soulsinging · July 2009

Indifference wrote:

Radiohead equals a snoozer of a show.....wouldn't go with a free ticket. Like some songs/albums.

Their set at Lollapalooza was one of the most boring music experiences of my life. Thom played about 3 straight piano ballads that were just him tinkling a few keys randomly while moaning, and then he had the balls to get up to the mic and tell the crowd that they were too quiet and boring. WTF? I can assure you Thom, the crowd was not quiet and boring all weekend or during PJ's set the year before... perhaps you might want to rethink your set selection if you want a little energy from the crowd.

Their run of albums from Kid A-Hail to the Thief is incredibly inconsistent and overrated. But In Rainbows is a better album than anything PJ has done since Binaural.

cbbjr · July 2009

soulsinging wrote:

Their set at Lollapalooza was one of the most boring music experiences of my life.

I could definitely see them not coming off well headlining a festival (even though they seem to headline half of them) when you have listened to "normal" music all day. You have to be in the right mood. They are my second favorite band after PJ, and the show I saw on the In Rainbows tour was visually the best I have seen, but I would much rather see them at a venue in which I could sit down and take it all in. Not exactly a band that makes you jump up and down for three hours.

Dissidentman · July 2009

Eduardo Veduardo. wrote:

Dissidentman wrote:

Who gives a rats ass who has more talent, one band makes music that my ears enjoy, the other does not...

can't argue with that logic...I like it

well thank you...

kiljoythemerciful · July 2009

I don't think radiohead has done anything innovative since Kid A. I like In Rainbows, but it sounds like a throwback to the bends. I guess the way they released it was innovative, but the music itself? The records following Kid A were basically poorer versions of that album. Amnesiac and Hail to the Thief, were albums with some good tracks, but I don't think they paid off as well. This is basically how I feel about Binaural, Riot Act.

Anyways, I find both bands (and this is true of most creative endeavors that have legs) had an explosive creative period, and have struggled in some sense to match that period after a certain point. Pearl Jam Ten-Yield (1991-1998) and Radiohead The Bends-Kid A (1993-99). I like radiohead's experimental music, but I don't see how that makes them more talented. The other difference which allows for perhaps more creativity, or self-indulgence depending on your view point, is that Radiohead is largely the vehicle of one man with the creative support of four other musicians.

I love both bands.

kiljoythemerciful · July 2009

Indifference71 wrote:

drew0 wrote:

Radiohead are very talented, but they need to come down off their high horse and so do their fans. I love Radiohead, but their fans constantly talking about how great they are and Thom & the boys taking themselves way to seriously really pisses me off sometimes.

+1 to that for sure!

I've always found the fan base of these bands to be very similar. Very defensive of the band and generally delusional about their musical abilities.

Jason P · July 2009

Both bands put on great live shows. I've seen Radiohead three times and each show has been memorable. But both band do have strange touring ideologies of late. At least Radiohead came to Indy.

thunderDAN · July 2009

drew0 wrote:

Radiohead are very talented, but they need to come down off their high horse and so do their fans. I love Radiohead, but their fans constantly talking about how great they are and Thom & the boys taking themselves way to seriously really pisses me off sometimes.

who is taking themselves too seriously, the band that charges $55 a ticket or the one who charges $85?. The one who gives their album away or the one who has to sign a deal with Wal Mart to sell it?

icemanap · July 2009

thunderDAN wrote:

Then there's the overexcited-crowd rumor. Concertgoers at the State Theatre were moshing so hard, the story goes, that they offended the artsy sensibilities of Radiohead, who wrote off rowdy Detroit Rock City for good.

My word, god forbid anyone wanting to have a good tme at a Raidohead gig. That's really frowned upon - lets just go to a gig and be upset. Very, very talented band bunch of musicians but when I listen to a Radiohead song, it doesn't excatly help my mood!

JordyWordy · July 2009

kiljoythemerciful wrote:

Anyways, I find both bands (and this is true of most creative endeavors that have legs) had an explosive creative period, and have struggled in some sense to match that period after a certain point. Pearl Jam Ten-Yield (1991-1998) and Radiohead The Bends-Kid A (1993-99). I like radiohead's experimental music, but I don't see how that makes them more talented. The other difference which allows for perhaps more creativity, or self-indulgence depending on your view point, is that Radiohead is largely the vehicle of one man with the creative support of four other musicians.

I love both bands.

I agree with a lot of what you're saying, and personally i cant understand how people would got to a Radiohead show and not at least enjoy some of the rockier/heavier songs ..... National Anthem, Paranoid Android, Iron Lung, There There, etc.

I think the point about Radiohead being "more talented" relates to the fact that their songs are generally FAR more difficult to perform live than your average PJ song. Thats all. The timings, the tunings, the weird chords, the electronics, the multi-instrument songs.... etc. Granted, if someone doesnt like their music, those factors arent going to win them over.

I dont think Radiohead is a Thom Yorke vehicle??? No more so than PJ is "Ed Vedders band" anyway? Johnny Greenwood writes a huge amount of their material. He wrote the score for There Will Be Blood too.

Kilgore_Trout · July 2009

atleast we can all agree that NIN is a better band than PJ

oh and radiohead rocks... tied with PJ in my book

benjs · July 2009

sgossard3 wrote:

atleast we can all agree that NIN is a better band than PJ

oh and radiohead rocks... tied with PJ in my book

I think we should all cut the crap. This isn't an apples with apples comparison - it's music - one of the most subjective topics I know of. I don't think I could say I like NIN, Pearl Jam, or Radiohead more. Each of them are great in my opinion, and I find time for all of them, and could not tell you honestly which I preferred, because in a day or two, it can change.

ARazorbackguy1 · July 2009

That's funny, cause I saw them at the UMB bank pavilion in St. Louis and the superpages.com center in Dallas.

Radioheads fight with clear channel venues is about like PJ vs ticketbastards. RH is a great band and so is Pearl Jam. It's not like they are singing the same songs or anything. They can both be great at the same time.

Kilgore_Trout · July 2009

benjs wrote:

sgossard3 wrote:

atleast we can all agree that NIN is a better band than PJ

oh and radiohead rocks... tied with PJ in my book

I think we should all cut the crap. This isn't an apples with apples comparison - it's music - one of the most subjective topics I know of. I don't think I could say I like NIN, Pearl Jam, or Radiohead more. Each of them are great in my opinion, and I find time for all of them, and could not tell you honestly which I preferred, because in a day or two, it can change.

i hear ya... its true... i was just playin

but in all honestly PJ continues to slip in my standings while other bands go above and beyond for their fans, release amazing albums, and are truly innovative with album release, merch, etc

backspacer has to be a classic!

Flagg · July 2009

At least Radiohead says why they won't play somewhere.

Pearl Jam keeps it to themselves and then watches their fans come up with wacko theories and call each other names.

thunderDAN · July 2009

Flagg wrote:

At least Radiohead says why they won't play somewhere.

Pearl Jam keeps it to themselves and then watches their fans come up with wacko theories and call each other names.

That is cool how Radiohead does it. They say back during the winter or early spring they are playing 15 dates and give the cities so you can make plans accordingly. Pearl Jam releases a little here and a little there so you could plan a big trip and have them announce a date in your town in the meantime

mvw · July 2009

I'm going to the Radiohead message board to talk about how great and innovative Pearl Jam are! :roll:
Honestly, let's stick to PJ here. We all have our own opinions on whether Radiohead is a good band or not and that's fine. I don't like them and I really don't care if any of you do or don't. If people want to talk about Radiohead then lets move it to the "Other Music" thread forum. The board here should just be about Peace, Love, & Pearl Jam.

DewieCox · July 2009

PJ has made more(at least as many) great albums than Radiohead and there's no question who the better live band is.

I'll take Ed's lyrics and singing over Thom's anyday

Johnny is probably the all around best guitarist in either band, but I can't think Stone is too far behind.

Matt C is a more talented drummer, he just hasn't showed it with PJ

Can't name the bassist in Radiohead, but he definitely plays cooler stuff than Jeff.

What exactly has Radiohead done that's innovative besides OK Computer and the IR release?

The Creed comments and all that are way off base. We don't blame Radiohead for the crappy music they've inspired, do we?

NIN shouldn't be mentioned in the same breath as Radiohead and PJ.

benjs · July 2009

DewieCox wrote:

What exactly has Radiohead done that's innovative besides OK Computer and the IR release?

Amnesiac, Kid A, and Hail to the Thief. To have five albums in a catalog that are all pretty radically different from each other and all completely innovative is quite the feat in my opinion.

DewieCox · July 2009

benjs wrote:

DewieCox wrote:

What exactly has Radiohead done that's innovative besides OK Computer and the IR release?

Amnesiac, Kid A, and Hail to the Thief. To have five albums in a catalog that are all pretty radically different from each other and all completely innovative is quite the feat in my opinion.

Those 3 albums sound alot alike, and Kid A is the only one of those that is really that good.

In Rainbows, OKC, and The Bends all sound like a good mix of what they're about and they're truly great albums, along with Kid A. The other 2 not so much.

OceansJenny · July 2009

thunderDAN wrote:

mvw wrote:

thunderDAN wrote:

they aren't Radiohead because:

1)Radiohead preaches anti-corporation (like Pearl Jam) and when touring they try to avoid places with corporate sponsorship. So they try to avoid the "Verizon Center" when they can play somewhere else. This is why they never play Detroit. Also, when they do play places that have advertising, they pay to take the banners down.

Pearl Jam meanwhile signs deals with Verizon and Target

2)Radiohead charges $55-60 per ticket (during a time gas was $4 a gallon mind you), Pearl Jam charges $80+

3)Radiohead disperses shows. They play the whole country and don't just single out the North East and West

4)Radiohead sucks and thom yorke is a whiney bitch.

haha. Radiohead is more talented than Pearl Jam. I love Pearl Jam, but there is nothing innovative or creative about them. They are the reason bands like Creed exist and are compared to them. It's the reason Radiohead is often referred to as "the best band in the world" and why when you speak of Pearl Jam the first thing people ask is "oh they are still around?'

just sayin

Ugh. Radiohead is terrible. Bunch of slow wailey music. BLAHHH. Someone made me get that yellowly ugly album with the guy on it and I ended up selling it on eBay after 1 listen.

Radiohead Tour?

Comments

Categories