On June 14 2006 02:08 zulu_nation8 wrote: can someone recommend me an album thats changed their taste in music, perspective on life, etc, something that is really really deep. I dont care what genre, but preferably after the 90s and not really well known.
why preferably after the 90s? ><
my friends are the same, they ignore oldies because of the fact, and all I listen to now are oldies because, well, the good stuff was made back then imo (my opinion, don't flame!).
i have some pink floyd, reason i dont listen to oldies much is because everyone around me in school and with whom i grew up with all have screen names like tedzepplin and everytime i hang out with them theyd play something like the who and it all just influenced me too much against my will so that i wont listen to it consciously. It's cool to trace back all the influences of the bands i like but all in all i just want something new and experimental
Muse is a pretty good post 90's band, the singer sounds "exactly" like Thom Yorke. Most of their stuff is a little harder than Radiohead's post OK Computer tracks, more like the pablo honey sound. Absolution and Showbiz are two good albums, worth a listen at least.
I kinda agree with a-game, especially this little masterpiece
there are people who are just a little "too into it" in almost any activity/hobby. some people don't like to eat normally, they like to go on forums and discuss with others how they make their omelettes "with just a titch of libyan parsely, a pinch of costa rican oregano, a dash of siberian yellow wolf ginger, mongolian falcon eggs, norwegian goats milk (only from goats younger than 3!), argentinian cheese from the de la paso elite ranch (membership required!)" and they just drone on and on to each other about all of their stupid idosyncrasies when eating. me i just eat a fucking omelette, it's food it turns into mush in your stomach and then most of it turns into shit, it's not a masterpiece. if you spend that much time/effort analysing your food (or your music) then yes, it's a bit overdoing it.
I feel a-game is right in analyzing how the band itself approaches its music. It's NOT as fucking serious as some people think. And even though I really don't care about people's tastes, sometimes people are "too into it". There was a thread a few weeks back with a link to a video featuring, supposedly champion guitarists, I've forgotten who it was. It was the usual concert solo = a lot of noise. Technically great, but without any feel whatsoever. It really sounded like something a 3-year old would do, at first try. Random notes all the way. Finally someone stepped into the thread and questioned the greatness behind it, upon which this someone got thoroughly flamed. That's kinda what's happening here with a-game. An omelette is a fucking omelette, the National Anthem is a song without any ingenuity but a lot of random noise, I feel I personally could have composed something ten times better that a lot more people would respond to and be able to appreciate. And I am a BIG fan of Radiohead.
But whatever, people like what they like. Personally I agree with a-game.
Radiohead isn't normally my kind of music but then again Radiohead has their own style or actually you never know what a song is gonna sound like. At least that is how I see them Also, I tend to think they are a little bit too artsy...
there are people who are just a little "too into it" in almost any activity/hobby. some people don't like to eat normally, they like to go on forums and discuss with others how they make their omelettes "with just a titch of libyan parsely, a pinch of costa rican oregano, a dash of siberian yellow wolf ginger, mongolian falcon eggs, norwegian goats milk (only from goats younger than 3!), argentinian cheese from the de la paso elite ranch (membership required!)" and they just drone on and on to each other about all of their stupid idosyncrasies when eating. me i just eat a fucking omelette, it's food it turns into mush in your stomach and then most of it turns into shit, it's not a masterpiece. if you spend that much time/effort analysing your food (or your music) then yes, it's a bit overdoing it.
I feel a-game is right in analyzing how the band itself approaches its music. It's NOT as fucking serious as some people think. And even though I really don't care about people's tastes, sometimes people are "too into it". There was a thread a few weeks back with a link to a video featuring, supposedly champion guitarists, I've forgotten who it was. It was the usual concert solo = a lot of noise. Technically great, but without any feel whatsoever. It really sounded like something a 3-year old would do, at first try. Random notes all the way. Finally someone stepped into the thread and questioned the greatness behind it, upon which this someone got thoroughly flamed. That's kinda what's happening here with a-game. An omelette is a fucking omelette, the National Anthem is a song without any ingenuity but a lot of random noise, I feel I personally could have composed something ten times better that a lot more people would respond to and be able to appreciate. And I am a BIG fan of Radiohead.
But whatever, people like what they like. Personally I agree with a-game.
What's the criteria to determine the difference between 'passionate/interested' and 'fanaticly overboard'.
I think the problem most have with a-game is that he is acting as an authority about which is which. He has no validation for such a position. He belittles and insults the fans of this thread because what they find passionate, he trivializes by calling it an 'over-the-top waste of time'.
This thread was made with the purpose of inviting people who are passionate about Radioheads music. The degree of passion is not an issue. However, i doubt anyone would create a thread about passion just to invite others to insult those who are passionate.
I personally think religion is a tragic waste of time. I think religion is one of the worst things ever created in the history of our race. I think people over-analyze the words of the bible instead of understanding the intent behind what they're trying to convey. So to me it would make sense to stay out of a 'what are your thoughts on the bible' thread. Or, at the very least, if all i could contribute were insults and negativity, i'd read the thread and keep my trap shut.
Aditionally, i am curious as to how you became aware of the intentions behind Radioheads lyrics. I find it hard to believe that Radiohead could produce such songs as Electioneering and How to Disappear Completely without having more than just 'a little random thought and a good time' put into it. If the background behind these songs is so simple, why would the lyrics not be equally as simple. And these 2 songs are two that have obvious thought put behind them. Then you have Let Down which is absolutely brilliant and the meaning is not clear at all. I have a hard time agreeing that anyone giving thought to Let Down is 'fanatical'.
Most importantly, i believe that trivializing ones attempts to 'get into' music is unjust - even if no meaning was put into that music. Quite frankly, i don't give a rats ass if a song is completely random. If i enjoy the song and enjoy finding my own meaning in it, then good for me! No one else should have the iniquity to demean or trivialize my experience. For all you know, the meaning i find in Radiohead's music is much deeper, broad, and fulfilling than any meaning they could have attributed to their accidental fluke of a masterpiece!
Right. Well, mostly it was the omelette quote that I agreed with, I haven't actually read the entire thread. But he put the nail on the head with the omelette thing; whether or not that quote applies to anyone in this thread, I don't know and don't care, but certainly there are people who are extremely elitist about their taste in arts. I think that's what he touched on, that's what I recognized and liked.
Thom himself has said that there are a lot of people who think Radiohead is a 100% serious band, where every little word of every song has some ingenuity behind it. They don't take themselves half as seriously as many of their fans do. I'm not out to trivialize anyone's attempts to "get into" music at all. If you found out the meaning of life listening to High and dry, more power to you. But there's a fine line between artsy and elitist, one that many cross without seeing it themselves. Don't tell me you've never met a single Radiohead fan who didn't strike you as elitist. You'd either be lying, or you haven't met enough Radiohead fans.
I think what it boils down to in the end is that I recognize something in a-game's posts that I can relate to; general unwillingness to become totally fanatic with something. Sure I can be deeply moved by a good music piece as much as anyone else, but I don't go overboard and certainly the last emotion I'd feel if someone didn't agree with my music taste, is to be offended. Just the length of this thread alone goes to show how easily offended people are, unless I missed something particularly offensive that a-game said.
On June 13 2006 20:46 mrmin123 wrote: I like The National Anthem because it's just so out there. The music itself and the vocals blend together perfectly in a screeching, nonsensical way. There is no order, no harmony, just a cacophony of sounds that together build up into this brilliant nonstop audible sensation, that abruptly breaks down to a more mellowed down version of itself into a confusing finale.
Yet everything somehow makes sense.
this is what mrmin said, this could be straight out of a high school music theory paper, how in the world do you get fanaticism from three intepretive sentences. Just because you guys dont like "high" art doesnt mean you have to take it out on radiohead fans.
i think if mrmin said instead "national anthem" is a sick song with no harmony and its just like a crazy song man, no flames wouldve resulted in this thread, but the extra wording and analysis seemed to really disturb some people
Anyone gotten Thom Yorke's albumn, The Eraser yet? I was pretty dissapointed to be honest, I liked about 4 of the 9 tracks, and I thought Cymbal rush would be included on the next Radiohead albumn rather than on Thom's with a bunch of weird electronic crap added to it.
On June 14 2006 15:36 Stygg wrote: Right. Well, mostly it was the omelette quote that I agreed with, I haven't actually read the entire thread. But he put the nail on the head with the omelette thing; whether or not that quote applies to anyone in this thread, I don't know and don't care, but certainly there are people who are extremely elitist about their taste in arts. I think that's what he touched on, that's what I recognized and liked.
Thom himself has said that there are a lot of people who think Radiohead is a 100% serious band, where every little word of every song has some ingenuity behind it. They don't take themselves half as seriously as many of their fans do. I'm not out to trivialize anyone's attempts to "get into" music at all. If you found out the meaning of life listening to High and dry, more power to you. But there's a fine line between artsy and elitist, one that many cross without seeing it themselves. Don't tell me you've never met a single Radiohead fan who didn't strike you as elitist. You'd either be lying, or you haven't met enough Radiohead fans.
I think what it boils down to in the end is that I recognize something in a-game's posts that I can relate to; general unwillingness to become totally fanatic with something. Sure I can be deeply moved by a good music piece as much as anyone else, but I don't go overboard and certainly the last emotion I'd feel if someone didn't agree with my music taste, is to be offended. Just the length of this thread alone goes to show how easily offended people are, unless I missed something particularly offensive that a-game said.
yeh, i see what you mean.
I'm certainly in the same boat (in fact, i wrote a post defending him when it occurred to me that regardless of the merit of what he had to say, this wasn't the thread to say it).
I (typically) avoid music fanatics as they all they talk about is music, aren't interested in your opinions, and get offended if you don't agree with theirs.
Finding your own meaning to the song... Now.. with radiohead you can do that... But with: "The Candyshop"... can't really take that as a love ballad. I'm not makin' a point. Just amusin' myself.
Sometimes I feel a band makes a point to play material that isn't popular purely because of that fact. I think this is an example of that.
I'm not saying it's a bad song, but it not worthy of being the final song of the final encore. I saw Radiohead in Toronto last week and it was an incredible show, but that last song kinda finished it in an anti-climatic way.
EPT
