EPTCan someone explain to me why all the music radiohead has made since (and including) Kit-A has sucked? Some of it sounds like they've got a couple downies in charge of writing the music...
Nevermind vs OK Computer - Page 2
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
IdiotWind
Canada321 Posts
Can someone explain to me why all the music radiohead has made since (and including) Kit-A has sucked? Some of it sounds like they've got a couple downies in charge of writing the music... | ||
|
PHauxE
United States69 Posts
On February 15 2007 21:00 IdiotWind wrote: Also : Can someone explain to me why all the music radiohead has made since (and including) Kit-A has sucked? Some of it sounds like they've got a couple downies in charge of writing the music... When I first started listening to Radiohead, it was Paranoid Android (because of the map in starcraft, lol), and at first, I hated most of their other songs. The next song I found I liked was Creep. Eventually picked up OK Computer, didn't listen to many of the songs on it, but eventually, I listened to more and more of the album, and the music just grew on me. I can't really explain it any other way. Now it's so 'bad' that I can't find a Radiohead song I don't like ~_~; They definitely got more 'out there' as their albums kept going on, but ironically, it's those albums that ended up being the better ones for me. The whole process of going through the groups music was a giant paradox in the end. | ||
|
z7-TranCe
Canada3158 Posts
actual listening value? not so much | ||
BroOd
Austin10831 Posts
On February 15 2007 21:06 z7-TranCe wrote: anyone hear thom yorke's new album? makes a great game - "guess the drug he was on when he wrote.." actual listening value? not so much I honestly think he was just getting some stuff out of his system, especially considering some of the new radiohead songs. I think Analyse and Skip Divided are good songs though. | ||
|
Wysp
Canada2299 Posts
On February 15 2007 21:00 IdiotWind wrote: Also : Can someone explain to me why all the music radiohead has made since (and including) Kit-A has sucked? Some of it sounds like they've got a couple downies in charge of writing the music... well, thom yorke and co. are a fairly 'weird' bunch. They seen themselves being imitated again after OK Computer and Thom Yorke said in interviews he began to hate his voice because it. (I know this is strange, but this is apperantly how the man thinks.) This along with there love of electronic music made them want to try something different, and they did. I used to loathe Kid A/Amnesiac, but after about 6 months since the first few attempts to listen to them something clicked and I began to love them and gradually over the last year I've started to love the two albums. Hail to the Thief is pretty easy listening to anyone into rock or metal, iunno why you wouldn't like it if you like OK Computer. | ||
|
Wysp
Canada2299 Posts
On February 15 2007 21:06 z7-TranCe wrote: anyone hear thom yorke's new album? makes a great game - "guess the drug he was on when he wrote.." actual listening value? not so much I think the song "The Eraser" is superb. Harrowdown Hill is really good too. | ||
|
Adaptation
Canada427 Posts
As for Thom Yorke, is album was quite good, in particular ''The Eraser'' and ''The Clock''. Anyone knows when Radiohead's next album is schedualed? | ||
|
Wysp
Canada2299 Posts
| ||
|
chobopeon
United States7342 Posts
On February 15 2007 21:06 z7-TranCe wrote: anyone hear thom yorke's new album? makes a great game - "guess the drug he was on when he wrote.." actual listening value? not so much the second half of the album is pretty good, i think the first half i barely play. | ||
|
FearlessFlyingFrog
89 Posts
On February 15 2007 20:46 SweeTLemonS[TPR] wrote: Just because something is popular doesn't mean it's good. Nirvana sucked ass, too, for the record. My sentiments exactly. | ||
|
BroOd
Austin10831 Posts
Thanks for the enlightenment. | ||
|
Wysp
Canada2299 Posts
"why would you say something so inflammatory? They are popular and critically accliamed, clearly not bad even though they arn't your preference." It doesn't suck ass. You don't enjoy it, but you should respect it. To draw example from a far more acclaimed and popular piece of art, I do not enjoy the Mona Lisa. Do I respect it? Certainly. its disgusting that you would so thoughtless try to agitate people. If you tried to qualify your opinion I could respect you as more than a shit disturber, but you haven't even attempted to. You've just trampled on a respected band with no fucking reason. goddamn tools. | ||
|
pirate cod
810 Posts
| ||
|
Flaccid
8838 Posts
On February 15 2007 20:48 IdiotWind wrote: I mean, I really, really like nirvana, but if you think they made music in general better, like the way bob dylan did, you're just stupid, and if you think radiohead made music worse, you should probably go shoot yourself. They're both amazing bands. Meh, I'm <less> drunk now than I was when I wrote that post, but I suppose I should at least make an effort to explain myself: Radiohead is a band that caters to the music snob. They made music worse by giving these vile creatures something to latch on to - something with critical and commercial success that somehow validated their existence as a whole. Radiohead didn't, directly, make music worse - but they made the world of music much harder for a music fan to tolerate. Nirvana on the other hand, opened us up to a world we would have never seen. There is a reason Nevermind is the most important album of the 90s. No Nevermind = no Pearl Jam (Alive), no Soundgarden (Badmotorfinger/Superunknown), no grunge movement at all. Grunge, as a definition, is meaningless, as the bands at the time weren't into any kind of 'movement' - but the music that came out of Seattle at the time has as much of an influence on the rock of today as anything else. Had Nevermind not blown up out of nowhere, none of the other pioneering bands of the area would have been given a second look. Nevermind made the grunge scene. The grunge scene made modern rock. On the other hand, OK Computer is just another Radiohead album. Big fucking deal. And as for Bob Dylan - perhaps I shouldn't argue with a guy who has a Dylan track as his TL.net ID, but I feel that in owning every album/bootleg/live cut/B-side I can get my hands on gives me some insight into the man - he didn't change music. He brought decent song writing into the mainstream but he didn't do anything that others weren't already doing out of the spotlight. Saying Bob Dylan 'changed music' is like saying Elvis Presley 'invented rock and roll'. There is a big difference between changing/inventing and simply making something a bit more accessible. And I say this as a MASSIVE Dylan fan. But then again I'm stupid and should shoot myself. | ||
|
gravity
Australia1861 Posts
| ||
|
FearlessFlyingFrog
89 Posts
On February 15 2007 22:21 Wysp wrote: "why would you say something so inflammatory? They are popular and critically accliamed, clearly not bad even though they arn't your preference." It doesn't suck ass. You don't enjoy it, but you should respect it. To draw example from a far more acclaimed and popular piece of art, I do not enjoy the Mona Lisa. Do I respect it? Certainly. its disgusting that you would so thoughtless try to agitate people. If you tried to qualify your opinion I could respect you as more than a shit disturber, but you haven't even attempted to. You've just trampled on a respected band with no fucking reason. goddamn tools. Sure I respect them. I respect the fact that they write there own stuff. I respect that they are diffrent from other bands. I respect the sole fact that they are music makers in a day and age where corporate America pumps out trash album after trash album after trash album. "My sentiments exactly" was more based on his last statement about being popular doesn't make you good and is more towards Nirvana because I really don't know Radiohead so well. I just think that Kurt Cobain and Nirvana are given too much credit for bad music. When I say bad music I mean what is bad to me, so other people might think its great music. When I say bad music though I mean it doesn't sound good, it isn't even slightly catchy, and the lyrics sound like some "has marbles in their mouth" to quote Werid Al Yankovic. I know they "changed" music but to make a comparison of Rollingstones vs. The Beatles is the same as Nirvana vs. Radiohead is complete crap in my opinion. | ||
|
bine
United States2352 Posts
| ||
|
Wysp
Canada2299 Posts
good night, too late to be arguing about music. | ||
|
BroOd
Austin10831 Posts
1. radiohead has never catered to fans or snobs. they've shunned every chance they've been given to repeat a commercially successful formula. the fact that so called "music snobs" have latched on to them should in no way be a reflection on them. 2. Nevermind may have certainly introduced grunge to mainstream, but it was not exactly pioneering. Not only were many other bands making this kind of music before nirvana, nirvana wore it's countless blatant influences on its sleeve. nevermind benefited greatly from the musical climate, and i think its reputation grows heavily from that, as opposed to objective musical merit. | ||
|
Tadzio
3340 Posts
I'm glad WMP comes with a playlist shuffle option, that's all I'm saying. | ||
| ||
