# What do you think about Radiohead?



## PresenTense (May 7, 2016)

I really love that band. In Rainbows is one of my favorite albums of all time. All of their albums are great.


----------



## AndreyGaganov (May 16, 2016)

Not a fan of the band _per se_, though I almost thoroughly enjoy listening to _Kid A_, which is my only favorite album from them.


----------



## EarthBoundRules (Sep 25, 2011)

_OK Computer_ is great. I also enjoy _Kid A_ and _In Rainbows_.


----------



## Morimur (Jan 23, 2014)

Pop/rock band with delusions of grandeur. They think they're avant garde.


----------



## regenmusic (Oct 23, 2014)

I never really liked them. Among modern bands I liked Mew, Stereolab, Belle and Sebastian, and Broadcast.


----------



## Iean (Nov 17, 2015)

Morimur said:


> Pop/rock band with delusions of grandeur. They think they're avant garde.


First, Radiohead is not pop/rock. Maroon 5 is pop/rock.

And no, they are not deluded enough to think of grandeur. It was the press who gave them a semblance of grandeur after a series of critically-acclaimed albums early in their career. Plus the fact that if you ask any new/emerging band to name its influences, Radiohead's name is always mentioned.

So, series of critically-acclaimed albums + influence on new artists = grandeur :angel:


----------



## GreenMamba (Oct 14, 2012)

EarthBoundRules said:


> _OK Computer_ is great. I also enjoy _Kid A_ and _In Rainbows_.


Pretty much exactly what I was gong to post.


----------



## DiesIraeCX (Jul 21, 2014)

I'm with GreenMamba and EarthBoundRules, those would be my top three, as well.

Just today I listened to _In Rainbows_ in the car, in its entirety, thanks to some major traffic.


----------



## Morimur (Jan 23, 2014)

Iean said:


> First, Radiohead is not pop/rock. Maroon 5 is pop/rock.
> 
> And no, they are not deluded enough to think of grandeur. It was the press who gave them a semblance of grandeur after a series of critically-acclaimed albums early in their career. Plus the fact that if you ask any new/emerging band to name its influences, Radiohead's name is always mentioned.
> 
> So, series of critically-acclaimed albums + influence on new artists = grandeur :angel:


Critically acclaimed by whom? Rock critics? 'Journalists' of the highest order. :tiphat:


----------



## Iean (Nov 17, 2015)

Morimur said:


> Critically acclaimed by whom? Rock critics? 'Journalists' of the highest order. :tiphat:


Rolling Stone Magazine, Allmusic, Pitchfork, NME, Spin, Mojo, NME, etc - for print/online media

Three Best Alternative Album awards (Grammy) One Ivor Novello award, etc - from music award-giving bodies..

What else do you want as proof of their excellence in their craft? An award from YOU?:angel:


----------



## Morimur (Jan 23, 2014)

Iean said:


> *Rolling Stone Magazine, Allmusic, Pitchfork, NME, Spin, Mojo, NME, etc* - for print/online media


Yes, _reputable_ indeed.

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## quack (Oct 13, 2011)

I used to really like them, right from the _Creep _era. I listened to most of their work before the release of their newest album and realised it is just Thom being incoherently whiney over some elaborate drum patterns


----------



## Iean (Nov 17, 2015)

Morimur said:


> Yes, _reputable_ indeed.
> 
> :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:


Can you cite a more reputable specific music magazine aside from these?


----------



## regenmusic (Oct 23, 2014)

Iean said:


> Can you cite a more reputable specific music magazine aside from these?


I'm sorry to say this but I don't think there is such thing as a reputable magazine for popular music, unless perhaps it's very small, like a zine.

All you have to do to prove this is to look at the 40 or more records from the 60s and 70s that are now being praised on YouTube, some of which only had one acetate made (or at least that was all that is known to survive today). Some, like Nick Drake, ended up taking their own life but are now recognized as being one of the greatest songwriters of the 20th Century. I don't see how any magazine today would be any different than the ones from that time.


----------



## Iean (Nov 17, 2015)

regenmusic said:


> I'm sorry to say this but I don't think there is such thing as a reputable magazine for popular music, unless perhaps it's very small, like a zine.
> 
> All you have to do to prove this is to look at the 40 or more records from the 60s and 70s that are now being praised on YouTube, some of which only had one acetate made (or at least that was all that is known to survive today). Some, like Nick Drake, ended up taking their own life but are now recognized as being one of the greatest songwriters of the 20th Century. I don't see how any magazine today would be any different than the ones from that time.


If this is the case, then which group of people is "reputable" enough to judge the "quality" of any popular music?


----------



## regenmusic (Oct 23, 2014)

Iean said:


> If this is the case, then which group of people is "reputable" enough to judge the "quality" of any popular music?


The problem is that commercial music on all levels is filled with hype, advertising, skillful public relations. It isn't until after the dust settles...all I am saying is that it's not a foolproof system. It depends on what your values are. My values are looking for artists that are currently overlooked. They obviously are not being served by the major magazines. It used to be that artists would get discovered by other artists or patrons. I am not pessimistic but I do wonder if people today can "afford" to do that anymore.


----------



## Iean (Nov 17, 2015)

regenmusic said:


> The problem is that commercial music on all levels is filled with hype, advertising, skillful public relations. It isn't until after the dust settles...all I am saying is that it's not a foolproof system. It depends on what your values are. My values are looking for artists that are currently overlooked. They obviously are not being served by the major magazines. It used to be that artists would get discovered by other artists or patrons. I am not pessimistic but I do wonder if people today can "afford" to do that anymore.


What about award-giving bodies like the Grammys? Are they also part of the hype and skillful public relations?


----------



## Morimur (Jan 23, 2014)

Iean said:


> What about award-giving bodies like the Grammys? Are they also part of the hype and skillful public relations?


Grammys are crap.


----------



## Biwa (Aug 3, 2015)

Morimur said:


> Grammys are crap.


Crap at least has a use. :lol:


----------



## Iean (Nov 17, 2015)

Morimur said:


> Grammys are crap.


So, what IS NOT crap?


----------



## Iean (Nov 17, 2015)

Morimur said:


> Grammys are crap.


Instead of saying that these magazines and this award-giving body are crap, why not tell the community what/who are the AUTHORITY in determining the quality of non-classical music?


----------



## CDs (May 2, 2016)

Iean said:


> Instead of saying that these magazines and this award-giving body are crap, why not tell the community what/who are the AUTHORITY in determining the quality of non-classical music?


The listener. Which is you me everybody.
I based what I like and ultimately what I buy on my ears not magazines, grammys or records executives.


----------



## Guest (May 28, 2016)

If Radiohead crops up in any discussion, you can rely on Morimur to drop by and tell us not just that he dislikes them, but in such a way that we must believe that they are, objectively, unworthy. It's the same compulsion that one or two other members are roundly criticised for when Mozart is the topic, and that, of course, provokes even greater ire.

Fortunately, his opinion is one among many, and yours, PresenTense, and mine are equally valid.



regenmusic said:


> The problem is that commercial music on all levels is filled with hype, advertising, skilful public relations. It isn't until after the dust settles


As someone who came to Radiohead after the dust had settled, I can firmly say that for me, they are the most 'significant' band I have listened to since I gave up fixating on Genesis in 1981, and finally recovered from the trauma of the break-up of the Fab Four in about 1973! Radiohead and The Beatles are my 'Mozart and Beethoven'. I saw them live in 2008 and had been listening to them for only a year. Though I was aware of their respectable presence in the charts, and a little of the hype, I simply wasn't interested and I had only heard 'No Surprises'.

My favourites are probably _Kid A _and _In Rainbows_, but only by a slight margin over _Ok Computer _and _Hail to the Thief._


----------



## Xenakiboy (May 8, 2016)

Can't say that I do think about Radiohead much. I don't see them as great as they're made out to be but I admit there are a few alright songs, mainly on Ok Computer though. I can't say that this type of alternative rock has a lot of appeal for me though.


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

General comment on this and similar threads: some posts are really not worth responding to.


----------



## Iean (Nov 17, 2015)

^^^ I have no problem if somebody tells me that this artist or this band is crap - that is his opinion. BUT he has to tell me who/which artist is not crap for him, otherwise he is just another click-baiting troll whose real-life existence is so pathetic that he has to create an online existence which gives him the chance to experience the things deprived of him in real life - fame, money, style, RESPECT, etc.:angel:


----------



## Xenakiboy (May 8, 2016)

I think the song Daydreaming off the new album was interesting, I saw it in passing and liked the video. I don't dislike the band but don't have much an opinion personally, I have heard a reasonable amount of their catalogue, just not my kind of Alternative rock.


----------



## Biwa (Aug 3, 2015)

Don't lose sleep over it, Iean. Music is subjective. 
I find most of the discussions about so-called 'serious' Classical music here quite amusing. Intellectual head banging for sure! :lol:
But, it's fun (and often but not always educational) to read.

About Radiohead...I love their music. I only wish they would remix their music into 5.1 or 4.0 surround. Like 1970s Prog Rock, it would open up amazingly and reveal so much.


----------



## Iean (Nov 17, 2015)

Biwa said:


> Don't lose sleep over it, Iean. Music is subjective.
> I find most of the discussions about so-called 'serious' Classical music here quite amusing. Intellectual head banging for sure! :lol:
> But, it's fun (and often but not always educational) to read.
> 
> About Radiohead...I love their music. * I only wish they would remix their music into 5.1 or 4.0 surround.* Like 1970s Prog Rock, it would open up amazingly and reveal so much.


Agree on this:angel:


----------



## Morimur (Jan 23, 2014)

Iean said:


> ^^^ I have no problem if somebody tells me that this artist or this band is crap - that is his opinion. BUT he has to tell me who/which artist is not crap for him, otherwise he is just another click-baiting troll whose real-life existence is so pathetic that he has to create an online existence which gives him the chance to experience the things deprived of him in real life - fame, money, style, RESPECT, etc.:angel:


:tiphat: :tiphat: :tiphat: :tiphat:


----------



## regenmusic (Oct 23, 2014)

Note I didn't put Radiohead down, I just said that I never really liked them. I can see why they are considered one of the greatest modern bands. I think sometimes there is a generation gap with some people, where they just don't naturally enjoy some new band based on some aspect of merit that is no longer being used by the newer band. And, even in older bands that are considered great, there is some reason why I don't like their music. Such bands for me would be Tull and Queen, I was just never a fan of theirs. One thing about Radiohead: they have this "little band" demeanor about them, but they are a hundred million dollar band machine, one of the biggest bands today. They do generate a lot of money and help pay a lot of people's paychecks. I don't think that's bad, I just want to point it out because it's funny how the two can go hand in hand. Something about them seems so small and low key.


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

Iean said:


> ^^^ *I have no problem if somebody tells me that this artist or this band is crap - that is his opinion. BUT he has to tell me who/which artist is not crap for him*, otherwise he is just another click-baiting troll whose real-life existence is so pathetic that he has to create an online existence which gives him the chance to experience the things deprived of him in real life - fame, money, style, RESPECT, etc.:angel:


I was with you for the bold portion (before you launched into gratuitous abuse ) It's like that guy who recently joined the forum to say Beethoven sucks and who never responded when he was asked what music he preferred. We deserve to know how seriously to take our critics. On that note - and I hope he will correct me if I am wrong - Morimur is, I believe, a big fan of The Velvet Underground. I was interested to learn that after hearing him dismiss King Crimson. 

By the way, the Grammy's are an industry marketing scam.


----------



## CDs (May 2, 2016)

EdwardBast said:


> By the way, the Grammy's are an industry marketing scam.


Same could be said for the _Oscars_ and _Golden Globes_.


----------



## Vronsky (Jan 5, 2015)

I never liked Radiohead also. Swans, Velvet Underground and Joy Division are much, much better IMO.


----------



## Morimur (Jan 23, 2014)

EdwardBast said:


> I was with you for the bold portion (before you launched into gratuitous abuse ) It's like that guy who recently joined the forum to say Beethoven sucks and who never responded when he was asked what music he preferred. We deserve to know how seriously to take our critics. On that note - and I hope he will correct me if I am wrong - Morimur is, I believe, a big fan of The Velvet Underground. I was interested to learn that after hearing him dismiss King Crimson.
> 
> By the way, the Grammy's are an industry marketing scam.


Rock music is mostly crap but VU, Television, MC5, Joy Division, CAN, Stooges, and Pixies are among the few exceptions.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

Morimur said:


> Rock music is mostly crap but VU, Television, MC5, Joy Division, CAN, Stooges, and Pixies are among the few exceptions.


There's a lot of good stuff, my son. You're young yet. I just listened to You by Gong, and that is one cool, jazzy, trippy record! 
RIP Daevid Allen


----------



## Xenakiboy (May 8, 2016)

starthrower said:


> There's a lot of good stuff, my son. You're young yet. I just listened to You by Gong, and that is one cool, jazzy, trippy record!
> RIP Daevid Allen


Because I mentioned it in the current listening thread?


----------



## PresenTense (May 7, 2016)




----------



## PresenTense (May 7, 2016)

Morimur said:


> Rock music is mostly crap but VU, Television, MC5, Joy Division, CAN, Stooges, and Pixies are among the few exceptions.


With the exception of Joy Division, the rest of the band you mentioned are crap to me haha. There are still lots of good bands out there. The last band that really catched my attention was Syd Arthur. You all guys must check them out. Listen to their second album on Spotify, it's reaaaaally good. There is not so much about them on Youtube though 











SPOTIFY:


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

I never liked Radiohead , pure and simple.


----------



## helenora (Sep 13, 2015)

Pugg said:


> I never liked Radiohead , pure and simple.


:tiphat:

couldn't find a sign/smilie "bow"


----------



## helenora (Sep 13, 2015)

I´ve deleted post


----------



## PresenTense (May 7, 2016)

helenora said:


> IÂ´ve deleted post


Ummmmm......wut? í ½í¸


----------



## helenora (Sep 13, 2015)

nothing ....I think it was something not flattering this band discussed here :lol:

therefore perhaps after thinking twice I´ve deleted it.....but now, I already don´t remember why


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese (Jan 8, 2013)

They're much better than Coldplay, they leave me cold, could go on about their Joe Satriani take but I won't......


----------



## Guest (Sep 27, 2016)

Conscious that every expression of an opinion is seen as an invitation to express the contrary, I'll nevertheless wonder what's going on when I go to sleep having last listened to _Burn the Witch _and awake humming _Every Day Hurts _by Sad Cafe - a band I'm only dimly aware of because of this hit, but would not give house room to.

Why does one's mind play such tricks?


----------



## James Mann (Sep 6, 2016)

I admit that I have unfortunately never heard Radiohead


----------



## helenora (Sep 13, 2015)

James Mann said:


> I admit that I have unfortunately never heard Radiohead


my twin soul  
very good sign! that´s why on your avatar Orson Welles


----------



## Leggiero (Oct 13, 2016)

_A Moon Shaped Pool_, has, IMHO, the best bookends of any of the albums they've put out this century. The intervening tracks have yet to get their claws into me, but that isn't to say that they won't...


----------



## Flamme (Dec 30, 2012)

Good things...Marked my growing up in 90s...


----------



## PresenTense (May 7, 2016)

In Rainbows is a masterpiece in my opinion. Same as Kid A.


----------



## GodotsArrived (Jan 12, 2017)

Lack the will to enter the debate but for the record, I love Radiohead. One of vew few bands I still listen to.


----------



## lextune (Nov 25, 2016)

Radiohead is a great rock band. If you are into rock bands. Call it Art Rock, or Experimental, or whatever...

From '95 to '01, (The Bends, OK Computer, Kid A, and Amnesiac), they could do no wrong for this listener.

I was never able to get into any of the albums after that.


----------



## yetti66 (Jan 30, 2017)

OK Computer took me longer than any album to "get". At first - nothing. I persisted and played it once a week for several months and eventually it won me over. A truly great album. The only other album that took a long time for me to get was Husker Du ZEN ARCADE - whole different experience there!


----------



## PresenTense (May 7, 2016)

lextune said:


> Radiohead is a great rock band. If you are into rock bands. Call it Art Rock, or Experimental, or whatever...
> 
> From '95 to '01, (The Bends, OK Computer, Kid A, and Amnesiac), they could do no wrong for this listener.
> 
> I was never able to get into any of the albums after that.


In Rainbows is great! Give it a try! haha


----------



## PresenTense (May 7, 2016)

yetti66 said:


> OK Computer took me longer than any album to "get". At first - nothing. I persisted and played it once a week for several months and eventually it won me over. A truly great album. The only other album that took a long time for me to get was Husker Du ZEN ARCADE - whole different experience there!


That happened to me when I listened to Kid A/Amnesiac for the first time when I was 16. I wasn't into IDM stuff at that time. Then, I explored Aphex Twin and WARP Records artists and it all made sense.


----------



## PresenTense (May 7, 2016)




----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

Radiohead? Like their production. Hate the vocals. Same thing with R.E.M. Good music, but whiny vocals ruin the music.


----------



## AfterHours (Mar 27, 2017)

Radiohead is a very good band. As with many "All Time Best" Rock artists (Beatles, David Bowie, Beach Boys, U2...) they're very overrated if we're truly comparing them to the giants of Classical Music or the history of art (as one should if we're calling them the "all time best"). Again they are very talented with some excellent (but still hugely overrated) albums, such as Ok Computer, Kid A and Amnesiac, but they pale in comparison to several superior albums from their influences, such as late period Talk Talk (Spirit of Eden, Laughing Stock) or early-1970s Can (Tago Mago, Future Days)... A more recent album, that is probably influenced by Kid A/Amnesiac-era Radiohead (among other artists), but quite superior, is Shaking the Habitual by Knife. If it were by Radiohead it would probably be called "the greatest album of all time" but instead it typically gets mixed reactions.


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

His vocals are very hit or miss for me.


----------



## pierrot (Mar 26, 2012)

Pseudo-experimental pop band. Might be impressive for music newcomers of people who don't explore too deep but that's it, an ok group at most.


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

It's really ridiculous how the music business had me accepting rock "musicians" as singers that can't really sing with proper technique. Thom Yorke certainly falls into this category. some thought provoking ideas they have musically, sometimes pretentious, but nothing compared to my favorite Classical pieces imo.


----------

