|   Can I get a description of the Radiohead CD's? | unleasHell
Aug 23, 2001 6:37 AM | | I have never even heard them, but they seem to stir people up with references to Prog., Jazz, and Krautrock.
may try to check out some sound clips, but I wonder if I should be checking these guys out... |
| I was a little dissapointed | Azuth
Aug 23, 2001 7:20 AM | | With all the positive talk on these boards you might think Radiohead must be the best thing since sliced bread. I like the music, but it seems a little too dependent on electronic sound effects. Kinda like 99% of the music could be handled by a sampling midi keyboard. The vocals reminded a little of King Crimson cept a bit more artsy and whiney. Its not the electrical/prog/alternative nirvana that many would make it out to be, but its still good music.
While they do stir that grungy feel-good alternative side of me, I can usually find a dozen other bands that fit my moods more appropriately. |
| re: Can I get a description of the Radiohead CD's? | Darius
Aug 23, 2001 8:03 AM | | It is interesting to me, unleasHell, how you have followed so many obscure paths through today's modern music, including many bands I am sure who have something in common with Radiohead's sound, without having heard Radiohead's albums. This is not meant to be a criticism but rather I'm interested that we seem to learn about music so differently. I started checking Radiohead out because I kept reading raves about them -- "album of the year" in various magazines etc. Reading music magazines was my main source of learning about new music until I came across this board, because my friends were not music geeks like me, and I had no older sibling or anything to show me the way (and I certainly wasn't going to get it from radio). But also, I am the kind of person for whom if an album is listed by writers in a couple rock magazines as the "album of the year", I'll probably want to pick it up, regardless of what exact style it was in. Regardless of the many flaws of rock criticism (don't get me started), I've had decent luck with albums I pick up this way. Many wouldn't, and don't even pay attention to these sources -- fair enough -- but if you don't, how do you learn about new stuff you should check out (obviously we have the web now but what about before)? Is it that you check out more specialized sources that are geared toward particular styles that you like? This is interesting to me because you seem to have a huge amount of knowledge about bands that others haven't necessarily heard about (as well, of course, about many that are known as well by other folks on this board).
Okay, as for the actual descriptions:
Pablo Honey is their first album. It's more straight-ahead rock with a good sense of drama but it's not the first one to check out.
The Bends is dramatic, intense, but catchy hard rock. It has a lot of the vocal drama of U2 at their height and some of the "guitar god" playing of a great 70s band, but it is still rooted in a 90s sensibility. It is perhaps the easiest to like of all the Radiohead albums and, IMO, their first masterpiece.
OK Computer was when they first had the ambition and complexity of prog music. They started being compared to Pink Floyd, especially, because they had the high drama and atmosphere at times of Waters/Gilmour-era Floyd. Still, though, very modern sounding music with rough, distorted guitars, often weird, often depressing. The main theme seemed to be dehumanization because of high technology. Their second masterpiece, IMO.
Kid A and Amnesiac were when they stepped away from guitar rock into a weirder more electronic, more atmospheric, often more washed-out sound. Definitely Krautrock, ambient, jazz, and other avante garde elements. They are both quite interesting and innovative albums, and difficult (although I'm sure not for you!). I actually think one of these two (I would recommend Amnesiac) might be the most interesting Radiohead introduction for you.
Hope this is helpful. |
| because......... | unleasHell
Aug 23, 2001 8:52 AM | | I usually avoid commerical music, I do not listen (or read), or even believe when mainstream reviews are heeping praise on an Artist. I had heard the name Radiohead dozens of times but to me they were no different than Limp Bizket or Marilyn Manson (NOT sound wise) just hype-wise. So the only reason I can give for avoiding Radiohead is that they were too talked about (I know that may sound lame). I first got into Porcupine Tree back in 1995 (sky moves sideways) before they were so popular... (still like them a lot though).
You are right about my on-line reaseach, I have a dozen (or more) places that either SELL stuff or REVIEW stuff (and I would be happy to post some here) where I get purchasing Information.
I sort rambled around with this message, if you want to dicuss it more, I would be happy to... (just ask) |
| Thanks. A helpful explanation (nt) | Darius
Aug 24, 2001 5:46 AM | | |
| Round, bout 5" in diameter, hole in the middle... | 3-LockBox
Aug 23, 2001 10:22 AM | | I was a little disappointed, probably too much hype. OK Computer is just that, OK. Kid A is just uninspired.
This is a hit and miss hobby; one person's treasure is another person's trade fodder. My latest head scratcher; Built To Spill. A friend of mine at work wants me to like this band, but, I don't know. The music is fine, the guy's voice is grating. Radiohead has the same problem for me, the lead singer. Bands like Dream Theater seem to have a better handle on this genre. |
| re: I can send you my Radiohead sampler if you like. | Ms. Nomer
Aug 23, 2001 11:55 AM | | Check comp-4-trade. I made it for myself but have been asked to burn copies about a dozen times by my friends (which is why I put it up on comp-4-trade). If you don't like it you're loss is nothing, while I lose about $1.60 :-). They definitely take some time to absorb, but well worth the effort IMO. |
| |
