Radiohead discussion continues

[djerdap]

New Yorke song:

Thom Yorke Shares Fashion Week Song ‘Villain’ | Billboard

 

[GirlsAloudFan]

Remember how fucking exciting it was when they were like 'King of Limbs out in a week'? I remember exactly where I was and what I was doing when I saw it.

Cannot fucking wait though I am expecting first quarter 2016 at the earliest.

I do. It was thrilling. Though not quite AS thrilling as the similar announcement for In Rainbows. What a night that was.

I remember both vividly. As I'm sure many around here do.

Both were such fucking cool ways to let your fans know you have a new album.

 

[lazarus]

Am I the only one distressed by the words "Thom Yorke shares Fashion Week song"?

 

[elevated_u2_fan]

Remember when he had a song on the Twilight Soundtrack and we all freaked out? Good times.

 

[gump]

Apologies in advance to anyone who got excited at the bumping of this thread. No news that I know of.

I was just thinking though, that it's interesting that for all the grief we give Shuttlecock for their lack of productivity, we don't really give Radiohead that same grief even though their productivity hasn't been any better in recent years. In fact, it might be a little worse.

Their last EMI release, HTTT, was released in June 2003. In the twelve years and a few months since then, they've put out two albums, one of which was EP-like in length.

In that same period of time, U2 have put out three albums and might put out a fourth next year.

So I just thought it was an interesting contrast. Why do we not get as pissy at Radiohead for their lack of productivity?

Could be a number of reasons. Maybe...

1. Their recent output has been less disappointing for a lot of people and so they are willing to be more patient? Like, a lot of people might say IR is better than anything U2 have done in the 21st century and when you make an album that good, you get more leeway?

or

2. It bothers people less because when Radiohead takes five or six years to put out an album, it's because they hadn't felt like making one, whereas when U2 do the same, it's because they started making one in year two, nearly finished it by the end of year three, scrapped the whole thing and started over, nearly finished it again by the end of year four, brought in extra producers to remix half the tracks at the beginning of year five, and then finally put it out at the end of year five after several false starts?

Just wanted to start this discussion.


Sent from my iPad using U2 Interference

I think it's reason 1. IR, which to me is a masterpiece (and unquestinoably a critical consensus), was released only 8 years ago. U2's last album that can be remotely in the conversation, Pop, is turning 20 in two years. I'm not a huge fan of King of Limbs, but it's still arguably a better album than anything U2 has done post-Pop.

In sum, I don't think the issue is the lack of productivity. It's quality. If U2 were still releasing fantastic albums every 8-9 years, they'd be as well respected as Radiohead (and in the conversation for greatest rock band ever, non-Beatles division).

 

[Danny Boy]

Am I the only one distressed by the words "Thom Yorke shares Fashion Week song"?

Not the first time he has composed runway music.

 

[mikal]

I think it's reason 1. IR, which to me is a masterpiece (and unquestinoably a critical consensus), was released only 8 years ago. U2's last album that can be remotely in the conversation, Pop, is turning 20 in two years. I'm not a huge fan of King of Limbs, but it's still arguably a better album than anything U2 has done post-Pop.

In sum, I don't think the issue is the lack of productivity. It's quality. If U2 were still releasing fantastic albums every 8-9 years, they'd be as well respected as Radiohead (and in the conversation for greatest rock band ever, non-Beatles division).

I would rather listen to SOI than TKOL any day, and I love Radiohead.

Sent from my SM-G928P using U2 Interference mobile app

 

[LemonMelon]

King of Limbs' second half alone is much better than SOI, with any highlights from the first serving as a nice bonus.

I wasn't really that enamored with Amok or Tomorrow's Modern Boxes though. Radiohead has far too much talent for Thom to top them on his own.

 

[mikal]

See I've always start the second half was over rated just because the first half (minus Bloom) was that bad.

Sent from my SM-G928P using U2 Interference mobile app

 

[iron yuppie]

Hating on King of Limbs, a classic Interference pastime.

 

[LemonMelon]

What's funny is that it ended up top 5 in our 2011 poll. Classic.

 

[lazarus]

The second half is fantastic, but as a whole album? Nope. I'll take SOI, No Line, and Bomb over it.

Sorry.

 

[bobsaget77]

What's the big deal about Radiohead? They've only released one song and it was like 20 years ago. That I'm a creep song. Classic one hit wonder band.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

 

[LemonMelon]

The second half is fantastic, but as a whole album? Nope. I'll take SOI, No Line, and Bomb over it.

Sorry.

Don't apologize to me. You're the one listening to SOI and Bomb instead.

 

[gump]

Metacritic scores

In Rainbows: 88
King of Limbs: 80
ATYCLB: 79
HTDAAB: 79
NLOTH: 72
SOI: 64

 

[LemonMelon]

If SOI had been released traditionally, it would have a 90+.

Spoiler

 

[martha]

I listened to KOL a couple of times driving around this summer, and I like it, but it's not all that.

 

[iron yuppie]

That high of a score for Bomb is really surprising. I have a hard time thinking of an album by anyone that has aged worse. The only thing from that era that sounds even remotely fresh at this point is fast cars.

 

[lazarus]

I still maintain it's the most consistent 2000- album. Others are obviously going to disagree, but for me it doesn't have any major stumbles like Cock Crazy or Stand Up Comedy (others would also name Boots) or gratuitous overproduction blunders on the level of Tedder/Epworth's meddling.

ATYCLB is consistent too, I guess, but it's a half-baked album they didn't work on in the studio for long enough and it has no balls. They also includes an obvious disposable b-side in Wild Honey. So it loses that matchup.

Having said all that, I don't think the Bomb's highs are very high compared to the previous two albums' peaks.

 

[iron yuppie]

Having said all that, I don't think the Bomb's highs are very high compared to the previous two albums' peaks.

This summarizes it perfectly. Bomb is consistently middling. Strange that they followed it up with No Line, which is half excellent and half disappointing.

I'm sure this had been said a million times, but something else that really hurts Bomb is the mastering. It's nearly unlistenable on headphones.

 

[lazarus]

Ehh, mastering isn't really important enough to me compared to every other element. Either the songs and production are there or they're not.

I do agree to some extent about it "aging". COBL would have placed in my Top 3 of the decade, now I'm definitely sick of it (sorry, Cobbler) and it simply doesn't stand up to the "epic'" songs of the past. Love and Peace Or Else doesn't sound very cool anymore. All Because Of You is pretty generic, and both pale in comparison to the rockers on the new album.

But Vertigo still holds up (The Miracle is going to age far worse, believe me), Miracle Drug still has a great chorus and passionate work from B&E, One Step Closer is nicely understated, A Man and A Woman has a great groove and remains an impressive departure, and Yahweh still sounds like it was recorded during the JT sessions. Original Of The Species could have been a lot better (see the live version from Amsterdam) but it's still a nice piece of writing. The divisive Crumbs still works for me because of how loose it feels, even if it goes a little over-the-top near the end.

And then there's Mercy and Fast Cars, which are still the two best songs from the sessions. I wonder if they had included these two and ditched ABOY and maybe LPOE, would we be looking on it a lot more favorably?

 

[bobsaget77]

I'm sure this had been said a million times, but something else that really hurts Bomb is the mastering. It's nearly unlistenable on headphones.

This.
Vertigo, for instance, is unlistenable on headphones because the sound is so unbalanced. It gives me a headache. The weird opening of MD is a horrible transition from Vertigo. There are many more examples, such as the blatant copy-and-paste editing of OOTS and the ear raping outro of Crumbs. We could be here all day discussing the piss poor mastering of Bomb.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

 

[BVS]

Metacritic scores

In Rainbows: 88
King of Limbs: 80
ATYCLB: 79
HTDAAB: 79
NLOTH: 72
SOI: 64

If SOI had been released traditionally, it would have a 90+.

Spoiler

Holy fuck :facepalm:

If you ever have to use a metacritic type source to justify your likes, you're doing it wrong.

If you don't think reviews are biased and based on other factors than the music alone, then you aren't reading them. And if you aren't reading them, don't use that as your yardstick, you'll end up looking like those posters who can't think for themselves.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

 

[martha]

ABOY's intro hurts my ears every time. Hurts them.

 

[gump]

Holy fuck :facepalm:

If you ever have to use a metacritic type source to justify your likes, you're doing it wrong.

Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

Yes, because we only like things if metacritic rates it highly.

Also, reviews are biased, but somehow fans' opinions aren't.

 

[youarenotimmune]

KOL is like a really good EP to me. Apart from Morning Mr. Magpie and Feral, I really dig the other 6 tracks.

And the lukewarm sentiment here towards Amok really surprises me. It's one of my favorite albums of the last few years. Ingenue, Unless and Amok are simply fantastic songs.

 

[cobl04]

I really love Amok. I think that was great. And I still go back to a handful of tracks from Tomorrow's Modern Boxes. What I wouldn't have given to have been at the recent shows where Thom performed it with Jon Hopkins.

 

[LemonMelon]

I don't hate Amok, but I do feel it was a missed opportunity. That could have been a fun left turn for Thom a la the David Byrne/St Vincent collaboration, but mostly it sounded grey and Eraser-esque, without anything as great as Harrowdown Hill to justify its conservative approach.

My concern is that, after evolving as a shocking rate over 7 years, that the band and its members have begun to settle for the known. I'm interested in whatever the band releases because there's so much talent involved, but I don't expect another Kid A from them. The less the new album sounds like a Thom solo record the better.

 

[djerdap]

Nah, Ingenue and Amok are as good as anything from The Eraser.

The album as a whole is not that great though.

 

[Kieran McConville]

Eraser is so, so very good. It maybe gave their activities a busier look last decade than they deserved (the way Passengers did with U2). Yes it is a Yorke solo album (with some surreptitious Nigel Godrich involvement I guess), but I honestly feel like most of it could as easily have been Radiohead. 'Analyze' or 'Harrowdown Hill' are better than most of HTTT imo. And around that time Yorke was pretty much just handing the band finished songs and telling them 'do it', wasn't he.