radiohead unappreciation thread

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

who is worse, wilco or radiohead?

  • wilco

    Votes: 26 63.4%
  • radiohead

    Votes: 15 36.6%

  • Total voters
    41
Status
Not open for further replies.
when did I ever call anyone crazy?
pretentious, snobbist and self involved would be more likely
 
I find this to be a tad ridiculous because Morning Glory is horribly produced. It sounds so muddy.

Beyond that, Revolver has Tomorrow Never Knows, which is one of the most exciting tracks of the era from a sonic point of view.

Granted. Tomorrow Never Knows is mindblowin' in any era, and always will be, but songs like For No One, Good Day Sunshine and And Your Bird Can Sing (which I adore), are unlikely ro excite people as much as Morning Glory and Champagne Supernova.

"Tomorrow Never Knows what it doesn't know to soon"
 
why is that astonishing?
I never agree with 80% of the people here

which I fully attribute to how far up their own arse they are

:up:

I think you've got your personal pronouns a bit muddled up here.
 
Picking between Radiohead and Wilco's like picking between Michael Jordan and Larry Bird - neither of them are worse than the other, one of them is just whiter.

It's more like trying to choose which one of the Golden Girls you'd rather do.
 
Oasis is a reinterpretation of old art, and they transform the old art into something more exciting and exhillarating than what the old art could ever hope to be.

Mind you, an often overlooked reality is that if you give someone who doesn't know anything about the history of pop music copies of Revolver and Morning Glory, and they play them one after the other, they are more likely to have their mind blown by Morning Glory just due to sonic advancements in the 30 year gap between the recording of the albums. That's just fact. Revolver and Pepper's excitability is more due to the impact the albums had in their contemporary setting, even though they are fucking phenomenal in their own right today anyway


That is NOT a fact, you're insane. Maybe a philistine would think Oasis sounds better, but I don't believe that for a second. The reason The Beatles have survived this long, and why they continue to be so popular, is not solely because of their influence. It's because people still listen to it for the first time and think it sounds fresh and exciting.

Just because you and the people you associate with don't find it as "exciting and exhilirating" says more about the listeners involved than the artist.

Unbelievable.
 
We're done. I'm not giving anymore chances of people being able to discuss things maturely in this thread, because it is pretty obvious that it isn't going to happen.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom