Radiohead's biggest weakness - Page 3 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Lemonade Stand > Lemonade Stand Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 06-22-2005, 07:34 PM   #31
New Yorker
 
Flying FuManchu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Used to live in Chambana. For now the Mid-South.
Posts: 3,149
Local Time: 12:54 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Jack In The Box


agreed

Radiohead isn't my favorite band, but I admit they can create original tunes, with different tempos

"lack" of rhythm isn't a weakness, but of course, everything in abuse is bad
I agree.
__________________

__________________
Flying FuManchu is offline  
Old 06-22-2005, 07:44 PM   #32
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 4,422
Local Time: 05:54 AM
this thread is nonsense.

airbag has more funk in it than half of the top 10 mowtown hits.

and don't even come at me about motown because
I'll embarress you.


besides which, name a nirvana tune that has what you're looking for.
for that matter, name a who tune that does.
__________________

__________________
JOFO is offline  
Old 06-22-2005, 08:53 PM   #33
Refugee
 
Pinball Wizard's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Electric Lady Land
Posts: 1,972
Local Time: 11:54 PM
Not to delve too deeply into semantics, but it sounds like the lionshare of the thread is directed at a question of groove and blues rather than rhythm. Rhythm is just working within a set frame of time and subscribing a set of instruments to that rigor.

As Basstrap said earlier, Radiohead works in quite complicated signatures, and the syncopation that is required across those five musicians is ridiculous. On the surface, it may appear that they don't have the most sensual of grooves, but the rhythm in their basslines and the precision of their percussion section creates a different order of rhythm... one that can be just as appealing as some of the overt examples.

Do the low frequencies necessarily need to be amplified in order for that aesthetic of rhythm to exist? I don't know. Why work in a convention that imparts a formula if there's a more interesting way to achieve a rhythmic sensibility?

In my opinion, it's often the death of a band when they try to "re-discover their musical roots"... Some are successful as they expand upon the sound and the vibe, but others stagnate in attempts to emulate.

Yes. I figure I'm entitled to a Don King moment or three.
__________________
Pinball Wizard is offline  
Old 06-22-2005, 09:13 PM   #34
Blue Crack Distributor
 
corianderstem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Seattle
Posts: 63,720
Local Time: 09:54 PM
I have nothing of interest to add here, and I'm not even a Radiohead fan, but I just wanted to say that this thread is very interesting.

Rock on, shake your ass on, Thom Yorke on, etc.

__________________
corianderstem is offline  
Old 06-23-2005, 07:31 AM   #35
Acrobat
 
TheRooster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Hiding out in the big city blinking
Posts: 391
Local Time: 12:54 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Pinball Wizard
Not to delve too deeply into semantics, but it sounds like the lionshare of the thread is directed at a question of groove and blues rather than rhythm. Rhythm is just working within a set frame of time and subscribing a set of instruments to that rigor.

As Basstrap said earlier, Radiohead works in quite complicated signatures, and the syncopation that is required across those five musicians is ridiculous. On the surface, it may appear that they don't have the most sensual of grooves, but the rhythm in their basslines and the precision of their percussion section creates a different order of rhythm... one that can be just as appealing as some of the overt examples.

Do the low frequencies necessarily need to be amplified in order for that aesthetic of rhythm to exist? I don't know. Why work in a convention that imparts a formula if there's a more interesting way to achieve a rhythmic sensibility?

In my opinion, it's often the death of a band when they try to "re-discover their musical roots"... Some are successful as they expand upon the sound and the vibe, but others stagnate in attempts to emulate.

Yes. I figure I'm entitled to a Don King moment or three.
This is a great post. Speaking of basslines I love Paranoid Android's. It randomly comes into my consciousness and won't leave for days, pure genius.
__________________
TheRooster is offline  
Old 06-23-2005, 07:54 AM   #36
Blue Crack Addict
 
joyfulgirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 16,615
Local Time: 10:54 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Pinball Wizard
Not to delve too deeply into semantics, but it sounds like the lionshare of the thread is directed at a question of groove and blues rather than rhythm. Rhythm is just working within a set frame of time and subscribing a set of instruments to that rigor.

As Basstrap said earlier, Radiohead works in quite complicated signatures, and the syncopation that is required across those five musicians is ridiculous. On the surface, it may appear that they don't have the most sensual of grooves, but the rhythm in their basslines and the precision of their percussion section creates a different order of rhythm... one that can be just as appealing as some of the overt examples.

Do the low frequencies necessarily need to be amplified in order for that aesthetic of rhythm to exist? I don't know. Why work in a convention that imparts a formula if there's a more interesting way to achieve a rhythmic sensibility?

In my opinion, it's often the death of a band when they try to "re-discover their musical roots"... Some are successful as they expand upon the sound and the vibe, but others stagnate in attempts to emulate.

Yes. I figure I'm entitled to a Don King moment or three.
Nice.
__________________
joyfulgirl is offline  
Old 06-23-2005, 07:57 AM   #37
Blue Crack Addict
 
Lancemc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Ba Sing Se
Posts: 17,664
Local Time: 01:54 AM
Radiohead's biggest weakness is Hail to the Theif.
__________________
Lancemc is offline  
Old 06-23-2005, 03:06 PM   #38
War Child
 
Layton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Ohio
Posts: 750
Local Time: 01:54 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by u2popmofo
I have to admit Layton, I dont really understand your arguments at all.

Who cares if someone can do something, if that's not remotely something they're trying to do. If you dont find any of their music to have a "human" or "baser" quality to it, then that's really nothing more than how you interpret their music.
You're probably right. The interpretation argument is always a hard one to get around when talking about art, but just for the hell of it I'll try anyway----lol.

To me it's a weakness that Radiohead doesn't allow the full breadth of human existence to flow through their music.

Now to keep this simple, I'll break down this idea of existence into 2 components. The first being an intellectual, abstract and relatively sophisticated way of experiencing life. The second being a more sensual, sexual and relatively primitive way of experiencing life. Usually people characterized by that second way express it through rhythm and beats (i.e. the great African rhythms that basically gave birth to all rhthym based music). There's been some good rebuttals stating that Radiohead is great with rhythm because of their use of varied time signatures, etc. Usually, varied siganatures are mathematically knotty and take great smarts to put together. Since Radiohead is such an artistically abstract oriented band, these signature changes feel like they're coming from the same tendency. Unlike say great jazz musicians who base their time signature changes more on feel than thought.

I'll go so far as to say that Radiohead might be rock's best ever at portraying their music through that more cerebral way, but they also might be one of the worst ever at portraying their music through more primitive means. Now that's a very minor criticism given how great their strength is. Still though, it makes me wonder because obviously that more primitive side has to exist in them. This leads me to think that they are suppressing this half of themselves. It's as if they're cutting themselves in half and only offering that part of their existence to the world with their art. From that vantage point as a listener, one can begin to feel this suppresion in their music. I think that feeling of suppression can be construed as a weakness relative to other all-timers.
__________________
Layton is offline  
Old 06-23-2005, 03:23 PM   #39
Blue Meth Addict
 
u2popmofo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Texas
Posts: 36,961
Local Time: 11:54 PM
Great post, Layton.
__________________
u2popmofo is offline  
Old 06-23-2005, 03:24 PM   #40
Blue Crack Addict
 
joyfulgirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 16,615
Local Time: 10:54 PM
Really, really great.

I would argue that National Anthem has its primal moments, though.
__________________
joyfulgirl is offline  
Old 06-23-2005, 03:29 PM   #41
War Child
 
Layton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Ohio
Posts: 750
Local Time: 01:54 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by LJT


Its an argument that goes round and round...i think bands should try everything...i think Bono also said that its a lot harder to write a joyful song than one which is miserable*shrugs*...really if you think about Radiohead are just sticking to what they do best in their own eyes, therefore if they wanted a challenge would it not be to write something that was joyful, even close to Mysterious Ways funky and danceable? and maybe commercial?...just an idea....
That's an interesting point. U2 really reinvigorated their career in the '90's by consciously and purposely playing to their weaknesses. Radiohead has yet to take on that kind of artistic challenge. This really speaks to where they are at the moment with their art. Even diehards will admit the last few albums have been a step down for the band. To find something they've never done and attempt to become great at it could be an artistic elixir for Radiohead, but do they have the balls to risk alienating their devoted fanbase, like U2 did. In other words, does Radiohead have an ingenious curveball like AB in them. That remains to be seen.
__________________
Layton is offline  
Old 06-23-2005, 03:39 PM   #42
Blue Meth Addict
 
u2popmofo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Texas
Posts: 36,961
Local Time: 11:54 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Layton


That's an interesting point. U2 really reinvigorated their career in the '90's by consciously and purposely playing to their weaknesses. Radiohead has yet to take on that kind of artistic challenge. This really speaks to where they are at the moment with their art. Even diehards will admit the last few albums have been a step down for the band. To find something they've never done and attempt to become great at it could be an artistic elixir for Radiohead, but do they have the balls to risk alienating their devoted fanbase, like U2 did. In other words, does Radiohead have an ingenious curveball like AB in them. That remains to be seen.
I dont know, but I'd say most people outside of the U2 fanatic world think that 'Kid A' was far more of a step in a completely different direction than 'Achtung Baby' was (and far more of a risky step at that).

It's all just a general interpretation. There are a massive amount of people out there also who prefer all of Radiohead's recent material to their early material (I'm in this group). Anyways, just trying to say that there's not exactly any kind of absolute in this, and that it's not very true that, "even die hards will admit the last few albums have been a step down". I dont feel this at all about Radiohead (but I do about U2's most recent album). Personal tastes and opinions, everyone thinks of it all differently.
__________________
u2popmofo is offline  
Old 06-23-2005, 03:50 PM   #43
LJT
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
LJT's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Belfast
Posts: 5,039
Local Time: 06:54 AM
I think the U2 of the 90s was an experiment to see how extreme they can take a more mainstream audience, and now its how far they can take a more cerebal audience into the realm of pop (i think i mean they tried to make cerebal music more accessible and pop music accessible to the cerebal) If that makes sense to anyone....

Radiohead are just delving deep into one extreme in my opinion, as Layton said there has to be another side to them...i like them but not greatly and will not pass judgement on the little i know of them...which is something that happens often enough with U2
__________________
LJT is offline  
Old 06-23-2005, 05:18 PM   #44
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Zoomerang96's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: canada
Posts: 13,459
Local Time: 11:54 PM
while i agree entirely with what popmofo has said, this is still a really interesting thread layton.

nice work.

even if i don't agree with much of what you said.
__________________
Zoomerang96 is offline  
Old 06-24-2005, 12:08 AM   #45
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
HeartlandGirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 6,835
Local Time: 10:54 PM
As some around here know, I've been reading a biography of Manic Street Preachers. And just today, I read an interview that the band gave where the reporter criticized them for not being 'real' enough, for not having songs that their listeners could relate to, songs to connect the band with their listeners. And to paraphrase the members of the band, they basically said, it's time to move beyond the boyfriend/girlfriend love songs. They want their songs to be cerebral and talk about politics, race, class, governments, literature, art, film, etc. They don't care if their songs are sexy or danceable--what they care about is that their songs say something IMPORTANT.

So with that in mind, I have to agree with those who are saying that it is NOT a weakness of Radiohead that they don't make any dance hits or baby-making music. There's more to life than sex, sexuality, and personal relationships. Hurray to those bands who are out there to say something different.
__________________

__________________
HeartlandGirl is online now  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:54 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com