HTDAAB Vs. Hail to the Thief

[Lancemc]

I think it is wonderful that the deaf are getting into music ...

Hahahaha! That's one of my favorite insults.

dance my minions dance!

 

[If you shout...]

ahahahahahaha!!!!!!!!!

It really bugs me how some feel Radiohead can be added to that elite group of bands/musicians...their catalogue isn't remotely as strong as the Beatles, Stones, Zeppelin etc, in terms of the overall strength of the albums themselves, but also the individual songs. How mahy Radiohad songs can be seen as memorable classics? a dozen tops, maybe..the bands I mentioned prior have at 2 to 3 or even 4 times as many.... Also Radiohead aren't as experimental as their fans like to think, either..theyhaven't changed music. Heck, I still think U2 need one more masterpiece besides the new one, JT and AB to be evn thought of with the very best bands, and yet they are leagues ahead of the Oxford miserabilists

I realize that it's been quite some time since you posted this and since I posted what you were replying to, but I still feel that I've gotta' come in and sort of explicate just where I was coming from in saying that, "I was seeing the best band since U2's peak. I was seeing a band capable of taking on The Beatles at their peak."

First of all, I DO NOT think that Radiohead's overall catalogue is as strong as The Beatles' catalogue...nor as strong as The Stones, nor Zep, nor U2, nor Dylan, nor Springsteen nor about a MILLION other acts. They haven't released that many albums, so that would indeed be a sillier thing for me to claim. And, yeah--they aren't super-experimental. They do things which are often unexpected and they definitely have their own, fairly unique vibe which few other bands have really co-opted...but they're not OUT THERE in a big-time way. But that's not really what I'm looking for, you know? I mean, they do things in a new way each time they put out an album (or they have so far, anyway--who knows what the future holds?) while still managing to stay true to what they are as a band. I dig on that. That's what I have found so refreshing about U2 as a band (or Talking Heads, or The Velvet Underground, or any of the other acts I already mentioned) for much of its life.

Still, for me...? Hail To The Thief was a fucking amazing album. It just was. I know that it is dark; I know that it is morose; I know that it is oftentimes miserable. But that is the way I was--and still am--feeling about a lot of things in this world. And a lot of other people feel the same way, I might add--maybe you do, too! Now, that doesn't mean that someone who is concerned about where the world is going HAS to love or even like this music; saying something like that is crazy. What I think is tough to debate, though, is that the album (like it, love it, or even abhore it) does a pretty good job of summing up these types of feelings. Isolation. Lonliness. Fear. Paranoia. Outrage. Etc...

That said, I do think it's a better album than U2's latest. ...And I DO think that--during the whole Hail-era, to coin a new term--Radiohead is capable of challenging U2's greatness during their peak period and The Beatles during their respective peaks. Are they better, as a whole, than either band? No. And they're not as good as many others. For me, though, this PERIOD of Radiohead (as well as the Kid A-era) is as strong--maybe stronger--than any era of any other band, ever.

It is just my opinion, and I know that many, many people disagree with me...but wasn't Hail To The Thief voted the Album of the Year by Interference users, last year....? To each his/her own, of course...I hope that that goes without saying. But I will stand by what I say. And what I'm saying--I think--isn't quite what you thought I was saying.

Oh...and I LOVE "Backdrifts." Maybe my second favorite song on the album...

 

[Sleep Over Jack]

Hail To The Thief-era Radiohead seems to me like a pale imitation of their finest era (OK Computer)...I think even at their peak they cannot hope to compete with Rubber Soul, Revolver, Pepper, Abbey Road , White Album, as individual works. You see, I think Radiohead are very one-dimensional, emotionally, since the general tone of their music is one of doom and gloom, they don't seem to explore other areas or feelings..very one-tone to me.

 

[ponkine]

This is funny folks, it´s clear ( and you know that ) most of fans will think HTDAAB is better than Hail To The Thief, just for one reason... we´re on a U2 forum, not a Radiohead one
so fans can´t be objetive. If we all were on a Radiohead forum, most of fans would think Hail To The Thief is far better than HTDAAB

As for me, I´m a fan both of U2 and Radiohead . In terms of music, compositions, production, experiments, sounds, etc, Hail To The Thief is far, I mean FAR better than HTDAAB, really The only one song who could be compare with "2+2=5", "Sit Down, Stand Up", "There There", "Where I End And You Begin", "Myxomatosis" or "Scatterbrain" is City Of Blinding Lights. I listened both album, and my opinion was clear: after listening Hail To The Thief complete, HTDAAB gets even worse, safer and weaker than I felt before listen to Radiohead

I´m waiting for all those replies trying to kill me now

 

[Lancemc]

Keeping in mind all of this is still just our own shitty opinions, I have to say that Hail-era Radiohead is with the exception of their very first album, their worst work to date. The songs are just crappy. It's like they were trying to make another OK Computer, but didn't want to make it accessible....at all. I think they just didn't have any real direction when making HTTT.

 

[Sleep Over Jack]

Yeah its like I said, that HTTT is an inferior version of OK Computer..of course ponkine will say he prefers HTTT so he can feel he is in a "cool" minority on this site.

 

[rjhbonovox]

Hail To The Thief at least tries to sound fresh, if not totally being a great album. Neither albums are great albums but are both listenable. The down side of HTDAAB is that its all too catchy and melodic, and sounds too much like what U2 have done before. The down side to HTTT is that the album is tooooo down, beautiful moments on it (Sail To The Moon) but an overall depressing feel to it and not enough uplifting moments. I would say that both albums are about even. Definetly don't compare with either bands best albums (Achtung Baby, OK Computer).

 

[Sicy]

Originally posted by
(Mods- don't delete this post...you seem to have a habit of deleting ANY post I make just because it's too quick or to the point...! Sorry I don't write ESSAYS about U2...! )

We do not delete people's posts.

 

[Sleep Over Jack]

Hail To The Thief at least tries to sound fresh, if not totally being a great album. Neither albums are great albums but are both listenable. The down side of HTDAAB is that its all too catchy and melodic, and sounds too much like what U2 have done before. The down side to HTTT is that the album is tooooo down, beautiful moments on it (Sail To The Moon) but an overall depressing feel to it and not enough uplifting moments. I would say that both albums are about even. Definetly don't compare with either bands best albums (Achtung Baby, OK Computer).

I think HTTT is a mere rehash of previous Radiohead styles...why it exempt from the criticism that you've forced upon U2's new album?


For me it is simple..HTTT is one of Radiohead's worst, (not THE worst, nothing they do could be as bad the hilariously awful Pablo Honey) HTDAAB one of U2's finest...

 

[MrBrau1]

Hail To The Thief at least tries to sound fresh, if not totally being a great album. Neither albums are great albums but are both listenable. The down side of HTDAAB is that its all too catchy and melodic, and sounds too much like what U2 have done before. The down side to HTTT is that the album is tooooo down, beautiful moments on it (Sail To The Moon) but an overall depressing feel to it and not enough uplifting moments. I would say that both albums are about even. Definetly don't compare with either bands best albums (Achtung Baby, OK Computer).

Damn. It must suck to hate The Beatles, with all their catchy and melodic music.

 

[JOFO]

It's simple, really.

u2 is very interested in making music for the mainstream these days.

radiohead is not.

nothing inherently wrong with either approach, as long as some good music comes from it.

imo, there's good music to be found on both.
u2's is more uplifting, and I want that right now. they certainly want to promote the hell out of their music, and the music they're doing now is not on the cutting edge. fine by me; the melodies and chords are beutiful.
radiohead's is more musically challenging and dark, which I respect. As a musician, I can say that all in radiohead are great musicians, and can write "the bends" parts 2,3,4 and 5 if they wanted to. they just don't want to, which is why people are pissed off at kid a, amnesiac, and httt.

p.s. people should really stop from comparing anyone going beyond the beatles, because it just ain't gonna happen. they were there first, and you can't change history.

 

[Yahweh]

Radiohead is a band that like a lot of bands have a niche in the market that fills a gap for a certain number of limited people. This is just who they are this is the music they write, the media wanted them to be the next super band to take the place of U2 I knew this wasnt going to happen because this is not who Radiohead are, they have a loyal fan following and they always will have that following.

U2 on the other hand is trying to be and doing so quite admirably The Beatles of our generation. With this task that theyve created for themselves from the time they have been formed means that they will have unequaled critisism of each album release because they have a very large fanbase of both hardcore and casual fans and they wont be able to ever please everybody with an album. This will continue to get more and more difficult with age because the fanbase will bring naustalgia into the mix rather then evaluating each album equally just based on the music that is on it.

I feel that Coldplay is developing a following simular to U2s and are accesable enough just like U2 to have the casual listeners ear and as they put out more albums I expect them to go through the same circle that U2 has went through especially in the last 10 or so years since Passengers where people were expecting a certain thing but didnt get what they wanted and will go back to saying Parachutes was Coldplays best just because it was Coldplays first.

Evaluating albums is not a very easy thing to do unless you put about 100 people that have never heard of U2 or Radiohead before into a listening booth and have them evaluate what sounds better to their ears.

Asking a hardcore U2 or Radiohead fan this question is really quite useless because we already know the answer that they will provide.

To end it off basically there are many niche bands in rock music and Radiohead is one of them, and while there will be critics of Radiohead, they certainly wont match that of somebody like U2, The Beatles or even Coldplay because Radiohead is and always will be seen as an influencial band but certainly not a super band as U2 and The Beatles have done and Coldplay has the potential to do.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

i hate radiohead and think they haven't put out anything good since OK Computer.

hope that answers your question.

 

[rjhbonovox]

Damn. It must suck to hate The Beatles, with all their catchy and melodic music.

Not a big fan of The Beatles. Never have been. "She Loves You" was not one of the biggest songs of the 60's, wouldn't you say. I have never compared U2 to the beatles. Obviously your a fan of putting on an album and doing the ironing while your not really listening to it. Music is for listening to, but U2 have become a band with their latest album where you don't have to really listen to it, and when you do it becomes boring. They have become a band where every track on an album has to have a catchy chorus, they never used to be like that. And when people say that U2 are better song writers now(as Lilywhite has said recently) then they are talking out of their arse!!!!!

 

[ZeroDude]

Achtung Baby (and The Joshua Tree) owns all of Radioheads back catalogue, although off topic you could get support for that claim nearly everywhere, although HTDAAB is good it isnt really brilliant.

 

[Dalton]

Not a big fan of The Beatles. Never have been. "She Loves You" was not one of the biggest songs of the 60's, wouldn't you say. I have never compared U2 to the beatles. Obviously your a fan of putting on an album and doing the ironing while your not really listening to it. Music is for listening to, but U2 have become a band with their latest album where you don't have to really listen to it, and when you do it becomes boring. They have become a band where every track on an album has to have a catchy chorus, they never used to be like that. And when people say that U2 are better song writers now(as Lilywhite has said recently) then they are talking out of their arse!!!!!

Again RJH, if you can't see the skill and artistry in the songs on HTDAAB you are no musician. Sure you might be able to enjoy and play one style on your guitar, but certainly no musician. You think the album is boring - fine. People who don't understand calculus find it boring because they don't understand whats going on....

 

[doctorwho]

As a person who can't stand Radiohead, barring a few token songs, I cannot relate at all. Experimentation for the sake of experimentation is self-indulgent, and I think Radiohead are very much in that area. Perhaps some fans appreciated their experimentation on "O.K. Computer" and "Kid A" (even though I can't stand either, especially the former and I've given it MANY listenings), but now it seems that Radiohead knows their "bread and butter" lies with being experimental and "out there" - so they continue in that vein. Sadly, to my ears, it's the same argument that some fans are using against U2 - that it's nothing more than Radiohead sounding like Radiohead.

Maybe ATYCLB and HTDAAB are full of structured songs - gosh, the horror. As is JT and AB aren't? As if "Pop" doesn't have more than its share of verse, chorus, verse, chorus? That said, even HTDAAB has some experimental overtones with L&PorE and "Fast Cars". And ATYCLB was experimental - in the U2 world at least - with "Stuck.." and "Wild Honey". But of course, all four of those songs seem to rank amongst the least favorite by fans, despite the fact that they are also the most experimental tracks on those two albums. So it's a no-win situation for U2. Sound like classic U2? Not experimental enough. Try to experiment? Don't like it. But have Radiohead on auto-pilot and they *must* be the "better" band. Blah...

I have no problem with an artist making accessible music. Sure, have experimental tracks or tracks that are deeply personal - but why not throw out some works that a more general audience can relate to, can understand, can appreciate? This doesn't make one a "sell out". Rather, it's understanding your audience and it's making music that is accessible, but also brilliant.

 

[Lancemc]

Not a big fan of The Beatles. Never have been. "She Loves You" was not one of the biggest songs of the 60's, wouldn't you say. I have never compared U2 to the beatles. Obviously your a fan of putting on an album and doing the ironing while your not really listening to it. Music is for listening to, but U2 have become a band with their latest album where you don't have to really listen to it, and when you do it becomes boring. They have become a band where every track on an album has to have a catchy chorus, they never used to be like that. And when people say that U2 are better song writers now(as Lilywhite has said recently) then they are talking out of their arse!!!!!

1. The Beatles were technically some of the greatest musicians of their time. All of their albums from Rubber Soul on until Abbey Road are some of the most complex and finely-crafted (excluding maybe the White Album) albums of the past 40 years. And people call Radiohead experimental? The Beatles were the first to do almost everything! Listen to Srgt. Pepper's and try to tell me how on Earth they made that in 1967, it's really remarkable.

2. Pop, Achtung Baby, The Joshua Tree, War, Rattle and Hum. those are all U2 albums that have extremely catchy and traditional song structures. Style aside, HTDAAB is really no different than POP.

3. RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE!

 

[ZeroDude]

Music can be experimental within the traditional verse chorus verse chorus structure which is something people forget.......

 

[Lancemc]

Music can be experimental within the traditional verse chorus verse chorus structure which is something people forget.......

So so right you are. It's sad when people think that music is only good when it's all clicks and beeps over a drum loop with Thom Yorke moaning incoherent nonsense through a voicebox.

 

[rjhbonovox]

1. The Beatles were technically some of the greatest musicians of their time. All of their albums from Rubber Soul on until Abbey Road are some of the most complex and finely-crafted (excluding maybe the White Album) albums of the past 40 years. And people call Radiohead experimental? The Beatles were the first to do almost everything! Listen to Srgt. Pepper's and try to tell me how on Earth they made that in 1967, it's really remarkable.

Seargent Peppers is boring crap, if you listen to it now it sounds sooooooooo dated. If you really want to hear great 60's music that still sounds fresh and exciting today then Hendrix's Are You Experienced/Axis Bold As Love/Electric Ladyland albums are what you should listen to.

Also, although I respect Lennon/McCartney for being great song writers, I will never ever respect a prat like George Harrison who in 1997 said that no one will be listening to U2 songs in 20 years time and what have they ever done. Can anyone on here remember this? Certainly sticks in my mind and it comes from a guy that was verrrrrrrrrrry lucky to know Lennon and McCartney and take a free ride in the biggest band ever. What did George Harrison ever achieve on his own. Oh hang on he sang that religious shite "My Sweet Lord", yeah fuc#ing ground breaking that was!

 

[ZeroDude]

Sgt. Peppers boring eh? It seems to me you have have a lack of respect for a good tune coupled with good lyrics which what draws people to most music anyway to a certain extent in nearly every genre .

 

[Lancemc]

You know what rjh, I try to be civil and have calm balanced discussions in here, but you are really pissing me off. I know this is going to sound opinionated and rude, and I apoligize to the mods in advance, but you are one of the most ignorant, bigoted, stupid son of a bitch I've ever seen on here. You call us blind worshippers, but you are really the one that has his head lodged up his own ass. You just cannot allow yourself to agree with anyone, no matter how right they are. What did George Harrison ever accomplish? How fucking ignorant are you? He contributed some of the best songs The Beatles ever produced (While My Guitar Gently Weeps, Taxman, Here Comes the Sun, Sometimes), not to mention his first solo album "All Things Must Pass" that to this day stands as one of the defining albums of the 70's. I'm sorry that you are so in the dark about truely good music, that you can't appreciate a band as important as Srgt. Pepper, or Abbey Road. How glad I am I'm not like you.


P.S. I am truely sorry to all those who were still involved in this thread in a more civil way than I just was, because now it will be closed, and I can't say I'll be upset it is.

 

[neutral]

Thanks for the personal attack.

What constitutes a post or thread worthy of being closed, deleted, or edited by the forum moderators?
Anything that is a personal attack (by personal attack, we also include yawns, rolleyes, etc. that are directly intended to annoy, and are used excessively).

You know, replying to someone's post with "ahahahahahaha!!!!!!!!! " really isn't very nice and could also be viewed as a borderline personal attack.

 

[neutral]

P.S. I am truely sorry to all those who were still involved in this thread in a more civil way than I just was, because now it will be closed

You're right. If you have to "apologize to to the mods in advance" in your post, it would probably be better to just not post it.


That being said, some of you need to learn to discuss your opinions in a more civil manner or further action will be taken.