Radiohead's biggest weakness

[u2popmofo]

Originally posted by MrBrau1


I agree. Their lack of range is a huge weakness. It would be great to hear them toy with some "Rock and Roll", country, R&B, even pure pop. But I think their fanbase would run away if they released anything with a "wink" or "smile" in it.

You have to admit though, this is like saying U2 should try metal and rap, and then saying it's a "weakness of theirs" because they don't.

And when it comes down to it, you could make a pretty good arguement that Radiohead HAVE done songs influenced and including sounds from all of those noted genres.

[U2DMfan]

I happen to think 'There, There' among others has a pretty cool rhythm going on, but that's just me.

[U2DMfan]

Originally posted by u2popmofo

And when it comes down to it, you could make a pretty good arguement that Radiohead HAVE done songs influenced and including sounds from all of those noted genres.

or just listen to Pablo Honey, right?

[elevation2u]

Myxamatosis [sp?], i might be wrong, Knives out, national anthem...those are few with definitely good ryhthms , rhythm doesnt necessarily have to be mysterious ways, motown or beyonce...
radiohead isnt meant to be dance music, last i checked

[Basstrap]

I think you have to have some love of actual "music" to appreciate a lot of recent Radiohead music.
that is, an appreciation of shifting beats and crazy time signatures. Believe me, it requires a HELL of a lot of talent to pull off something like Pyramid song or even Let Down.

It's one of the main things I love about them. 4/4 gets old fast.

if you want to shake your ass, then go listen to Remy Shand

[Flying FuManchu]

Originally posted by u2popmofo


You have to admit though, this is like saying U2 should try metal and rap, and then saying it's a "weakness of theirs" because they don't.

And when it comes down to it, you could make a pretty good arguement that Radiohead HAVE done songs influenced and including sounds from all of those noted genres.

U2 tried faux rap with Bono's spoken word/ mish mash. Look at Elevation. Miami. You're Not My Baby... As for metal? They never did true metal but they've done hard rock which is pretty close.

Anyways, who's talking about blues based rock I'm sure if you analyze the Bends you can find some blues based riffs or lead bits (can't remember since its been so long since I listened to the album). Wasn't this thread about how Radiohead can't bring a little to the fleshly jiggle? Techno isn't blues based and it still can make people dance.

[Zoots]

Originally posted by Flying FuManchu


U2 tried faux rap with Bono's spoken word/ mish mash. Look at Elevation. Miami. You're Not My Baby...

Don't forget Elvis Ate America!

As for Radiohead, I agree with u2popmofo that it can't be considered their weakness. It's just not their style. And.. yes U2DMfan, There There has a very nice rhythm!

[Flying FuManchu]

Wait... so people won't begrudge Radiohead for not going beyond their own apparent limitations by excusing it as being a style issue?

[LJT]

Originally posted by Flying FuManchu
Wait... so people won't begrudge Radiohead for not going beyond their own apparent limitations by excusing it as being a style issue?

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....

[Jack In The Box]

Originally posted by Basstrap
4/4 gets old fast.

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

[Flying FuManchu]

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.

[JOFO]

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.

[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.

[corianderstem]

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.

[TheRooster]

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.

[joyfulgirl]

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.

[Lancemc]

Radiohead's biggest weakness is Hail to the Theif.

[Layton]

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.

[u2popmofo]

Great post, Layton.

[joyfulgirl]

Really, really great.

I would argue that National Anthem has its primal moments, though.