The Official Radiohead Thread

[sweet_nothing]

Originally Posted by trace87

i hate a national anthem.

I strongly prefer the live version to the studio version, but you have to admit the bass is hypnotic.

Originally Posted by dac

Those songs are more meant to be a part of the album as a whole and fit the concept they are trying to go for. Yes, if you put on either of those songs out of the blue, they suck, but in the context of the album they work.

qft
The albums just wouldnt be the same without them especially Fitter Happier.

[Urban Hat€monger ?]

Originally Posted by dac

Those songs are more meant to be a part of the album as a whole and fit the concept they are trying to go for. Yes, if you put on either of those songs out of the blue, they suck, but in the context of the album they work.

Who says I wasn't referring to them in the context of the album ?

[debaserr]

Originally Posted by sweet_nothing

I strongly prefer the live version to the studio version, but you have to admit the bass is hypnotic.



qft
The albums just wouldnt be the same without them especially Fitter Happier.

ok ok. i dont HATE it. but its definitely one of the weakest tracks off kid a in my opinion. i usually skip it.

[sweet_nothing]

I'll be honest the first time I heard Kid A I thought it was boring as hell, the only song I thought worth giving a second listen to was Optimistic. But once I gave it a proper listen and opened my mind at abit I saw that it really was a great album. I usally do this with all Radiohead albums except the Bends and In Rainbows.

[Mr Sensitive]

I find Treefingers very theraputic.

[jibber]

random impression about radiohead:

I love radiohead. They are one of my favorite bands, and one of the very few bands I can listen to for hours on end without getting bored. What annoys me however, is how they've been elevated to near deity status by putting out a free album. Everyone sings their praises for not selling out, for keepin their integrity, and staying true to their music.

Please, In Rainbows was as much a really good marketing scheme as it was a dig on big record labels. The only reason they were able to pull this off was because they were already a hugely successful band in the first place. No one would bat an eyelash at a band who put their very first record out for free download, at best it would be praised as a cool thing to do, but because a massively successful band does it, they are the new gods of alternative music.

They knew what they were doing. They knew the huge media frenzy that this would create, and they knew that thousands of people would then go out and buy their other records after jumping on the radiohead bandwagon.

Great band, and with REALLY GREAT business sense.

[Dr. Yellow Black]

Fitter Happier makes sense to be on OK Computer. It is a computer talking right?

EDIT: Jibber, I wish I held off posting a little more, you post makes perfect sense. Radiohead was smart for doing this, but I would add that from kids at school, Rockband had a lot to do with it also.

[dac]

Originally Posted by Urban Hatemonger

Who says I wasn't referring to them in the context of the album ?

Well then you obviously just hate those songs then.

Originally Posted by jibber

random impression about radiohead:

I love radiohead. They are one of my favorite bands, and one of the very few bands I can listen to for hours on end without getting bored. What annoys me however, is how they've been elevated to near deity status by putting out a free album. Everyone sings their praises for not selling out, for keepin their integrity, and staying true to their music.

Please, In Rainbows was as much a really good marketing scheme as it was a dig on big record labels. The only reason they were able to pull this off was because they were already a hugely successful band in the first place. No one would bat an eyelash at a band who put their very first record out for free download, at best it would be praised as a cool thing to do, but because a massively successful band does it, they are the new gods of alternative music.

They knew what they were doing. They knew the huge media frenzy that this would create, and they knew that thousands of people would then go out and buy their other records after jumping on the radiohead bandwagon.

Great band, and with REALLY GREAT business sense.

No one ever said Radiohead is against making money. The point they were trying to make with In Rainbows was that the whole business of the recording industry is messed up. They dislike the fact that the people that make the music aren't garnering the majority profits while some big wig in L.A. is making money for doing nothing. They dislike how it's the corporations that decides what is going to sell and the fact that they force bands to conform in order to make money. I don't know if Radiohead knew they would actually make more money than they normally would have, but they did know this record would change the recording industry forever.

[Urban Hat€monger ?]

Originally Posted by dac

Well then you obviously just hate those songs then.

Dislike rather than hate.

Anyway the point I was making that you have seemingly ignored is that I believe OK Computer is a more consistently good album while Kid A when it's good is better than OK Computer but when it's bad it's worse than OK Computer.

So I rate them about equal.

[sleepy jack]

In case any of you radiohead fanboys (i.e. dac, sweet_nothing) wonder why people hate you so much just read this thread. You're worse than Tool fans.