Originally Posted by Don

Hey, just wanted to post my reply to david thorpes article which can be found by clicking here: Radiohead Sucks

I emailed him the following, which I've yet to have a reply to. Tell me what you think. If you like radiohead read it but if not, whatever...Enjoy.

Hello David. Let me start by telling you a bit about myself musically before I tell you my opinion of your banter.
I'm 22, have completed all 8 grades on the piano, been learning the guitar and bass for 5 yrs each along with singing for 3 and also played trumpet for a couple in the school band. My best instrument however is the drums which I have been playing for 13 yrs. I am also in a hard rock band playing the drums and backup vocals. Why am I telling you all this? Well I know you know; it's obvious isn’t it?
I quite enjoyed how you structured your argument but am quite disturbed about a few things. The first being that you claim to be smarter than everyone reading it, which is very arrogant, even you must agree with that. You also make other generalisations throughout. I'm curious to know how much you actually know or think you know about music itself and not about all the conformities within the music industry and in particular bands, eg Radiohead.
Okay, your argument is that radiohead are 'tricking' people into thinking they're good when they're not, yet you never explain why they're not good or why they 'suck', even though the title or your article is that they suck.
Right now you're probably thinking that I’m just another huge radiohead fan or that they're my favourite band, well let me assure you that this is not true. However, being a musician myself and being able to play a lot of their songs, it becomes quite apparent that Radiohead are, to put it simply: extraordinary musicians. They are not like any other rock band to date which is why I think you don't like them. I think that you just don't get their music, and feel that critics just say they're good because they’re different. Well they are different; they are actual talented musicians. There are hardly any rock bands out there from this era and the past era that were talented musicians in comparison to radiohead. Most rock bands from then and now know some chords and some progressions that sound good together, just put them in and right some lyrics and basic melody to go with it as simple as that. Now, I’m not saying that bands like the Beatles or led zeppelin are crap or aren’t ‘good’, because that is subjective. But to say they are not as complex or as talented as radiohead in that regard is not. Radiohead however, actually use complex chords, complex chord progressions, eerie chords that fit because they don't fit (i.e. no one else uses it making them unpredictable, which in turn make them genuine musicians), complex time signature changes and key changes, (and keys) , they use multiple layers in many songs including choir, stings, abstract and extremely multifaceted percussion elements and brass, just to name the unordinary that, in my opinion, every rock band should have in their songs to make the texture thicker, and gives the songs more heart and accomplishment. Most rock bands don't even use keyboards or piano, my God, you need a piano if you're going to compose a decent rock song. I haven't even commented on Thom Yorke's absolutely amazing voice which you cannot (!) disregard. You say they suck but you know that Yorke is a remarkable singer don't you? You can't disagree with that. The way he slides between octaves, uses melisma, and how his voice effortlessly shifts from a sweet falsetto to vicious snarls. He also uses vibrato, rubbato, and has mastered his breathing technique which allows him to hold notes with ease; street spirit and sulk are great examples. I'd be here all day if I went through the songs and analyse how complex and talented radiohead are. If you ask me too I might, as long as it convinces you that you're wrong.
Moving on now. I agree when you say Pablo Honey was not that good of an album. And I find it unbelievable how the same band can produce albums like OK computer, the bends and Kid A. This is where your (and others who think the same as you) greatest suspicion must come from. Well did it ever occur to you that bands get better as they progress? Some don't I admit but most do.
In summing up, I hope you have come to realise that Radiohead haven't tricked the public because they actually are extraordinary musicians. You said: "Radiohead, the kings nerdy, boring, tuneless rock music", which is absolutely absurd. Please listen to OK computer several times before you say something as ludicrous as that. Tuneless?? If it's anything there's too much tune. And the melodies and chord progression are too complex. Which brings me to the down side or radiohead's music. More complex albums such as Kid A actually requires the listener to know a bit about music before liking it and really appreciating it. And it is a fact to say that they are a lot more people listening to music that aren't musicians.
I hope you’ve found this educational. I'll finish this by reinstating my argument. You wrote: 'You might tell me “David, there is no possible way you could dislike (insert name of terrible band you stupidly think is good). They are geniuses.” Oh, but I can, and I do.' Are you going to tell us WHY they're crap without using genealisations and broad subjects when actually discussing their music? I told you why they don't suck; now you tell me why they suck with an argument that's worth reading this time.