Premier Rock Forum

zorg wrote: Wed May 14, 2025 3:55 pm
I will give them credit for sounding relatively fresh at the time, but they weren't 18...the band were pushing well into their 30s by that point.

To be clearer, I'm the 18 year old who didn't know much about IDM or Can in 2000.

FMs equating U2 to Radiohead is just fucking reckless.

Lu Zwei wrote: Wed May 14, 2025 4:18 pm FMs equating U2 to Radiohead is just fucking reckless.

If for no other reason than Radiohead was always willing to pursue their artistic aims to the point of baffling everyone, while U2 seemed like they were only trying to find new and updated ways to stay massive.

Just finished listening to OK Computer. Again, it's been a while. Again, it's a fine album. Odd time signatures.. instrument switching.. all interesting, not revolutionary.

From what I remember of the next albums, I'm not sure if I want to continue and listen to Kid A or Amnesiac straight through. I am tempted to skip to Hail to the Thief.

I don't hear any U2 in this.

Lu Zwei wrote: Wed May 14, 2025 4:18 pm FMs equating U2 to Radiohead is just fucking reckless.

Just listen to the U2 track I posted, and tell me Radiohead weren’t trying to cop that 3 years later on Kid A.

I am in no way equating their songs or talent, only the chopped & screwed approach to guitar music during their “innovative eras”, which I think is evident.

zorg wrote: Wed May 14, 2025 6:12 pm

Lu Zwei wrote: Wed May 14, 2025 4:18 pm FMs equating U2 to Radiohead is just fucking reckless.

Just listen to the U2 track I posted, and tell me Radiohead weren’t trying to cop that 3 years later on Kid A.

I am in no way equating their songs or talent, only the chopped & screwed approach to guitar music during their “innovative eras”, which I think is evident.

Hard to know exactly what Thom Yorke & co. were emulating with Kid A, but your explanation sounds plausible.

I don't get the love for Kid A and Amnesiac. The change in sound is definitely a thing.. again, interesting but not something that hadn't already been done. The songs themselves just aren't as good as before or after in my opinion. I haven't read a lot of their interviews during this time period so it's possible they already confirmed this, but... it screams of "writer's block" to me. Or at least intentionally bypassing the good material for the weird material.

zorg wrote: Wed May 14, 2025 6:12 pm

Lu Zwei wrote: Wed May 14, 2025 4:18 pm FMs equating U2 to Radiohead is just fucking reckless.

Just listen to the U2 track I posted, and tell me Radiohead weren’t trying to cop that 3 years later on Kid A.

I am in no way equating their songs or talent, only the chopped & screwed approach to guitar music during their “innovative eras”, which I think is evident.

I hear the similarity with this one U2 track, but I think it is a fluke for U2. Sounds like they walked in the studio with a boring U2 song and someone left the 1176 cranked on the drum bus by accident and they went with it. It's a one off of weirdness for an otherwise really mundane musical experience of U2. So yeah, you could probably say sometimes Radiohead sounds like borken U2 and I wouldn't throw anything at you. Also both bands have singers with dumb faces, and all the money in the world to spend in a studio. Looking up who produced that little U2 record indicated 'produced by Flood". and I went... Oooooooooh, that makes sense. All NIN probably broke ALL of his 1176's!

EDIT: how much of all of this do we blame on Trent Reznor?

Does U2 or Radiohead have more integrity? U2 started out in the post-punk scene, and The Edge alone makes about as much noise as RH's three guitarists.

Krev wrote: Wed May 14, 2025 6:55 pm Does U2 or Radiohead have more integrity? U2 started out in the post-punk scene, and The Edge alone makes about as much noise as RH's three guitarists.

Oh, I have no clue how to answer that.

They're both bands that had enough early success that permitted them later in their careers to do whatever the hell they wanted. It seems a bit backwards, but it's a thing. That strategy can warrant interesting results. See Tusk.

Re: The Edge vs. Radiohead's "three guitarists"... no matter what The Edge could accomplish in the studio, he's still only one guitarist when they play live. And Bono is pretty much useless except as a singer, so U2* is effectively down two instrumentalists compared to Radiohead. I'll take Yorke, Greenwood, and O'Brien (who all can also play instruments other than guitar) over The Edge.

*I still like several U2 albums

BTW I’ll always have a soft spot for John Leckie’s production because of This Nation’s Saving Grace, but The Bends ain’t it. Never was. In my young days Radiohead was always supposed to be the no man’s land group, like, you were alright if you liked them but no other good bands but The Bends being someone’s fav was instant .

They did well enough on Ok Computer and Kid A was their masterpiece (not revolutionary), but who kind of cares after that. Sometimes I turn on A Moon Shaped Pool to see if I was harsh on it when it came out and that thing sucks.

I’ve been browsing wikipedia because of this goddamn thread and its kind of hilarious they considered Creep a Scott Walker ripoff. I can maybe kind of imagine it done like Jackie a little bit but there is no way in hell.

They seem like genuinely bad people at this point. Like namedrop Chomsky in an interview now bitch!

Anyways I forgot I need to buy Luke Haines’ book.