Rotten Tanx wrote:Ten songs is enough to think about and judge a band isn't it? Or must we listen to several albums of every band in order to have an opinion? That could take some time.

quite. also, i think "i don't like the singer's voice" is probably the most valid reason to dislike a band that there is. fingers on a chalkboard don't get better with repeat listens. i can never listen to neil young for this very reason.

I saw Radiohead at an outdoor arena in Houston last month. I think they sound better on record then in a live context. It was missing some energy. Of course I saw them on the lawn very far away and should have brought binoculars. I didn't mind the last album they did. Overall I'm indifferent to them.

I've never liked this band. I've heard all the records except the new one. I had to listen to every record on the road in a van with people that treated them with great reverence. They kept trying to convince me of their greatness, and I just wanted the record to end. I would never willingly listen to this band again and I avoid hearing their music.

crucial.

gnangle wrote:crucial.

What does this mean?

it is an emphatic way of underscoring the outlined hardlined stances displayed in the above posts.i am observing the nature of the music fans almost warlike resistance to any infiltration of anything outside their realm of musical safety. Its like watching the swiss government conduct a citizenship hearing.

ERawk wrote:I think Monsieur Warandie's post mostly reflects how I feel about the music itself, though there are a couple of songs on HTTT that I like but "Wolf at the Dorr" is probably their most tedious song.

i do actually think that HTTT contains a handful of good-to-great songs, it's just not so great as an actual 'album'.

(the good HTTT songs would imo be there there, scatterbrain, sail to the moon, and yes, wolf at the door. probably 2+2=5 as well. i quite like we suck young blood too, though it seems to be fairly unpopular)



i find it interesting to note that if radiohead had decided to put 3 or 4 of the songs from the IR bonus disc onto the album we probably would have had another bloated, aimless album like HTTT. it would have been better quality bloated and aimless album, but bloated and aimless nonetheless. thankfully they realised that concise is usually best.

I get the feeling whenever there's criticism of popular rock acts, that we wouldn't hold an otherwise underground band to the same standard. Talk of concise albums, or more criticism leveled at their type of fan, than the music.

gnangle wrote:it is an emphatic way of underscoring the outlined hardlined stances displayed in the above posts.i am observing the nature of the music fans almost warlike resistance to any infiltration of anything outside their realm of musical safety. Its like watching the swiss government conduct a citizenship hearing.

This argument is frequently used and is stupid: "I like something popular which you don't, so you are obviously small-minded and insecure." CRAP.

I think that Radiohead are ok, fwiw.

Also:

sunlore wrote:Wait so people actually listened to this band when they were thirteen?

Wow.

And to think that people give me shit for having liked Aerosmith at that age.

This band is like having tea and biscuits with your Lesbian aunt who kind of studies Sanskrit and is into encaustic. Like, I can see how it appeals to twenty-somethings on their first mortgage, but thirteen.

Did you also cry a lot?

Worth repeating for pure ha ha.

Thank you Lourens.

Yesterday I was almost stomped to death by moshing Radiohead fans. Moshing. To Radiohead.

I love Radiohead. I think they are fucking awesome.