I’ve read so many blogs, heard so many people, listened to so many other ipods and I just don’t get it. What do others like, hear or whatever, that makes them love Radiohead? I hate Radiohead! Ok, so I like ONE song (Fake Plastic Trees), but I just don’t get what the big fuss is all about.
Radiohead is called a genius group, a group that cannot do anything wrong; and yet when I previewed their recent album from 2007 I couldn’t even finish one song. Every song left me shaking my head and crazy.
I really enjoy music, all kinds of music. I would even go as far as saying I have good taste in music. Many times when I listen to an album I think, that one will be a hit, and often times it has become one, so I don’t think it’s me, but maybe it is. VH1 had a list of the top 100 best rock songs ever, and I love all of them.
Please help me know what I’m missing here, or are there others like me out there?
Posts: 82 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm not a big fan of Radiohead. I like OK Computer, but I understand where you're coming from in terms of how strange it is that they're so heavily lauded upon.
What music do you like?
Posts: 368 | Registered: Aug 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Can you identify what it is about their music you don't like? Can you identify what it is about other groups you do like?
Posts: 4313 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's OK. They're not for everyone. You're not missing anything.
They're one of my favorite groups for a lot of reasons, but know that there are LOTS of people out there that don't like Radiohead, and that's OK.
Posts: 1314 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I like them. I think they're okay. There are a few songs that I like but most blend together for me. Alittle too much angst and hard-to-hear vocals.
But I can't say that DISlike them, I just don't understand all the worship (though most of my friends have fallen off the train recently and say that "Rainbows" has almost none of the things they like about Radiohead, so they listen to "Hail to Thief" and like to pretend that they broke up before they went down this recent path.)
Posts: 1733 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
that's funny. I was a bit disappointed with Hail to the Thief and thought In Rainbows was absolutely spectacular. HTTT would probably be number 6 on my list of Radiohead albums.
Posts: 8741 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I like Radiohead because they don't produce cookie-cutter music. "Cookie cutter" being totally subjective, of course. They aren't stuck on one set of chords and one hook. They are too uber-cool to fall for that trap. My iPod library is not very large because there aren't many bands that do that for me.
I also like them because the lyrics are not the center of their music, but part of the music. I love the rhythms, Thom's voice, the chords, the melodies, and all the extra stuff they put in each song.
Posts: 5957 | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Can you identify what it is about their music you don't like? Can you identify what it is about other groups you do like?
Good question.
What I don’t like: Their overall sound. Very depressing and melancholy (not like Smashing Pumpkins melancholy though, I like Smashing Pumpkins)
The structure of their music. I like an intro, verse, pre-chorus, chorus, bridge, maybe a middle eight or a breakdown thrown in and then extros and an ending with good closure. Hey, maybe this tells me a lot about my own physiological state! Now don’t get me wrong, I know some of their songs have these elements, so maybe it’s just their overall feeling and sound. Sometimes I feel like they are trying to be Pink Floyd on depressants.
What is it I like about other groups? Other groups actually tell a story in their songs, and share a feeling other then just Strange and Weird and Depressing. Heck, I’d rather listen to a bad country song, and at least I’ll get a story out of it.
Posts: 82 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Radiohead used to be a lot more verse and chorus, especially in The Bends and to some extent OK Computer. Then they seemed to transition to making the whole song into one overall shape.
Posts: 5957 | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
see, i personally favor music that doesn't tell a specific story. I prefer abstract lyrics or songs where lyrics aren't central to the song. I like music that evokes emotion and lets my mind wander, with lyrics in there to maybe push my stream of thought into different directions.
Not to say I hate all music that tells a story(that'd be patently false, songs like Dylan's Hurricane would be an example of a story song I love), but to me it's the music that is first and foremost. Often the lyrics are almost inconsequential. Which is one of the reasons I love Radiohead. It's Thom's voice and the way he sings and the emotion he puts into it I love, not the particular words he's saying.
Posts: 8741 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think you'll find, Presences, that a lot of people love Radiohead for the very reasons you hate them. Hopefully that should answer your question if you're still not sure. Lots of people love "strange" and "weird" and "unique".
As for depressing, there's lots of music out there that I find extremely depressing (mostly "normal" radio hits). Radiohead engages my brain, which is the opposite of depressing.
Posts: 1314 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Interesting Comments. I do like a lot of what some would say strange and weird music. Pink Floyd, Xavier Rudd, Vampire Weekend, Modest Mouse, and The Strokes. I also like the old faithfulls, like U2, Matchbox 20, Red Hot Chili Peppers, The Beatles, Collective Soul, Weezer, and Ben Harper just to name a few.
I expected Radiohead fans to express the reasons they like the music and I guess Launchywiggin has said it best so far. When he said,
quote:
As for depressing, there's lots of music out there that I find extremely depressing (mostly "normal" radio hits). Radiohead engages my brain, which is the opposite of depressing.
posted
I love Radiohead's OK Computer and Kid A, and not so much they're other stuff. I haven't really listened to their newest one, so I don't know what I feel about that.
I love them for the same reasons I love Sigur Ros. There's no requirement that I listen to their lyrics. It's fine to listen to their voice and instruments, and not have to worry about it.
I use them both for when I'm writing or doing work, because they keep the part of me that gets all antsy occupied while the rest of my brain can write articles or do homework problems.
I love it when there are long, drawn out drones. Kind of like the Uilleann pipes or bagpipes in Irish music, when there is this constant note or chord that drives the song. And the music transforms slowly.
Take 'Everything in it's Right Place' from Kid A. It has that steady droning of the keyboard in the back, pretty much through most of the song. Then there's the voice on top, with other percussion and overtones.
His lyrics are good, but I don't listen to the words. I like the sound of the voice, as if it's another instrument. I mean, I just now realize that he's saying "Yesterday I woke up sucking on a lemon." I don't know what that means. And I don't really care. And the song is not short. I love long songs.
It's the same with Sigur Ros. There songs are very long, and their lyrics at some points are meaningless. In Untitled (), the songs don't have names, and the words are in a fake language they call "Hopelandic." There other CDs feature this and Icelandic, which I do not speak. So I am free to listen to the timbre of the voice, and not the explicit words or phrases.
Take Untitled # 8, a.k.a. Popplagið, there's a string line that plays for most of the twelve minute song, and the strings, percussion, and voice all build and build and build over it, making it IMHO a very engaging song.
Your old faithfuls, like Beatles, Weezer, RHCP, U2 just don't do it for me. The songs (with some exceptions) are forgetable and not something I would listen to if I had a choice.
I hope all of that helps.
Posts: 1711 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
So Radiohead fans, could you give me a list of your top 5 or so favorite songs?
Maybe my problem was being introduces to the newest 2007 album first and only hearing other songs here and there.
Posts: 82 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
So Radiohead fans, could you give me a list of your top 5 or so favorite songs?
I'd like to give them another chance...
Maybe my problem was being introduced to the newest 2007 album first and only hearing other songs here and there.
Posts: 82 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
Fake Plastic Trees Karma Police Everything In It's Right Place Electioneering Creep Weird Fishes/Arpeggi
Posts: 1336 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Their library is so diverse... I'll try to pick some highlights from different eras, in no particular order.
HTTT - There There Amnesiac - Pyramid Song Kid A - Idioteque OK Computer - Paranoid Android Kid A - Everything in Its Right Place The Bends - Street Spirit IR Disc 2 - Last Flowers IMBW Live Recordings - True Love Waits
And, for completeness' sake, something from Pablo Honey... umm, Creep, maybe. Blow Out's not terrible. I've got a thing for Anyone Can Play Guitar, but it's not a particularly good song.
This is just the tip of the iceberg.
Posts: 433 | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
Paranoid Android Idioteque Jigsaws Falling Into Place True Love Waits Street Spirit
I wouldn't necessarily call these my top 5. But these are some of my favorites and don't duplicate any of solos!
edit-damn you Fusiachi! I almost threw Pyramid song on my list too.
I'm now adding Talk Show Host and How to Disappear Completely to my list.
Though honestly, i would just suggest you listen to The Bends. If you like more standardly structured songs that album might be your best bet. I guess Pablo Honey as well, though I don't like recommending that album.
Posts: 8741 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
Cuttooth -- Amnesiac b-side Fake Plastic Trees -- The Bends Paranoid Android -- OK Computer Talk Show Host -- Romeo + Juliet sdtrk Scatterbrain -- Hail to the Thief Pyramid Song -- Amnesiac 15 Step -- In Rainbows Killer Cars -- Pablo Honey/The Bends b-sides
Man, this list would be about 30 songs long if I kept typing so I'll stop there.
Posts: 5957 | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Here is my take on them. Please understand that I’m not in anyway wanting to sound demeaning on anyone’s taste of music. I’m just trying to understand something I don’t and enjoy all you Radiohead fans’ comments.
Fake Plastic Trees – Really like, have all the elements that make a good song for me. Karma Police – Very good song, again everything I think a good song should have. Everything In It's Right Place – One of those songs I don’t get… Electioneering – Not bad, I think it is a song well put together, but wouldn’t purposefully listen to it. Creep – Probably their first HIT for me way back in the day. Weird Fishes/Arpeggi – had its few moments, but as a whole, just left me not understanding it, however, it may turn into one of those songs that if I listen to enough I may enjoy more.
So solo, out of the 6 listed songs from your list, I’d happily listen to 3 of them. Guess that’s not too bad, but wow, those other three just leave me wondering...
Posts: 82 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'll have to add the Motion Picture Soundtrack version that's just Thom and guitar, made long before Kid A. That is an awesome song.
Posts: 5957 | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, after reviewing some more of their songs, I’m going to take back my opening post that I “Hate” Radiohead. I do like a handful of their songs.
Posts: 82 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, the thing is, given what you've said here, I don't know that you'll really love any list. Radiohead is a band whose mood is usually paranoid, menacing, and restrained, even in their more sedate or "pretty" songs. You also need to put less emphasis on the singer as storyteller, not because they don't tell stories, but that this aspect is always secondary to using the voice and imagery in the the lyrics to fit with and accentuate the music going on around it. They have been called the modern day Pink Floyd, and in that regard, I think it is apt. PF isn't known for straightforward lyrical songwriting.
My list of favorites (by album): Pablo Honey None, although Creep is a useful starting point to see how they have changed over time.
The Bends "The Bends" "Just" "My Iron Lung" "Black Star" "Street Spirit (Fade Out)"
OK Computer "Paranoid Android" "Subterranean Homesick Alien" "Karma Police" "No Surprises" "Lucky"
Kid A "Everything in Its Right Place" "Kid A" "How to Disappear Completely" "Idioteque"
Amnesiac "Packt Like Sardines in a Crushd Tin Box" "Pyramid Song" "You and Whose Army?" "Like Spinning Plates"
Hail to the Thief "2 + 2 = 5 (The Lukewarm.)" "There There. (The Boney King of Nowhere.)" "A Punchup at a Wedding. (No no no no no no no no.)"
In Rainbows -- Hardest one to whittle down, still in a honeymoon period over this album "15 Step" "Weird Fishes/Arpeggi" "Reckoner" "Jigsaw Falling into Place" "Videotape"
posted
Looking at your response to others, you like Radiohead's sensibility, when applied to more conventionally structured rock songs, but you aren't buying their experimental stuff. And that's cool, not everyone likes the same stuff.
posted
I'm glad that what I appreciate most about Radiohead is what others are saying they like here. That is, the lyrics and storytelling being secondary to the imagery and emotion of the music.
I think I'm drawn to music that does that, because very often I am writing when I am listening to it, and having music that conjures up emotions without demanding that I pay attention to words is crucial. Pink Floyd is one of my favorite bands for that reason among others. Heck, sometimes I turn on Chopin, because that's the mood I want. Even *cough* Enya is useful.
Posts: 5957 | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
You have to be in a certain mood to listen to Radiohead. They can definitely sound a bit depressing at first glance. One of the reasons they are so popular is because their sound is so dense. The songs they have are so full of emotion and they create these beautiful musical landscapes for the listener to just immerse themselves in.
Posts: 1158 | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Presences, it's okay to dislike Radiohead. I have the best musical taste on this forum, and I think they suck. More accurately, they are capable of producing decent songs whenever they write songs that don't sound much like Radiohead.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by SoaPiNuReYe: You have to be in a certain mood to listen to Radiohead. They can definitely sound a bit depressing at first glance. One of the reasons they are so popular is because their sound is so dense. The songs they have are so full of emotion and they create these beautiful musical landscapes for the listener to just immerse themselves in.
The "depressing" angle is, I think, based a basic difference between how folks who enjoy Radiohead and folks who don't approach music (and often any artistic medium).
I find any art that imparts a sense of catharsis to be incredibly powerful. It creates a surge of emotion in me that, regardless of the actual "positivity" or "negativity" of the source, feels good in a very fundamental way. It's hard to describe... it's not a feeling that's easily defined as "happy." It just feels good, and right, and very intensely so.
So when I listen to Radiohead songs like "How To Disappear Completely" or "No Surprises," I don't come away with a feeling of sadness or depression, despite the songs' dark subject matters and melancholy tone. Instead, I feel uplifted. The odd structures of their songs furthers this sensation, because the first time I listen to a song, I can't predict where it will go; however, its unconventional nature means that I end up internalizing what makes it unique upon repeated listens much more quickly. Whereas many bands' songs can blend together in your brain, you will never mistake two different Radiohead songs for each other.
Conversely, I have a lot of friends who don't like Radiohead, and they very often (although not always) tend to describe their musical tastes using terms similar to the ones Presences used: traditional structures, storytelling-driven lyrics, catchy tunes, and a general feel that isn't "depressing." Unlike me, they tend to feel the mood of a song as their actual emotional response to it, and so a sad song makes them feel sad, while a happy song cheers them up. So Radiohead songs tend to come off as weird, upsetting, and paranoid.
Admittedly, the above is painting with a broad brush, and I don't mean to place any sort of value judgments on how I listen to music compared to others. Both styles of listening are equally valid. In my experience, one inevitably leads towards enjoyment of Radiohead, whereas the other leads away.
Posts: 1321 | Registered: Sep 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I have to mention, I called Radiohead's music "paranoid, menacing, and restrained", and realized the prove it with their song titles from just one album (OK Computer):
posted
Here are the top five Radiohead songs I think you would like that you haven't already tried, in no particular order:
You (Pablo Honey) Planet Telex (The Bends) Just (The Bends) The Trickster (My Iron Lung EP) Optimistic (Kid A)
If you like those and want more, listen to Absolution, the third Muse album.
quote:I really enjoy music, all kinds of music. ... VH1 had a list of the top 100 best rock songs ever, and I love all of them.
Many of the top 100 best rock songs ever share the same musical structure, are written in a handful of different keys, and recycle a lot of the same chord progressions. I'd probably also love most of VH1's top 100 rock songs if I saw the list, but that isn't what makes my taste in music diverse. What makes my taste in music diverse is that there are composers and artists I like who were writing 200 years ago, 100 years ago, 10 years ago, and right now, all in totally different genres and styles of music and using different groups of instruments. I like everything from Chopin's piano concertos to Thelonius Monk's jazz craziness to Led Zeppelin's straight-up rock to Aphex Twin's electronic musings.
I like Radiohead both when they're being conventional and when they're being unconventional, although there are significant portions of each category within Radiohead's total volume of work that I also dislike -- e.g. most of Amnesiac, most of Pablo Honey, Bones from The Bends, the second track on In Rainbows. I like pop and hooks and ABAB and all that good stuff, but those things are absolutely not prerequisites for me to like a song, and I certainly don't think they should be prerequisites for a song to be considered "good." A lot of what I consider the "best" music I listen to lacks those things; some of my favourite music lacks those things.
Posts: 10886 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, Presences, I'm mostly with you - I don't get most of the Radiohead love that's out there. I really liked OK Computer, but the more recent albums don't get there for me.
We can start a club. Posts: 3932 | Registered: Sep 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: [QB] Presences, it's okay to dislike Radiohead. I have the best musical taste on this forum, and I think they suck.
The structure of their music. I like an intro, verse, pre-chorus, chorus, bridge, maybe a middle eight or a breakdown thrown in and then extros and an ending with good closure. Hey, maybe this tells me a lot about my own physiological state! Now don’t get me wrong, I know some of their songs have these elements, so maybe it’s just their overall feeling and sound. Sometimes I feel like they are trying to be Pink Floyd on depressants.
It is quite true that Radiohead doesn't deal in traditional song structures that much for some key reasons- reasons taht have a big impact on their sound, their structure, their content, and their style. One thing about the band that can make it quite different from others is that all the members of the band have different influences on the compositional process with the albums- they all have different interests, and especially in the case of York and Greenwood, they each contribute totally different parts of a lot of the same songs. You'll notice, I think, that the band has moved far afield from the days when York was the most well recognized member and the guiding influence. Lately, as in the second half of their life as a band, Greenwood has shown brighter in my opinion as a creative force. York is pretentious, difficult to deal with, and melancholic, especially lyrically. Greenwood on the other hand is much more complex in mood and interesting to listen to.
The other issue that you probably don't appreciate if you can't get through their albums is that their songs are compiled into an album before they are finished. This means that elements from the different songs start effecting the transitions to and structures of other songs. If you listen to the Kid A album, the first three songs are contiguous, not in style, but in their transitions and in their overall mood and structure- there is also a style correlation, but it is changing. You'd never get taht if you didn't listen to them consecutively, and frankly I doubt you'd enjoy it the first 10 times. Maybe that's just the way Radiohead is. I rarely like their songs until I've listened to them a number of times-
It's something I experience in my own compositional process. When you've spent many different sessions, maybe even combined different projects together to produce a whole that represents all of the moods which produced it, you come up with something like a 12 layer dip of ideas and emotions and interpretations. Unlike the traditional song you describe, these songs don't move in a single direction, don't share a single unifying purpose, and they can be very baroque, even though they contain minimalist elements.
All this doesn't sum up to "you should like it," but I think "you should be able to appreciate it, given a healthy perspective." That perspective can be gained, imo, from listening a lot more than you have, and maybe that's not worth it to you, because you don't believe in it anyway.
quote: What is it I like about other groups? Other groups actually tell a story in their songs, and share a feeling other then just Strange and Weird and Depressing. Heck, I’d rather listen to a bad country song, and at least I’ll get a story out of it.
So I think that's the key assumption you make, and wrongly from where I'm sitting. The story of a Radiohead piece is one that's told on a plane different from a country song- the focus is often unclear on first or second listen. For instance, "Everything in it's Right Place," only has something like 4 lines in it. They don't mean that much together, but in context of the song, the sound produced, the progression of tension and release in the track, you can appreciate the words and the manifold evocations they suggest- they can begin to form mental pictures for you, mental landscapes that keep coming back or unfolding around you. That stuff's fascinating to me, but it's not something you're going to like if you want to listen to a country song and hear a story- at least not in the same sitting. Personally, I think "story songs" in the traditional form are an anathema to music. Or at least to interesting music.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tarrsk: Conversely, I have a lot of friends who don't like Radiohead, and they very often (although not always) tend to describe their musical tastes using terms similar to the ones Presences used: traditional structures, storytelling-driven lyrics, catchy tunes, and a general feel that isn't "depressing." Unlike me, they tend to feel the mood of a song as their actual emotional response to it, and so a sad song makes them feel sad, while a happy song cheers them up. So Radiohead songs tend to come off as weird, upsetting, and paranoid.
Admittedly, the above is painting with a broad brush, and I don't mean to place any sort of value judgments on how I listen to music compared to others. Both styles of listening are equally valid. In my experience, one inevitably leads towards enjoyment of Radiohead, whereas the other leads away.
There was an interesting presentation on this in my mixed electronic musc/ technicultural studies class. There are many underpinnings of this "music=emotion" attitude in western culture that insist upon the idea that a mood or an outlook is necessarily reflected in a particular musical mode, in a particular harmony, or in a particular rhythm. Ironically it's the kind of musical absolutism that some here criticize me for, but it is just assumed to be true: the assumption that music only exists as mood, and that this mood is fixed and that your perception of that mood is necessarily correct.
I get very impatient with people who constantly equivocate when describing music by invoking mood as a primary element. It just isn't- in a lot of music. It also promotes intellectual laziness, so that the person can write off the "depressing," the "not fun," and also defend their counterparts, which may be artistically inferior.
In my personal experience, the most creative and dynamic artists I have met do not avoid a clear mood, but they do not lean on a mood in the way that many listeners do. The only glaring exception was Terry Moore, a well known poet who read at a reading before me, and his poems were highly evocative of mood and emotion. I think the difference was that he was stressing that part of the experience in a way that payed close attention to effect- creating a "mood structure," in a way that was highly relateable.
Basically, what I find is that when musicians talk about other people's music, mood is less of a factor because it is understood to be a) difficult to quantify, b) inherent to music, and fully expected (so it would be like remarking that a novel had a story) and c) less interesting or revealing than other subjects. When I show a piece to my composition teacher, he doesn't even ask me what the mood of the music is- unless he feels that I don't know. At that point, determining the mood is quite simple, and breaks in the mood are quite obvious and blunt objects.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Jon Boy: I'll second the suggestion of starting with The Bends and working your way forward (and backward). Here's a list of a few of my favorites:
Oy. Picking just five is hard, and I'm not entirely satisfied with my choices.
I agree with 2+2=5 and Reckoner. I just don't get why lucky is on so many lists- it's such a throwback song, it's a radiohead novelty.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Isn't a novelty something that's "new, original, or unusual"? Did you mean it like it was the opposite of those?
I don't bother with picking 5 Radiohead songs as being my "favorites" or any better than others. However, here is a list of 5 Radiohead songs that aren't the other 100 Radiohead songs, and tell a menacing story:
(Get your)
Knives Out
(Because there's)
A Wolf at the Door. (It Girl. Rag Doll.)
(with)
Myxamotosis
(who was)
Hunting Bears.
(The wolf yells:)
We Suck Young Blood. (Your Time is Up.)
Posts: 1314 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote: I get very impatient with people who constantly equivocate when describing music by invoking mood as a primary element. It just isn't- in a lot of music. It also promotes intellectual laziness, so that the person can write off the "depressing," the "not fun," and also defend their counterparts, which may be artistically inferior.
Intellectual laziness? Artistically inferior? Just because someone listens to music as a mood invoking experience does not make them or the song artistically inferior. Most of the music I listen to does invoke a mood on me, which is why I like the music. I believe that is an artistic ability for the artists to create a song that stirs my emotions and an imaginative ability on my part to allow it to create moods for me. I let the songs do this to me because I enjoy that. (maybe I’m a little weird) I also LET books, conversations, movies and such provide me a mood, isn’t that part of the human experience? Your assumptions seem to me intellectually lethargic. The human dynamic of each individual person stretches beyond our understanding. There are plenty of intellectuals that are very emotionally driven human beings, whether they admit it or not. Try to understand that maybe one’s preference in music is just that, a preference. Radiohead songs are artistic, unique, and intriguing. However, I just don’t like to listen to them. Am I put into a mood when I listen to them? Yes. Could I make them not put me into a certain mood? Yes, but that makes the listening experience unmemorable and quite frankly, boring to me, but that is just me. Some are drawn towards a mood, others abstractness. Who is to really determine if one way makes them a better recipient of music? And is it a challenge to their intellect? There are dead heads and intellectuals who love Radiohead. I could say the same about those who like Collective Soul.
My case and my point; I don’t get all the music that others like, and I like music that others loath. I opened this post trying to get into the minds of those who like Radiohead. I didn’t want to miss out on something others seemed to love. I love music, as you’ve all read, and my conclusion is this: “One Man’s Rubbish is Another Man’s Fortune”. Also, each of our dynamics are so complex and diverse that our taste in music should not come down to who is more intellectually capable than the other.
Posts: 82 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Orincoro: I agree with 2+2=5 and Reckoner. I just don't get why lucky is on so many lists- it's such a throwback song, it's a radiohead novelty.
Whoops. I meant "Let Down," not "Lucky."
Posts: 9945 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Presences, I said people who "equivocate" by using mood as a descriptive or generalizing crutch. I didn't say anything about people's preferences, I was talking about how people THINK about music and describe it. Listen to what you want, god forbid I should suggest that I don't like it when people talk a certain way- I'm constantly told by people who don't like the way I think/talk. Get over it.
quote: Also, each of our dynamics are so complex and diverse that our taste in music should not come down to who is more intellectually capable than the other.
I still have a problem with people who deny that an intellectual experience in music is impossible for them- I seek a balance, but the emotional side is far, far overhyped by popular media, and dominates conversations about music which I find nonproductive and non-communicative.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:You have to be in a certain mood to listen to Radiohead.
Mood? Maybe altered state of mind. Perhaps that a generalization but when I hear pot-heads or people under other mind-altering influences tell stories about their various "high experiences," Radiohead seems to be the popular musical backdrop. Which I can totally understand because some of their songs with their bleary lyrics and melodies are remind me how I'd feel drunk at some college party. And that's probably why I find myself repulsed by certain songs.
quote:I get very impatient with people who constantly equivocate when describing music by invoking mood as a primary element. It just isn't- in a lot of music. It also promotes intellectual laziness, so that the person can write off the "depressing," the "not fun," and also defend their counterparts, which may be artistically inferior.
quote: Conversely, I have a lot of friends who don't like Radiohead, and they very often (although not always) tend to describe their musical tastes using terms similar to the ones Presences used: traditional structures, storytelling-driven lyrics, catchy tunes, and a general feel that isn't "depressing." Unlike me, they tend to feel the mood of a song as their actual emotional response to it, and so a sad song makes them feel sad, while a happy song cheers them up. So Radiohead songs tend to come off as weird, upsetting, and paranoid.
quote:That stuff's fascinating to me, but it's not something you're going to like if you want to listen to a country song and hear a story- at least not in the same sitting. Personally, I think "story songs" in the traditional form are an anathema to music. Or at least to interesting music.
I ran into this problem while trying to describe my first listening of "Rainbows" to my boyfriend. I spent most of my youth training in piano or voice, so while I always sucked a musical theory, I had a pretty good ear for the styles I was trained for which are mainly classical, operatic, and showtunes. Now, he's a pretty good guitar player so no doubt his ear is more refined for the guitar-based tunes of the modern musical machine. And it just runs back to this whole aesthetic argument over what is beauty and that cliched but important statement, "I don't know about art, but I know what I like when I see it." I can listen to all the arguments in the world about how their use of chords is amazing or how they revolutionized lyrical singing, and so forth. But it just doesn't speak to me. I don't know much about guitar chords and I wasn't trained for that kind of singing, so I don't appreciate it. When he listens to Radiohead or a new jazz album, I know we aren't hearing the same things. He hears something technical and instrumentally creative while it feels lacking to me. He likes the openness of instrumental songs while, as a writer who grew up with a folk influence, I value the storytelling. He wants to imagine his own story while I want an author to take me on a journey and tell me a tale that may be outside my realm of experience.
As for emotions, I like when a song can be both whimsical and depressing. I'm a huge dork when it comes to the Barenaked Ladies because they can come up with these infectious melodies but when you stop to listen to the lyrics, they're often about feeling lost, damaged, lonely, hurtful, etc. And that probably says alot about my psychological state. haha. They're more about using music as a support or partner to the storytelling (which isn't to say they aren't good musicians because you should hear Jim Creeggan on the bass on their earlier stuff. Wow!)
Its all about what is it about music that brings you in. Are you there for the technical skill, the storytelling, or some mystical visceral reaction?
Posts: 1733 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I haven't heard very much Radiohead music. But I find the song "Creep" to be endlessly annoying and whiny. I'm assuming that not all of their music is similar to this style of disturbingly whiny?
On a differing note, I really like the band Relient K.
- If I had interest in listening to Radiohead, what would be a good album with which to begin my exposure to their music?
Posts: 9 | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Orincoro: Presences, I said people who "equivocate" by using mood as a descriptive or generalizing crutch. I didn't say anything about people's preferences, I was talking about how people THINK about music and describe it. Listen to what you want, god forbid I should suggest that I don't like it when people talk a certain way- I'm constantly told by people who don't like the way I think/talk. Get over it.
quote: Also, each of our dynamics are so complex and diverse that our taste in music should not come down to who is more intellectually capable than the other.
I still have a problem with people who deny that an intellectual experience in music is impossible for them- I seek a balance, but the emotional side is far, far overhyped by popular media, and dominates conversations about music which I find nonproductive and non-communicative.
I don't think it's as clear as an intellectual/emotional divide. As I wrote in my last post, my response to music like Radiohead's operates fundamentally on an emotional level. As a guitarist and classical violinist, I also happen to know enough about music theory to appreciate that Radiohead does some really amazing things from an intellectual standpoint, but ultimately it's not the reason why I like them. It informs my opinion, and perhaps provides a rational explanation for why their music affects me more than that of bands that more closely adhere to traditional musical structures- for example, Coldplay, who are often (and justifiably so) derided as "Radiohead-lite."
But the ultimate basis of my enjoyment of Radiohead really is the emotional component. The songs make me feel, very strongly. They're extraordinarily evocative. Without that sense of emotional connection, I wouldn't be a fan of the band, no matter how complex or intellectually stimulating their music was. There are plenty of bands who are far more musically ambitious than Radiohead, from the technical complexity of Rush to the avant-garde noise rock of Battles, which challenges our very definition of music. But I'd listen to "Kid A" or "In Rainbows" over either of those bands anyday, because I find those albums viscerally powerful in a way that the music of Rush and Battles isn't.
Where I differ from Presences' perspective, I think, is what I described earlier, which is that though the emotional component of a piece of music is of utmost importance to me, the actual specific mood it conveys is secondary. I've had that same cathartic feeling evoked by both "happy" and "sad" songs, by "storytelling" songs and "abstract" songs, by hard rock songs with a driving beat and folk songs accompanied only by an acoustic guitar. Really, Radiohead are most impressive to me because they can so consistently inspire that reaction. For most bands, I'll get that feeling from some of their songs but not others. Radiohead gets me every damn time.
Edit: Case in point from their newest album... you won't find two songs more stylistically disimilar than "15 Step" (an electronic dance track written in 5/4 time) and "Faust Arp" (a delicate folk ballad backed by a gorgeous string section). But when I hit that instrumental breakdown halfway through "15 Step," I get almost an identical intensity of emotion as I feel during the transition to the lovely outro of "Faust Arp."
Posts: 1321 | Registered: Sep 1999
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
More accurately, they are capable of producing decent songs whenever they write songs that don't sound much like Radiohead.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
