posted
Up for discussion... This is a list of bands which have become popular by blatantly imitating Radiohead. (In my opinion). Now, it is worth noting that *all* of the bands mentioned here have chosen either The Bends or OK Computer to imitate. At least as a jumping-off point ... Then, to their credit, they seem to find their own style, to some degree. But the shadow of Radiohead is always there, in every song.
1) Coldplay - Used the unique sound of Radiohead's The Bends as their starting point, even going so far as to copy Jonny Greenwood's math-rock guitar stylings and Thom Yorke's penchant for writing rorschach-test lyrics. "Yellow" "Spies" etc. Chris Martin is quoted again and again as saying that Coldplay are simply following the path that Radiohead invented. And the level of their imitation is incredibly obvious. However, Coldplay has become more and more commercial since their debut, now using the cheap songwriting trick of turning an already-existing phrase (ala U2 "It has to be believed to be seen") into a lyric. Gone are mysterious lyrics and intimate piano songs. They have moved on from a place of strict imitation to one of lobbing softball "easy listening" songs at top 40 radio and making millions while being the new Gods of stadium soft rock. Good for them. They are a skilled band, and while I (now) find their music a bit distasteful, at least they are not shy about crediting the band they are imitating with creating the style they have so unashamedly aped.
2) Muse - Like Coldplay, Muse used the success of The Bends as the platform from which to launch their careers. On their disc Showbiz they sound *exactly* like the more up-tempo tracks ("Black Star", "Just", "My Iron Lung") of The Bends but with a heavy piano mixed in. Produced by Jonathan Leckie (Radiohead's former producer), the level of their imitation is shameless. However, unlike Chris Martin, Matt Bellamy violently denies any influence. He seems to get angry about it, in fact. He attributes the same-ness of his band's sound to shared musical influence. He claims that his singing is influenced by Morrissey, and so is Yorke's, and that is why they sound the same. But Yorke sounds nothing like Morrissey, and neither does Bellamy. But he does sound *exactly* like Yorke. Coincidence? I really doubt it. However Muse no longer sound much like Radiohead, as they decided to take the style into a more riff-heavy Metallica-esque realm. To get an accurate idea of the current sound of Muse, imagine Metallica but with banging piano riffs instead of guitars, and Thom Yorke-style singing. And that is basically Muse.
3) Keane - Well, Keane is Radiohead-Lite. Keane is Radiohead with a piano and a book of Robert Frost. Keane is the latest arrival in the new wave of bands riding Radiohead's wake. This is not to say they're not good, or effective. If they had arrived 10 years ago I'd have called them talented, and original. In the current musical scene, however, they are about as fresh as the socks currently stinking from underneath my desk. I like their song, and I sing along to it. It's the Iron Lung EP with a hook. Nice. I like the piano-band twist on the style.
4) Starsailor - Most of you have probably never heard of them so I will spare you the analysis.
5) Palo Alto - Ditto. (Incidentally, Palo Alto is the title of an awesome Radiohead B-side.)
6) Sigur Ros - Lovely? Yes. Haunting? Yes. Sound exactly like Radiohead in every possible freaking way? Yes. Fake Jonny Greenwood guitar stylings? Yes. Fake Thom Yorke vocals? Check. Computer wind and Radiohead-esque synths for good measure? You betcha. Lyrics? NO idea, I don't speak the language. But they've got the Radiohead soundscape thing down. They're a little more consistently depressed than Radiohead. Which is a major feat.
Well, those are off the top of my head. I know there are many more. I will have to think about this a little more.
Posts: 2267 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Who cares? I sure as hell don't, Coldplay, Muse, Keane, all great bands in my opinion. Even if they are using a style of music that Radiohead once used, who cares. Styles of music can't be owned, others can enjoy such a style to the point where they too wish to make music similar. Thinking too biased towards one band isn't going to get you to start really enjoying certian bands. I mean, look at classical music, it all bascally sounds the same, but at the same time, its not even close. I can think of many bands that fashion themselves after other great artists. Look at the Ramones, and then look at other Punk bands, and see similarities. Look at Queen and David Bowie, and see how certain bands have the hint of them in their songs. Don't hate bands or distaste them just because they sound like a band that you obviously love listening to.
Posts: 262 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I love Radiohead! Since their music is so good, it naturally influences a lot of people. Now I want to go listen to everything I can find by all those bands. Sounds like I'm missing a lot of good stuff.
Posts: 6246 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
One band which was constantly accused of stealing from /imitating Radiohead, but in fact are innocent of the charges, is called Travis.
Posts: 2267 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
TL you have really great descriptions and comparisons for the bands! I think Chris Marin's lyrics are more on the sappy side comparted to Radiohead. Just like American mainstream starts to all sound alike, it works the same in England since Radiohead is more mainstream there than it is here. Have you heard Muse's latest album? Some very depressing stuff on there. Coldplay's new album I've only heard once, it doesn't sound very varied, but it could be because I wasn't paying close attention.
Can't wait until new Radiohead stuff! Posts: 326 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
TL, the first time I heard Coldplay's new single I thought it sounded a lot like U2. But I'm not much of a Radiohead fan to begin with.
Posts: 2867 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Coldplay definetly sounds more like watered down U2 than radiohead to me... And, just because the Muse dude has a high voice, doesn't mean he's trying to sound like the Radiohead dude. Radiohead's stuff is rather atmospheric. Muse is quite different, and does seem to be more like Morrisey.
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Not every band whose singer uses high registers is imitating Radiohead, you know. I think you're giving Radiohead way too much credit here (and I say this as a longtime Radiohead fan).
Posts: 10886 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Sigur Ros formed in 1994 predating much of the hype surrounding Radiohead aside from the song Creep.
Posts: 1336 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
It is impressive the lengths people will go through to prove that their favorite band is The Greatest Band EverTM.
Posts: 3243 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
This same argument has been made about every famous band that's ever existed. Hundreds of bands imitated the success of Nirvana, thousands tried to imitate the success of craptacular pop punk. You'll even hear whiners complaining that Dido and Frou Frou are imitation Sarah McLaughlan, but the point remains: no one cares. At least bands like Muse and Sigur Ros are, you know, GOOD. And I think one of the previous posters was right: Sigur Ros pre-dates Radiohead anyway, so accusing them of imitation is a shallow argument at best.
Besides, everyone likes comparing Muse's Matt and Coldplay's Chris to Thom Yorke for the sake of convenience: neither's voice is anything like Thom's, and most people will readily admit that Matt Bellamy is a much better vocalist than Thom is anyway.
quote:Sadly, between them, Coldplay, Muse and Keane have not written a single song that would make it on to a Radiohead LP.
This poster has either not given Coldplay and Muse a serious listen, or hasn't heard Hail to the Thief. I don't particularly like Keane, though, so I won't argue about that ^_^.
Posts: 4313 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by erosomniac: And I think one of the previous posters was right: Sigur Ros pre-dates Radiohead anyway, so accusing them of imitation is a shallow argument at best.
Pablo Honey was released in 1993, and Radiohead had been together since the 1980s, just not so much on the scene.
Creep, after little initial success, really became popular in 1994.
Sigur Ros formed in 1994. The later toured with Radiohead.
Make connections if you want to make them.
That being said, I don't really care. Silly thing to argue about-- if the music is good, listen. If not, don't listen.
Posts: 433 | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, 1) someone does care. Me. 2) I'm not saying everyone who sings in a high pitch is imitating Thom Yorke. I'm saying these specific bands are. 3) I'm not trying to say Radiohead is the Greatest Band Ever (though they are pretty freaking good.) 4) And of course the same argument has been made before about other bands because, what seems to happen is, whenever someone really original and brilliant comes onto the scene (like Radiohead, or like the Pixies, or like the Ramones) a bunch of people come out to imitate them.
I *like* most of the bands I am saying are Radiohead imitators.
But I believe in crediting where credit is due. Radiohead were/are unique. When they came onto the scene -- especially with The Bends -- no one sounded like them. No one. Not even close.
Now, everyone and their brother sounds like them.
I'm not mad at the other bands for aping their style, all I'm saying is, let's give credit to Radiohead for *inventing* something new. The Beatles and the Beach Boys did it, Black Sabbath did it, the Talking Heads did it, the Pixies did it, and now Radiohead have done it.
posted
In particular, I will note that I am a huge fan of Parachutes, and an enormous Muse fan. I think Keane is all right, and I own a couple of Starsailor records and a couple of Paloalto records. I have everything Sigur Ros ever released in the US.
I am a *huge* music fan.
What makes Radiohead so special is that they don't sound like anyone but themselves. They are heavily influenced by certain people (R.E.M., Tom Waits, the Smiths, Television, the Talking Heads) but they do not imitate them in any way.
And that is what I admire the most.
Posts: 2267 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: most people will readily admit that Matt Bellamy is a much better vocalist than Thom is anyway.
Yeah, most MUSE fans.
Most Muse fans (I am one, btw) have the same chip on their shoulder about Radiohead that Bellamy has. They resent the fact that it's so easy for others to recognize that their favorite band started out as nothing more than a pale Radiohead imitation, it drives them crazy with jealousy.
Which is funny. I really, really dig Muse, though. They're very good.
I think the constant comparisons to The Bends upon the release of Showbiz drove them into more interesting musical territory than they otherwise would have gone... I think they had a major inferiority complex around that time that led them to want to prove something, which led to the more distinct-sounding and cool Muse of today.
Posts: 2267 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I would argue that such comparison is useless anyway. People will like the music that they like.
I think you are mistaken when you say that Radiohead is unique in that they do not sound like anyone but themselves. While early radiohead was fairly cutting edge alt-rock, there were many stylistic simularities between Radiohead's music and that of bands such as Nirvana, Soundgarden, and The Cure.
I for one used to find myself drawing comparisons between early Radiohead with early Pearl Jam (particularly The Bends and Ten). However those two bands today have very distinct and different styles, reflecting the transitions and evolution that the bands when through.
Listen to Radiohead's Kid A and Pearl Jam's Yeild alblums, for example, and you can clearly see how the two groups took very distinct paths regarding the music they make, but I still like the music from both bands.
The fact that a band may sound similar too someone else, especialy in their early years, doesn't necesarily negate the merits of their music. You either like the music or you don't. And who knows, maybe the album that Keane puts out several years from now will sound nothing like their recent release, just as Hail to the Theif is a a very different sounding record than Pablo Honey or The Bends...
It could happen
Posts: 43 | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
Well, Radiohead flat-out, undeniably, unutterably, NEVER sounded like Pearl Jam or Soundgarden. Pablo Honey was a little closer to the realm of grunge, I agree, but The Bends most assuredly does NOT sound anything remotely like Ten. Just not even close, no way, no how. (Just for fun I just played songs from both albums back and forth to try to get a feel for what you are saying -- and no dice.)
And I never made the argument that the fact that these bands are imitation Radiohead makes their music meritless.
And in fact I have gone out of my way to give them credit, where it is warranted, for branching away from their initial instincts to carbon Radiohead and find a more distinct sound. I specifically praised Muse and Coldplay for doing just that.
But in my opinion Radiohead were the pioneers of this particular form of pop, back in the days of The Bends and OK Computer.
And now everyone is doing it.
That is all I am saying.
Posts: 2267 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I completely agree with you regarding giving them credit. Radiohead changed the face of popular music.
Regarding Pearl Jam and Radiohead: to me "planet telex" and "Oceans", "High and Dry" and "Black" specificaly have many similar elements. Perhaps less closely, "Just" and "Porch". It might just be me, but I always associated the two albums, though Ten is definatly a lot heavier, while The Bends is more mellow and acoustic. Still, Radiohead did not evolve in a vacuum.
My main point was that bands' styles change over time, and that it does a band a diservice to judge their meritbased on who they sound like. Apparently I didn't do a very good job getting that across. I feel that as long as a group is not an exact stylistic copy of another band, which none of the listed bands are, what matters is whether or not you like the music.
posted
After listening to the few Coldplay songs I have, I must admit that they do have a few songs that very closely resemble the mood of "Fake plastic trees" style Radiohead, though they also have many songs that are clearly demonstrate a unique style. While I admit that they are many similarities between Radiohead and Coldplay (many more than my rather poor example of pearljam and radiohead), Coldplay also has it's own distinct style and I would hope that they continue to grow so as to further develop that style.
Posts: 43 | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
All great musicians start out by imitating the sound of someone else. Most continue to do so for their whole career. It's not a bad thing.
Posts: 8120 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Sure, Tres, but TL's claim that Radiohead were not imitators of other sounds is invalid. Pablo Honey is a pretty clear-cut case of a Brit-pop take on the grunge sound. The acoustic material on The Bends, while good, is the nth in a long line of Beatles imitations. Their post-OK Computer material reveals electronic influences.
As someone else pointed out, Radiohead do not exist in a vacuum. Just like everyone else, they have musical influences and those influcences show through in what they write.
I also have some particular criticisms of two of TL's comparisons.
Muse
Muse's Showbiz definitely sounds a lot like early Radiohead, partly because of the music and partly because Bellamy's voice does sound like a fuller version of Yorke's. But that doesn't mean Bellamy is imitating Yorke's singing style, it simply means that they have similar voices. Bellamy can't help what his voice sounds like; it's not his fault his voice sounds like someone else's.
I also think it's a serious misnomer to say that Muse went in a "Metallica-esque" direction after Showbiz -- it's a disservice to both Muse and Metallica, particularly if you listen to Muse's middle album, Origin of Symmetry, which sounds nothing like either Radiohead or Metallica. Even Absolution, Muse's third release, doesn't have anything on it that resembles Metallica... but there are indeed some songs on it that sound like Radiohead. So I'd say that I agree with the first part of your assessment -- Showbiz sounds a lot like Radiohead -- but I disagree with the rest. And again, I'm speaking as someone who likes both bands (all three, actually, since I also like Metallica).
Sigur Ros
I honestly think everything you wrote about Sigur Ros after "lovely" and "haunting" is completely wrong. I'm not trying to be a jerk, I really do think you're way off base on this one. The guitar tones are completely different -- Johnny likes a lot of bite in his clean guitar, sort of like the Chili Peppers (he doesn't play it that way, but the settings you'd use to get both sounds out of the same setup are quite similar). I've played guitar for eight years and know songs by both bands, and when I'm playing I definitely can't get away with using the same guitar tones for Sigur Ros material as I do for Radiohead material. Sigur Ros also have a penchant (paticularly on Agætis Byrjun) for using lots of echo, which Johnny largely eschews.
Also, again with the "not every singer who pitches his voice high is imitating Thom Yorke" thing. The guy from Sigur Ros doesn't sound like Yorke at all, he just uses a similar range. This does not mean that he's imitating Yorke. I don't think he particularly sounds like Yorke, and given that the bands are roughly contemporaries it isn't likely that one is imitating the other in this respect.
I don't know what you're talking about with "computer wind and Radiohead-esque synths." I've got every Sigur Ros studio album, so I can only assume you're talking about that EP they did as the soundtrack to some performance art piece or another in the last couple of years. I didn't buy that, it didn't interest me. I also have all of Radiohead's albums save Amnesiac (which I lost some time ago but never bothered to replace since I don't like it much apart from Life In A Glass House and Pyramid Song) as well as some of their EPs, and I'm becoming increasingly confident that we're listening to two different bands who both happen to be named Sigur Ros.
Seriously, I just don't hear the influence you describe. I hear some similarities on a limited scale in both bands' later material (I'm thinking () and Kid A here -- How To Disappear Completely sounds a bit like Sigur Ros in places), enough so that I'd put them in the same musical category, but overt influence of the The Bends-Showbiz type? No.
Added: Oh. The reason I say we're listening to two different bands named Sigur Ros is that you label them "consistently depressed" when I find their music both uplifting and inspiring. Slow does not equal depressed. Try listening to Staralfur on a sunny day in front of a panoramic view, for instance.
I really like Sigur Ros as well. All of the bands I've mentioned in this post are bands I quite like. Posts: 10886 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
twinky, I thought I described the comparison between Muse and Metallica pretty well, and I still think I was right. By no means am I claiming that Muse became Metallica imitators, but Metallica songs tend to be based on strong, repeated guitar riffs of a distinct style.
Muse has become much the same way, but they're using a lot of pianos and other instruments in place of the guitar ... They still use the guitar, of course, but they don't so much build their entire songs around the sound. Their songs now tend to be based upon strong, repeated piano riffs. (They're using the piano as something like a lead hard rock guitar, wich makes for some enormously interesting and entertaining music.)
*That* is the comparison I was making -- those are the elements of style they share with Metallica. I don't think they actually *sound* like Metallica.
As far as The Bends sounding like The Beatles, sure, in the sense of following the rock song-structure which The Beatles and Brian Wilson more or less invented over the course of the 60's, but that is rock music, period. I don't remember John Lennon's singing sounding *anything* remotely like Thom Yorke's. I don't remember anything like Jonny Greenwoods' beautiful (and filthy) guitar-stylings coming from the Beatles. I don't remember Beatles songs being layered with futuristic synths and bell-noises.
Posts: 2267 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I've actually heard all of coldplays material, and all of Muse's (including Hullaballoo, which was actually kinda cool) but while Hail to the Thief was a weaker album by their standards, it still maintained a standard that songs like "The Scientist" nor "Plug in Baby" (Ok, maybe plug in baby) could not meet.
I do agree that Coldplay do have a U2 vibe, but Muse to this day just sound like a younger, more energetic, but a little foolhardy radiohead.
Posts: 122 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Metallica songs tend to be based on strong, repeated guitar riffs of a distinct style.
That's a really broad statement that is also true of almost all rock bands -- Green Day, for instance. I don't think it really means anything. Also, Muse always used a lot of piano; this is not a new development on their part. On songs like Apocalypse Please and Space Dementia the piano is central, but on other songs (Stockholm Syndrome, Citizen: Erased) the keyboard is just a footnote. Basically, I think you're overgeneralizing and that it doesn't work. Bellamy's astonishing piano virtuosity is featured on a number of songs, sure, but this: "Their songs now tend to be based upon strong, repeated piano riffs" ...well, it just isn't true. Not even half of the songs on their last record were based upon strong, repeated piano riffs, and that's even less true if you consider their last two records.
quote:I don't remember John Lennon's singing sounding *anything* remotely like Thom Yorke's. I don't remember anything like Jonny Greenwoods' beautiful (and filthy) guitar-stylings coming from the Beatles. I don't remember Beatles songs being layered with futuristic synths and bell-noises.
I didn't say that The Bends was a Beatles imitation. I said that Radiohead's immediate influences show through in their music, just like every other band in the history of music. Radiohead are not special in this regard.
In short, I think you're giving them too much credit. It's funny that I should say so, given that I've been a big Radiohead fan for a little more than ten years now and that The Bends was one of the formative albums of my adolescence and is still one of my absolute favourite records. I've sung their praises on this forum many times, especially after seeing them live. But I think you're going overboard on this one. Is this thread some sort of reaction to TomD's post about Radiohead being mostly "masturbatory filler?"
Mintieman:
On the other hand, Radiohead could not write or perform something like Butterflies & Hurricanes. They simply are not sufficiently talented, individually or collectively (which is perfectly understandable, given Matt Bellamy's obvious virtuosity). So that goes both ways, and it makes neither band better or worse.
Posts: 10886 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)
