(Amnesiac and Hail To The Thief are my two favorite Radiohead albums. At first, I was enraged by this comment, but then I realized that the diversity of opinions within the broad Radiohead fanbase is strong evidence against this article's presumption that Radiohead fans follow blindly. But really...I want to be upset about this SO BADLY because Amnesiac is, song-for-song, better than any other album they've recorded.)
Yes! Well said.
Why can't the lukewarm response of critics be because they thought it was an alright album? There's no need to either declare it revolutionary or pan it.
Stop projecting your opinion like it's objective fact.
And it's insulting to suggest (like the article does) that people who like this album must be giving Radiohead a free pass.
What an ass.
I agree with what you say about fatigue. We're so expectant that when a new Radiohead album doesn't come fully formed, the way we see/hear their older albums, we assume the album is flawed.
From the original post: "Incisive enough, but you get the sense critics would be even, well, more critical if it weren’t Radiohead."
--I think this is the opposite of what's true. I think people are harder on them because it's Radiohead and they think the band is obligated to change the world. But people had a lukewarm response to Hail To The Thief, yet I enjoy it more than most of their albums...and Amnesiac is my favorite record of theirs (often written off)...
...which leads to an even bigger issue:
To claim that fans just give the band a pass, whether you intend it or not, completely negates anybody's genuine fondness for the record (and any future music from the band). Can't you take someone at their word that they enjoy something? Even if you don't? There's lots of popular music that I can't stand (Best Coast, Wavves, etc), but I don't think the enjoyment felt by their fans is anything less than genuine. I know there's not a strong correlation there, but to say people who like The King Of Limbs are blind followers is a bit insulting to people who actually enjoy it. It's saying, "No, actually. You don't enjoy it. Because I don't--therefore, no one in their right mind actually COULD enjoy it." If we're operating on those terms, everyone who likes whatever Radiohead does next can't prove that they're not just a follower.
Exactly. What a joke. To take the suggestion to listen on headphones as a joke and then say you are underwhelmed by the album?? I'm not surprised. It's like smearing grease all over your glasses and laughing at someone who offers to clean them off for you.
That sarcasm about headphones is so off-base. This album is so detail-oriented and subtle in production, mixing and mastering. You're missing out so much to listen on a laptop or earbuds. It's a wholly different listening experience.
YOUR comment is the biggest slap in the face. To suggest that it doesn't matter how it's heard is to miss so much of the effort put into music like this. No wonder you were so underwhelmed by it.
"every death cab record has been good and they all sound pretty much alike."
The adage "agree to disagree" has never been more appropriate than right here. They've had a very distinct transformation on each album.
This song is fine, but it can't hold a candle to We Have The Facts/Forbidden Love/Photo Album era stuff. I'm still going to listen eagerly to the full album, hoping to find something to love, but I've stopped expecting it a long time ago.
Speaking for myself, I wouldn't complain that they didn't remake We Have The Facts, but I'm still bummed out with everything they've put out after Transantlanticism. I can complain that it seems to lack the things I enjoyed about them back then.
So, would I want them to "rewrite" their better albums and songs? No. But would I appreciate something that at least reminded me why I used to listen to them in the first place? Absolutely.
Wow, I disagree with most of this. It's weird that a Pitchfork write-up fueled the majority of it, rather than the music.
So I'm gonna continue to listen to this. Lots. Just in time for Spring.
Really good songs.
1) That write-up was barely discernible.
2) I think it was saying that SNL was bad. Which is weird because I thought several parts were very funny (Black Eyed Peas sketch, Weekend Update, etc)
3) "insisting on their weird-television-mix"? Not-sure-what-you-are-implying...
4) These were solid performances. Sounded great to me. Really looking forward to this album.
Someone having a bad day?
It's so weird to me when people complain about good bands being like robots on stage or looking bored...what do you want? Blink 182 hopping around? And to criticize the for rarely improvising is such a weird, misguided criticism. It's fine that you don't like a band, but don't impose your weird jam-band standards on everyone.
But Amnesic and Hail To The Thief both have electronics and billowy textures of vocals. And this really isn't glitchy at all...there are some synth loops in the first track and Phil plays along with some programmed stuff in a couple other songs, but other than "Lotus Flower" (the combination of dark and poppy, mostly falsetto, electronic-driven beat), this album doesn't sound like The Eraser at all...
I get that if you never liked Foo Fighters, this is no big deal. But for the amount of times I listened to The Colour And The Shape in the late 90s, I can't help but be curious every time they put out new music. And can I just say that There Is Nothing Left To Lose was SO GOOD, too. This...eh...okay...
How is The King Of Limbs "essentially The Eraser rewritten"??
What does that mean? Is it that there are programed drums in a couple songs? Because if that's your reason to call it The Eraser, then every Radiohead album in over a decade has been The Eraser.
i'd like to see your ratings of all those albums after you'd had them a day.
don't try to say "this album simply isn't great" like that's a fact. it's not "simply" anything. maybe you "simply" don't like it because you expect a band to intuitively know what you want out of them and then cater to it, and when they (continue to) defy expectations and predictions, you feel a little dumb and left out.
"worthless electronic beeps frosting"?? man. listen harder. there is so much happening here. it's so intricately orchestrated. this is an absolutely thrilling album. to write it off as a "D" the day after its release is so strange to me.
but my point is all the songs are NOT thom's voice and the rhythm section...there's so much going on and it's not fair to the band to oversimplify it like that. because of the way it's arranged and mixed, a lot gets lost on small speakers. i'm not a hi-fi snob or anything but there's an immense difference listening to this really loud on good speakers or headphones than on a laptop. but magpie, separator, little by little, give up the ghost, are all guitar songs, they are just mixed in a way that pushes percussion to the front, which is a new approach for the band. and all of the songs have so much in terms of keys, guitar effects, vocal effects, horns, and strings, that it's oversimplifying to say it's just thom and the rhythm section.
agree to disagree, i suppose. i don't need anyone else to enjoy this album, but i just wish people wouldnt be so quick to write it off.
Damn. I know how I sound when I say this, but listen harder and listen more. "Lotus Flower" is up there with their best songs, for sure. I think "Bloom" is too. And oh yeah, it's been out a day.
Nothing minimalistic here, except "Give Up The Ghost"--even then, there are plenty of little touches that give it more character than a simple acoustic song.
And "Pulk/Pull..." is a perfect example of that. The day I got Amnesiac, I was so disoriented. The more immediate songs stood out but the more challenging stuff confused me. It wasn't until years later that I found some clarity there and it's my favorite Radiohead album. "Pulk/Pull" is a masterpiece and I'm sure people talked shit about it the way they are about "Feral" now. I'm looking forward to growing with this album.
Are you really proclaiming this album as their death knell?? What the hell? It's been out a day. And it's fantastic. How are they "stuck"? This is nothing like In Rainbows, or anything they've done. Sure there are elements of things they've done, but yeah, I can say that it's surprising. They've never layers so many things so subtly. The orchestration is fantastic, it's just not over the top. They pushed the programmed stuff and percussion to the front, which is why people are saying it sounds like The Eraser, but there's so much more happening, and it's fantastic.
What do you know about their inspiration? What an arrogant statement. I'm sick of people's entitlement.
You saying it's just groves and Thom's voice makes me think you're just listening on laptop speakers or something because this record is so rich and thick. There are so many intricate elements woven together. I think it's the most subtle thing they've done, which makes it sound simple at times, but it's far from it.
Comments