Guest blicero Posted December 11, 2009 Share Posted December 11, 2009 They're kind of like Super Furry Animals in that they chase gimmicks like surround sound or protools or softsynths or whatever. They should just play their rock music live in a big room in front of good microphones connected to a high quality stereo tape machine. They can't accept the fact that they're a rock band and they keep searching for that special "it" that doesn't exist. If I ever met them I'd tell them to keep it simple stupid. I heard their last album on a plane last year, it was average but I bet they're more enjoyable live in a small venue without any 'fans' in the room. Nearly any musical genre you can think of got to wear it is by experimentation, in all it's forms. Otherwise, music literally wouldn't exist as we know it. A bit pathetic that such a narrow view would be found on an electronic music forum, don't ya think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest IRARI Posted December 11, 2009 Share Posted December 11, 2009 I bet they're more enjoyable live in a small venue without any 'fans' in the room. for me this is true of any musician Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Berk Posted December 11, 2009 Share Posted December 11, 2009 radiohead are not bad at all and idioteque is nice the cold shit thatgets signed to warp is bad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
perunamuusi Posted December 11, 2009 Share Posted December 11, 2009 where Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest chunky Posted December 11, 2009 Share Posted December 11, 2009 They're kind of like Super Furry Animals in that they chase gimmicks like surround sound or protools or softsynths or whatever. They should just play their rock music live in a big room in front of good microphones connected to a high quality stereo tape machine. They can't accept the fact that they're a rock band and they keep searching for that special "it" that doesn't exist. If I ever met them I'd tell them to keep it simple stupid. I heard their last album on a plane last year, it was average but I bet they're more enjoyable live in a small venue without any 'fans' in the room. yeah. and fuck the beatles, pink floyd, devo and brian eno for bothering with experimental instruments and recording techniques!!! i want to listen to pure guitar driven rock forever!! /sarcasm I ain't opposed to experimental instruments. What do you mean by experimental recording techniques? Pro-tools? I ain't against any of those artists, but I don't see how Radiohead have followed them in terms of experimentation. What have Radiohead done that is some kind of great experiment? Chopping stuff up on pro tools is all I can think of. Radiohead walked down the same path as Mogwai in falling in love with all this Kid606 Flashbulb D'tachi glitch IDM junk. In their imagination they think they're following the Beatles in terms of experimentation but imo the sad but true reality is that they are following the lame modern path of 'glitch IDM', a style that has nothing to do with Aphex Twin's legacy. As an aside, when Kid A came out I read a review in NME by Keith Cameron where he opined that the difference between Aphex Twin and Radiohead was that Aphex Twin made electronic music all the time, like all day every day, while Radiohead weren't so experienced. I always remembered this argument hehe, don't know exactly why. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Berk Posted December 11, 2009 Share Posted December 11, 2009 havent listened to this in a lng time, brings back memories Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awepittance Posted December 11, 2009 Share Posted December 11, 2009 i can't say i hate tom yorke or radiohead, but i definitely hate the music when it makes contact with my timpanic membrane. I have to turn it off immediately. probably has something to do with how obsessed my sister become of Kid A and the other ones and i was forced to listen to it through the wall Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest blicero Posted December 11, 2009 Share Posted December 11, 2009 They're kind of like Super Furry Animals in that they chase gimmicks like surround sound or protools or softsynths or whatever. They should just play their rock music live in a big room in front of good microphones connected to a high quality stereo tape machine. They can't accept the fact that they're a rock band and they keep searching for that special "it" that doesn't exist. If I ever met them I'd tell them to keep it simple stupid. I heard their last album on a plane last year, it was average but I bet they're more enjoyable live in a small venue without any 'fans' in the room. yeah. and fuck the beatles, pink floyd, devo and brian eno for bothering with experimental instruments and recording techniques!!! i want to listen to pure guitar driven rock forever!! /sarcasm I ain't opposed to experimental instruments. What do you mean by experimental recording techniques? Pro-tools? I ain't against any of those artists, but I don't see how Radiohead have followed them in terms of experimentation. What have Radiohead done that is some kind of great experiment? Chopping stuff up on pro tools is all I can think of. Radiohead walked down the same path as Mogwai in falling in love with all this Kid606 Flashbulb D'tachi glitch IDM junk. In their imagination they think they're following the Beatles in terms of experimentation but imo the sad but true reality is that they are following the lame modern path of 'glitch IDM', a style that has nothing to do with Aphex Twin's legacy. As an aside, when Kid A came out I read a review in NME by Keith Cameron where he opined that the difference between Aphex Twin and Radiohead was that Aphex Twin made electronic music all the time, like all day every day, while Radiohead weren't so experienced. I always remembered this argument hehe, don't know exactly why. i don't believe that Radiohead has ever used ProTools. But that is beside the point. If you want specific examples... I believe they were one of the first major rock groups to incorporate a Kaoss pad into their music. also, i can't think of any other rock group that regularly records and performs with an Analogue Systems modular synth rig. The synth part of almost every song they perform live is built in and powered by Reaktor. the rhythm guitarist (Ed O'Brien) spends almost as much time on the floor noodling with effects as he does playing a guitar when they perform live. many of jonny's effects are built in Max/MSP by running his guitar through his MacBook. i could probably go on and on... so no, they do not use ProTools and yes, they do experiment with atypical tools/instruments in their "Rock" music. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest analogue wings Posted December 11, 2009 Share Posted December 11, 2009 you've got it backwards - it isnt cool to hate radiohead, radiohead are just uncool to me they epitomise that whole "yeah i love synthesisers but PROPER music has guitars and singing" orthodoxy. the number of best of the year lists i've seen that are like dance record, synth record, rap record, pop record, synth record, RADIOHEAD they just sound like people desperately trying to do something "important" with tired old formulas. i find their music at best ploddy and unengaging, at worst whiny and adolescent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awepittance Posted December 11, 2009 Share Posted December 11, 2009 i don't feel as strongly as you do but i do think a lot of this backlash against them could have something to do with how drastically overhyped they were when they started dabbling in electronics, you couldn't read any music publication or talk to anybody about music without hearing the band's name. and no the music itself did not justify the hype. so maybe some of the radiohead defenders in here can understand what it feels like day in and day out to be inundated with music that you find shitty and having people try to push 'Dude you gotta listen to Kid a on acid its the best album of all time' on you weekly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awepittance Posted December 11, 2009 Share Posted December 11, 2009 i don't believe that Radiohead has ever used ProTools. But that is beside the point. If you want specific examples... I believe they were one of the first major rock groups to incorporate a Kaoss pad into their music. also, i can't think of any other rock group that regularly records and performs with an Analogue Systems modular synth rig. The synth part of almost every song they perform live is built in and powered by Reaktor. the rhythm guitarist (Ed O'Brien) spends almost as much time on the floor noodling with effects as he does playing a guitar when they perform live. many of jonny's effects are built in Max/MSP by running his guitar through his MacBook. i could probably go on and on... lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest blicero Posted December 11, 2009 Share Posted December 11, 2009 to be fair, the band is not responsible for any hype. in fact, they loathe it more than anyone else. so i don't think it's fair to be angry at them because NME and Pitchfork are a bunch of trend-chasing fan boys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Velazquez Posted December 11, 2009 Share Posted December 11, 2009 they are average. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest blicero Posted December 11, 2009 Share Posted December 11, 2009 i don't believe that Radiohead has ever used ProTools. But that is beside the point. If you want specific examples... I believe they were one of the first major rock groups to incorporate a Kaoss pad into their music. also, i can't think of any other rock group that regularly records and performs with an Analogue Systems modular synth rig. The synth part of almost every song they perform live is built in and powered by Reaktor. the rhythm guitarist (Ed O'Brien) spends almost as much time on the floor noodling with effects as he does playing a guitar when they perform live. many of jonny's effects are built in Max/MSP by running his guitar through his MacBook. i could probably go on and on... lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest IRARI Posted December 11, 2009 Share Posted December 11, 2009 why is cool to hate miley cyrus? i rearry rike that party in the usa song! "YEAH-EAH-EAH, EAH-EAH-EAH-EAH" "IT'S A PARTY IN THE U.S.A.!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brian trageskin Posted December 11, 2009 Share Posted December 11, 2009 to be honest, i don't really like in rainbows. as analogue wings said, it's like they thought "ok we experimented with electronics a bit, but proper music takes guitars and you have to sing and all that stuff". kid a was a billion times more interesting imo. also, they just repeated themselves with in rainbows. they took no risk. at least hail to the thief was experimental, even though it's not a very good album. thom yorke the eraser ftw though i hope they go back to electronics and ambient Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awepittance Posted December 11, 2009 Share Posted December 11, 2009 to be fair, the band is not responsible for any hype. in fact, they loathe it more than anyone else. so i don't think it's fair to be angry at them because NME and Pitchfork are a bunch of trend-chasing fan boys. you're right it's not fair to be angry AT THEM, but it is completely fair to find their music absolutely repellent on every level hype or not and the hype does not help alleviate the pain, it makes it worse. i was loling at all your obscure equipment name dropping to try to increase their cred of being 'pioneers', i especially found funny the 'they built every synth in reaktor' part not to mention the slight lol incurred by the mention of X/Y grid effects processors historical importance in music Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest blicero Posted December 11, 2009 Share Posted December 11, 2009 to be fair, the band is not responsible for any hype. in fact, they loathe it more than anyone else. so i don't think it's fair to be angry at them because NME and Pitchfork are a bunch of trend-chasing fan boys. you're right it's not fair to be angry AT THEM, but it is completely fair to find their music absolutely repellent on every level hype or not and the hype does not help alleviate the pain, it makes it worse. i was loling at all your obscure equipment name dropping to try to increase their cred of being 'pioneers', i especially found funny the 'they built every synth in reaktor part' absolutely. everyone is entitled to like or hate their music. i'm just sick of hearing people talk about what bands should or should not do, without simply judging the music on it's musical merits alone. like, who cares what instruments were used? is it good music, or not? bob dylan jumped from acoustic to electric, and yet somehow the world kept on spinning. the beach boys added a theramin, and it actually worked. is the rule that if you make an album like "kid a", you can never make an album like "in rainbows" after it? i don't get it. i thought we had reached a point where all instruments were on the table... why do people feel the need to shove music/artists into little neat categories and chastise them if the try to evolve or change? people who spend more time discussing genre names than they do discussing the actual music make me sick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awepittance Posted December 11, 2009 Share Posted December 11, 2009 i think all of those things are valid, but if you are criticising those concepts you are slightly guilty of doing the same thing, trying to increase their austere by name dropping all the obscure 'electronic' equipment they claim to use and why it's important. it shouldn't matter what tools someone else uses, people always *confuse the builder with the hammer. hehe and i know i've gotten into many debates on this subject before (AE/maxmsp) but i've come to the conclusion that tools matter little Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest chax Posted December 11, 2009 Share Posted December 11, 2009 probably because on every last.fm group everywhere the number one is ALWAYS radiohead, the genre doesn't even matter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest blicero Posted December 11, 2009 Share Posted December 11, 2009 i think all of those things are valid, but if you are criticising those concepts you are slightly guilty of doing the same thing, trying to increase their austere by name dropping all the obscure 'electronic' equipment they claim to use and why it's important. it shouldn't matter what tools someone else uses, people always *confuse the builder with the hammer. hehe and i know i've gotten into many debates on this subject before (AE/maxmsp) but i've come to the conclusion that tools matter little hey now... i was simply trying to demonstrate in what ways they have experimented with electronic tools/instruments. i wasn't trying to say they were cool for doing so, just trying to refute the claim of whoever it was that was saying that they were just a ProTools band trying to be IDM wannabes: "What do you mean by experimental recording techniques? Pro-tools?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jules Posted December 11, 2009 Share Posted December 11, 2009 people hate the hype they get more than the music itself. i believe this to be true with animal collective too. any band thats hot or gets a lot of talk is inevitably going to be ripped apart too. if rh was around in the 70s, they would be gods. edit: also, how many of their songs really have 'glitch idm' in them. not many to my knowledge. and more recently they are moving away from that anyway. see twisted words... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awepittance Posted December 11, 2009 Share Posted December 11, 2009 i have to admit when i first heard Animal Collective there was already a huge amount of expectation built up in me. The dude who played it for me thought it was the greatest new music out, and while i thought it was decent i wasn't really that impressed. So you're right, that hype can effect ones judgement of music but it's not a fully conscious thing. At least i can't fully stop expectations from developing in my brain when i hear about something over and over again. right afterwards i experienced a satisfying feeling of popping Download's Eyes of Stanley Pain and watching the bewilderment on his face 'what the fuck is this? ' 'this is amazing, who is this' 'its Download, a side project of Skinny Puppy' 'woah, did this just come out? sounds very futuristic' 'nope it's over 13 years old' 'get the fuck out of here' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest IRARI Posted December 11, 2009 Share Posted December 11, 2009 i have to admit when i first heard Animal Collective there was already a huge amount of expectation built up in me. The dude who played it for me thought it was the greatest new music out, and while i thought it was decent i wasn't really that impressed. So you're right, that hype can effect ones judgement of music but it's not a fully conscious thing. At least i can't fully stop expectations from developing in my brain when i hear about something over and over again. i will admit that because Glass Plate has anything to say about animal collective i am automatically disinterested, sorry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoodie Posted December 11, 2009 Share Posted December 11, 2009 i don't like radiohead because they remind me of coldplay. and i really don't like coldplay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.