Smoke sounds more like a Radiohead song. But YNWITA, though perhaps reminiscent of older Radiohead, is something they abandoned LONG ago and seem to have zero interest in now. Why couldn't it be a Radiohead song? The answer seems obvious to me and I disagree with Thom.

it is how radiohead should sound, modern-day. I realize this is a different band, but RH have not sounded like this since In Rainbows.

And not even then. They haven't sounded like that since The Bends.

Which, to be clear, is fine. I'm down with a band stretching and not repeating themselves. But it's weird that 2/5 of Radiohead think the song is worthy of release as long as it isn't under the Radiohead umbrella.

The Bends was 23 years ago. That’s not representative at all of Radiohead; it’s an outlier. So what you’re saying is you want Radiohead to sound not like Radiohead, but the second album of their career that they made in the 1990’s.

Not at all what I'm saying. As evidenced by the post I made above this one.

Again, I’m not sure how you can pick out a song and say that this is how the band should sound like when they’ve only really had that particular “sound” with their first two albums released nearly 25 years ago. That hasn’t been Radiohead for 85% of their catalog.

Feels like you're being willfully dense here, Chris.

I wouldn't really say these sound like The Bends much at all; it feels more like the band that did The King of Limbs decided to do a stripped-down rock kind of thing. When I think The Bends, I think of big choruses and melodies; compared to that, these feel less listener-friendly. They're good songs, though I wonder if it means we've entered a period where Radiohead is for all intents and purposes defunct.

So then on what do you base your conclusion that this is how this band should sound?

I’m truly baffled by this.

Agreed 1000000%.

This sounds like a simplified …. Radiohead.

I think Radiohead has decided that there are certain songs they can't do because they don't sound like Radiohead. But here we have two members of the band doing songs that are in that vein. So clearly, they enjoy the sound. They enjoy the songs. These are good enough for 2/5s of Radiohead but not for Radiohead because it doesn't "sound like Radiohead."

That's what I'd like to see Radiohead get over.

I see a lot of guess work going on here. I don't think Thom especially is much of a "planner" and more of a "feeler and doer", and I don't think any of them are the type to quit the band, especially over something like this. These aren't very heady songs; they feel very off the cuff, and that's why I think they're a side project. Full band RH painfully arrange the fuck out of their albums, and this and all other Thom Yorke side project stuff is all more of a "let's wing it" nature.

I'm not sure how you could say that about a band that has such disparate sounding songs like You Never Wash Up After Yourself, Fog, Optimistic, Planet Telex, House of Cards, Sit Down Stand Up, Let Down, Bodysnatchers, Sulk, Daydreaming, and Hunting Bears, to name a few. All of these songs are what the band sounds like. So I don't know how you can say that a straightforward song like You Will Never Work in Television Again (which would fit nicely on In Rainbows) or The Smoke (that sounds strikingly similar to Lotus Flower) doesn't sound like Radiohead.

please stop yelling.

you're not my real dad

by the way, that reminded me of a story. when my son was in junior soccer about 7 years ago, my wife secretly promised to pay him $5 if, during one of his games when i yelled something at him, he yelled out so everyone on the sidelines could hear: "YOU'RE NOT MY REAL DAD." he did. half the parents who knew me laughed. the other half gasped.

i would’ve yelled back something about adoption being an arduous process.

Careful, you're referencing songs from 25 years ago!

i almost yelled out "that's pretty obvious, considering how you're playing!"