Sun April 30, 2017 6:16 pm
matt reeder wrote:Really isn't the genius of Radiohead the very fact that at least 6 of their 9 albums are somebody's favorite? Their weaker albums would be many other bands' best albums.
Sun April 30, 2017 6:20 pm
cutuphalfdead wrote:matt reeder wrote:Really isn't the genius of Radiohead the very fact that at least 6 of their 9 albums are somebody's favorite? Their weaker albums would be many other bands' best albums.
Listen, it's dumb when people say it about Pearl Jam and it's dumb when people say it about Radiohead.
Sun April 30, 2017 6:22 pm
matt reeder wrote:cutuphalfdead wrote:matt reeder wrote:Really isn't the genius of Radiohead the very fact that at least 6 of their 9 albums are somebody's favorite? Their weaker albums would be many other bands' best albums.
Listen, it's dumb when people say it about Pearl Jam and it's dumb when people say it about Radiohead.
Why is it dumb? There aren't many bands who are consistently great.
And in the case of Radiohead, I'm not sure anybody over the past 20 years has a better case for this.
Sun April 30, 2017 6:27 pm
Sun April 30, 2017 6:31 pm
cutuphalfdead wrote:matt reeder wrote:cutuphalfdead wrote:matt reeder wrote:Really isn't the genius of Radiohead the very fact that at least 6 of their 9 albums are somebody's favorite? Their weaker albums would be many other bands' best albums.
Listen, it's dumb when people say it about Pearl Jam and it's dumb when people say it about Radiohead.
Why is it dumb? There aren't many bands who are consistently great.
And in the case of Radiohead, I'm not sure anybody over the past 20 years has a better case for this.
Because if Pablo Honey is anyone'e best album, then they're merely an OK band.
Sun April 30, 2017 6:32 pm
Kevin Davis wrote:cutuphalfdead wrote:matt reeder wrote:cutuphalfdead wrote:matt reeder wrote:Really isn't the genius of Radiohead the very fact that at least 6 of their 9 albums are somebody's favorite? Their weaker albums would be many other bands' best albums.
Listen, it's dumb when people say it about Pearl Jam and it's dumb when people say it about Radiohead.
Why is it dumb? There aren't many bands who are consistently great.
And in the case of Radiohead, I'm not sure anybody over the past 20 years has a better case for this.
Because if Pablo Honey is anyone'e best album, then they're merely an OK band.
I don't think "Pablo Honey" was intended to be one of the six...
Sun April 30, 2017 6:32 pm
Sun April 30, 2017 6:34 pm
Sun April 30, 2017 6:40 pm
cutuphalfdead wrote:matt reeder wrote:cutuphalfdead wrote:matt reeder wrote:Really isn't the genius of Radiohead the very fact that at least 6 of their 9 albums are somebody's favorite? Their weaker albums would be many other bands' best albums.
Listen, it's dumb when people say it about Pearl Jam and it's dumb when people say it about Radiohead.
Why is it dumb? There aren't many bands who are consistently great.
And in the case of Radiohead, I'm not sure anybody over the past 20 years has a better case for this.
Because if Pablo Honey is anyone'e best album, then they're merely an OK band.
Sun April 30, 2017 7:18 pm
Sun April 30, 2017 7:58 pm
Kevin Davis wrote:Their track record is great. Equally impressive is that for as long as they've been around, they don't really seem to retread much familiar ground -- I mean, there is a pervasive mood that infiltrates all their records, and a couple of formal templates they return to maybe once per record or so, but there is a remarkable lack of repetition across their catalog, and I'm not someone generally bothered by repetition. But when I look at the hundreds of different bands on my shelf, there aren't many of them whose best album I'd say is inferior to Radiohead's seventh-best album. Radiohead are great and I like them a lot but even after all these years I think the pedestal people put them up on is a little exaggerated -- in the end they've got a great stuff/good stuff/stuff-I-don't-care-about ratio that is comparable to dozens of other artists I like.
Sun April 30, 2017 9:14 pm
durdencommatyler wrote:Kevin Davis wrote:Their track record is great. Equally impressive is that for as long as they've been around, they don't really seem to retread much familiar ground -- I mean, there is a pervasive mood that infiltrates all their records, and a couple of formal templates they return to maybe once per record or so, but there is a remarkable lack of repetition across their catalog, and I'm not someone generally bothered by repetition. But when I look at the hundreds of different bands on my shelf, there aren't many of them whose best album I'd say is inferior to Radiohead's seventh-best album. Radiohead are great and I like them a lot but even after all these years I think the pedestal people put them up on is a little exaggerated -- in the end they've got a great stuff/good stuff/stuff-I-don't-care-about ratio that is comparable to dozens of other artists I like.
I basically agree with this except that I would argue that their level of repetition is about on par with any of my favorite bands. It's better than many, but it's nothing special.
Sun April 30, 2017 9:16 pm
Sun April 30, 2017 9:18 pm
Rangi Guy wrote:I kinda lost interest with Radiohead after Amnesiac, In Rainbows sparked my attention again, but it was A Moon Shaped Pool that got me loving this band again
Sun April 30, 2017 9:21 pm
matt reeder wrote:durdencommatyler wrote:Kevin Davis wrote:Their track record is great. Equally impressive is that for as long as they've been around, they don't really seem to retread much familiar ground -- I mean, there is a pervasive mood that infiltrates all their records, and a couple of formal templates they return to maybe once per record or so, but there is a remarkable lack of repetition across their catalog, and I'm not someone generally bothered by repetition. But when I look at the hundreds of different bands on my shelf, there aren't many of them whose best album I'd say is inferior to Radiohead's seventh-best album. Radiohead are great and I like them a lot but even after all these years I think the pedestal people put them up on is a little exaggerated -- in the end they've got a great stuff/good stuff/stuff-I-don't-care-about ratio that is comparable to dozens of other artists I like.
I basically agree with this except that I would argue that their level of repetition is about on par with any of my favorite bands. It's better than many, but it's nothing special.
We just hold them in a different regard then. I think there are plenty of artists who have been consistently great but I just cannot find another example of a band that I love that continues to be great for this long. I guess this also has something to do with how much I love A Moon Shaped Pool; I know that not everybody here holds it in the same light. I think it depends on how much you like late-period Radiohead, or if there's ever been a point where you think their quality dipped in the past 22 years. I don't remember a point since 1997 where I didn't think they were the best band in the world.
Obviously, I think they're one of the greatest bands ever and I think they're leagues better than any band over the past 20 years. I rate them higher than a lot of classic rock acts generally regarded as the greatest ever.
Sun April 30, 2017 9:22 pm
LetMeSleep wrote:Rangi Guy wrote:I kinda lost interest with Radiohead after Amnesiac, In Rainbows sparked my attention again, but it was A Moon Shaped Pool that got me loving this band again
Close to my history with the band except I'm yet to hear AMSP. One day, someday, sometime soon.
Sun April 30, 2017 9:33 pm
durdencommatyler wrote:matt reeder wrote:durdencommatyler wrote:Kevin Davis wrote:Their track record is great. Equally impressive is that for as long as they've been around, they don't really seem to retread much familiar ground -- I mean, there is a pervasive mood that infiltrates all their records, and a couple of formal templates they return to maybe once per record or so, but there is a remarkable lack of repetition across their catalog, and I'm not someone generally bothered by repetition. But when I look at the hundreds of different bands on my shelf, there aren't many of them whose best album I'd say is inferior to Radiohead's seventh-best album. Radiohead are great and I like them a lot but even after all these years I think the pedestal people put them up on is a little exaggerated -- in the end they've got a great stuff/good stuff/stuff-I-don't-care-about ratio that is comparable to dozens of other artists I like.
I basically agree with this except that I would argue that their level of repetition is about on par with any of my favorite bands. It's better than many, but it's nothing special.
We just hold them in a different regard then. I think there are plenty of artists who have been consistently great but I just cannot find another example of a band that I love that continues to be great for this long. I guess this also has something to do with how much I love A Moon Shaped Pool; I know that not everybody here holds it in the same light. I think it depends on how much you like late-period Radiohead, or if there's ever been a point where you think their quality dipped in the past 22 years. I don't remember a point since 1997 where I didn't think they were the best band in the world.
Obviously, I think they're one of the greatest bands ever and I think they're leagues better than any band over the past 20 years. I rate them higher than a lot of classic rock acts generally regarded as the greatest ever.
Sure. And I think a lot of people agree with you. Which is why Kevin said "Radiohead are great and I like them a lot but even after all these years I think the pedestal people put them up on is a little exaggerated." And I think you're proving his point for him. I'm Team KD here. Radiohead are great. But, frankly, and I certainly don't expect ANYONE let alone you, Matt, to agree with me on this --- but just for my own tastes, a band like The Decemberists is just as brilliant and consistent. And I prefer them. You'll think I'm nuts. But take that feeling and try to flip it. As absurd as you think it is that I would say The Decemberists are just as consistent and fresh and non-repetitive and interesting as any of the best bands out there. That feeling you have? That's the same exact feeling I have when people piss themselves over Radiohead. And I fucking adore Radiohead! I think they're brilliant.
Sun April 30, 2017 10:14 pm
matt reeder wrote:I understand this. I know people who feel the same way about The Decemberists. Or Wilco. Or The National. I don't think there's anything wrong with that. I don't feel the same way and that's fine. I think there are plenty of groups / singers who have been consistently great for a long time. So I'll concede that point. I just think that Radiohead is better than all of those bands, and that's probably because they hit almost all of my musical sweet spots.
I saw Colin Meloy play a set in February (he was sandwiched between Stephen Malkmus and Sleater-Kinney) and I didn't dislike him as much I once did. It just isn't ever going to do anything for me, I don't think. He was pretty good. And that's okay.
Mon May 01, 2017 12:54 am
Tue May 02, 2017 2:06 pm