ITS OVER
RADIOHEAD IS FINISHED
>now magazine
lol
NOW That's What I Call Music more like it lol
>now magazine
lol
This is not a rock album
more like NOW MAGAZINE IS FINISHED
They're 100% right though none of the performers have any energy or power any more. The album is literally weak.
Why do people still expect Radiohead to bust out a guitar solo or something? They haven't done that in decades.
>>64721727
>Praises the album for its attention to detail
>"but it isn't enjoyable, 6/10"
Why are these morons allowed to write reviews?
They're literally dumbing down the quality standards.
I can't believe all these major publications are already reviewing it - I say that even in reference to the positive reviews. I guess that's just the nature of music journalism nowadays. Way too reactionary for my tastes.
People are basically complaining about there not being enough pop hooks from what I've seen.
who gives a shit
>>64721838
also this, "rock-oriented band?" fucking idiots, literally no member of the band have made rock music in almost a decade.
What a crock of shit. Someone fire these hacks.
>>64721880
Identikit is catchy as fuck.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
>the """""""""masterpiece""""""""" that is Lemonade
>implying
>>64721880
>muh pop hooks
>muh melody
>Where is this album's "Creep"? I want something I can sing along to! It's still the early 90's right? I give it a 2/10.
holy shit music reviewers are complete shit
How about you all explain why they're wrong?
Oh wait, you can't because you're all crossboarding, newfag teenagers.
>>64721980
Now Magazine is a normie/pleb oriented publication.
Literally not worth paying attention to.
>>64721727
literally who?
>>64721980
Explain to me how Radiohead have to be confined to being a "rock" band, and now you've realized I'm correct, why does it matter if they make energetic music as opposed to something structured, subtle and detailed.
>>64721980
>complains about crossboarding like that even means anything
>posts /a/ reaction images
>>64722025
How is AMSP more structured and detailed, its literally just a bunch of midtempo jams save like two exceptions.
>>64721880
Radiohead hasn't been doing pop hooks in over a decade
>>64721980
They are literally panning the album because there arent enough hooks, which is ridiculous
>>64722076
>A bunch of midtempo jams
So when are you going to listen to the album then?
>>64721937
I have no idea what this first review is even trying to say. At first I thought it was saying this album is shuffled and disjointed, which wouldn't be a bad way of describing AMSP even if you liked it, but the review says this in reference to the Radiohead discography as a whole which makes no sense.
>>64721840
watch the producers
it's all about the bottom line, not the quality
>>64722095
Burn the Witch
Decks Dark
Deser Island Disk
Identikit
Present Tense
Tinker Tailor
True Love Waits
>>64722115
Somehow AMSP existing is going to shuffle and disjoint the collections of Radiohead fans?
>>64721832
>>64721838
>>64722025
Radiohead are a rock band pretending not to be a rock band by making pretentious drivel.
There's little variation or creativity at work either. The resulting music is insipid, predictable, navel gazing garbage.
>>64721937
Is he comparing this album to fucking Beyonce?
>>64722090
They're panning it because there's no energy. This is by far Thom's worst album vocally.
>>64722152
>Radiohead are a rock band
[Citation needed]
>>64722143
>Jams
I don't think this word means what you think it means
>>64722152
>Radiohead are pretending
stopped reading there. They can literally do what they want. It's obvious you want them to make two-dimensional geetar music so why continue this conversation even further
>people's only complaint is that the tempi of the songs are the same
What the fuck is NOW magazine?
>>64722248
>I don't think this word means what you think it means
Do you know what midtempo means? Did you listwn to how none of those tracks have a meaningful development throughout?
/mu/ BTFO
>>64722275
>I'm not reading the thread I'm in
>>64722294
Idiot
>>64722294
>Do you know what midtempo means?
Just because they're midtempo does not mean they are "jams" you fucking moron, in case you didn't know that means that they are playing without predefined arrangements or preparation you oaf
>Did you listwn to how none of those tracks have a meaningful development throughout?
Your (incorrect) opinion
you are a moron
>>64722344
>>64722352
So that's it? You can't prove me wrong so you'll just say "idiot?" God, stay in high school kids...
>>64722382
see
>>64722352
i.e. the larger post literally in response to you although >>64722344
put it quite well
>>64722382
You have to make an actual point before we can prove you wrong, fucking dolt.
>>64722315
Name a comment that can't be reduced to that. All the complaints about how there's "no energy," "no variety," and "no creativity" are saying the exact same thing, and that isn't even a proper criticism.
>>64722443
>>64722444
None of that explains how there is substantive development for the tracks listed earlier.
Can you explain that?
>>64722456
Thom Yorke's vocals are the worst in his career.
>>64722475
It is objectively the case that every track on the album develops over the course of its runtime, whether you find it meaningful or not is subjective.
>>64722502
but they are still good
>>64722475
You never explained how there wasn't, dumb kid. The burden of proof falls on the acuser, git.
>>64722529
They have no presence when they clearly should, and he misses notes in thefucking album.
>>64722541
Explain how there is not a bagpipe on Burn the Witch.
You can't explain a lack of something you fucking idiot, you have to prove it's there.
>>64722502
That shit peaked at In Rainbows but now you can definately tell there is either no enthusiasm or he just doesn't/can't sing in his higher range as well
>>64722584
>They have no presence when they clearly should, and he misses notes in thefucking album.
fucking where
>>64722584
Wow. Did you drop out in middle school you retarded fuck?
>>64722618
Chorus of Burn the Witch.
There were one or two other spots too.
>rock-oriented band
have they listened to a single release since the bends/okc
>>64722584
So you're saying BTW has no progression? The fuck?
>>64722171
This is true
>>64722666
It doesn't, until the final few seconds.
I listed like seven tracks by the way.
>>64722643
No he fucking doesn't. Even if he did, that's one minute fucking detail which nobody noticed, on the entire album.
Keep reaching.
>>64722152
ok cool
i still don't care though
>>64722656
They've still busted out some rockers since like I Might Be Wrong, Go To Sleep, and Bodysnatchers. It's hasn't been the band's MO after OKC for sure, though.
>>64722475
>Burn the Witch
The section from about 1:00 - 1:30 grows and overtakes the song during the latter half, which substantially alters the feel of it.
>Decks Dark
The song is basically in ternary form with a coda, and the mid-section is much higher-energy than the outer two. The outro is also totally different, more of a lower-energy groove that subverts the listener's expectations coming off the end of the outer-section.
>Desert Island Disk
Not any development here, but it puts you in a place and keeps you there, which I enjoy.
>Identikit
If you can't hear a significant development from the opening to "broken hearts make it rain" there's no saving you.
>Present Tense
The first three minutes build to the last two.
>Tinker Tailor
The song evolves from sort of cracked electronics to being overgrown with strings. Not my favorite, though.
>True Love Waits
The initially organic-sounding piano is overlaid with electronics that make it sound increasingly mechanical.
>>64722629
Great argument!
>>64722699
You may want to relisten to BTW's second verse and outro, then. There's indicators of progression, though like most of the album it's pretty subtle.
>>64722710
Obviously they've released a few, but keyword here is rock-oriented, which hasn't been true in 16 years.
>>64722171
>This is by far Thom's worst album vocally.
>>64722725
Most of your explanations are "yeah but there's a little bit though"
Come on man, you're proving NOW right.
>>64722730
What you're saying is the equivalent of saying "prove to me the sky is blue and has clouds in it!" every song has progression. There's no use in arguing with someone as stupid as you.
>>64722778
He's not saying there's a little bit, he's saying the changes are fucking subtle you retard.
>>64721727
>rock-oriented band
kek
>>64721727
>it's bad to make subtle, detailed music now
holy shit, kill me senpai
It's not a negative review. Also, >print media
>>64721880
It's almost as if these people haven't listened to a single entire Radiohead album before their employer slapped the review task on their desk.
>now magazine
>>64722778
In 4/7 of those songs, there is significant development. In the other 3 it doesn't matter, but there still is some. Also I find it interesting that you neglected to mention The Numbers, which has the least development of any song on the album (it works though)
>>64721727
>Oh that "Creep" band?
>they are definitely rock-oriented
Not a radiohead fan myself.. but does /mu/ seriously get their music recommendations from NOW magazine?
Maybe I was wrong about this board.
>>64722897
if you thought /mu/ was a good board, you were wrong, but it's not because we read NOW
>>64722877
Yeah it was my bad for not mentioning The Numbers too. Forgettable even visually.
Overall its just not a convincingly arranged or performed album. Feels hashed together and lacking in energy and determination.
>>64722887
the writer was probably trying to please to the normie readers who had only ever heard creep once
>>64722926
I would say that it sounds like it is actually one of their most meticulously arranged and structurally planned albums to date, and that you are full of shit.
>>64722926
>Overall its just not a convincingly arranged or performed album
You don't think they arranged or performed on it? Are they lying to us?
>Feels hashed together
It took them 5 years to make the album, financed themselves, with no due date.
>lacking in determination
How is this measured? How do you know how determined they are?
>>64721980
>>64722045
lol feel the burn faggot
>>64722981
>It took them 5 years to make the album
See now I know you're an idiotic crossboarding newfag, because you should fucking know that they were all doing their own things from 2012-2014. Thom went solo/AFP, Jonny composed, Phil went solo...you don't know shit kid. Have a good day.
>>64722965
This. These arrangements are basically IR on LSD with even more organic orchestral accompaniment.
>>64722926
It isn't their best clearly, but I think you are wrong and that actually it is good.
>>64722965
You mean The King of Limbs right?
>>64723093
These two records aren't in the same league and you know it
>>64723062
>crossboarding
What post makes you say that?
>because you should fucking know that they were all doing their own things from 2012-2014
Like... writing songs for this album? Demoing them?
>rock oriented band
You just been tricked
>>64722877
>>64722926
Not even a huge fan of The Numbers but it's pretty hard to miss the explosive string accompaniment in the second half.
>>64723116
Correct, TKOL is far more inspired and creative than AMSP.
>>64723148
Read an entire post before shitposting.
>>64721727
>Rock oriented
Thom would have a fit reading that.
Anyway, who exactly are NOW magazine?
>>64723202
>TKOL is far more inspired and creative than AMSP
keep thinking that, meanwhile AMSP gets all the credit and TKOL is forever known as the second dent in Radiohead's gleaming career
... a forgotten album
>>64723202
>Read an entire post before shitposting.
I dismiss irrelevant text.
Now answer my questions.
>>64723239
>>64723202
Not him but I disagree with that. TKOL is a good album but it sounds like a relative footnote, the band experimenting with loops and rhythms in typical Krautrock jam session form. If anything, I think they wear their love for that genre a little too far out on their sleeves on that record to say it's "more inspired and creative" than most of their albums - they've never been shy about dickriding Can but TKOL rides it more emphatically than the others. AMSP, on the other hand, strikes me as a very natural progression from IR with its dreamier, more densely layered arrangements.
>>64723303
>normie publications reviewing non-normie music
This is just like non-black women reviewing Lemonade. These people need to check their neurotypical privilege. THIS ALBUM WAS NOT MADE FOR YOU.
>>64723256
Yes, there are more plebs than patricians.
>>64723312
Name another concept album by RH.
Name other modal tracks by RH.
Name polyrhythmic tracks by RH.
>>64723367
>one of the top-selling bands of the 90s
>non-normie
>>64723401
>resorting to relative music theory bullshit that doesn't make it any better or worse
good job
>>64721838
Ironically, this album contains one of only four radiohead songs with a guitar solo
>>64723470
? There is way more than 4
>>64723459
>things that make an album unique not just for the artist, but for all of their genre, don't apply because pleb teenagers don't understand them
You just proved my point, idiot.
Guys, I'm just finishing my first listen, and honestly, I'm a bit "Meh" on it at the moment. I feel like I'll enjoy it more on subsequent listens though.
>>64723401
>Name polyrhythmic tracks by RH.
Not him but listen to In Limbo and How To Disappear Completely. That was simply off the top of my head, so I'm sure there are more,
>Name another concept album by RH.
Define "concept album"
>>64723470
There are at least 5 or 6 on The Bends alone. Are you retarded?
>>64723531
So you're saying only tracks from their best album match up? Makes sense.
An album around an idea, lyrically and sonically.
>>64723509
>album has theory-based gizmos for nerds to gawk at
>however album is dull and uninspiring in terms of arrangement and production, and expends what makes the band's albums good for these boring traits
if that makes me a pleb teenager, I'll stay that way
>>64723526
It's a grower. AMSP's meandering structures and dense layers take a little digestion, not a whole lot on the surface to really grab onto for some of these tracks. Some like Decks Dark and Identikit are pretty accessible, though.
>>64723601
>So you're saying only tracks from their best album match up
No I'm saying you don't seem to understand what polyrhythm is if you think it's a red herring in their discography
>An album around an idea, lyrically and sonically.
Then every Radiohead album is a concept album.
>>64723601
Hail to the thief
Okc
>>64723605
>theory-based gizmos
>things found in folk music from eastern europe and africa
Those pretentious Zulus and their drum patterns!!!!!
>>64723662
Yeah, that's the vibe I'm getting. There are definitely some bits I REALLY liked, like the first two minutes of Ful Stop. Once exams are done, I'll probably throw in a couple more listens.
>>64723703
give me a reason why that should make the album inherently more impressive
>>64723700
>Then every Radiohead album is a concept album.
The King of Limbs lyrics and titles and structures and sonics all point to nature and fauna.
How do other albums do this in their discog?
>>64723701
No, both of those albums have explicitly been said by the band to not be conceptual.
>>64723116
The King of Limbs was better
>>64723749
Because they aren't in much else music in rock or pop music.
>>64723784
if you're a sad contrarian who can't let go of the past
>>64723256
>second dent in Radiohead's gleaming career
such bs
>>64723767
>How do other albums do this in their discog?
Lyrics in other albums point to paranoia about the increasingly modern world, and the emergence of a social disconnect when, in theory, we should be more closely connected (digitally speaking).
>No, both of those albums have explicitly been said by the band to not be conceptual.
Nice goalpost shifting
>>64721838
Their album before King of Limbs had Bodysnatchers
>>64723796
>something is more scarce in music and therefore it's use makes it better
>>64723815
cry more
>>64723803
That's AMSP, an album chained to their 90's discog.
>>64723828
No, explain specifics. I did for TKOL.
>>64723803
p4k and fantano didn't dicksuck radiohead being glitchy so therefore it is bad
>>64723873
Of course it does you idiot. Do you know anything about art history or art theory?
>>64723885
>That's AMSP, an album chained to their 90's discog.
you can't defend this opinion
>>64722584
>Explain how there is not a bagpipe on Burn the Witch.
top level b8 here folks
>>64723885
>I did for TKOL.
Incorrect. i gave the same amount of specifics as you did for TKOL.
Try again or admit defeat.
>>64723916
Except how most of the album is 90's unfinished B sides.
>>64723916
True Love Waits is a The Bends song
>>64723952
Which ones?
>>64723933
You didn't pick an album, so there's nothing to discuss.
>>64723885
In what way is AMSP chained to their 90's discography? Of all their albums I get more Amnesiac and IR vibes than anything else, save Burn The Witch which would be right at home on HTTT. Those are all 2000's records - I do not hear much PH/Bends/OKC on AMSP at all. Decks Dark recalls some of Subterranean Homesick Alien's imagery I guess but that's all I've got.
>>64723914
originality=/=scarcity you dumbshit
>>64723911
because it was fucking dull and nothing happened or was innovated
>>64723952
>>64723965
fucking duh. yeah sounds like it came straight from their 90's catalog too
>>64723966
If you don't know, then you're clearly a newfag to /mu/ or Radiohead's music.
>>64723982
>You didn't pick an album
See >>64723700
Read again, I stated it.
>>64723952
So you're more concerned with the origin point of songs rather than their final execution?
>>64724010
Wrong on both accounts.
Try again.
>>64724005
>originality=/=scarcity you dumbshit
Didn't answer my question.
for context here is an average cover of "NOW" magazine.
>>64724005
I found it extremely interesting, simultaneously jarring/challenging tradition song structures and beautiful/dreamy. A high point in their progression
>>64724052
oh you mean this one
>Do you know anything about art history or art theory?
apparently more than you do
>>64724093
Where did you get your education then?
>>64724086
>challenging tradition song structures
lol
>>64724062
gimmie that link to those 93 so-now shoes
i heard theres also 25% off jones footwear
>>64724050
Then I guess you started browsing at 15 and are now 18.
>>64724116
In the context of Radiohead's song structures it did. Particularly coming after In Rainbows
>>64724112
Portlandia you faux-artiste faggot
>>64724150
Sorry, 4chan didn't exist in 1995.
So unable to answer the question I assume?
Amnesiac
Kid A
In Rainbows
OK Computer
TKOL
AMSP
HTTT
The Bends
Pablo Honey
Hey guys did you know Radiohead was on the first NOW THAT'S what I call Music album?
It has come full circle.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Now_That%27s_What_I_Call_Music!_(original_U.S._album)
>>64724194
Kid A
OK Computer
In Rainbows
Amnesiac
AMSP
The Bends
HTTT
TKOL
Pablo Honey
>>64721980
>calls other people crossboarding newfags
>shits on radiohead
my sides
>>64721727
rotfl my sides
![1462818182893[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/V0YW7Yr.jpg "1462818182893[1].jpg")
Most uninspired Radiohead album by far. Thom Yorke's vocals sound awful and lackluster, songs that go nowhere, lethargic mood. This is high-end muzak.
>>64724244
Ok Computer
Kid A=In Rainbows
AMSP=Amnesiac
HTTT
TKOL
Bends
PH
>>64724152
IR was very much a tightening of song structure for the band. Kid A and Amnesiac both featured stranger, more unhinged tracks. Even HTTT, despite being a marked shift back into more conventional territory, had shit like We Suck Young Blood. IR is handily the band's poppiest post-Bends record, so of course TKOL would blow it out of the water with structural ambition - so does every other Radiohead album from OKC onwards.
>>64724317
this
>>64724244
I don't understand how anyone can have The Bends over TKOL.
It's such college Freshman brit pop and I can't even make it through without feeling like a milksop
>>64724333
Good point and nice trips
>>64723767
Not him and am too late but w/e
RH don't have any concepts album, but if you take your description, most of them are
>OK Computer
Alienation
>Kid A
Not really, but technogenic apocalypse or smth
>Amnesiac
Anxiety over death, anxiety in general
>Hail To The Thief
muh 1984
>In Rainbows
Not too theme consistent, but love is pretty prominent
>>64724317
c'mon you just wish you could yell "BROKEN HEARTS MAKE IT RAIN!" over a bass groove and droning synthesizers
or is that just me?
The
One
True
Ranking
https://rateyourmusic.com/list/boldfaure/the_radiohead_discography__ranked_
>>64724521
>Not too theme consistent, but love is pretty prominent
muh faust
What time does Ful Stop get good?
>>64724668
at around 3:10
>>64724668
When Glass Eyes start tbqh senpai
For some reason Desert Island Disk and Ful Stop are the only weak tracks on it (and they are still really good), everything else in the album flows fucking perfectly (especially Glass Eyes-Present Tense streak omg)
>>64724668
If you dont dig the vibes then you arent gonna like it
>>64725011
nobody ever gives enough credit to the vibes....
>>64723401
come on as someone who has had their theory papers praised by some of the top theorists in the field and who studies theory at one of the top theory institutions in the world, and who likes tkol, even i can see that this theory-based argument is bullshit
>>64723952
>Except how most of the album is 90's unfinished B sides.
>Most of the album
You mean True Love Waits... and literally nothing else?
>>64723303
/thread
>>64723303
Poor Beck.
>>64723531
>>64723401
Weird Fishes / Arpeggi is another polyrhythmic
>>64723303
HAHAHAHAHA
And this shit gets weighted into the score of Metacritic?
Just goes to show you how irrelevant reviews are.
>>64721980
>complains about crossboarding
>posts a weeb image on /mu/
kys retard
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JLrCGgA0bEY
Whenever you criticize Radiohead ITT
>>64724771
I think Ful Stop is an album highlight. The instrumentation is rife with dread, the lyrics incisive, and the slow-building progression a nice take on krautrock and early post-rock. I do agree that Desert Island Disk is a relative low point, though. Not that it's bad, just kind of limp compared to the rest of the album.
>>64721727
>no catchy songs like creep or high and dry 6/10
>>64727749
My sense of "catchy" might be fucked but I find songs like Burn The Witch, Decks Dark and Identikit pretty much earwigs.
carl the cuck.jpg
>>64728154
>"Radiohead have never produced a genuinely good album in their careers."
Holy fuck, what a fucking contrarian cunt. I hope this is just a user review and not a published review.
>>64728154
For all the pretension this review gives off it's funny to me that he thinks this is even a rock album.
>>64728154
This is better than Montie's review.
>>64728154
>>64728266
I've read his reviews on iTunes, he's actually very intelligent and has great taste.
Unlike you two.
>>64728374
please stop. you're hurting my feelings.
>>64728266
it's true though
