Radiohead: Best band of the last 20 years?

[vapid]

Not looking to get too technical, I just think based on longevity, talent, versatility, replayability, etc.

[Meticode]

I have no clue, I never think about stuff like that.

[pete's montreux]

I have still yet to listen to any Radiohead. I don't think I've ever listened to an entire song.

I think the Mars Volta should be up there, IMO. Maybe the Strokes. I'm not sure, I'd have to think about it.

[pete's montreux]

To be honest, there are only a handful of bands that have been consistently releasing material for the last 20 years.

I don't know, are you counting bands formed before 1990?

[heyhey]

Yea I can't think of any bands that's really close even.

Pablo Honey, The bends KidA, OK Computer, In Rainbows over 20 years just unprecedented.

And before someone mention RHCP no they are not close.

[HisJoeness]

I like RH but I am not a fan of Yorke's vocals.

*ducks behind couch*

[vapid]

Who would some of the other candidates be?
Inb4 Hawker says Oasis.

Addressing Pete: I feel like Radiohead shares a lot of the good qualities (and some of the bad) of the Mars Volta, but have been quality for much longer.

[BRabbiT]

...And before someone mention RHCP no they are not close.



why not?

[pete's montreux]

Inb4 Hawker says Oasis.

Addressing Pete: I feel like Radiohead shares a lot of the good qualities (and some of the bad) of the Mars Volta, but have been quality for much longer.

I wouldn't know, but the Mars Volta's last album was garbage. Has Radiohead ever put out something that bad?

What does everyone think of Nine Inch Nails?

[heyhey]

I have still yet to listen to any Radiohead. I don't think I've ever listened to an entire song.

I think the Mars Volta should be up there, IMO. Maybe the Strokes. I'm not sure, I'd have to think about it.

The Strokes has ONE historically great album. Is This It.

Mars Volta has ONE great Album Deloused in Comatorium.

Everything else from those two bands are simply good to meh.

In term of longevity Radiohead is winner by longshot IMO.

[pete's montreux]

The Strokes has ONE historically great album. Is This It.

Mars Volta has ONE great Album Deloused in Comatorium.

Everything else from those two bands are simply good to meh.

In term of longevity Radiohead is winner by longshot IMO.

That's a very bold statement, anything to back it up?

[vapid]

That's a very bold statement, anything to back it up?
If you're thinking about Frances, I'd say Frances is very good, but in my opinion not great.

[pete's montreux]

Beck has been releasing quality material for about 15 years. I love most of his work.

[Captain Kirk]

Most overrated band of the last 20 years if anything.

[pete's montreux]

If you're thinking about Frances, I'd say Frances is very good, but in my opinion not great.

I actually prefer Frances to De-Loused.

[pete's montreux]

Nominees:

Radiohead
the Mars Volta
RHCP
Beck
Nine Inch Nails
the Strokes

There really isn't a lot of bands that could even be nominated.

[pete's montreux]

I'm assuming vapid would allow artists as well into the mix, no?

[Jackass18]

Most overrated band of the last 20 years if anything.

This.

I never really could get into them and never really saw what the big deal was about them.

[heyhey]

That's a very bold statement, anything to back it up?

To be fair Frances is probably same quality as Delouse. But the two albums sounded quite similar so I give edge to Delouse. IIRC frances was more commercially succesful but by the time Frances hit I was really through with my At the Drive in/Mars Volta phase so it just didn't click with me. I guess that's why I only rate it as good because it was a retread. It also felt more tiring since almost all the songs were almost obnoxiously long. The sound was too monotnous for me. and the album concept too big for the actual music it embodied.

feel free to disagree. I don't really like progressive rock anymore so my opinion is skewed.

You like Coheed and Cambria? I see a lot crossover appeal between Mars Volta and them.

Yea beck is another good choice simply for longevity and growth.

[RedBlackAttack]

It is Radiohead and it really isn't even close.

This run of albums...

The Bends
OK Computer
Kid A
Amnesiac
Hail To The Thief
In Rainbows

...is impossible for any band of the last 20-30 years to compete with. You are talking about a band that has largely been considered the best in the world for nearly 15 years. There are few bands in rock history that have stood at the top for that long of a period.

[pete's montreux]

To be fair Frances is probably same quality as Delouse. But the two albums sounded quite similar so I give edge to Delouse. IIRC frances was more commercially succesful but by the time Frances hit I was really through with my At the Drive in/Mars Volta phase so it just didn't click with me. I guess that's why I only rate it as good because it was a retread. It also felt more tiring since almost all the songs were almost obnoxiously long. The sound was too monotnous for me. and the album concept too big for the actual music it embodied.

feel free to disagree. I don't really like progressive rock anymore so my opinion is skewed.

Well then this argument is pointless because I'm just really getting into prog rock.

[pete's montreux]

Does it have to be new material?

Led Zeppelin:

BBC Sessions
How the West Was Won
DVD

Shits on about any other band!

[vapid]

Brand New would be one of the few bands that might deserve into the debate; pretty much everything they've put out has been gold.

Luca (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J3K-2Sfzs6w)
I love Brand New but well they only have Deja and The Devil as real quality works, I found Daisy to be mostly dissapointing and their first album was basically another genre.

Beck.. I mean sure similar genre but he IS just an artist and I'm not too familiar with him so its up to debate I guess.

[Captain Kirk]

This.

I never really could get into them and never really saw what the big deal was about them.

And I listen to their albums, and while not bad at all, at the same time I'm more blown away at how popular and overrated they are due to this material that I think is good for a couple listens, and then it's just ok after that.

And Red Hot Chili Peppers have many more everlasting songs than Radiohead has in their entire collection.

[pete's montreux]

I love Brand New but well they only have Deja and The Devil as real quality works, I found Daisy to be mostly dissapointing and their first album was basically another genre.

Beck.. I mean sure similar genre but he IS just an artist and I'm not too familiar with him so its up to debate I guess.

As far as Beck goes, I personally think anything he does is must listen. Every studio album he's released since Odelay is incredible. My favorite being Midnight Vultures.

[vapid]

And I listen to their albums, and while not bad at all, at the same time I'm more blown away at how popular and overrated they are due to this material that I think is good for a couple listens, and then it's just ok after that.

And Red Hot Chili Peppers have many more everlasting songs than Radiohead.
Interesting because for me RHCP has a few decent songs that I get tired of after a while but I can listen to entire Radiohead albums starting from OK Computer to their recent In Rainbows album through and through. In my opinion Radiohead has done more to widen their range and experiment with different genres, whereas RHCP's efforts end up sounding quite similar,which is fine if you like how they sound.

[PistolPete]

replayability

Just have to laugh at this. Anybody's favorite band probably gets just as much replayability as these guys.

I would put AIC, Pearl Jam, Soundgarden, and even U2 ahead of them.

[pete's montreux]

Jeff Buckley would've been the most original and creative artist of the last 20 years had he not died.

[pete's montreux]

Also: currently download Radiohead's discog, along with the Smashing Pumpkins.

[Captain Kirk]

Just have to laugh at this. Anybody's favorite band probably gets just as much replayability as these guys.

I would put AIC, Pearl Jam, Soundgarden, and even U2 ahead of them.

Yes, very true. Because for me Radiohead doesn't have that much replay value. But take a favorite band of mine, theSTART, and I think I listen to their "Shakedown!" album for a good 6 years and only recently have needed to give it a rest.

And I don't think simply changing your sound from album to album or being creative necessarily means it sounds good. But that's just me. I know Radiohead is huge, but I doubt I'll ever understand why.

[JMT]

And I listen to their albums, and while not bad at all, at the same time I'm more blown away at how popular and overrated they are due to this material that I think is good for a couple listens, and then it's just ok after that.

And Red Hot Chili Peppers have many more everlasting songs than Radiohead.
Interesing topic and take.

My wife is a huge Radiohead fan. I had never really listened to them. She's younger than I am. In my experience, it seems awfully self-indulgent. OK, we under-produce everything to get that cool, "not really slick mainstream" sound. I get it. But what's the appeal of stuff sounding muddled, like it was put together in a basement somewhere?

I'd like it far more if not for the consistently atonal, awful vocals. Again, I get it. You're sad. The ever popular tortured artist effect. It gets old. But maybe you'd have a brighter view of life if you tried something new...like singing in a recognizable key!

I honestly try to listen to it, and there are some tunes I find quite good. But their popularity, to me, just goes to point out how fragmented the music industry is. So many niches, a mediocre band that hangs in there and caters to their core audience long enough gets lauded.

It just dawned on me. They're the Grateful Dead. Nothing very popular, just the ability to retain the same cult-like following for a long time.

[pete's montreux]

I can't believe you've never listened to a Radiohead song Pete. No Creep, Karma Police, or even Paranoid Android?

This (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qvv-LpTBWVk) is from their latest album. Beautiful, haunting stuff.

I'm downloading their discog right now, I'm going to put it on my iPod and listen to it over the course of a few days. An album a day, I think.

[vapid]

I can't believe you've never listened to a Radiohead song Pete. No Creep, Karma Police, or even Paranoid Android?

This (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qvv-LpTBWVk) is from their latest album. Beautiful, haunting stuff.
Reckoner is possibly a top 5 Radiohead song for me. It makes me want to direct a movie.

[pete's montreux]

Should I listen chronologically or is there an album I need to listen to right away? I like to experience the entire picture in order, but whatever you guys say.

[pete's montreux]

Well if there is no special order, I'm gonna do it like I usually do. First to last.

[Captain Kirk]

I can't believe you've never listened to a Radiohead song Pete. No Creep, Karma Police, or even Paranoid Android?

This (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qvv-LpTBWVk) is from their latest album. Beautiful, haunting stuff.

See, I clicked expecting something that was really going to have me wanting to go listen to some Radiohead, and the song was very mediocre to me. :oldlol:



Interesing topic and take.

My wife is a huge Radiohead fan. I had never really listened to them. She's younger than I am. In my experience, it seems awfully self-indulgent. OK, we under-produce everything to get that cool, "not really slick mainstream" sound. I get it. But what's the appeal of stuff sounding muddled, like it was put together in a basement somewhere?

I'd like it far more if not for the consistently atonal, awful vocals. Again, I get it. You're sad. The ever popular tortured artist effect. It gets old. But maybe you'd have a brighter view of life if you tried something new...like singing in a recognizable key!

I honestly try to listen to it, and there are some tunes I find quite good. But their popularity, to me, just goes to point out how fragmented the music industry is. So many niches, a mediocre band that hangs in there and caters to their core audience long enough gets lauded.

It just dawned on me. They're the Grateful Dead. Nothing very popular, just the ability to retain the same cult-like following for a long time.

Grateful Dead sums up Radiohead perfectly. They are this generation's Grateful Dead. Good call :applause:

[DirkNowitzki41]

There alright, but no way are they the best band.
Rascal Flatts >> Radiohead

[heyhey]

Should I listen chronologically or is there an album I need to listen to right away? I like to experience the entire picture in order, but whatever you guys say.

Their stuff changes quite a bit depending on the album. I would check out In Rainbows and Pablo Honey first. I feel that's radiohead's most raw and uninhibited albums.


It just dawned on me. They're the Grateful Dead. Nothing very popular, just the ability to retain the same cult-like following for a long time.

No you are thinking of PHISH. :roll: :roll:

Anyways Wilco and Modest Mouse are certainly up for conisderation if we just shortern the period of time to 15 years or something.

And the reason why RHCP is not as great as radiohead to me is that RHCP is a greatest hits type of band while Radiohead dicorgraphy has to be experienced in its totality.

[vapid]

I like the Wilco and Modest Mouse suggestions.

[Captain Kirk]

Anyone listen to The National? They sorta remind me of the situation Radiohead is in. Quality band, but I can see where they get overrated. They're album "High Violet" was high acclaimed, and I listened to it because I enjoyed the previous album "Boxer" very much. And I must say it wasn't really up to par for me.

If you haven't heard them, two songs from "Boxer":

Fake Empire (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DKWKRMxXB0M)
Mistaken for Strangers (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cgRsYkKb1eI) (one of my all time favorite songs period)

[RedBlackAttack]

Nah, really doesn't matter. OK Computer is probably their most accessible album though, that might be a good place to start.
Personally, I think The Bends is their most accessible work. Lots of great singles on that album that do well in standing alone. People that aren't necessarily comfortable with them or accustomed to their sound will still enjoy High & Dry, The Bends, Just, Street Spirit, Planet Telex, etc.

OK Computer is more of a concept album that is meant to be listened to from start to finish. New listeners aren't necessarily going to be committed enough to give it the attention that it requires, imo.

And, The Grateful Dead is a horrible comparison and take it from someone who is a big fan of both RH and GD. The Dead accumulated their audience by non-stop touring and by creating a jazz fusion-esque sound in their live show that promised two viewings would never be alike.

Radiohead is much more conventional in that they attained their popularity via official releases.

Also, Radiohead's audience is much, much bigger, even if you are talking about the Dead at their apex (early 70s).

[Captain Kirk]

Personally, I think The Bends is their most accessible work. Lots of great singles on that album that do well in standing alone. People that aren't necessarily comfortable with them or accustomed to their sound will still enjoy High & Dry, The Bends, Just, Street Spirit, Planet Telex, etc.

OK Computer is more of a concept album that is meant to be listened to from start to finish. New listeners aren't necessarily going to be committed enough to give it the attention that it requires, imo.

And, The Grateful Dead is a horrible comparison and take it from someone who is a big fan of both RH and GD. The Dead accumulated their audience by non-stop touring and by creating a jazz fusion-esque sound in their live show that promised two viewings would never be alike.

Radiohead is much more conventional in that they attained their popularity via official releases.

Also, Radiohead's audience is much, much bigger, even if you are talking about the Dead at their apex (early 70s).

The comparison is due to how popular both bands are/were yet how overrated they are/were. If you've never listened to either band, you'd think they were both God's gift to art the way people talk about them. There is almost a general consensus when it comes to how great Radiohead is, and that's what makes them overrated.

[RedBlackAttack]

The comparison is due to how popular both bands are/were yet how overrated they are/were.
:oldlol:

And you are the be-all and end-all in determining which bands are overrated and which are not? The Grateful Dead are completely UNDERrated, if anything. You are entitled to your opinion, but it is a horrible comparison nonetheless.

They are two bands that took completely different roads, catered to completely different audiences, and offered up completely different sounds.

World-wide popularity is also not comparable.

[Hawker]

:facepalm

[Ass Dan]

:facepalm


YOU READ MY MIND HOMIE!

Hmm, tell me who is cool Mr. Rockwriter. NME, Rolling Stone etc... put in your pages who I should worship as the shit.

sheeple be slippin yo!

[Ass Dan]

:oldlol:

And you are the be-all and end-all in determining which bands are overrated and which are not? The Grateful Dead are completely UNDERrated, if anything. You are entitled to your opinion, but it is a horrible comparison nonetheless.

They are two bands that took completely different roads, catered to completely different audiences, and offered up completely different sounds.

World-wide popularity is also not comparable.


The Dead are soooooooo much better than anything in the last decade. folks don't be knowin, but they need to be knowin.

Hippies facked it up for them, great musicians.

[Jackass18]

And I listen to their albums, and while not bad at all, at the same time I'm more blown away at how popular and overrated they are due to this material that I think is good for a couple listens, and then it's just ok after that.

Yep. Off the top of my head, Creep is the only song that I could really get into. I'm just not really a fan of Yorke's voice. It all comes down to preference, and there's many bands I would take a million times over Radiohead. I'd take Wu-Tang over Radiohead easy, whether you count the solo albums or not. OutKast, too. And, I'm not as big of a hip-hop fan as I used to be. Also, I'd go with RHCP, PJ, STP and even the Beastie Boys (can't count the first 2 albums, though). I don't put longevity as high as others. 2 of my favorite bands (CCR and The Smiths) only put out albums for about 5 years.

[DeuceWallaces]

I think Pearl Jam has them when you consider everything. They meant more in the mid early 90's and they're more relevant now.

[Jailblazers7]

Reckoner is possibly a top 5 Radiohead song for me. It makes me want to direct a movie.

Your comment made me think of this song. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RByvzmmEFiQ) One of my personal favorites.

[SinJackal]

I disagree.

Btw, if it's your favorite band, you should say that, and not say "best", since that would mean you're trying to state as fact that every other band is worse. Might annoy some people.

[RedBlackAttack]

I think Pearl Jam has them when you consider everything. They meant more in the mid early 90's and they're more relevant now.
More relevant now in what way? Radiohead's most recent release was In Rainbows in 2008. It entered the US and UK charts at No. 1.

What was the last PJ album to have that kind of opening? Vitalogy? Certainly not Backspacer, their most recent release (2009).

:confusedshrug:

[Qwyjibo]

Reckoner is possibly a top 5 Radiohead song for me. It makes me want to direct a movie.
It's the #1 Radiohead song for me with really no doubts about it. It's basically a perfect song to me.

[Se]

I would put AIC, Pearl Jam, Soundgarden, and even U2 ahead of them.

Alice in Chains.... no way
Soundgarden...... no way

The only possible answers are:
U2
Pearl Jam
Radiohead
Red Hot Chili Peppers

[DeuceWallaces]

More relevant now in what way? Radiohead's most recent release was In Rainbows in 2008. It entered the US and UK charts at No. 1.

What was the last PJ album to have that kind of opening? Vitalogy? Certainly not Backspacer, their most recent release (2009).

:confusedshrug:

:oldlol:

Backspacer debuted at #1 and sold more copies in the US (didn't check other charts) its first week than In Rainbows did. Furthermore, their 2006 self titled album was a critical and moderate commercial success. When you combine this with their prolific, and in demand, current touring schedule with their 90's sales and cultural impact I feel they're a better band over the past 20 years compared to Radiohead.

What is so :confusedshrug: about that?

[Zombles]

Outkast.

Radiohead is real good though.

[PistolPete]

[QUOTE=Se

[RedBlackAttack]

:oldlol:

Backspacer debuted at #1 and sold more copies in the US (didn't check other charts) its first week than In Rainbows did. Furthermore, their 2006 self titled album was a critical and moderate commercial success. When you combine this with their prolific, and in demand, current touring schedule with their 90's sales and cultural impact I feel they're a better band over the past 20 years compared to Radiohead.

What is so :confusedshrug: about that?
I said No. 1 in US and the UK, which is a pretty rare occurrence and shows wide-spread popularity. Peak position in the UK for Backspacer was No. 9.

Both albums went certified gold in the US. In Rainbows went gold in the UK, as well.

Cultural impact? :oldlol:

Not sure what you mean by that. Pearl Jam tours a lot... Much more than Radiohead. Not sure how that makes them 'better,' though. Radiohead still gets huge crowds regardless of where it goes and it still headlines the world's biggest festivals consistently.

[Dasher]

OutKast would be the correct choice. I like Radiohead when I was young, but as an adult they lost their appeal.

[RedBlackAttack]

LOL AIC and Soundgarden are way better bands than Radiohead though. I understand Radiohead has the fan base now and the ample discography, but those early 90's bands were classic. You just can't compare the musicianship.
Opinions are like @ssholes. And, in terms of musicianship, Radiohead matches up well with any of the bands you have mentioned.

Check out lead guitarist Johnny Greenwood's achievements outside of Radiohead. I'm wondering what you are basing your assumptions on other than personal preference.

[DeuceWallaces]

I said No. 1 in US and the UK, which is a pretty rare occurrence and shows wide-spread popularity. Peak position in the UK for Backspacer was No. 9.

Both albums went certified gold in the US. In Rainbows went gold in the UK, as well.

Cultural impact? :oldlol:

Not sure what you mean by that. Pearl Jam tours a lot... Much more than Radiohead. Not sure how that makes them 'better,' though. Radiohead still gets huge crowds regardless of where it goes and it still headlines the world's biggest festivals consistently.

Well you scoffed at Backspacer when in fact it did better in the States and only 8 slots below in the UK compared to Radiohead. Moreover, that's all relative depending on what else was released that week. Plus, the UK sales might not be that far apart considering In Rainbows only sold 44K in the UK release week. And if you want to go on about sales and chart releases I'm pretty sure Ten has sold more copies than every Radiohead release combined.

Cultural impact is not :oldlol: Were you paying attention from 91-96? They were the poster-child for rock music and the band of a generation along with Nirvana at the time. Not to mention their highly publicized battle with Ticketmaster after siding with Ticket's Plus.

Radiohead is a phenomenal live band with solid schedule, but Pearl Jam tours incessantly while headlining the same festivals and selling even more tickets.

Radiohead isn't even the biggest band in their own country the past 20 years.

[DeuceWallaces]

Yeah, sales means nothing these days. Everyone downloads it for practically nothing anyway; whether or not you put it up on your site for a penny.

[embersyc]

http://clubnotes.pmpblogs.com/files/2009/06/flaming-lips1.jpg

A challenger appears!









Eh, who I am kidding, Radiohead is better.

[HisJoeness]

What about The Roots? I submit them into the conversation. Illadelph Halflife, Things Fall Apart, Phrenology, Game Theory are all dope.

They are a model of consistency.

[Hawker]

http://i250.photobucket.com/albums/gg257/theoldoasis/gallery_pic27.jpg

Voted greatest frontman of all time.

[crosso√er]

I rather listen to Soundgarden then Radiohead; just my preference.

[RedBlackAttack]

Well you scoffed at Backspacer when in fact it did better in the States and only 8 slots below in the UK compared to Radiohead. Moreover, that's all relative depending on what else was released that week. Plus, the UK sales might not be that far apart considering In Rainbows only sold 44K in the UK release week. And if you want to go on about sales and chart releases I'm pretty sure Ten has sold more copies than every Radiohead release combined.

Cultural impact is not :oldlol: Were you paying attention from 91-96? They were the poster-child for rock music and the band of a generation along with Nirvana at the time. Not to mention their highly publicized battle with Ticketmaster after siding with Ticket's Plus.

Radiohead is a phenomenal live band with solid schedule, but Pearl Jam tours incessantly while headlining the same festivals and selling even more tickets.

Radiohead isn't even the biggest band in their own country the past 20 years.

I didn't scoff at Backspacer. It was actually one of their better releases of the last decade, imo... Maybe their most solid release since No Code. I just knew that it wasn't No. 1 in the UK and that the bulk of its sales were in the US.

Agree that album sales don't matter at all these days, especially for a band like Radiohead who encourages downloading of its albums.

IMO, that is what made the In Rainbows sales that much more impressive... Even with the band releasing the album for free (or whatever you wanted to pay) on its website, the album still went certified gold in the US and UK and entered the charts at No. 1 in both countries.

That says a lot about the diversity and devotion of their fanbase, not just in the US, but worldwide.

Listen... I like Pearl Jam. I even made a thread about the respect that I have for them some time ago. However, I can't put them on Radiohead's level, if for nothing else, than the fact that I believe Radiohead is consistently better and more willing to change and vary their sound so as not to get stale or outdated.

Pearl Jam released some great albums in the early-90s, but their releases (for the most part) following No Code have left me relatively uninterested. You look at RH's discography and it is literally classic album after classic album.

Like I said in my initial post in this thread... The seven-album run that they are currently on is one of the best that I can remember in rock history.

To say that Radiohead isn't the biggest band to come out of the UK in the last 15 years... I just don't know what you are basing that on. If it is album sales alone, then Lady Gaga>>>>>Radiohead and Pearl Jam.

Fortunately, that isn't the lone gauge for how influential and important a band is.

[embersyc]

What about The Roots? I submit them into the conversation. Illadelph Halflife, Things Fall Apart, Phrenology, Game Theory are all dope.

They are a model of consistency.

The Tipping Point is their best work, and you totally missed it. Still I'd pick Radiohead, Roots have become Jimmy Fallon's backup band, how did that happen?

[HisJoeness]

The Tipping Point is their best work, and you totally missed it. Still I'd pick Radiohead, Roots have become Jimmy Fallon's backup band, how did that happen?

I love "Star" but I gotta disagree with you on that. The album is still dope though. All their work is. They are definitely in this conversation.

[Two Worlds]

I pretty much agree with everything RedBlackAttack has said about Radiohead. I personally place Radiohead at the top mainly for the amount of great albums they have produced over the years. Another factor that I take into consideration that tends to get overlooked by many is the sheer amount of high quality B-sides that Radiohead has released throughout the years.

Here's a few examples of their great b-sides from albums 2-7(separated by album era)


The Bends

The Trickster
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4fUpKSfNq48

Punchdrunk Lovesick Singalong
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ugNNYY9PR50

Talk Show Host
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mcYu5Vg_YH8

Lewis (Mistreated)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AQZ1DDs_cMM

Maquiladora
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ue2Jhm-3i6Y


OK Computer

Polyethylene (Parts 1 & 2)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E1aqlT1YMe8

Pearly
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LTGnujQfcRg

Palo Alto
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=21TmsT1qsPo

Bishops Robes
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kK3JLbm1rTw

Meeting in the Aisle
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=On8ajxxQNJI


Kid A/Amnesiac

The Amazing Sounds of Orgy
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j5LT9X9F-YM

Trans-Atlantic Draw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T3poV6FSHM8

Worrywort
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LBUW3q5vv3E

Cuttooth
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BLitnT6w9h0

Fog
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fxh5rq_CGJI


Hail to the Thief

Gagging Order
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWG9xPWsg_g

Paperbag Writer
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pDdC2P8gY_M

Where Blue Birds Fly
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1qtPe_SyZuM

I Am A Wicked Child
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8EwLw5zfoLI


In Rainbows

Down is the New Up -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qoyN7zTvG58

Go Slowly
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RiZkv8alk4s

Bangers & Mash
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UUZQdZtmlT8

Four Minute Warning
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r3mMwyjTKB8

[PistolPete]

http://i250.photobucket.com/albums/gg257/theoldoasis/gallery_pic27.jpg

Voted greatest frontman of all time.

Ewww according to whom??

[PistolPete]

I dare somebody to find me a better Radiohead song than this song by Soundgarden.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9N3wkru_wd4

[brooks_thompson]

skipped thread. based on all of OP's qualifications, then radiohead is easily the 'best' band in the last 20.

and the thought that that is true really makes me sick. ok computer was good at the time..it doesn't really hold up. kid a is a certified classic. anything after was really middling stuff. i respect them, but they're the top pick in a weak draft class so to speak.

and to the above post by pete, radiohead - idioteque. to each his own i guess.

[andgar923]

Not looking to get too technical, I just think based on longevity, talent, versatility, replayability, etc.


Agree 100%

Not only is their music great, it also pushes boundaries and even redefines genres shifting the musical landscape.

Their constant evolution and fearlessness is something that most musicians dream about, but it isn't solely that they are fearless that makes them great, it's the fact that the results are also great. Sure, many other artists try to push their own limits and explore different boundaries, but they are rarely great.

[andgar923]

One thing I don't get is why people say they're 'overrated'?

How can they be, when they're universally acclaimed by critics?

Ok... ok.... critics don't matter, fine, I can dig that.... but how can they be overrated when millions of fans love their music?

Ok... ok.... Britney Spears has sold millions of records and has millions of fans, that doesn't necessarily equate to great music and I can dig that as well.

How can they be considered overrated when they've left a legacy with a huge impact?

Ok... ok... I understand that even Mc Hammer and Vanilla Ice have made an impact and left a legacy, I can dig that also.

However....

How can they be overrated if they're praised by their peers?

And, not just their peers within that style (genre) of music, but all across the musical spectrum.

YES.... Radiohead is praised, admired, copied, and has inspired artists ranging from hip hop, pop, electronica, indie, hard rock, heavy metal, punk, etc.etc. etc. by current and legendary artists alike.

So, if we factor in all of what I mentioned and throw in the universal respect and admiration from those within the music community around the world, how exactly are they overrated?
:confusedshrug:

[playtetris]

considering their impact on the record industry (paying whatever amount one chooses for an album release), originality, longevity, i would say they are a good rock candidate. wilco are not a bad nomination; they've released some very solid/consistent albums but lack the vociferous acclaim from pitchfork and the like.

i can't really think of anyone else in rock/indie that i would put forth in this debate. sonic youth would have to be up there, but they're possibly of a previous generation.

[jbot]

are they still around? haven't heard about them in years.

[raiderfan19]

Im not even remotely a fan of radiohead so I definitely wouldnt have them on this list. That said to each his own but claiming that they have been universally considered the best rock band in the world for 15 years is :facepalm

As for this debate, record sales mean very very little if anything. You know who the highest selling act of the 00s was? Wait for it. Nickelback. Anyone want to nominate them for best band of the last 20 years? My personal dark horse for this would be incubus though considering them for 20 years is pushing it since S.C.I.E.N.C.E. came out in 97. I also think that weve been a little one dimensional in terms of choosing bands.

If i was going to do a nomination list of bands that havent been mentioned it would look something like this
Incubus
Allison Krauss(and union station)
Foo Fighters
Metallica(Though to be fair their best 20 years would be the 80s and 90s)
Korn
Norah Jones(not quite there in longevity but way better in quality than several bands already mentioned)

[YAWN]

I honestly try to listen to it, and there are some tunes I find quite good. But their popularity, to me, just goes to point out how fragmented the music industry is. So many niches, a mediocre band that hangs in there and caters to their core audience long enough gets lauded.
:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

i know everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but damn you are so clueless.

[YAWN]

Radiohead is a phenomenal live band with solid schedule, but Pearl Jam tours incessantly while headlining the same festivals and selling even more tickets.


false. im staring at their numbers right now. radiohead is averaging 26,558 and Pearl Jam has been doing 21,182. The only thing pearl jam has going on that front is they charge their fans more money for tickets.

And i don't know if the 32 shows pearl jam did in 2009 and the 24 they have done this year count as "incessant" touring.

[YAWN]

considering their impact on the record industry (paying whatever amount one chooses for an album release), originality, longevity, i would say they are a good rock candidate. wilco are not a bad nomination; they've released some very solid/consistent albums but lack the vociferous acclaim from pitchfork and the like.

i can't really think of anyone else in rock/indie that i would put forth in this debate. sonic youth would have to be up there, but they're possibly of a previous generation.

wilco are one of my favorite bands and have released some really great albums... but in career comparison to radiohead they don't stand a chance.

[macmac]

I pretty much agree with everything RedBlackAttack has said about Radiohead. I personally place Radiohead at the top mainly for the amount of great albums they have produced over the years. Another factor that I take into consideration that tends to get overlooked by many is the sheer amount of high quality B-sides that Radiohead has released throughout the years.

Here's a few examples of their great b-sides from albums 2-7(separated by album era)



OK Computer

Polyethylene (Parts 1 & 2)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E1aqlT1YMe8

Pearly
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LTGnujQfcRg

Palo Alto
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=21TmsT1qsPo

Bishops Robes
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kK3JLbm1rTw

Meeting in the Aisle
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=On8ajxxQNJI




The airbag album was actually a phenomenal album in its own right, its insane to think those were OK computer's throwaway songs, they were really in their prime around the late 90s

[Jackass18]

If i was going to do a nomination list of bands that havent been mentioned it would look something like this
Incubus
Allison Krauss(and union station)
Foo Fighters
Metallica(Though to be fair their best 20 years would be the 80s and 90s)
Korn
Norah Jones(not quite there in longevity but way better in quality than several bands already mentioned)

Metallica sucked after the Black Album so why would you nominate them?

[vapid]

Metallica sucked after the Black Album so why would you nominate them?
Or Korn for that matter...

[Jackass18]

One thing I don't get is why people say they're 'overrated'?

How can they be, when they're universally acclaimed by critics?

Ok... ok.... critics don't matter, fine, I can dig that.... but how can they be overrated when millions of fans love their music?

Ok... ok.... Britney Spears has sold millions of records and has millions of fans, that doesn't necessarily equate to great music and I can dig that as well.

How can they be considered overrated when they've left a legacy with a huge impact?

Ok... ok... I understand that even Mc Hammer and Vanilla Ice have made an impact and left a legacy, I can dig that also.

However....

How can they be overrated if they're praised by their peers?

And, not just their peers within that style (genre) of music, but all across the musical spectrum.

YES.... Radiohead is praised, admired, copied, and has inspired artists ranging from hip hop, pop, electronica, indie, hard rock, heavy metal, punk, etc.etc. etc. by current and legendary artists alike.

So, if we factor in all of what I mentioned and throw in the universal respect and admiration from those within the music community around the world, how exactly are they overrated?
:confusedshrug:

Well, there's also a lot people that think they're overrated, and there's also a lot people that think that most Radiohead fans are pretentious douchebags (I don't think that way). It's just an opinion. Many people think that Radiohead is great, so if someone else doesn't, then they think that Radiohead is overrated.

[QUIZZLE]

And before someone mention RHCP no they are not close.


???

HA!

[JohnnySic]

Radiohead is pseudo-intellectual schlock. Do I need to wear fake glasses and those sport coats with the leather elbow pads to get it? :confusedshrug:

Gimme Pearl Jam, Alice in Chains, and a bunch of other bands over Radiohead...

[RaininThrees]

If you're thinking about Frances, I'd say Frances is very good, but in my opinion not great.

Agreed, though it depends on my mood, I guess. I consider De-loused to be more "listenable", where Frances some dedication to truly enjoy.... love them both, but love De-Loused a little more. Great band live, I've seen them 4 times.

And I really think the "best band" of the last 20 years is fairly subjective, and genre specific. Best rock band of the last 20 years? I'd say yes, absolutely.

[andgar923]

Well, there's also a lot people that think they're overrated, and there's also a lot people that think that most Radiohead fans are pretentious douchebags (I don't think that way). It's just an opinion. Many people think that Radiohead is great, so if someone else doesn't, then they think that Radiohead is overrated.
huh?

[andgar923]

Radiohead is pseudo-intellectual schlock. Do I need to wear fake glasses and those sport coats with the leather elbow pads to get it? :confusedshrug:

Gimme Pearl Jam, Alice in Chains, and a bunch of other bands over Radiohead...

ROFL @ this

You must've missed my post where I mentioned artists from the entire music world, from different genres are influenced by them and think very highly of them.

[playtetris]

wilco are one of my favorite bands and have released some really great albums... but in career comparison to radiohead they don't stand a chance.

iunno man. to me their best albums compete with radiohead in terms of creativity/ingenuity, but unlike radiohead they don't have any "filler" albums.

[JohnnySic]

ROFL @ this

You must've missed my post where I mentioned artists from the entire music world, from different genres are influenced by them and think very highly of them.
That's great. Its still pseudo-intellectual schlock to me.

Clearly they're great technical musicians, and their music may even be meaningful to some. Personally, I dont find it all that enjoyable.

[Pharcyde]

Also, Radiohead's audience is much, much bigger, even if you are talking about the Dead at their apex (early 70s).
I don't know.. The Dead still has a VERY large following with Rat Dog, Phil and Friends and now Furthur.

[DeuceWallaces]

false. im staring at their numbers right now. radiohead is averaging 26,558 and Pearl Jam has been doing 21,182. The only thing pearl jam has going on that front is they charge their fans more money for tickets.

And i don't know if the 32 shows pearl jam did in 2009 and the 24 they have done this year count as "incessant" touring.

What are total ticket sales this decade? I'm guessing it's not even close.

[Qwyjibo]

iunno man. to me their best albums compete with radiohead in terms of creativity/ingenuity, but unlike radiohead they don't have any "filler" albums.
I have to disagree with that. I'm a gigantic Wilco fan (seen them 3 times now) but Sky Blue Sky was I would say the weakest album if you look at both group's discographies. Sure there's Pablo Honey as well but Radiohead were just starting out, you cut them some slack for that. Sky Blue Sky, while still decent, seemed like somewhat of a lazy effort (minus a few songs) from a band who was already established. I'm just not a fan and considered a lot of that album to be filler. Every show I see I keep hoping they cut out some of the Sky Blue Sky material and fill it up with more Being There and Summerteeth.

[brooks_thompson]

I have to disagree with that. I'm a gigantic Wilco fan (seen them 3 times now) but Sky Blue Sky was I would say the weakest album if you look at both group's discographies. Sure there's Pablo Honey as well but Radiohead were just starting out, you cut them some slack for that. Sky Blue Sky, while still decent, seemed like somewhat of a lazy effort (minus a few songs) from a band who was already established. I'm just not a fan and considered a lot of that album to be filler. Every show I see I keep hoping they cut out some of the Sky Blue Sky material and fill it up with more Being There and Summerteeth.

really? it's my favorite album overall of theirs. that new guitar player that took over that record is awesome. of course, my second favorite album of theirs is a ghost is born, so that may invalidate my opinion.

wilco the album was really bad though.

[Qwyjibo]

really? it's my favorite album overall of theirs. that new guitar player that took over that record is awesome. of course, my second favorite album of theirs is a ghost is born, so that may invalidate my opinion.

wilco the album was really bad though.
I think we may just like different "Wilcos".

I liked the changes I saw from AM to Being There to Summerteeth to Yankee Hotel Foxtrot and to a lesser extent, A Ghost is Born. They were noticeable, risky and they worked. My faves are YHF, Summerteeth and Being There. Three consecutive albums with clearly distinctive sounds.

Maybe it's too much to expect a band to evolve their sound with every album but they kind started to settle in with A Ghost is Born and that progression has slowed since then. Past the first 3 songs on Sky Blue Sky, just not a fan. It lacked the creativity of previous albums. Although I still get chills every time I see Impossible Germany live. The Nels Cline solo on that song is one of the best things you can experience live these days. When I was at Bonnaroo in 2009, most of the people at the Wilco show initially seemed to be just waiting for Springsteen (who was on right after) but Wilco really won some people over with their performance.

[PistolPete]

and to the above post by pete, radiohead - idioteque. to each his own i guess.

To each his own is correct and respectable, but these guys incorporate sound machines and artificial sounds in their music. I listened to this song and that's the first thing you hear. It's very hard to choose a band over another when that band doesn't rely solely on playing their instruments. A DJ or sound mixer behind the booth is not an instrument.

[Dasher]

If Daft Punk qualifies as a band I would also rate them higher than Radiohead.

[YAWN]

iunno man. to me their best albums compete with radiohead in terms of creativity/ingenuity, but unlike radiohead they don't have any "filler" albums.

what filler albums?



What are total ticket sales this decade? I'm guessing it's not even close.
i only have access to the averages from the past 3 years and the history from their career. To get exact numbers id have to pay $10 for each artist hah.

[YAWN]

Past the first 3 songs on Sky Blue Sky, just not a fan. It lacked the creativity of previous albums. Although I still get chills every time I see Impossible Germany live.

you should revisit the rest of that album, its pretty good listening.

[Dolphin]

Radiohead is the only great rock band of this generation. Rock has been horribly bland for a while....and yes, I have searched for diamonds in the rough, but they tend to have one or two good songs surrounded by crap, which is not to say Radiohead hasn't been guilty of that as well, however not as much and their best songs are >>>>>> than the rest.

I usually am on the side that says "you just haven't looked hard enough" too. But really the only generes that I like that still produce good music on a consistent basis are EDM and metal. Rock is full of blandess and/or pretentious crap...including those bands that are supposed to be said diamonds in the rough. Just plain boring.

Somehow Radiohead has managed to grab me.

[Two Worlds]

I dare somebody to find me a better Radiohead song than this song by Soundgarden.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9N3wkru_wd4

Just:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tx6BowLrsUM (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tx6BowLrsUM&feature=fvw)

Paranoid Android:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aDpp0LVnQ80

My Iron Lung:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rrcEgHWUrSc

Lucky:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tejkhFyjoGE

The Bends:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5fu6dABbfMg

Blowout:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=37H6YGKAlgs


To each his own is correct and respectable, but these guys incorporate sound machines and artificial sounds in their music. I listened to this song and that's the first thing you hear. It's very hard to choose a band over another when that band doesn't rely solely on playing their instruments. A DJ or sound mixer behind the booth is not an instrument.

Radiohead actually do play instruments when they perform Idioteque live. The bassist handles the keyboards, the back up guitarist plays guitar+pedals, the drummer is involved, and Jonny Greenwood the lead guitarist handles the RS Integrator (http://www.analoguesystems.co.uk/rssystems.htm).

Here's two live performances of Idioteque:

Idioteque live at Glastonbury:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jX-fDKWGbRs

Idioteque live on Saturday Night Live
http://v.blog.sohu.com/u/vw/2605716

[andgar923]

To each his own is correct and respectable, but these guys incorporate sound machines and artificial sounds in their music. I listened to this song and that's the first thing you hear. It's very hard to choose a band over another when that band doesn't rely solely on playing their instruments. A DJ or sound mixer behind the booth is not an instrument.


So... what's wrong with using electronic devices as an instrument?

That means we should eliminate Pink Floyd, The Who, The Beatles, and a plethora of other artists as well then... no?

These "sound machines" are also 'instruments' and one still needs creativity to create music. Furthermore, not all of their sounds are created using electronic devices (or computers). Some of them sound like it, but in fact are unique instruments and boxes used to create these sounds. And just to add another tidbit..... they create most of their own sounds, it aint like they just use stock generic stuff (which shouldn't matter if they did).

Another thing worthy of noting..... not all of their music has electronic devices, and some of their greatest songs are as simple as a sole acoustic guitar or piano.

[sunsfan1357]

http://clubnotes.pmpblogs.com/files/2009/06/flaming-lips1.jpg

A challenger appears!

I've been meaning to check them out for a while now. Suggestions?

Personally, every song of Radiohead's that has been recommend to me I did not like at all. I don't know what it could be, maybe its just listening to a song here and there as opposed to an album where it can flow better.

[Qwyjibo]

I've been meaning to check them out for a while now. Suggestions?
Clouds Taste Metallic is a good album to start with IMO. It has accessible pop-ish songs but also prepares you for their weirder side as well.

Love this song: The Abandoned Hospital Ship - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qXHmLJFd434

[heyhey]

I've been meaning to check them out for a while now. Suggestions?

Personally, every song of Radiohead's that has been recommend to me I did not like at all. I don't know what it could be, maybe its just listening to a song here and there as opposed to an album where it can flow better.

I would start out with Yoshimi Battles the Pink Robots and Embryonic. To be honest their early stuff, 80s, is a bid drab to me.

check out Zaireeka and Soft Bulletin after that.

[PistolPete]

So... what's wrong with using electronic devices as an instrument?

That means we should eliminate Pink Floyd, The Who, The Beatles, and a plethora of other artists as well then... no?




No, I'm just referring to the poster that said Radiohead was better than Soundgarden, AIC and the other grunge bands on the 90's. There's no comparison. Those bands set a new standard for what Rock was. They shut the door for good for what was Glam Rock even though some Glam bands were still churning out some solid hits in the early 90's. It's like the whole world and MTV alike did a complete 180 and just ignored those classic bands from the 80's from then on.

Every where I go I hear that Radiohead is depressing and they rarely provide you with an up tempo tune. And for the most part that's true from what I've heard so far. Trust me, you guys are doing a great job of selling that band, but to no avail for me. If I want to mellow out to today's music, I'll stick with the Stoner Rock genre and bands like Kyuss, Nebula, Fu Manchu, Sleep, Acid King, etc..

And for the record, Pink Floyd was a bit overrated in my honest opinion. If I want moody music, I'll listen to The Doors instead. At least their singer had a voice you can mellow out to.

[andgar923]

I could never get into Flaming Lips, they're definitely an acquired taste.

There was a time when I thought Radiohead was a bit overrated, I was never truly a big fan but I did enjoy some of their music. I enjoyed their music before I was a non-fan, far more than I enjoy Flaming Lips' music.

I do understand why people are passionate about them tho. They're also very creative and innovative, although imo the results aren't as listenable as Radiohead's.

Not sure if this is the proper comparison to make, but to 'me' it's like comparing 'Yes' to 'Pink Floyd'.

Both great groups, and 'Yes' might even be the better musicians of the two. But Pink Floyd's final results are easier to digest imo (more pleasing). Not sure if that's a good thing or bad thing.

Having said that.....

As a producer I've learned that minimalism and nice melodies trump complex clashing sounds. And that's something that I've noticed with some artists that are great musicians, and something that I noticed with Flaming Lips to a degree.

They tend to have too much going on and the sounds clash at times. Whereas Radiohead, even tho they have 'layers' of sounds, they're more subdued and don't really fight for the listeners attention. They also have better melodies, which is what made The Beatles 'The Beatles'. I honestly don't see the same level of easy to digest melodic capabilities from Flaming Lips.

Perhaps a better suited analogy is Zappa and The Beatles. Frank Zappa is the better musician, but The Beatles made better music.

[andgar923]

No, I'm just referring to the poster that said Radiohead was better than Soundgarden, AIC and the other grunge bands on the 90's. There's no comparison. Those bands set a new standard for what Rock was. They shut the door for good for what was Glam Rock even though some Glam bands were still churning out some solid hits in the early 90's. It's like the whole world and MTV alike did a complete 180 and just ignored those classic bands from the 80's from then on.

And for the record, Pink Floyd was a bit overrated in my honest opinion. If I want moody music, I'll listen to The Doors instead. At least their singer had a voice you can mellow out to.

Dude.... Radiohead took rock music to another realm and made the lines between genres even more grey, which is a 'good thing'.

It's hard to classify Radiohead to any one genre, since they can easily weave themselves into most genres. That's because they've evolved and changed from album to album. We can't say the same for the groups mentioned, and the only one with true lasting power is PJ.

And really dude? The Doors>>> Pink Floyd?

I'm a huge Doors fan, but c'mon.

[Hawker]

I wouldn't consider Radiohead rock music considering they don't rock at all.

[andgar923]

I wouldn't consider Radiohead rock music considering they don't rock at all.

I wouldn't consider Oasis artists, since they're completely un-original/Beatles wannabes.

[Hawker]

I wouldn't consider Oasis artists, since they're completely un-original/Beatles wannabes.

And Radiohead is a Pink Floyd wannabe. Big deal.

[Dasher]

I wouldn't consider Radiohead rock music considering they don't rock at all.
LOL true.

[andgar923]

And Radiohead is a Pink Floyd wannabe. Big deal.

Not really.

There's a huge difference between being inspired, and copying.

[brooks_thompson]

alright i need caps lock for this


IF YOU'RE GONNA CHECK OUT THE FLAMING LIPS, THEN START WITH THE SOFT BULLETIN.

it's may not be as accessible as some of their earlier poppier stuff, or their pretty-damn-good-and-pretty-damn-popular yoshimi battles the pink robots, but it puts it all together, is damn catchy, fun, and challenging. don't you first want to listen to the album of theirs that has the highest potential to blow your mind?

[PistolPete]

Dude.... Radiohead took rock music to another realm and made the lines between genres even more grey, which is a 'good thing'.

It's hard to classify Radiohead to any one genre, since they can easily weave themselves into most genres. That's because they've evolved and changed from album to album. We can't say the same for the groups mentioned, and the only one with true lasting power is PJ.

And really dude? The Doors>>> Pink Floyd?

I'm a huge Doors fan, but c'mon.

I will only say this, today's music sucks. I'm 29 having lived through the 80's, 90's and today. Started my life listening to Rap, then gave that up in college and started listening to Rock, and now for the last 10 years or so, I've lent my ears to the Metal genre where I will gladly stay. For the youth of today (20 years and younger), I honestly don't think they know what they're talking about when it comes to what's good and what's better. But that's my opinion on everything.

Classic Rock is probably my forte right next to Metal, and I have never ever liked Pink Floyd. Their music is strictly for the severely inebriated crowd. Morrison took The Doors to a whole other level to me during Classic Rock's heyday.

Edit: Pearl Jam had to change their style too. They are much softer than how they used to be, and that's just the way Rock music was headed sadly.

[brooks_thompson]

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41B6QEM83EL._SL500_AA300_.jpg

do it already. best album of the 90s

[vapid]

I wouldn't consider Radiohead rock music considering they don't rock at all.
Radiohead has a few songs that rock harder than Oasis could ever. How do you rock out to Oasis's mellow, unemotional voice?

[Hawker]

Not really.

There's a huge difference between being inspired, and copying.

The Beatles didn't copy?

[Dasher]

Morrison was awful. He ruined what could have been great music.

[brooks_thompson]

The Beatles didn't copy?

girl groups, yeah. but they quickly turned it all on its head

[Hawker]

Radiohead has a few songs that rock harder than Oasis could ever. How do you rock out to Oasis's mellow, unemotional voice?

Creep is the closest thing that Radiohead has to rock that I've listened to.

(I own Ok Computer and the Bends.)

Radiohead will never rock out again with the way Thom Yorke sings. Softer than a pillow.

[brooks_thompson]

i do really dislike thom yorke's voice. unique doesn't mean it's easy to appreciate or listen to for more than 15 minutes at a time.

[PistolPete]

Morrison was awful. He ruined what could have been great music.

I know deep down inside you know you don't mean that

[Dasher]

I know deep down inside you know you don't mean that
I have always hoped that Morrison was playing an elaborate joke on people with his songs and persona. I have the same hope for Gucci Mane. Morrison had a great voice, but should have never been allowed to write anything. He is what happens when non-existent writing talent meets boundless pretension and falls assbackwards into a band of talented musicians.

[andgar923]

I will only say this, today's music sucks.

I agree for the most part.

I'm 29 having lived through the 80's, 90's and today.

I'm older than you are and have vivid memories of those eras (fav decade is the 70s).

Started my life listening to Rap, then gave that up in college and started listening to Rock, and now for the last 10 years or so,

Started off listening to hip hop as well, then rock in high school although I grew up with tons of classic rock. I listen to mostly classic rock, funk and soul today.... very little hip hop nowadays.

I've lent my ears to the Metal genre where I will gladly stay.

Not a huge metal fan, I like it but not in love with it. I've mellowed out throughout the years and have started to appreciate more downtempo mellower music.

For the youth of today (20 years and younger), I honestly don't think they know what they're talking about when it comes to what's good and what's better. But that's my opinion on everything.

I agree 100%

Classic Rock is probably my forte right next to Metal, and I have never ever liked Pink Floyd. Their music is strictly for the severely inebriated crowd. Morrison took The Doors to a whole other level to me during Classic Rock's heyday.

Edit: Pearl Jam had to change their style too. They are much softer than how they used to be, and that's just the way Rock music was headed sadly.

I used to be a bigger Doors fan and couldn't stand Pink Floyd in high school... why? because they were too mellow for my tastes back then. Although I liked a track or two, I mostly thought they were too soft and for 'f@gs' (same way I thought about Radiohead).

But as I got older and my musical tastes expanded, I learned to have more appreciation for them. But I became an even bigger fan when I started to produce and understand music in general better. Coincidentally, my understanding and admiration for Radiohead spawned from this time. Specially my admiration for their willingness to grow as artists and experiment successfully.

As an aspiring producer/artist I understand how hard it is to challenge yourself and experiment, it aint easy and like I mentioned, not too many artists in history have done it successfully. But they're evolution has also impacted other styles and genres outside of their own, which is even a bigger indication of their greatness. We can also track Pink Floyd's growth in the same manner as well. Listen to their early Syd Barrett stuff and then listen to Echoes. The difference between the acid psychedelic Syd music, is miles away from the space 'blues' that is Echoes. We also see a difference from DSOTM to The Wall, Animals, WYWH, etc.etc.

As much as I love 'hard rock' it's genre and stylized that follows the same pattern. While good and some of the artists are great, they're confined within their boundaries (which isn't necessarily a bad thing per se). But with Radiohead there is no boundaries. In the same way The Beatles didn't have any boundaries, and that is why many rank Radiohead so highly, and why 'artists' praise them so much.

[andgar923]

The Beatles didn't copy?

But they were still their own group, they were still themselves. They weren't trying to be anybody else but The Beatles.

Oasis tries to be The Beatles in every way shape and form.

[Hawker]

But they were still their own group, they were still themselves. They weren't trying to be anybody else but The Beatles.

Oasis tries to be The Beatles in every way shape and form.

You're correct. Oasis is Oasis and nobody else. Just like The Beatles try to be nobody but The Beatles.

[Hawker]

I always take issue when people say things like "Today's music stinks." It's the nostalgia effect; people always look back upon older music with fondness which kind of tends to cloud one's judgment in regards to modern music. I've come to the conclusion that it's some sort of psychological thing.

Nope. Most of today's music actually does suck.

[andgar923]

Not too many artists can go from something like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kmj176eFXEI

To something like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hdmP-vC_CSA&feature=related

To something like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d2_QtTa732Q

To this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ES2cjsjQCTM

Plus many more, all within the same album.

Its got something for the whole family!

[RedBlackAttack]

This is really only true if you're only considering mainstream, radio type stuff. There are TONS of great music, across more genres than have ever existed at any point in history, if you're willing to look around for it a bit.
Don't bother.

[andgar923]

This is really only true if you're only considering mainstream, radio type stuff. There are TONS of great music, across more genres than have ever existed at any point in history, if you're willing to look around for it a bit.

And besides, if it is a psychological thing like I'm beginning to think it is, of course you would say otherwise.

The difference is, great music was more accessible before.

By accessible I mean it was easier to find in the mainstream and within people's grasp.

There is always gonna be good artists in both the mainstream and the not so mainstream realm.

But there was a better balance in past eras.

Even then, if we consider the cookie cutter artists from past eras, they trump today's cookie cutter run of the mill artists in many ways.

I'd take a boy band from the 60s or 70s to any of today's.
I'd take the teeny bopper chick from past eras over today's as well.

Etc.etc. you get the point.

Mainstream music of past eras>>>> today's
Underground music of past eras>>>> today's
Bad music of past eras>>>> today's
Good music of past eras>>>> today's

[andgar923]

And how exactly aren't you fitting right into the whole psychological thing I mentioned before?

Because I measure music far more objectively than most do.

Most people that fit your criteria believe that the music they listened to growing up is the best, but I don't fit into this category.

I didn't grow up in the 70s, yet I believe it's the best era (followed by the 60s). I also believe that there's artists today that are as good if not better than past legends.

Using the 'nostalgic' argument imo is a weak argument no matter what topic. Its lazy and an scapegoat to avoid debating the issue.

I hate it when people's main argument is "Well you're just being nostalgic", weak.

[pete's montreux]

This thread turned from awesome to sucked in about 5 seconds. I had more bands to list, but I'm punching out.

[andgar923]

I don't think it's a weak argument at all. You're just saying that because it's inconvenient towards your argument.

I mean, there must be a reason why, irregardless of what generation people hail from, they almost always think that the music from their generation is better than anything that came after it, right? I mean, the music you love if often dismissed as inferior by people who came from the previous generation. This is something observable, there must be a reason for it.

I agree, there must be a reason why that is I'm not denying that.

I just think that its weak whenever people use that as a debate tactic and offer nothing more.

Its like those young cats in the NBA section, telling some of the older heads that today's players are better and that us older heads are just being "nostalgic". That's a weak and dismissive argument to make imo, because it's rarely followed up with anything else other than "you're just nostalgic, you're a hater".

I gave you specific legit reasons and yet, all you had to say was that I was basically being nostalgic. I then proceeded to disprove your accusation.

[brooks_thompson]

yeah let's not get into this again. i was guilty last time around

[pete's montreux]

It's not anyone specifically. It's ISH, this would've happened eventually. You could slowly see the tides swaying with every post. The first being "no RHCP" BS. Hilarious that someone just completely dismisses a band that's loved by millions upon millions in a single sentence because that person doesn't like them. Shit like that is so ignorant It's embarrassing.

[heyhey]

It's not anyone specifically. It's ISH, this would've happened eventually. You could slowly see the tides swaying with every post. The first being "no RHCP" BS.

They are really just not as musically talented, skilled or have great enough of a discography or influence to compete against Radiohead :confusedshrug:

and they are probably the band that most people would have thought of.

[pete's montreux]

They are really just not as musically talented, skilled or have great enough of a discography or influence to compete against Radiohead :confusedshrug:

First of all, you took the thread title and OP way too seriously. It was obviously designed to spark debate about several bands, not just compare them to one. And secondly, says who? You? What makes you the authority on this subject? You aren't, so please, for your sake, stop acting like an idiot. Your posts disgust me, and several others I'm guessing.

[Dasher]

If we are not limited to rock, I would argue Daft Punk and OutKast. Their discographies are superior, as their experiments are all hits, unlike Radiohead's.

[pete's montreux]

Daft Punk is someone who I forgot about. And yes, they are a band.

[brooks_thompson]

I apologize for derailing the thread; I just saw the whole "new music sucks" thing and thought I would comment on what I've come to believe more and more as some sort of psychological thing, based on observable phenomena. Like RBA said though, I shouldn't have even bothered. People have their minds made up and won't see it any other way.

Moving on...

OK, is there a consensus list of bands that might challenge Radiohead for this title? I've seen a few posted that have a case, but no real clear-cut challenger in my opinion. At least not when you consider all factors, that is.

wilco is all i got. i really can't get into the bands that peaked (IMO!) in the early 90s like pearl jam. it was right before the time i really got into music, and there's still not enough truly objective distance for me to evaluate them properly.

[brooks_thompson]

and again to shannonelements: i really don't see how it's a psychological thing when i was born in the mid-1980s and still hold the 60s and some mid-to-late 70s music as the pinnacle of rock n' roll and pop music. i am certainly guilty of the 80s nostalgia influence, but at the same time i think there was a lot of great music during the decade. and i truly love it in a non-ironic way as was the style for a few years from 2002-2005-ish.

you will have to explain what you mean by that a bit more

[PistolPete]

I used to be a bigger Doors fan and couldn't stand Pink Floyd in high school... why? because they were too mellow for my tastes back then. Although I liked a track or two, I mostly thought they were too soft and for 'f@gs' (same way I thought about Radiohead).

But as I got older and my musical tastes expanded, I learned to have more appreciation for them. But I became an even bigger fan when I started to produce and understand music in general better. Coincidentally, my understanding and admiration for Radiohead spawned from this time. Specially my admiration for their willingness to grow as artists and experiment successfully.

As an aspiring producer/artist I understand how hard it is to challenge yourself and experiment, it aint easy and like I mentioned, not too many artists in history have done it successfully. But they're evolution has also impacted other styles and genres outside of their own, which is even a bigger indication of their greatness. We can also track Pink Floyd's growth in the same manner as well. Listen to their early Syd Barrett stuff and then listen to Echoes. The difference between the acid psychedelic Syd music, is miles away from the space 'blues' that is Echoes. We also see a difference from DSOTM to The Wall, Animals, WYWH, etc.etc.

As much as I love 'hard rock' it's genre and stylized that follows the same pattern. While good and some of the artists are great, they're confined within their boundaries (which isn't necessarily a bad thing per se). But with Radiohead there is no boundaries. In the same way The Beatles didn't have any boundaries, and that is why many rank Radiohead so highly, and why 'artists' praise them so much.


Good stuff man, glad we actually see eye to eye on a few things. It's just that I'm surrounded by people half my age nowadays and we do get in serious discussions about bands, and of course I'm in the minority. Heh, I find it funny how I can relate more with what looks to be a loner student with a Misfits shirt on more than I can a straight A-college ready student. It's a futile effort on my part in trying to explain the 70's and 80's to the kids of today.

On a side note, I will say that probably the most talented musicians in today's age are of the Stoner Rock/Metal genre. There are a plethora of bands out there that no one has heard about that play some of the best and well-produced rock out there, that it's a damn shame they don't get the same amount of exposure.

Here's just a little sample: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9sHUJRVP_OA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g5LnkDcyjDw

[andgar923]

It's not anyone specifically. It's ISH, this would've happened eventually. You could slowly see the tides swaying with every post. The first being "no RHCP" BS. Hilarious that someone just completely dismisses a band that's loved by millions upon millions in a single sentence because that person doesn't like them. Shit like that is so ignorant It's embarrassing.

Because RHCP isn't as good.

They're a great band, but not in the same league.

[brooks_thompson]

On a side note, I will say that probably the most talented musicians in today's age are of the Stoner Rock/Metal genre.

this is very true, from the technical standpoint especially. i just find it frustrating that there are no really great songwriters who can combine great melodies with interesting but concise song structures

[pete's montreux]

Because RHCP isn't as good.

They're a great band, but not in the same league.

I don't care.

[andgar923]

Good stuff man, glad we actually see eye to eye on a few things. It's just that I'm surrounded by people half my age nowadays and we do get in serious discussions about bands, and of course I'm in the minority. Heh, I find it funny how I can relate more with what looks to be a loner student with a Misfits shirt on more than I can a straight A-college ready student. It's a futile effort on my part in trying to explain the 70's and 80's to the kids of today.

On a side note, I will say that probably the most talented musicians in today's age are of the Stoner Rock/Metal genre. There are a plethora of bands out there that no one has heard about that play some of the best and well-produced rock out there, that it's a damn shame they don't get the same amount of exposure.

Here's just a little sample: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9sHUJRVP_OA
The one thing I will say about metal and always defend them for, is their emphasis on musicianship, specially guitar playing.

They've kept the tradition of the guitar gods from the 70s alive, and the same can be said about the other instruments as well.

Ironically enough, what makes RAdiohead so great is what is also hurting the rock genre in general..... their willingness to be different and experiment.

I love that artists want to grow and want to try different things. However, I feel that many of today's 'indie' groups try too hard to do this. And in their attempts to be different, they end up sounding very generic and well... not really rocking too much. They also end up sounding like groups from the 80s and not really bringing much to the table. Now.... this is just 'in general' since there are some good artists out there. And in their effort to be different, they've not only lost the 'rock' in rock, but also lost how to really play guitar. Musicianship is hard rock/metal's foundation.... unfortunately, their loyalty has prevented them from exploring too much. Thus keeping the genre from escaping the same format. As soon as a group tries to expand and experiment, they're labeled sell outs or loose their 'hard rock/metal' label, and become 'indie' or some sub-genre of another sub genre.

Radiohead doesn't really rock hard, except for about 2-3 songs per album. And even then it aint heavy hard rock, but still good enough to pick things up.

[heyhey]

Good stuff man, glad we actually see eye to eye on a few things. It's just that I'm surrounded by people half my age nowadays and we do get in serious discussions about bands, and of course I'm in the minority. Heh, I find it funny how I can relate more with what looks to be a loner student with a Misfits shirt on more than I can a straight A-college ready student. It's a futile effort on my part in trying to explain the 70's and 80's to the kids of today.

On a side note, I will say that probably the most talented musicians in today's age are of the Stoner Rock/Metal genre. There are a plethora of bands out there that no one has heard about that play some of the best and well-produced rock out there, that it's a damn shame they don't get the same amount of exposure.

Here's just a little sample: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9sHUJRVP_OA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g5LnkDcyjDw

if you are into psychedalic music. I would suggest the band Mother. They are not well known at all. But just a bunch of really hippy good musicians out of DC. Very psychadelic sound. A little more poppy than than sixty watts shaman But worth checking out. Their entire EP Oktopus Klap is free online.

http://mother.bandcamp.com/album/oktopus-klap

[andgar923]

'Imo' the reason people love Radiohead so much, is because they offer you a taste of everything.

They'll offer a harder up tempo traditional rock track, followed by a jazzy song, followed by an experimental idm song, to a progressive ambient track that'll make Roger Waters nut on himself, to a pop rock song that even your parents can listen too. Many artists love to use the gimmicky 'kaleidoscope' title or label, but Radiohead's albums are the true defintion of this.

[Tito Beasley]

Damn, I had to make a pit stop back here just for this thread:

Since "the last 20 years" seems to be intended as a generality, the answer to this thread is U2.

And I feel very confident in saying that most people in this thread who are not listing U2, are not very familiar with them other than the shenanigans of Bono.

Sunday Bloody Sunday
New Year's Day
Pride (In the Name of Love)
Where the Streets Have No Name
I Still Haven't Found What I'm Looking For
With Or Without You
Desire
One
(She Moves In) Mysterious Ways
Beautiful Day
Elevation
Walk On
All That You Can't Leave Behind
Vertigo


please, eat your hearts out radiohead

lol @ the the mere idea of a comparison. also, bono's vocals shit massive diarrhea on thom yorke. many radiohead posers dont seem to be aware of this because U2 is too "pop" for them to admit liking.


U2 is an adults band. Radiohead is a kids band.

Even though Grateful Dead >>> Radiohead, I understand the comparison one poster made. Both are bands that groups of people basically use symbolically to unite their culture. In order to fit in as a hippie, you gotta like the grateful dead. In order to fit in as the new-age hippie of abstractness and faux-sophistication/intellectualism and off-center nonconformity, you have to like Radiohead. Both bands basically cornered a market which led to them being overrated by their fans, half of whom probably only liked them because it gave them a social identity, not because of anything music-related.


Ok, peace out again.

[Two Worlds]

The reason people aren't listing U2 is because they haven't released anything worth mentioning in about 20 years.

[Jackass18]

huh?

I'll put it this way, you like them and think highly of them and many others do as well, so a couple people calling them overrated shouldn't bother you.

[andgar923]

Damn, I had to make a pit stop back here just for this thread:

Since "the last 20 years" seems to be intended as a generality, the answer to this thread is U2.

And I feel very confident in saying that most people in this thread who are not listing U2, are not very familiar with them other than the shenanigans of Bono.

Sunday Bloody Sunday
New Year's Day
Pride (In the Name of Love)
Where the Streets Have No Name
I Still Haven't Found What I'm Looking For
With Or Without You
Desire
One
(She Moves In) Mysterious Ways
Beautiful Day
Elevation
Walk On
All That You Can't Leave Behind
Vertigo


please, eat your hearts out radiohead

lol @ the the mere idea of a comparison. also, bono's vocals shit massive diarrhea on thom yorke. many radiohead posers dont seem to be aware of this because U2 is too "pop" for them to admit liking.


U2 is an adults band. Radiohead is a kids band.

Even though Grateful Dead >>> Radiohead, I understand the comparison one poster made. Both are bands that groups of people basically use symbolically to unite their culture. In order to fit in as a hippie, you gotta like the grateful dead. In order to fit in as the new-age hippie of abstractness and faux-sophistication/intellectualism and off-center nonconformity, you have to like Radiohead. Both bands basically cornered a market which led to them being overrated by their fans, half of whom probably only liked them because it gave them a social identity, not because of anything music-related.


Ok, peace out again.

:facepalm

[playtetris]

:facepalm

u2 > radiohead? :roll: that is ridiculously asinine.

[playtetris]

I wouldn't consider Radiohead rock music considering they don't rock at all.

just (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oIFLtNYI3Ls&feature=av2e) doesn't rock? that shit rocks harder than anything oasis has ever written. that last rockout bit is f*cking killer

[PistolPete]

just (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oIFLtNYI3Ls&feature=av2e) doesn't rock? that shit rocks harder than anything oasis has ever written. that last rockout bit is f*cking killer

Heh, here's a better song that "rocks out": http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NUTGr5t3MoY

Please disagree, oh please do.

And a band I can't believe I forgot to mention that should be better in all your minds than Radiohead is Weezer.

This is excellent music: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ENXvZ9YRjbo

[YAWN]

:oldlol: at starface's post. apparently he miscalculated the whole 20 year thing.

[Two Worlds]

Heh, here's a better song that "rocks out": http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NUTGr5t3MoY

Please disagree, oh please do.

And a band I can't believe I forgot to mention that should be better in all your minds than Radiohead is Weezer.

This is excellent music: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ENXvZ9YRjbo
What albums from Radiohead have you listened to? Just curious.

[playtetris]

Heh, here's a better song that "rocks out": http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NUTGr5t3MoY

Please disagree, oh please do.

And a band I can't believe I forgot to mention that should be better in all your minds than Radiohead is Weezer.

This is excellent music: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ENXvZ9YRjbo

completely different genre. sure, it "rocks" harder, but it is certainly not a better song. not even close.

[PistolPete]

What albums from Radiohead have you listened to? Just curious.

I've clicked on every single youtube link for them in this thread and a few more i found on youtube. Just don't understand the hype. They sound bland to me

[HAzE024]

I nominate Slightly Stoopid and Sublime to represent the potheads

[YAWN]

And a band I can't believe I forgot to mention that should be better in all your minds than Radiohead is Weezer.

This is excellent music: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ENXvZ9YRjbo

wow, they haven't released a good album since pinkerton in 1996. two classic albums followed by 6 mediocre ones...

I know you can't really judge a CD by its cover, but seriously look at these:

their upcoming album "hurley"
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/8b/Weezer_Hurley_album_cover.jpg

their latest album raditude
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/9/95/Weezer-Raditude.jpg/600px-Weezer-Raditude.jpg

[brooks_thompson]

weezer raditude cover is a rip off of working class dog. those guys had the worst mid-career shift of any band i can think of.


and hail to the thief is my favorite radiohead behind kid a. they dialed it back a bit from kid b and made a pretty solid album.

[pete's montreux]

Was Tool mentioned? I don't listen to them at all but I know a lot of people love them.

[QUIZZLE]

I don't hate Weezer but in no way should they be a mention for the BEST band of the last twenty years,

[Dasher]

Why have The White Stripes not been mentioned? They have the best discography of mainstream bands in the last ten years.

http://www.100xr.com/100_XR/Artists/W/White_Stripes/The.White.Stripes.jpg

[L.Kizzle]

Who's their competition?

[bdreason]

Not a fan, but U2 should probably get a nod.





My pick is Dredg. The Pink Floyd of this generation.

www.dredg.com

[pete's montreux]

Not a fan, but U2 should probably get a nod.





My pick is Dredg. The Pink Floyd of this generation.

www.dredg.com (http://www.dredg.com)

Recommend an album/song please.

[FCN]

Can't believe I read this entire thread without seeing a single mention of Green Day. Love them or hate them they've been pretty steady the past 20 some odd years.

[bdreason]

Recommend an album/song please.


Very difficult. Most of their albums are composed as an entire piece, and each has their own distinct vibe.


I would recommend downloading their last 3 albums; "El Cielo", "Catch Without Arms", and "The Pariah, The Parrot, The Delusion".


Their music is very complex, and may take a few listens to grow on you. Give it a chance though.

[QUIZZLE]

Can't believe I read this entire thread without seeing a single mention of Green Day. Love them or hate them they've been pretty steady the past 20 some odd years.


:oldlol:

no way.

[QUIZZLE]

Why have The White Stripes not been mentioned? They have the best discography of mainstream bands in the last ten years.

http://www.100xr.com/100_XR/Artists/W/White_Stripes/The.White.Stripes.jpg


I don't know if I can agree with the whole discography thing but definitely an underrated band without a doubt.

[PHX_Phan]

Was Tool mentioned? I don't listen to them at all but I know a lot of people love them.

Came in here just to mention Tool. They easily get my nomination.

[Captain Kirk]

A lot of the songs people are listing as reason that Radiohead is great are songs that are really an acquired taste. A lot of it sounds like background music to an indie movie.

[RedBlackAttack]

Came in here just to mention Tool. They easily get my nomination.
I would have mentioned them earlier, but I didn't want to be too predictable in my love for Tool. I was just sort of waiting for someone else to bring them up. With some of the other bands mentioned here, they absolutely deserve nomination and, imo, they are probably the closest to Radiohead in terms of consistency over a long span of years.

They haven't released a huge amount of material, but when they do, they generally bring it...

Undertow (1993)

[pete's montreux]

I would have mentioned them earlier, but I didn't want to be too predictable in my love for Tool. With some of the other bands mentioned here, they absolutely deserve nomination and, imo, they are probably the closest to Radiohead in terms of consistency over a long span of years.

I would throw The Smashing Pumpkins out there, but they didn't quite have the consistency and longevity. Absolutely great in the early to mid 90s, though.

Yeah I mentioned them on the first page and realized I didn't have any of their stuff. Downloaded their discog the other day and have been listening non-stop since.

[RedBlackAttack]

Yeah I mentioned them on the first page and realized I didn't have any of their stuff. Downloaded their discog the other day and have been listening non-stop since.
Siamese Dream is a masterpiece. It isn't exactly 'grunge,' but it is probably my favorite album from the 'grunge' era.

Cherub Rock, Quiet, Hummer, Disarm, Rocket, Soma, Spaceboy, Luna...

Absolutely killer track after killer track and it flows perfectly. In fact, Cherub Rock (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VbrfXDFuzu0)is one of the greatest opening tracks to an album of all-time, imo. It gets me fired up just thinking about it.

[heyhey]

Siamese Dream is a masterpiece. It isn't exactly 'grunge,' but it is probably my favorite album from the 'grunge' era.

Cherub Rock, Quiet, Hummer, Disarm, Rocket, Soma, Spaceboy, Luna...

Absolutely killer track after killer track and it flows perfectly. In fact, Cherub Rock (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VbrfXDFuzu0)is one of the greatest opening tracks to an album of all-time, imo. It gets me fired up just thinking about it.

I agree with this. Siamese Dream is actually the only album I have from Smashing Pumpkins, heard it was their best album. My favorite tracks from it are Mayonaise and Cherub rock. I didn't realize it was the opening track but yea great songs.

So you are the residential Tool fan. I listened to Aenimia back in the day. I have no recollection of what I thought of it it now lol. What album or song would you recommend?

Tool must have one of the most dedicated fan base of any band. Everyone who I know that likes tool, REALLLy LIKEs tool if you feel me.

[FCN]

:oldlol:

no way.


?

They're not my favorite band either, but there's no denying their relevance, widespread popularity, and success the past 20 years or so.

[RedBlackAttack]

I agree with this. Siamese Dream is actually the only album I have from Smashing Pumpkins, heard it was their best album. My favorite tracks from it are Mayonaise and Cherub rock. I didn't realize it was the opening track but yea great songs.

So you are the residential Tool fan. I listened to Aenimia back in the day. I have no recollection of what I thought of it it now lol. What album or song would you recommend?

Tool must have one of the most dedicated fan base of any band. Everyone who I know that likes tool, REALLLy LIKEs tool if you feel me.
Yeah... Tool fans are a dedicated bunch. Much like Radiohead (and basically every other band worth listening to, imo), it is an acquired taste that may take a few listens for you to really get into the groove. BUT, if and when it clicks, it really clicks.

They are pretty much completely unique and they don't fit into any box or genre. They have been called prog rock, but they aren't much like genre predecessors Dream Theatre or Yes... More of a hard edge and the compositions are more complex.

They have been called hard rock/heavy metal, but they aren't THAT hard edge and the compositions (again) are more complex than what you find in most stuff in those genres.

The first and most obvious thing when listening to Tool is to really pay attention to the drumming and the changes in time signature. Danny Carey, imo, is the greatest drummer in the world, has been for well over a decade, and he is one of the truly elite rock drummers to ever live.

Simply keeping up with Tool's constantly changing time signatures is hard enough, yet he puts his own flavor into every beat and even finds places to freelance during live shows.

He really makes everything go, but the rest of the band is also incredible and Maynard James Keenan is an incredible singer.

It is tough to point you toward specific tracks, because their albums are really intended to be listened to from start to finish. Their songs are generally over seven minutes long (with many over 10 minutes), so this isn't radio-friendly stuff, for the most part.

They also make some incredibly disturbing videos, so I will warn you in advance. :oldlol:

Here are some of the highlights of

[PHX_Phan]

So you are the residential Tool fan. I listened to Aenimia back in the day. I have no recollection of what I thought of it it now lol. What album or song would you recommend?

Tool must have one of the most dedicated fan base of any band. Everyone who I know that likes tool, REALLLy LIKEs tool if you feel me.

All the albums are great, but if I had to choose a favorite it would probably be Lateralus.

I'd also throw Opeth out there, but didn't mention them earlier because not too many are into their style. Amazing discography.

[andgar923]

I'm a big Tool fan and even bigger Pumpkins fan, but their impact overall hasn't been as big.

Tool's music doesn't really extend as broad as Radiohead's. Although I do like Pumpkin's range and experimentation, they still aren't as good as Radiohead.

I mean.... some really great bands and artists have been mentioned all of which I either love or have tons of respect for. But Radiohead is at a slightly higher level 'overall'.

Their success via experimentation ratio is possibly the highest of any modern artist as well, and something that cannot be stated enough.

Sure, Tool is great and so are bands like PJ, but what will happen is they just completely changed the style and even genre? What would be the results if they didn't just do this for a track or for a small section but an entire album, album after album?

What we have with Radiohead is willingness to re-invent themselves over and over and consistently deliver at a very high level. Usually whenever artists try to experiment, things don't go so well and even alienate some of their fans.

[RedBlackAttack]

I'm a big Tool fan and even bigger Pumpkins fan, but their impact overall hasn't been as big.

Tool's music doesn't really extend as broad as Radiohead's. Although I do like Pumpkin's range and experimentation, they still aren't as good as Radiohead.

I mean.... some really great bands and artists have been mentioned all of which I either love or have tons of respect for. But Radiohead is at a slightly higher level 'overall'.

Their success via experimentation ratio is possibly the highest of any modern artist as well, and something that cannot be stated enough.

Sure, Tool is great and so are bands like PJ, but what will happen is they just completely changed the style and even genre? What would be the results if they didn't just do this for a track or for a small section but an entire album, album after album?

What we have with Radiohead is willingness to re-invent themselves over and over and consistently deliver at a very high level. Usually whenever artists try to experiment, things don't go so well and even alienate some of their fans.

As I've tried to make clear throughout this thread, I DO think that Radiohead has a relatively comfortable seat in the very front of even the most elite bands in the last 20 years. I would also rank them incredibly high on any all-time rock list. I know that some don't agree and that is fine, but their run of albums has been phenomenal for those of us that dig their sound (and that number is large and continually growing).

I've told this story on here before, but I saw Radiohead at Bonnaroo in 2006. During the initial announcement that they would be the Saturday night headliner of such a coveted festival, many of those that were unfamiliar with their style and maybe more into the jamband style that Bonnaroo initially catered to had a bit of a backlash against the decision. That is THE main act of the entire 4-day long festival and, unlike every other act of the weekend, it is the only spot that is unopposed by any other stage, so it is literally the only show all weekend that everyone attends together.

I joined the official Bonnaroo message board and read all of the responses leading up to and after the announcement... A lot of people weren't happy.

It was even more evident at the festival itself. I tried telling people how incredible their live performances were, but I could tell that not many of the hippies were embracing the idea.

That is until RH actually took the stage. It was an epic show... The longest setlist they have ever performed. They had the 100,000+ in attendance completely awestruck. Walking back to the campsite after they blew minds was not an experience I will soon forget...

Now, not only does Radiohead and, more specifically, Thom Yorke consider Bonnaroo '06 to be the best performance that they have ever given, many of the naysayers fully admit now that it was the greatest show that they have ever seen at Bonnaroo (many of whom have been to the festival every year since its creation).

It took some time, but I really do think that RH has broadened its fanbase well beyond where people might logically think that it rests (see Starface's post).

I've seen them five times over the years:

Cleveland 3x
Bonarroo
New York City

...which is a lot for an American. They bring it each and every time. Even those that may not be digging the music in the links would almost certainly appreciate the band if they saw them live. They put on a show unlike many other bands in the world... Maybe better than ANY other band. Tracks that many would think could not be performed live without the aid of synthesizers or an orchestra are pulled off beautifully by the original 5-piece band.



I would agree that Tool and TSP are below Radiohead in the pantheon, but I do think that they may be the next two in line... At least in my mind.

[andgar923]

As I've tried to make clear throughout this thread, I DO think that Radiohead has a relatively comfortable seat in the very front of even the most elite bands in the last 20 years. I would also rank them incredibly high on any all-time rock list. I know that some don't agree and that is fine, but their run of albums has been phenomenal for those of us that dig their sound (and that number is large and continually growing).

I've told this story on here before, but I saw Radiohead at Bonnaroo in 2006. During the initial announcement that they would be the Saturday night headliner of such a coveted festival, many of those that were unfamiliar with their style and maybe more into the jamband style that Bonnaroo initially catered to had a bit of a backlash against the decision. That is THE main act of the entire 4-day long festival and, unlike every other act of the weekend, it is the only spot that is unopposed by any other stage, so it is literally the only show all weekend that everyone attends together.

I joined the official Bonnaroo message board and read all of the responses leading up to and after the announcement... A lot of people weren't happy.

It was even more evident at the festival itself. I tried telling people how incredible their live performances were, but I could tell that not many of the hippies were embracing the idea.

That is until RH actually took the stage. It was an epic show... The longest setlist they have ever performed. They had the 100,000+ in attendance completely awestruck. Walking back to the campsite after they blew minds was not an experience I will soon forget...

Now, not only does Radiohead and, more specifically, Thom Yorke consider Bonnaroo '06 to be the best performance that they have ever given, many of the naysayers fully admit now that it was the greatest show that they have ever seen at Bonnaroo (many of whom have been to the festival every year since its creation).

It took some time, but I really do think that RH has broadened its fanbase well beyond where people might logically think that it rests (see Starface's post).

I've seen them five times over the years:

Cleveland 3x
Bonarroo
New York City

...which is a lot for an American. They bring it each and every time. Even those that may not be digging the music in the links would almost certainly appreciate the band if they saw them live. They put on a show unlike many other bands in the world... Maybe better than ANY other band. Tracks that many would think could not be performed live without the aid of synthesizers or an orchestra are pulled off beautifully by the original 5-piece band.



I would agree that Tool and TSP are below Radiohead in the pantheon, but I do think that they may be the next two in line... At least in my mind.

What I love about them, is that you never know what you're gonna get.

You kinda know where Tool is gonna go, in the same way that you know where the White Stripes, PJ, Strokes, Pumpkins (to some degree), Weezer, RHCP etc.etc. and one is guaranteed that 8/10 it will be something great.

Is this the Bonnaroo concert btw:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxNBaYF3dDg

I've never gone to any of their concerts, maybe one day I will.... anybody in L.A. wanna be my date?

No homo no homo no homo no homo

[RedBlackAttack]

What I love about them, is that you never know what you're gonna get.

You kinda know where Tool is gonna go, in the same way that you know where the White Stripes, PJ, Strokes, Pumpkins (to some degree), Weezer, RHCP etc.etc. and one is guaranteed that 8/10 it will be something great.

Is this the Bonnaroo concert btw:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxNBaYF3dDg

I've never gone to any of their concerts, maybe one day I will.... anybody in L.A. wanna be my date?

No homo no homo no homo no homo

Yep... that's it.

I actually downloaded that whole video when it was initially posted, just so I could experience that show again any time I wanted. It is on my hard drive as we speak.

The second to last song of the show was 'House of Cards.' This was a good amount of time before the track was ever released and I believe this was the first time that it was ever played live.

Anyway, about midway through the song, a massive glowstick war broke out. I'm normally against fan interaction, whether it be singing along, clapping, or whatever... I don't like attention being drawn away from the stage and I don't think bands like it in general.

However, this was the exception to the rule. With 100,000+ strong taking part in it (basically just tossing little colored glowsticks in the air) and with the mellow, soothing sounds of 'House of Cards,' it was an incredible sight. It literally looked as if colored sparks were flying and bouncing around... Everywhere.

This video doesn't do it great justice because you can't see what it looked like from further back, but you get the idea... And the sound/video quality is exceptional.

Check it. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AREoKy1eSl4&feature=related#t=58m35s)

I was happy that I was able to have been a part of it.

...and then they finish things up with an incredible version of 'Everything In Its Right Place'... Perfect show.

[Lamar Doom]

I missed the boat on this thread and Radiohead. Almost every one of my friends likes or loves them, I never really got it. I won't get into the bands I think are better than them because it ends up just being personal preference but I will say that I f*cking LOVE this video

No Surprises (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fUgMbKJu9ws)

[RedBlackAttack]

I missed the boat on this thread and Radiohead. Almost every one of my friends likes or loves them, I never really got it. I won't get into the bands I think are better than them because it ends up just being personal preference but I will say that I f*cking LOVE this video

No Surprises (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fUgMbKJu9ws)
Yeah, man... Classic video.

The lyrics to that track are incredible, btw. Contrary to popular belief, not all Radiohead songs are sad and depressing, but this one definitely nails the predicament that some people get into when they stop taking chances in life and get trapped in a cycle of repetitiveness and boredom.

"No alarms and no surprises, please..."

I'm pretty surprised you are not into RH, I have to say. Not that it is a negative or anything... Different strokes for different folks. But, having gotten to know you on this board over the years, I would have bet anything that you were a RH junkie. :confusedshrug:

[RedBlackAttack]

I love that song, especially about halfway through when his octave picks up.

Anyone else like Yorke's solo album?(The Eraser) Analyse (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pSSnvQpAc2c)
Hell yeah.... The Eraser is a great solo effort.

Here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z1nFB-R-_gI) is a killer acoustic version (just Thom) of 'The Clock' off of The Eraser. He has such a cool/funky strumming rhythm on this one.

[Lamar Doom]

I'm pretty surprised you are not into RH, I have to say. Not that it is a negative or anything... Different strokes for different folks. But, having gotten to know you on this board over the years, I would have bet anything that you were a RH junkie. :confusedshrug:

yeah, I probably meet the exact criteria of their demographic in a lot of ways, they just never did it for me. There's a few bands that are/were the staple of my friends and contemporaries tastes that never hit for me. I think I was averse to modern rock in the 90's.

[Two Worlds]

I love that song, especially about halfway through when his octave picks up.

Anyone else like Yorke's solo album?(The Eraser) Analyse (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pSSnvQpAc2c)
I love The Eraser. Have you heard the B-sides for it?

This is a good B-side from The Eraser:

The Drunkk Machine (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_8rEIzMbkCk)


Thom also formed a new band with Flea from the Red Hot Chili Peppers and a few others just to play The Eraser songs live. They call themselves Atoms for Peace.

Here they are covering Radiohead's Paperbag Writer:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RA8FVqm-cHY

Oh and here's a track Thom did recently called Hearing Damage, similar to the stuff found on The Eraser:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NXwyE0IrA2M

[QUIZZLE]

?

They're not my favorite band either, but there's no denying their relevance, widespread popularity, and success the past 20 years or so.

I personally just had lost all interest after their Dookie album. They started to fall in popularity and started putting shit out that was almost too unlike them. 'Wake me up when September ends' has to be one of the gayest songs ever.

As far as longevity goes, no one's going to beat out the RHCP IMO in the past 20 years.

[JohnnySic]

OK, I've been listening to Radiohead every day during my train commute to see if it sinks in. Its not working. I have Pablo Honey, The Bends, and OK Computer on my MP3 player - after about 4 songs in a row, I'm ready to chuck the thing out the door. The only song that ever clicked for me is (big surprise) "Creep". The Bends has one decent song (Fake Plastic Dreams). OK Computer is almost, but not quite, entirely incomprihensible twaddle.

[Two Worlds]

OK, I've been listening to Radiohead every day during my train commute to see if it sinks in. Its not working. I have Pablo Honey, The Bends, and OK Computer on my MP3 player - after about 4 songs in a row, I'm ready to chuck the thing out the door. The only song that ever clicked for me is (big surprise) "Creep". The Bends has one decent song (Fake Plastic Dreams). OK Computer is almost, but not quite, entirely incomprihensible twaddle.

It seems you already judged Radiohead even before you gave them a proper listen. Earlier in this thread you posted this about them:


Radiohead is pseudo-intellectual schlock. Do I need to wear fake glasses and those sport coats with the leather elbow pads to get it? :confusedshrug:

Gimme Pearl Jam, Alice in Chains, and a bunch of other bands over Radiohead...

It also seems a bit odd to call Radiohead fans pseudo-intellectuals when the very music you listen to(Pearl Jam for example)has members who are themselves fans of Radiohead.

There's really no reason to blindly hate Radiohead either. The members of Radiohead are genuinely nice people who put a good amount of effort into the music and are great towards their fanbase, they even gave away the last album for free. How can anyone hate that? I always say this to the people I try to introduce Radiohead to. Give a Radiohead album 3 full listens(like The Bends, Ok Computer or Kid A for example) if you don't like them after that then maybe Radiohead isn't for you...and there's nothing wrong with that.

[bdreason]

OK, I've been listening to Radiohead every day during my train commute to see if it sinks in. Its not working. I have Pablo Honey, The Bends, and OK Computer on my MP3 player - after about 4 songs in a row, I'm ready to chuck the thing out the door. The only song that ever clicked for me is (big surprise) "Creep". The Bends has one decent song (Fake Plastic Dreams). OK Computer is almost, but not quite, entirely incomprihensible twaddle.


Not a fan of Radiohead either... and I've listed to all their material. The most annoying thing about Radiohead is all their fans saying you have to like it, or something is wrong with you. I personally think they are vastly overrated... but that's just my opinion. Music is subjective, and you like what you like. I do enjoy a few of their songs, but most of their stuff sounds like sprawling elevator music, and I've never been a fan of the singers voice.

[RedBlackAttack]

The most annoying thing about Radiohead is all their fans saying you have to like it, or something is wrong with you.
Being a fan of Radiohead and being friends with a lot of people who are also RH fans, I have to wonder where you are hearing this? There is no consensus in music. It is all about what you want and like to hear. If RH doesn't do it for you, that is completely fine.

Generalizing about a huge fanbase because one or two fans rubbed you the wrong way at some point? Not sure that is the best way to evaluate a band's followers and, furthermore, that should have nothing to do with how you judge the music itself... Which is what this is about.

It seems to me that a lot of the people in this thread that are anti-RH (and I say 'anti,' because it seems like feelings are disproportionately harsh for a simple opinion on a band) have more to do with the perceived stereotypes of the fans than the music.

[bdreason]

Being a fan of Radiohead and being friends with a lot of people who are also RH fans, I have to wonder where you are hearing this? There is no consensus in music. It is all about what you want and like to hear. If RH doesn't do it for you, that is completely fine.

Generalizing about a huge fanbase because one or two fans rubbed you the wrong way at some point? Not sure that is the best way to evaluate a band's followers.


I'm sorry, but I've met TONS of snobby Radiohead fans over the years. Many of them friends of mine. I'm not labeling all Radiohead fans this way... but don't act like they don't exist. Most of it has to do with Radiohead having probably the largest cult (underground) following in the world.

edit- And their fans have nothing to do with whether I like the music or not... and the fact that you would claim it is is a typical Radiohead fanboy response.

[shoeguy3113]

I think we can all agree that Miley Cyrus (http://www.chacha.com/topic/miley-cyrus) is the greatest musician of our generation, with Jimi Hendrix a close second. But seriously, Radiohead is great but it's a stretch to call them the greatest group of the last two decades.

[RedBlackAttack]

I'm sorry, but I've met TONS of snobby Radiohead fans over the years. Many of them friends of mine. I'm not labeling all Radiohead fans this way... but don't act like they don't exist. Most of it has to do with Radiohead having probably the largest cult (underground) following in the world.

edit- And their fans have nothing to do with whether I like the music or not... and the fact that you would claim it is is a typical Radiohead fanboy response.
Yeah... Why would I think that the fans have nothing to do with your disliking the band when your initial post went like this...


Not a fan of Radiohead either... and I've listed to all their material. The most annoying thing about Radiohead is all their fans saying you have to like it, or something is wrong with you. I personally think they are vastly overrated... but that's just my opinion. Music is subjective, and you like what you like. I do enjoy a few of their songs, but most of their stuff sounds like sprawling elevator music, and I've never been a fan of the singers voice.

I was just going by your own post.

Also, combine that with other posts in this thread also generalizing about the fans of the band (JohnnySic, for example) and there does seem to be a stronger backlash against the listeners than the actual music.

I couldn't care less if you or anyone else likes the music. Of course, it is cool talking to people that have the same musical interests as me, but it certainly isn't something that I fret about. I enjoy the music and that is really all that matters.

You don't like it and that is also fine. The labeling of the fans is something that I don't understand, though... Especially with a worldwide fanbase as diverse as Radiohead fans.

You could just as easily go to a Pearl Jam show or an Alice in Chains show (moreso in the mid-90s when they were at their peak) and have their fans tell you that if you don't like this music, you have no taste.

People like that are called pretentious narcissists and RH certainly doesn't corner the market on them.

[bdreason]

Yeah... Why would I think that the fans have nothing to do with your disliking the band when your initial post went like this...






I was making an observation. I've told many fans (friends) over the years that I don't like Radiohead (I do like some of their stuff, mostly Kid-A), and I think they are overrated. The response is always the same; if you don't like their music, something must be wrong with you.

Obviously they don't say it like that. Usually it's something like, "oh you just don't understand the music", or "you haven't listened to them enough", or "they are amazing musicians, so if you don't like them you don't know good music".


Don't get me wrong, I appreciate Radiohead, and understand they are progressive and talented musicians... but their music never really did it for me. What's funny is that I'm also a fan of bands many other people don't like (see Ska, nobody likes Ska)for various reasons... but I never get defensive about it.

[Jailblazers7]

I was making an observation. I've told many fans (friends) over the years that I don't like Radiohead (I do like some of their stuff, mostly Kid-A), and I think they are overrated. The response is always the same; if you don't like their music, something must be wrong with you.

Obviously they don't say it like that. Usually it's something like, "oh you just don't understand the music", or "you haven't listened to them enough", or "they are amazing musicians, so if you don't like them you don't know good music".


Don't get me wrong, I appreciate Radiohead, and understand they are progressive and talented musicians... but their music never really did it for me. What's funny is that I'm also a fan of bands many other people don't like (see Ska, nobody likes Ska)for various reasons... but I never get defensive about it.

They likely responed that way because they think you are attacking their taste in music. The common response would be to then attack your taste in music. If you tell someone their favorite band is overrated, they aren't likely to respond with "Ok, I respect you opinion."

[PistolPete]

OMG this thread is still alive. Some of you guys are pushing this Radiohead business too far. Push Bibles, not Radiohead......they f'n suck!

[YAWN]

"if you don't like them you don't know good music".


in a way this is partially right. People in this thread going off about how radiohead sucks are morons and are probably the people that allow piece of shit music like brokencyde, jeffree star, and blood on the dance floor to strive.

Not saying everyone should LIKE radiohead, but to go out of your way and think they SUCK proves that you know nothing about what good music is.

Don't give me this subjective bullshit argument either. listen to this band that has TONS of fans and sells TONS of tickets. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qa6qpgLvH30 There is no way in hell anyone with an ounce of musical knowledge could say this is "good". If you like it you have terrible taste in music. Plain and simple.

[Legendofthe718]

I was making an observation. I've told many fans (friends) over the years that I don't like Radiohead (I do like some of their stuff, mostly Kid-A), and I think they are overrated. The response is always the same; if you don't like their music, something must be wrong with you.

Obviously they don't say it like that. Usually it's something like, "oh you just don't understand the music", or "you haven't listened to them enough", or "they are amazing musicians, so if you don't like them you don't know good music".


Don't get me wrong, I appreciate Radiohead, and understand they are progressive and talented musicians... but their music never really did it for me. What's funny is that I'm also a fan of bands many other people don't like (see Ska, nobody likes Ska)for various reasons... but I never get defensive about it.

Dood Ska rulez. Pepper, Rancid, catch 22. I like your style bro.

[RedBlackAttack]

Don't get me wrong, I appreciate Radiohead, and understand they are progressive and talented musicians... but their music never really did it for me. What's funny is that I'm also a fan of bands many other people don't like (see Ska, nobody likes Ska)for various reasons... but I never get defensive about it.

As jailblazers correctly pointed out...


They likely responed that way because they think you are attacking their taste in music. The common response would be to then attack your taste in music. If you tell someone their favorite band is overrated, they aren't likely to respond with "Ok, I respect you opinion."

Don't get me wrong... I won't get defensive if someone says Radiohead is 'overrated,' but it is completely understandable why some fans might. You don't have to be a fan of the band to understand that.

Saying that it just isn't your style and that you can't really get into it is perfectly reasonable. When you start throwing around words like 'overrated,' which have a negative connotation far past simple personal preference, there is a segment of fans that will likely defend the music just as a natural reflex... And that goes for any band.

There are plenty of popular bands both in the past and current that I just can't get into for whatever reason. But, if I see the artistic merit and musicianship in what they do, I would never dub them 'overrated,' because that is a pretty definitive slap in the face to their followers.

I think this is just a matter of semantics moreso than you trying to offend any particular fanbase.

[brooks_thompson]

Originally Posted by Jailblazers7
They likely responed that way because they think you are attacking their taste in music.


this is the problem with most people who can't have a level-headed discussion of music or other art: they feel like they're being slighted personally because they can't separate their tastes from their personality.



...and this thread's still around?

[Jackass18]

Generalizing about a huge fanbase because one or two fans rubbed you the wrong way at some point?

Radiohead fans have a reputation as being pretentious douchebags. That doesn't influence me (generalizations are usually the tool of lazy people who don't want to think), but I'm just saying what rep RH fans have. Their fans have nothing to do with me not being able to get into Radiohead. Hell, there could be a time in the future that I end up liking Radiohead, but as of now they don't really do anything for me. Yorke's voice just doesn't seem that engaging to me.

[pete's montreux]

My thoughts exactly, and something I've been saying for years now. Too many people have a distinct problem separating personal preference from artistic merit and intelligent analysis. There is a lot of music out there that I don't personally care for, but I can still acknowledge when it's creative, intelligently composed, and featuring quality musicianship.

This is something that I've discovered through maturity as well. I just can't do what some of these people in this thread are doing. I listened to a few Radiohead songs last week and I wasn't taken back like I thought I would be, but that doesn't mean they don't deserve everything they have right now.

[macmac]

Radiohead fans have a reputation as being pretentious douchebags. That doesn't influence me (generalizations are usually the tool of lazy people who don't want to think), but I'm just saying what rep RH fans have. Their fans have nothing to do with me not being able to get into Radiohead. Hell, there could be a time in the future that I end up liking Radiohead, but as of now they don't really do anything for me. Yorke's voice just doesn't seem that engaging to me.

Maybe you should listen to some of their instrumental tracks and go from there.

Meeting in the Isles
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=491-7Mlnes8&feature=related

Hunting Bears
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FnVY2Xtd1u0

Kid A
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J1cauzKU3Qk


I mean radiohead is much more than just Thom Yorke's vocals, each song's composition is just sublime....the instrumentation will often be the best part of the song, in fact I feel like Thom will often use his voice as just one more instrument in the symphony instead of drawing the main focus on it, especially on more experimental cds like kid A/amnesiac/hail to the thief...

[macmac]

This is something that I've discovered through maturity as well. I just can't do what some of these people in this thread are doing. I listened to a few Radiohead songs last week and I wasn't taken back like I thought I would be, but that doesn't mean they don't deserve everything they have right now.

Pete, say it aint so? I think a lot of RH fans come off as too strong because they have such an amazing outwordly experience with radiohead and can't believe others can't relate to the magnitude of awesomeness.

Don't tackle the whole discography at once, i'd say pick your spots at first. Here's a couple of my recommendations:

Spinning Plates piano (live)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FfsBa38E6S8

Everything in its right place
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OddXCja1N4E&feature=related

Life in a Glass House
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PtkZxqTH9tE

"Well of course, I'd like to sit around and chat, well of course, i'd like to stay and chew the fat...."

If you can fall in love with one song, you'll eventually fall in love with each album individually, each one a mistress introducing you to a new aspect of her anatomy....by the Reckoner, you'll be having hardcore @nal

[RedBlackAttack]

Maybe you should listen to some of their instrumental tracks and go from there.

Meeting in the Isles
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=491-7Mlnes8&feature=related

Hunting Bears
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FnVY2Xtd1u0

Kid A
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J1cauzKU3Qk


I mean radiohead is much more than just Thom Yorke's vocals, each song's composition is just sublime....the instrumentation will often be the best part of the song, in fact I feel like Thom will often use his voice as just one more instrument in the symphony instead of drawing the main focus on it, especially on more experimental cds like kid A/amnesiac/hail to the thief...


Excellent analysis of Yorke's approach to the vocals. I've even read in interviews with him that he tries his best to make those vocals one small part of the overall composition, not something that listeners should solely focus on over all of the other sounds that they create. I'll throw out In Limbo (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q6-sTkVdAqQ&feature=related), Pyramid Song (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s2VzLn6DMCE&feature=av2e), Sail To The Moon (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YkpaJ6FAfZI), Weird Fishes_Arpeggi (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-3DrL8pwu1k), and Dollars and Cents (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j_v2OsC9yT0) as others that really illustrate what we are talking about.

Yeah... Thom does provide some vocals in all of those, but his voice is being used as more of an instrument than the traditional singer/songwriter dynamic.

Keep listening, Pete. I don't mean to sound like the (apparently) stereotypical Radiohead fan, but the potential payoff for you is something that I would hate to see you give up on so early in your experience with the band.


...and this thread's still around?

These kinds of posts always fascinate me. Yeah, the thread is still 'around.' You posted this comment at 12:04 a.m. The previous post on the topic was at 5:56 p.m. The thread was either on the verge of being on the second page or already there when you decided to comment.

That 5+ hour window that existed between my post and your post probably constituted the longest time gap between comments since the thread was created. So... I guess I should thank you for bumping the thread back to the top of the forum just when it was about to die.

I think this is a pretty interesting discussion. I know it isn't as valuable to the forum as threads which currently dominate the OTC like So tomorrow i have sociology exam, I bet I can get you to like Justin Bieber's music..., and Justin Bieber song slowed down 8x, but I've enjoyed the back-and-forth on this topic... Even with those that are intent on ripping RH and its fans.

[JohnnySic]

n/m.

[Fallguy20]

If Daft Punk qualifies as a band I would also rate them higher than Radiohead.

Personally I would put them ahead of Radiohead.


Can't believe I read this entire thread without seeing a single mention of Green Day. Love them or hate them they've been pretty steady the past 20 some odd years.

While Green Day is and just might always be my favorite band, they don't get anything more then an honorable mention somewhere at the very bottom.



Im surprised that Nine Inch Nails was mentioned and then abandoned in like the first two or three pages without anyone making a case for them. Trent Rezznor really has put out so much quality music that the sheer amount is staggering.

Eight studio albums in the last 21 years (lets count Pretty Hate Machine, shall we?) that in their own right are solid to say the least as concept albums or even the few that seem like they just threw leftover songs together, NIN beats Radiohead on the count of longevity that so many of you are using as the defining trait over other (and easily arguably better) better bands.


The thing is tho, its all gonna come down to your own personal taste.

[brooks_thompson]

These kinds of posts always fascinate me. Yeah, the thread is still 'around.' You posted this comment at 12:04 a.m. The previous post on the topic was at 5:56 p.m. The thread was either on the verge of being on the second page or already there when you decided to comment.

That 5+ hour window that existed between my post and your post probably constituted the longest time gap between comments since the thread was created. So... I guess I should thank you for bumping the thread back to the top of the forum just when it was about to die.

I think this is a pretty interesting discussion. I know it isn't as valuable to the forum as threads which currently dominate the OTC like So tomorrow i have sociology exam, I bet I can get you to like Justin Bieber's music..., and Justin Bieber song slowed down 8x, but I've enjoyed the back-and-forth on this topic... Even with those that are intent on ripping RH and its fans.

you missed out a little on the subtext of my post. i've put my fair two cents in on this thread.

[andgar923]

I can understand if people aren't into Yorke's voice. I personally like it, but I can understand.

A question for fans: Where would you guys rank Hail to the Thief? I know it's one of their least popular albums, but I personally love it.
http://img651.imageshack.us/img651/994/radioheadhailtothethief.jpg

2 + 2 = 5 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lstDdzedgcE)
:bowdown:

Ahead of Pablo Honey for me.

Not one of my favs, but still good.

[Qwyjibo]

A question for fans: Where would you guys rank Hail to the Thief? I know it's one of their least popular albums, but I personally love it.
Ahead of Pablo Honey and Amnesiac. It's still a very good album but definitely towards the bottom when considering Radiohead.

[macmac]

Ahead of Pablo Honey and Amnesiac. It's still a very good album but definitely towards the bottom when considering Radiohead.

Amnesiac is probably their most underrated album. Every song on there is spectacular and yet it receives no love.

[GOBB]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zbKQPqs-cqc

^^^my favorite Radiohead song.

[bdreason]

Radiohead fans have a reputation as being pretentious douchebags. That doesn't influence me (generalizations are usually the tool of lazy people who don't want to think), but I'm just saying what rep RH fans have. Their fans have nothing to do with me not being able to get into Radiohead. Hell, there could be a time in the future that I end up liking Radiohead, but as of now they don't really do anything for me. Yorke's voice just doesn't seem that engaging to me.


You just don't know good music. Just keep listening to RH and maybe someday you will get it. :rolleyes:

[macmac]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zbKQPqs-cqc

^^^my favorite Radiohead song.

Yup solid track and what do you know? Off Amnesiac.

This is how I would rank their albums:

Kid A
Amnesiac
Ok Computer
Hail to thief
In Rainbows
The Bends
Pablo Honey

Probably not a very popular view, I just love the more experimental mature albums a bit more than their rock roots

[bdreason]

And look at this message a Radiohead fan sent me just because I said I don't like them in this thread.




"negged you pretentious *******. Redblackattack is right about you. I just read the PM he sent me about you. You really don't know music ****."




Typical RH fan. :oldlol:

[Two Worlds]

Yup solid track and what do you know? Off Amnesiac.

This is how I would rank their albums:

Kid A
Amnesiac
Ok Computer
Hail to thief
In Rainbows
The Bends
Pablo Honey

Probably not a very popular view, I just love the more experimental mature albums a bit more than their rock roots

Yeah Amnesiac is one of my favorite Radiohead albums. Pretty impressive how they managed to record both Kid A and Amnesiac in the same sessions. Even the Amnesiac b-sides are pretty awesome and were worthy of being on an album.

Amnesiac B-sides:

The Amazing Sounds of Orgy (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j5LT9X9F-YM)
Worrywort
(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LBUW3q5vv3E)Kinetic (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AmJSO_zG9lQ)
Trans-Atlantic Draw (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T3poV6FSHM8)
Cuttooth (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BLitnT6w9h0)
Fog (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fxh5rq_CGJI)
Life In A Glasshouse (extended version) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wKnuqYrjjE) I prefer this version over the one found in Amnesiac

They sound like a completely different band with the Amnesiac b-sides. Sounds a bit ahead of it's time in places.

[Jackass18]

Maybe you should listen to some of their instrumental tracks and go from there.

Meeting in the Isles
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=491-7Mlnes8&feature=related

Hunting Bears
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FnVY2Xtd1u0

Kid A
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J1cauzKU3Qk


I mean radiohead is much more than just Thom Yorke's vocals, each song's composition is just sublime....the instrumentation will often be the best part of the song, in fact I feel like Thom will often use his voice as just one more instrument in the symphony instead of drawing the main focus on it, especially on more experimental cds like kid A/amnesiac/hail to the thief...

I'm guessing that I emphasize singing more than some of the other people in here, but I'll give those songs a listen later when I have more time.

[RedBlackAttack]

"negged you pretentious *******. Redblackattack is right about you. I just read the PM he sent me about you. You really don't know music ****."
:oldlol:

Don't feel bad... I got this one a couple of days ago referring to this thread...


You're one of the biggest nerds on this site. Leave, go get p*ssy. - WE DA BESS



A question for fans: Where would you guys rank Hail to the Thief? I know it's one of their least popular albums, but I personally love it.
http://img651.imageshack.us/img651/994/radioheadhailtothethief.jpg

2 + 2 = 5 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lstDdzedgcE)
:bowdown:
Funny... I also really love that album... But I can't put it too high on the albums list just because they've been so consistently great for so long. That isn't a reflection on that terrific album, but rather a statement on the quality of all of their releases.

1. Kid A
2. In Rainbows (w/B-sides included)
3. OK Computer
4. Amnesiac
5. Airbag - How Am I Driving?
6. Hail To The Thief
7. The Bends
8. Pablo Honey

My In Rainbows selection as No. 2 probably isn't all that popular of an opinion, but I thought that it was an unreal release... Especially when you include the B-sides.

MK1 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ixp7NL4RML0)
Down Is The New Up (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4CX7Qzb1dj8)
Go Slowly (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y6GkPkwkgSE)
MK2 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4X69fLfPyBQ)
Last Flowers to the Hospital (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QxYemY8CQaw&feature=related)
Up On the Ladder (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hj-fk8Q-oRc&feature=related)
Bangers & Mash (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h8BqSK1qL-g&feature=related)
4 Minute Warning (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gT2pkjPs_6s&feature=related)

["Jesus"]

I actually enjoy their older albums more than their experimental stuff. The Bends was my favourite.

[Qwyjibo]

1. OK Computer
2. Kid A
3. In Rainbows
4. The Bends
5. Hail to the Thief
6. Amnesiac
7. Pablo Honey

[Angelsaurus Rex]

Not in my humble opinion.

[bdreason]

:oldlol:

Don't feel bad... I got this one a couple of days ago referring to this thread...




No worries, I actually thought it was funny.

[pete's montreux]

Pete, say it aint so? I think a lot of RH fans come off as too strong because they have such an amazing outwordly experience with radiohead and can't believe others can't relate to the magnitude of awesomeness.

Don't tackle the whole discography at once, i'd say pick your spots at first. Here's a couple of my recommendations:

Spinning Plates piano (live)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FfsBa38E6S8

Everything in its right place
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OddXCja1N4E&feature=related

Life in a Glass House
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PtkZxqTH9tE

"Well of course, I'd like to sit around and chat, well of course, i'd like to stay and chew the fat...."

If you can fall in love with one song, you'll eventually fall in love with each album individually, each one a mistress introducing you to a new aspect of her anatomy....by the Reckoner, you'll be having hardcore @nal

BRB listening to Radiohead

But seriously, I listened to the songs while at work on the shitty iPod earbuds and that was just a quick glance into their stuff, by no means am I done, or sweeping them under the rug already. There's too many people in this thread who's musical opinion I respect highly of to do that. I honestly just don't have a lot of time to myself lately. When I get the time and I'm in the mood, I'm definitely going to give them a hard, hard listen.

Whether I end up liking them is really not important to me, It's whether I give them the respect of giving them the chance, you know?

[Jackass18]

Maybe you should listen to some of their instrumental tracks and go from there.

Meeting in the Isles
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=491-7Mlnes8&feature=related

Hunting Bears
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FnVY2Xtd1u0

Kid A
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J1cauzKU3Qk

I liked the first song, but didn't really feel the other 2. Sometimes it takes quite a number of listens for me to like a song, but I'm not sure if that would help for the 2nd song.

[RedBlackAttack]

I liked the first song, but didn't really feel the other 2. Sometimes it takes quite a number of listens for me to like a song, but I'm not sure if that would help for the 2nd song.
I don't want to call 'Hunting Bears' a filler, because I actually really like it on its own, but I think it was more intended to be heard in the context of the entire album than specifically on its own.

Give In Limbo (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q6-sTkVdAqQ&feature=related) a shot. That is a pretty experimental track, but it is an example of how Yorke's voice is just used as another instrument, not the focal point of the music.

[Dolphin]

This alone puts Radiohead far beyond those other boring bands.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=slOklBP9B_8

[playtetris]

kid a
amnesiac
ok computer
hail to the thief
the bends
in rainbows
pablo honey

[andgar923]

:oldlol:

Don't feel bad... I got this one a couple of days ago referring to this thread...




Funny... I also really love that album... But I can't put it too high on the albums list just because they've been so consistently great for so long. That isn't a reflection on that terrific album, but rather a statement on the quality of all of their releases.

1. Kid A
2. In Rainbows (w/B-sides included)
3. OK Computer
4. Amnesiac
5. Airbag - How Am I Driving?
6. Hail To The Thief
7. The Bends
8. Pablo Honey

My In Rainbows selection as No. 2 probably isn't all that popular of an opinion, but I thought that it was an unreal release... Especially when you include the B-sides.

MK1 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ixp7NL4RML0)
Down Is The New Up (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4CX7Qzb1dj8)
Go Slowly (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y6GkPkwkgSE)
MK2 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4X69fLfPyBQ)
Last Flowers to the Hospital (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QxYemY8CQaw&feature=related)
Up On the Ladder (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hj-fk8Q-oRc&feature=related)
Bangers & Mash (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h8BqSK1qL-g&feature=related)
4 Minute Warning (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gT2pkjPs_6s&feature=related)

I thought In Rainbows was hands down the best album of the decade. I'm sure that's an even more unpopular opinion but that's what I currently believe.

I think In Rainbows sums up their career up to this point. They've put everything they've learned in that album, as we get a taste from all of their albums. Some songs are powerful, some are beautiful, and some just rock, not bad for an overrated pretentious bunch of f@gs.

[andgar923]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zbKQPqs-cqc

^^^my favorite Radiohead song.

I can listen to this forever and at times I have.

Very hypnotic.

This song gave me a writer's block for almost 6 months, and I started to doubt myself as a producer as I tried to emulate the 'mood' in this song. Although they have many atmospheric songs, this one is the most haunting, solemn with a feel that's indescribable.

I've seen cover versions of this song, and I've seen people play it on the piano.... yet they never reached their level of atmosphere/mood.

I spent almost 3 months trying to re-create the same mood without ever coming close, it's almost as if they were in a trance while recording this song, perhaps guided by the spirits that Yorke is singing about.

One last thing.....

People (and I in the past), have labeled Radiohead as a soft, pretentious, cry-baby, whiny music. When in reality, they're music is perhaps darker than many death metal bands.

[QUOTE]Cracked eggs dead birds
Scream as they fight for life
I can feel death can see it

[RedBlackAttack]

I can listen to this forever and at times I have.

Very hypnotic.

This song gave me a writer's block for almost 6 months, and I started to doubt myself as a producer as I tried to emulate the 'mood' in this song. Although they have many atmospheric songs, this one is the most haunting, solemn with a feel that's indescribable.

I've seen cover versions of this song, and I've seen people play it on the piano.... yet they never reached their level of atmosphere/mood.

I spent almost 3 months trying to re-create the same mood without ever coming close, it's almost as if they were in a trance while recording this song, perhaps guided by the spirits that Yorke is singing about.

One last thing.....

People (and I in the past), have labeled Radiohead as a soft, pretentious, cry-baby, whiny music. When in reality, they're music is perhaps darker than many death metal bands.

Another incredibly hypnotic, atmospheric one that I consider highly underrated is the final track on OK Computer, The Tourist (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x0F0d8joPT8&feature=search). Thom's voice sours on that one.

Scatterbrain (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yw_sQjAH0NY&feature=search) is another of those 'underrated' tracks for me. I've seen it performed live and that really makes you appreciate the simple yet effective composition.

It is clearly an anti-war tune, but the metaphors used create incredible mental imagery.



I'm walking out in a force ten gale
Birds thrown around, bullets for hail
The roof is pulling off by its fingernails
Your voice is rattlin' on my window sill
Yesterday's headlines blown by the wind
Yesterday's people end up scatterbrain
Any fool can easy pick a hole I only wish I could fall in
A moving target in a firing range
Somewhere I'm not
Scatterbrain
Somewhere I'm not
Scatterbrain
Lightning fuse, powercut
Scatterbrain

[andgar923]

Another incredibly hypnotic, atmospheric one that I consider highly underrated is the final track on OK Computer, The Tourist (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x0F0d8joPT8&feature=search). Thom's voice sours on that one.

Scatterbrain (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yw_sQjAH0NY&feature=search) is another of those 'underrated' tracks for me. I've seen it performed live and that really makes you appreciate the simple yet effective composition.

It is clearly an anti-war tune, but the metaphors used create incredible mental imagery.

The Tourist is very Floyd-ish, and has a very 'ethereal' feel to it, and the harmonizing and melodies on this song will make The Beatles proud.

[Two Worlds]

The Tourist is very Floyd-ish, and has a very 'ethereal' feel to it, and the harmonizing and melodies on this song will make The Beatles proud.

I remember having a ''mind blown'' moment years ago after reading an interview with Radiohead talking about The Tourist. They talk about the connection between Airbag and The Tourist, it was such an obvious thing...yet I never realised it back then.

here's a bit of that interview:
''In her attempt to interpret OK Computer as a concept album in the vein of a Phillip K. Dick novel, interviewer Claire Kleinelder accidentally uncovers Jonny's idea of continuity. She suggests that the car speeding off in 'The Tourist' feeds back into the accident that begins 'Airbag', thereby "bringing the album to a complete circle." Thom: "Wow...that's great. Absolutely right about the last song preceding the first. Very interesting." Jonny: "Nobody has ever got that before. That's cool!"''

[Jailblazers7]

My List:

Kid A
OK Computer
Amnesiac
Hail to the Thief
In Rainbows
The Bends
Pablo Honey

[Jailblazers7]

One of my most listened to songs is Electioneering:

http://www.youtube.com/watch#!v=E9qWbWn6sos&feature=related

I love the guitar in this song.

[hito da god]

chili peppers > radiohead.

[andgar923]

I would buy all of their albums if they got released either in DVD-Audio or SACD (my fav format). But until then, my surround sound needs will be met with this DTS 5.1 'Kid A' version:

http://www.demonoid.com/files/details/2210231/3945748/

Their albums are begging to be remastered in SACD.

[Jackass18]

I don't want to call 'Hunting Bears' a filler, because I actually really like it on its own, but I think it was more intended to be heard in the context of the entire album than specifically on its own.

Give In Limbo (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q6-sTkVdAqQ&feature=related) a shot. That is a pretty experimental track, but it is an example of how Yorke's voice is just used as another instrument, not the focal point of the music.

That song wasn't bad and I certainly liked it more than Hunting Bears.

[ShaqAttack3234]

I may be in the minority here, but I know very little about Radiohead.

[RedBlackAttack]

I would buy all of their albums if they got released either in DVD-Audio or SACD (my fav format). But until then, my surround sound needs will be met with this DTS 5.1 'Kid A' version:

http://www.demonoid.com/files/details/2210231/3945748/

Their albums are begging to be remastered in SACD.
1.23 gigs!? :eek:

I want to download it, but I fear that I may not be able to play it. I do have my surround sound hooked up to my computer, but I'm not sure the full-on surround would work right playing through my computer... I may have to burn it onto a disc and then play by putting it directly into my SS.

Are these files 'difficult' to play?

[RedBlackAttack]

I may be in the minority here, but I know very little about Radiohead.
I would highly suggesting perusing the last few pages and giving them a shot. It isn't for everyone (clearly), but for those that do dig the sound, there is nothing quite like them.

[RedBlackAttack]

Click here you n00b. (http://www.foobar2000.org/components/view/foo_input_dts):lol

If you use headphones just use that other component I just linked to, no need for new downloads.
Ok Captain Compute...

So, I just pulled that into my components folder... Are you saying that now I can listen to any of my albums, even if it is low resolution 128-bit mp3s and they will play in 5.1 surround? Do I have to adjust any settings?

[RedBlackAttack]

As long as you're using headphones. You also need to acquire the Dolby DLL file.
http://www.dlldll.com/dolbyhph.dll_download.html

Then when you configure the component(your DSP manager in Foobar's preferences), it will ask for the location of where you have the aforementioned DLL file on your system. Give it a try, you'll notice the difference immediately.
Ok... So, I opened the Preferences>DSP Manager and there are two columns... The 'active dsp' side is empty and the other side (available DSPs) has a long list, but I don't see the DLL that I downloaded as one of the available DSPs.

There is a file locater at the bottom of the window, but it is grayed out... I can't click in it. :confusedshrug:

[RedBlackAttack]

That's because the DLL that you downloaded isn't the DSP. It's simply the engine that drives the DSP. The DSP you want to configure is called "Dolby Headphone." Once you open up the configuration window for that, you'll need to navigate to the DLL you downloaded.
Oh OK... I got you.

Gracias.