-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Radiohead to collaborate with Flaming Lips?
- Thread starter terrene
- Start date
- Status
enjoy bell woods
Banned
I don't know if I could ever feel close to a band that millions of others pretend to feel close to.
enjoy bell woods said:
That's fair enough. I do feel sort of aliennated when I see all these casual fans of the band, but then I got into them back when it seemed like no one else even knew who they were. So I still feel a sort of kinship with them.
I disagree here too then. HTTT is almost a 180 from Kid A/Amnesiac, thematically, and musically.
enjoy bell woods
Banned
Peru said:
His response sums my feelings up well enough. He understood what I meant.
I'm starting to understand where bell woods is coming from. With a new Radiohead thread EVERY WEEK, I am seriously starting to hate them. I can't bring myself to listen to there music anymore without balking. I guess you just come to a point where you ask yourself "Is all of this hype really justified?"
I'm starting to think it's not. :-/
I'm starting to think it's not. :-/
enjoy bell woods
Banned
I like bad British bands no one cares about it. Don't listen to me.
Peru said:
Well, but why is it common knowledge then? There're certain records that any objective observer can tell are great, like Pet Sounds or What's Going on, and ones that anyone can tell are shite. If you don't like those great albums then that's your own personal taste, but it doesn't diminish the objective quality of the album.
Anyway, I don't even know why I'm talking about this. :lol
enjoy bell woods
Banned
But there are points where that objective line sort of blurs. Because look, everyone thinks OK Computer and Kid A are uncontested masterpieces, but then you have people like me saying that they're really not all that good. And if I'm to be honest, I don't necessarily see any objective worth in either of those albums.
kablooey said:
No I agree, it's a shitty debate subject, but when the ball's a-rollin.
My subjective tastes dictate that record X is good and so is Z but record Y is not. We can agree on that and establish certain norms amongst fellow music connoiseurs, certain treats and feats that we agree upon as bad or wrong. But it's still taste! We're still filtering it through personal filters, no matter what group we belong to.
"ones that anyone can tell are shite" : No. Some people will say any record is bad and any record is bad.
"any objective observer can tell are great," There is no such thing as an objective observer. We are observing music, variations on sound and structure and it follows that it will ALWAYS be taste and it will ALWAYS be a personal experience, and as such it is ALWAYS subjective and NEVER objective.
enjoy bell woods
Banned
Naaah, I don't agree.
This argument is now ridiculous.
Dot-Nick, you're acting like Radiohead is a new pop group that you can't stand.
Their "casual" fans pale into comparison to a "casual" Kelly Clarkson or Nickelback fan. A "casual" Radiohead fan still pays a lot more attention to their music than your typical mainstream yuppie, first of all.
It's okay to think Radiohead is your favorite band, or one of your favorites. There's nothing wrong with that. You shouldn't hate a band based on how much they are discussed on the Internet. If it wasn't for the Internet a lot of bands you like wouldn't be discussed at all, because the mainstream rejects them. Radiohead, for as mainstream as you'd like to label them, don't get much attention here in the US on the airwaves. All I ever hear on the radio is "Creep". That's it. MTV? Fuse? Never. And if they are played it's not a big deal and not many people are paying attention. Radiohead's time to shine on the airwaves was 1997/98, and they had their 15 minutes of fame. I don't recall seeing new Radiohead videos on MTV all the time, constantly being discussed by the youth.
Radiohead are music journalists' darlings, first and foremost. That appreciation branches out and/or relates to soon to be fans/long-time fans that got into Radiohead's music sometime last decade. For what it's worth to this discussion, the most any one Radiohead album has sold is like 2.5 - 3 million copies I believe (OK Computer). New pop, nu-metal and rap acts come out and sell a million or two in the album's first month, then fade into obscurity forever.
So please, let's stop acting like Radiohead is some super popular preppy mainstream band that we cannot stand listening to. Most people wouldn't be able to name any Radiohead song with the exception of Creep if they're lucky. I've talked to some people, online and off, that thought they were one-hit wonders.
I could say the same thing about the Pumpkins. They were insanely popular 10 years ago. Not that many people talk about them anymore. It's not like the year is 1996 and all you see on TV is SP videos. You don't see them anywhere. Even with the article about them recording in the studio under the name Smashing Pumpkins now online, I haven't seen a damn thing about it on TV. It'll probably get a few mentions in music mags. Big deal. That's what they're for. They have almost been erased from the MTV mentality entirely. Their success in being so popular on the Internet has to do with bootlegs and b-sides/demos/unreleased stuff/etc. that people really like to talk about, which stems from longtime fans talking about whatever else they love about the band. This shouldn't imply that you're so disgusted with all of the talk about the band that you shoot them down every chance you get, it's not going to change anything, it isn't 1996. Or in Radiohead's case, 1998.
It amazes me how so many people on the Internet act like bands that aren't that popular anymore are still viewed as these big threats to independent music because they're stealing the spotlight, or something. Sorry, you can blame that on angry 14 year old Johnny's favorite new "Lil" rapper or nu-metal group. You can blame that on the way music is marketed now opposed to the early/mid 90's. In today's world, there would be no Nirvana, Smashing Pumpkins, Radiohead, none of it. You can just fucking forget that. They would've never happened or never took off. Period.
Dot-Nick, you're acting like Radiohead is a new pop group that you can't stand.
Their "casual" fans pale into comparison to a "casual" Kelly Clarkson or Nickelback fan. A "casual" Radiohead fan still pays a lot more attention to their music than your typical mainstream yuppie, first of all.
It's okay to think Radiohead is your favorite band, or one of your favorites. There's nothing wrong with that. You shouldn't hate a band based on how much they are discussed on the Internet. If it wasn't for the Internet a lot of bands you like wouldn't be discussed at all, because the mainstream rejects them. Radiohead, for as mainstream as you'd like to label them, don't get much attention here in the US on the airwaves. All I ever hear on the radio is "Creep". That's it. MTV? Fuse? Never. And if they are played it's not a big deal and not many people are paying attention. Radiohead's time to shine on the airwaves was 1997/98, and they had their 15 minutes of fame. I don't recall seeing new Radiohead videos on MTV all the time, constantly being discussed by the youth.
Radiohead are music journalists' darlings, first and foremost. That appreciation branches out and/or relates to soon to be fans/long-time fans that got into Radiohead's music sometime last decade. For what it's worth to this discussion, the most any one Radiohead album has sold is like 2.5 - 3 million copies I believe (OK Computer). New pop, nu-metal and rap acts come out and sell a million or two in the album's first month, then fade into obscurity forever.
So please, let's stop acting like Radiohead is some super popular preppy mainstream band that we cannot stand listening to. Most people wouldn't be able to name any Radiohead song with the exception of Creep if they're lucky. I've talked to some people, online and off, that thought they were one-hit wonders.
I could say the same thing about the Pumpkins. They were insanely popular 10 years ago. Not that many people talk about them anymore. It's not like the year is 1996 and all you see on TV is SP videos. You don't see them anywhere. Even with the article about them recording in the studio under the name Smashing Pumpkins now online, I haven't seen a damn thing about it on TV. It'll probably get a few mentions in music mags. Big deal. That's what they're for. They have almost been erased from the MTV mentality entirely. Their success in being so popular on the Internet has to do with bootlegs and b-sides/demos/unreleased stuff/etc. that people really like to talk about, which stems from longtime fans talking about whatever else they love about the band. This shouldn't imply that you're so disgusted with all of the talk about the band that you shoot them down every chance you get, it's not going to change anything, it isn't 1996. Or in Radiohead's case, 1998.
It amazes me how so many people on the Internet act like bands that aren't that popular anymore are still viewed as these big threats to independent music because they're stealing the spotlight, or something. Sorry, you can blame that on angry 14 year old Johnny's favorite new "Lil" rapper or nu-metal group. You can blame that on the way music is marketed now opposed to the early/mid 90's. In today's world, there would be no Nirvana, Smashing Pumpkins, Radiohead, none of it. You can just fucking forget that. They would've never happened or never took off. Period.
enjoy bell woods said:
Well, the majority of critical opinion says otherwise. Not that the majority of critical opinion is always right, but the burden of proof lies on the minority opinion to prove his point. I have a friend, who made the site Radiohead Unpackt, that explains pretty well why OKC/Kid A/Amnesiac should be regarded as great albums, but then the site went down a few months ago. It would've made this a lot easier for me.
I listened to Radiohead exclusively for like... 8 months. Kid A and OK Computer changed my tastes in music, definitely. But damn, this same thread happens EVERY week with the SAME people bitching and/or praising the SAME things over and over. I don't think Radiohead is worth it, anymore. Every time I hear someone make a request on an ALTERNATIVE radio station here in Reno, I can always here some shmuck in the background saying "PLAY PARANOID ANDROID!" or something. Radiohead is now like that band that people listen to just to say "Well I listen to Creed, but I ALSO listen to Radiohead." like it makes you hip or something.
I just want to listen to music, damn.
I just want to listen to music, damn.
Yeah, so? When I was in like 10th grade, I listened to Limp Bizkit, KoRn, Creed, and a bunch of other shitty alt. rock bands, AND I liked Radiohead and the Pumpkins. I had no idea I'd now love bands like Wilco, Sonic Youth, My Bloody Valentine, The New Pornographers, The Arcade Fire, etc. etc. etc. Not that they were all around then, but I still didn't care for more independent music. At all. It was listening to SP and Radiohead that made me continue to want to listen to different things over the years. Why? They're basically two bands that weren't afraid to change. They went from being mainstream darlings to totally obscure for the sake of doing whatever they wanted to. That made me want to get into other bands that were just as obscure in that regard. That's also why they're my favorite bands of all time. Otherwise I'd still be listening to KoRn and a bunch of nu-metal.dot-Nick said:
That guy you speak of on the air that likes Creed but also Radiohead is more likely to grow into having a much better taste in music BECAUSE he discovered them. In my case, that's what I did. I got sick of eating up everything the mainstream threw at me, I wanted to know what else was out there, and now I'm glad I don't listen to the radio anymore.
A-fucking-men. When I got into Radiohead, I used to frequent the #radiohead channel on Austnet's IRC server. Most of them were pretentious pricks but I stuck around for a few of the nice ones and eventually quit it because of said wankers. It didn't sway what I thought of Radiohead. Just because a fool likes a certain song by Radiohead and only that, i.e. my siblings bar my brother believe that Radiohead turned shit after OK Computer. Does it matter and do I let it get to me? 'Course not.Peru said:
Same reason why EBW constantly slashes out at certain bands that I enjoy - who cares. His opinions, while valid to whoever agrees to them, do not affect what I think and feel for music I listen to.
edit: It's not like I have to listen to the naysayers bitch and moan whilst listening to the band anyway
I'll be the first to admit I have a *real* problem with people swaying my tastes in music. If you sound legit, I usually check out whatever you tell me to. There was a time where I took EBW's opinion really critically, and I couldn't listen to Sufjan Stevens for like two months. 
I'm trying to get over it.
I'm trying to get over it.
That's what you get for listening to EBW. :loldot-Nick said:I'll be the first to admit I have a *real* problem with people swaying my tastes in music. If you sound legit, I usually check out whatever you tell me to. There was a time where I took EBW's opinion really critically, and I couldn't listen to Sufjan Stevens for like two months.
I'm trying to get over it.
People intimidate me easily. If you use really big words and throw in a bunch of references to bands I've never heard of, I freak out and think you're better than me. :lol The sad thing is, I'm not joking. When I was into Radiohead, EBW was the first person I ever saw who said "Yeah I don't like this band." because prior to that, everyone was like "omgggg boner." over them. So I really trusted his opinion in music. I guess it was just the right time and place.speedpop said:
Now I don't really care about what he likes, but to each his own.
People who say they don't like Radiohead are the same as people who say they don't like Nirvana. Sure, they got bigger than they had any right to be, but the fact is that they wrote some amazing songs that people could relate to, and captured the spirit of their time. Anyone trying to deny that is a poseur.
Now that's a stupid statement to make.kablooey said:
I like about two Nirvana songs. Come As You Are and On a Plain. Seriously.
You know what I had to say about Nirvana before, and I'm not acting like a poseur, please.
People don't like Radiohead because they're simply not for everyone. They are a much more personal band, they aren't manufactured for the mainstream. They gave up on that after their first album. Even their second didn't really take off in the states, and OK Computer basically thrived off of critical acclaim alone. It wasn't like an MTV success or something.
Besides, you can't compare the success of Nirvana and Radiohead really. Two entirely different bands.
I stand by what I said.
Nirvana was never manufactured for the mainstream either; when "Smells Like Teen Spirit" first broke it took everyone completely by surprise. Anyway, I should clarify what I said - you don't have to like Nirvana yourself, but any respectable music fan has to admit that they were a great band.
Nirvana was never manufactured for the mainstream either; when "Smells Like Teen Spirit" first broke it took everyone completely by surprise. Anyway, I should clarify what I said - you don't have to like Nirvana yourself, but any respectable music fan has to admit that they were a great band.
kablooey I think you have a problem with that thing called taste. Earlier you claimed so-and-so was something every smart person objectively had to like, an oxymoron if there's ever been one. Now you're saying you HAVE to "accept" that certain bands are great. Why? I don't care for Nirvana's sound, and they're not great for me. I can respect the influence they had on a culture of kids and musicians, but I don't like them. I don't think you'll get very far with a mindset saying that certain "absolutes" exist in art.
enjoy bell woods
Banned
A respectable music fan doesn't have to admit anything. My interests don't lie in early '90s alternative. I couldn't care less about Nirvana.
Really, it's just music. Unless your career is music criticism, who cares what you do or do not like?
Really, it's just music. Unless your career is music criticism, who cares what you do or do not like?
enjoy bell woods
Banned
I really don't care what you like. I just like to give my opinion, however unwanted it is.
- Status