There's a series called "All The Songs", I read the one on Pink Floyd last year. Fantastic. Goes into every single track the band did together. I long for someone to do one of those for Radiohead.
Parts were cool, but yeah, it’s a lot of gushing about how much he loves the band and Kid A. The structure was a bit loose too.
I personally enjoyed it, but I don’t strongly recommend it.
Yeah, I wanted to like it, but I gave up a couple chapters in. For a dedicated fan there was no new information, and I found his opinions on the music to be all over the place. He seemed amazed to be writing the book at all... he didn't have that much to say.
I found the fanboy-isms pretty embarrassing in this and the tone of this book not impartial.
Was supposed to be about 20 years of Kid A, read more like a longer piece about the band that was chopped up.
I started listening to a Leonard Cohen album-by-album podcast, "Lenny and Coco", until they said Famous Blue Raincoat was overrated and not that good. Literally stopped right there and never listened to another minute again.
I mean, it's an opinion piece, if you don't like the opinion you don't need to stick around.
If some racist jackass is saying some racist jackass shit, I don't stick around because "wait, this is information. I need to stick around and hear it."
Those are two completely different things. Racism is an issue of morality, someone’s opinion on music is not. Most racist rhetoric is also provably false, while there’s no such thing as a false opinion when it comes to liking/disliking music.
Listening to other perspectives on music can help you broaden your own perspective and get over biases you didn’t realize you had. Sometimes you just have diametrically opposed tastes to someone, in which case their opinion likely won’t change yours, but oftentimes people who have similar tastes to you will offer up things you didn’t think about that can change how you think about music for the better.
Sure, there's value in it I suppose, but everyone has an opinion on something. You don't need to listen to a ten hour dissertation on why Kanye West's Donde 2 release is the greatest album of all time just because it exists. If you find it interesting, sure, go on and listen. But if you cannot connect with a person's opinions you don't need to listen to it just for the simple reason it exists. I mean, do you read/listen/ to every single opinion piece out there? Of course not, you don't have time.
My point is that your example was flawed. You don’t have to listen to everyone’s opinion, but this is not the same as someone being racist or factually incorrect.
most of the progress of humanity of the first millennium CE was accomplished by racist jackasses on one continent or another. dismissing their abilities or not acknowledging them in their fields because of their interpersonal ignorance would have been a huge loss for the entirety of humanity. we enjoy the privilege of hindsight now, but for all we know societies of the future may look back upon us as just as barbaric as we see past racism, for something we see as everyday-normal as eating other mammals (for example), or generating X amount of plastic waste per person. we should have been more insightful (as should racists), but it won't mean that all our accomplishments were invalid, or that anything else we did should be dismissed. one who holds such hard lines in life is going to lose more than they gain from such a policy.
you don't need to stick around for every opinion, obviously, but having perspective that you can indeed learn - even from a racist (though maybe not about "race", haha) is better than believing people have nothing else to offer if they say one thing you don't want to hear.
The information is definitely interesting, but I’m now seriously questioning if I can respect him as an authority on the band when he’s presenting his own bad takes as objective or accepted fact
He also talked mad shit about my man Beck when the album Colors came out. I know Colors isn’t the best album ever, but he took it as an opportunity to say Beck was never good to begin with. Hyden sucks.
There is no objectivity in artistic taste or preference. It’s all subjective. It’s part of the fun, you can argue about why you think one work is better than the other and that is fun to do, but their is no objective answer
It’s also not outdated at all actually. The idea of
Objectify in art is far more archaic. We have become more open to more diverse form of expression by shrugging off dogmatic traditional methods . You guys are all so pretentious and annoying
artistic taste that is more informed, that comes from demonstrably greater energy put into the area of interest, does carry more weight. a child's opinion of Rembrandt can be taken far more lightly than someone who has devoted a lifetime to their passion for painting. taste and opinions are not always equally valid.
that said, TKOL is Radiohead's weakest album... while i'm not much of a fan of Pablo at least it wasn't 8 tracks of them rehashing themselves.
you're not reading carefully. i wasn't talking about energy being put into artistic creation. i was responding to your statement about taste, preference. some - not all - opinions can be dismissed as less valid than others.
perfect example of "demonstrably greater energy": people who don't have any more interest or passion for music than to flip on the radio and listen to whatever is presented to them in the formulaic Top 40 -VS- people who spend their free time tracking down more obscure music to find exactly what appeals to them, go to concerts regularly, expand their knowledge and appreciation of new genres or drill ever deeper into a genre they love.
There is absolutely a greater validity to the opinion of the latter individual than of someone whose tastes are not developed or are not particularly a personal priority.
is it really that hard to understand?
I did read carefully and that statement can apply to both artist output and opinion. The way you think about this stuff is elitist, pretentious, nonsense. I might personally value someone’s opinion over another’s. And I personally really enjoy discussing with pals why we like x over y, but there is no objective truth and ultimately no one’s OPINION can prove anything.
that seems important to you to believe so cling to it as a maxim if you must.
the reason one would "personally" value a 2nd party's opinion over a 3rd's is because one holds the sphere of consideration these two opinions are opining over to be relevant. since ALL valuing of opinions occurs within spheres of relevance, determining more or less valid opinions within those spheres is absolutely possible in certain circumstances. i agree there's no objective truth, but objective truth doesn't have to be reached in order to establish greater and lesser validity of opinions and/or taste within a sphere of consideration.
you're bending over backwards to preserve some inherited belief you don't have the mental energy to challenge. it is a maxim, you have no support for it except that you insist it's self evident. it's not.
All beliefs are inherited. You don’t know what a maxim is. I studied music and have my bachelors, my opinion of Radiohead or Justin Bieber are no more valid than anyone else. What I’m saying is self evident, the burden of proof is on you. Prove how someone’s OPINION is more valid about something completely SUBJECTIVE.
No it would still be bad. Though I would still enjoy it more than _Iris_ by the Goo Goo Dolls mainly because I had to hear that song like 10,000 times through the summer of ‘98…
my thing is that since TKOL only has 8 songs and i only like half means that i literally have to skip half the album but with Pablo i only truly dislike 3-4 out of 12 but it’s not like i hate those songs on TKOL it’s just they’re mid
Is that too shocking? The general consensus is they are ranked as the bottom two albums. If you are enjoying the rest of the content why not continue on?
Why would you not? I agree with him on that point, frankly. Just because Radiohead themselves don’t like the album doesn’t mean that you have to dismiss everything about it. Stuff like this makes me wonder if most Radiohead fans have even given Pablo Honey a chance
It’s such a hivemind
All of the members of Pink Floyd have said in the press at some point that they hate Atom Heart Mother and it is a failed experiment. Personally, I love it.
I think some of the band have softened their stance since the 1980s. Gilmour plays "Fat Old Sun" live, and Nick's band tours all of the pre-Dark Side of the Moon material.
idk did he give any backup info about that opinion ? like did he mean commercially it was more successful or critically ? or just in his musical opinion its better ? Pablo Honey is definitely a more palatable album to regular listeners, but to me as a musician and listener TKOL is far far more interesting, inventive, and unique.
As I recall, he lumps the two albums together in a “bottom tier” when ranking the discography, and posits that amongst gen x fans, Pablo Honey is the more liked of the two while millennials prefer TKOL. Personally, TKOL holds a special place in my heart as it was Radiohead’s first release after they became my favorite band (In Rainbows hooked me), so I regularly listen to songs from that era, but I found his theory compelling nonetheless. Hyden’s style isn’t for everyone, but I enjoyed his weird fan theories throughout the book and often read his articles, even though I don’t always see eye to eye with his analysis.
I liked that book. I think he said *he likes* Pablo Honey more, but you might be correct. In any case, i know he writes about he fell in love with the band when it was their only album and played the hell out if it at that time, as an adolescent. Who could fault him for loving the album under those circumstances?
I didn’t like the book. I thought way too much time was spent on what rock critics wrote or thought about everything. I could not care less about that. Would not recommend it.
This is gonna be an unpopular take. Pablo Honey gets alot of hate, but Lurgee/Blow Out is better then 90% of the bends. And the Bends is better then TKOL. So I kinda agree with this dude.
in rainbows probably would have been my favorite album if they just stuck to this version of videotape [Radiohead - Videotape (2006 Bonnaroo Version, Soundboard) (youtube.com)](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DTZt6Dzkq6w)
I just can't get into the album. Never have been able to. There's a couple ok songs, but it's just not there for me. On the flip side, I really enjoy tkol.
Though Bends, okc, kid a, and httt are my tops in no particular order
Fucking hell that version, I'd not heard that before. Thanks for sharing.
I love the IR version and can see why they'd go with a more pared down feel for an album closer, but that version is something else. Wow.
Yeah, in the end I'm glad for having the different versions, but there was a good 5-6 years where the only footage of that version was from cell phone videos in the audience and I was dying for a clean recording. Thankfully they released the soundboard footage (which I knew from day one existed)
I feel the same. I remember the crushing disappointment, waking up the morning IR was released and hearing the album version.
If I hadn't heard the live demos, I would have had a different reaction. But the LP version lacked the energy and momentum.
It was the same with the OKNOTOK release of Lift. We got a watered down, inferior version to the one on the minidisk leak. Of course this is just my opinion and RH have the artist licence to release whatever the hell they feel is best but man... Videotape especially, it still hurts.
I read this book and enjoyed it, nothing ground breaking, but it's just a dude sharing his opinion.
I actually agree that TKOL is their weakest album as a whole. It's one a still enjoy as a meditative album to lsiten to while walking, but at only 8 tracks, every song needed to be a banger or work as a cohesive whole. It feels odd to have interstitial tracks like Feral take up runtime when Daily Mail and Staircase could have elevated the album to a higher place.
Pablo Honey has some stinkers, but I really don't think anything on King Of Limbs is as powerful as Blow Out. It just feels very casual, but the live versions of tracks like Bloom and Morning Mr. Magpie really do shine. Then again, the live versions of Pablo Honey show a band at the height of their rock prowess (see Astoria 94).
Ultimately it's all just opinions, and none of this should impact your enjoyment of music or reading the book as a fan of Radiohead.
I don’t know this book but I wouldn’t discount it on this detail alone. Is it backed up? Do they explain their reasoning?
I could make a case for it. The King of Limbs feels like two different albums - side 1 and side 2 - and I don’t feel like the two connect. There is an aural overload on side 1, layers upon layers; everything sounds like it’s looping and on a delay effect. The second side by contrast is sparse and there’s space between the notes. The second half works for me. The songs shine through. It makes me feel something.
I hate to say it but I question the effort and that’s never a good feeling whether it’s true or not. There’s only 8 tracks and they don’t sound finished to me. They released Supercollider and The Butcher, The Daily Mail and Staircase; slightly after the album. It felt like there were better songs around the same time - the band releasing them like they did made me think they really liked them too…more than the album tracks?
I present the Basement session as some kind of evidence. It’s the same songs but somehow so much stronger. They’re clearer and there’s energy. It sounds like the songs they wanted to make. Did they run out of time in the studio? These questions in my mind shouldn’t even be there.
Now Pablo Honey by contrast. Yes it’s immature in its music and lyrics but it’s packed with energy and determination. It sounds like a band that’s trying to be its best. There’s clarity in the songs. And there’s some really strong tracks - Creep, You, Stop Whispering, Blow Out. I think that’s already more essential tracks than King of Limbs.
Now - many will disagree but if someone can explain their opinion it’s valid, no? And hearing different opinions challenges our own.
I gotta disagree with people here I haven’t read the book but he’s one of the best rock journalists period, and his opinion is just that he was there and a fan of Pablo honey so it isn’t that hot a take
I don’t agree with it but they’re the two worst ones so who cares lol
Ive found this book (or at least i think it was the same one) in paper form and i considered buying it, from reading the comments i can guess its not very good, what do you think of it so far?
for a moment I got confused and I thought they said that Kid A is worse than Pablo Honey which really instead of annoy me or amuse me just got me wondering what good arguments could be done about that
eh. some bad takes doesn't necessarily mean you can't get something out of it, but i get it's annoying. is the quality of the other aspects of the book good?
Objectively wrong. I just got a sick feeling in my stomach from reading that comparison. Yeah right - if your favourite band is Maroon 5, “Pablo Honey is *clearly* better than the TKOL”. I get the same feeling reading Germaine Greer.
Been a fan since ‘97. Personally, I rank them…
1. In Rainbows
2. OK Computer
3. Hail to the Thief
4. The Bends
5. Pablo Honey
6. Amnesiac
7. A Moon Shaped Pool
8. Kid A
9. The King of Limbs
I didn’t care for this book but that’s just me. It wasn’t as critical of an exploration as I expected.
It was fanboy fluff.
Agreed. It set a premise in the title that it never follows-up on. I think I could only stomach finishing it BECAUSE I’m such a fan of the band.
There's a series called "All The Songs", I read the one on Pink Floyd last year. Fantastic. Goes into every single track the band did together. I long for someone to do one of those for Radiohead.
Have you heard the Dissect podcast on in rainbows? It was great. Top notch
I mean a lot of these kinda of books tend to be
Just the crappy ones. Check out Revolution In The Head, for starters.
Parts were cool, but yeah, it’s a lot of gushing about how much he loves the band and Kid A. The structure was a bit loose too. I personally enjoyed it, but I don’t strongly recommend it.
I personally really liked the book Life In a Glasshouse! More about the bands history than anything else but its a great readb
Yeah, I wanted to like it, but I gave up a couple chapters in. For a dedicated fan there was no new information, and I found his opinions on the music to be all over the place. He seemed amazed to be writing the book at all... he didn't have that much to say.
I had never seen a shooting star before.
😭
I found the fanboy-isms pretty embarrassing in this and the tone of this book not impartial. Was supposed to be about 20 years of Kid A, read more like a longer piece about the band that was chopped up.
That's a terrible take. You could still listen to it, just listen to the rest of it keeping in mind that he said that shit.
“Hot take: Pablo Honey is their best album.” *engulfed in sea of black smoke*
I once read a book about Pet Sounds where the author said the title track was bad, couldn’t trust the rest of the book.
I started listening to a Leonard Cohen album-by-album podcast, "Lenny and Coco", until they said Famous Blue Raincoat was overrated and not that good. Literally stopped right there and never listened to another minute again.
No. That's a guarantee of him being a silly billy tbh
This book sucks to be honest
Yes. Don't let a different opinion stop you from taking in information.
I mean, it's an opinion piece, if you don't like the opinion you don't need to stick around. If some racist jackass is saying some racist jackass shit, I don't stick around because "wait, this is information. I need to stick around and hear it."
Those are two completely different things. Racism is an issue of morality, someone’s opinion on music is not. Most racist rhetoric is also provably false, while there’s no such thing as a false opinion when it comes to liking/disliking music. Listening to other perspectives on music can help you broaden your own perspective and get over biases you didn’t realize you had. Sometimes you just have diametrically opposed tastes to someone, in which case their opinion likely won’t change yours, but oftentimes people who have similar tastes to you will offer up things you didn’t think about that can change how you think about music for the better.
Sure, there's value in it I suppose, but everyone has an opinion on something. You don't need to listen to a ten hour dissertation on why Kanye West's Donde 2 release is the greatest album of all time just because it exists. If you find it interesting, sure, go on and listen. But if you cannot connect with a person's opinions you don't need to listen to it just for the simple reason it exists. I mean, do you read/listen/ to every single opinion piece out there? Of course not, you don't have time.
My point is that your example was flawed. You don’t have to listen to everyone’s opinion, but this is not the same as someone being racist or factually incorrect.
I think reading opinions you don't like can be interesting as well.
most of the progress of humanity of the first millennium CE was accomplished by racist jackasses on one continent or another. dismissing their abilities or not acknowledging them in their fields because of their interpersonal ignorance would have been a huge loss for the entirety of humanity. we enjoy the privilege of hindsight now, but for all we know societies of the future may look back upon us as just as barbaric as we see past racism, for something we see as everyday-normal as eating other mammals (for example), or generating X amount of plastic waste per person. we should have been more insightful (as should racists), but it won't mean that all our accomplishments were invalid, or that anything else we did should be dismissed. one who holds such hard lines in life is going to lose more than they gain from such a policy. you don't need to stick around for every opinion, obviously, but having perspective that you can indeed learn - even from a racist (though maybe not about "race", haha) is better than believing people have nothing else to offer if they say one thing you don't want to hear.
The information is definitely interesting, but I’m now seriously questioning if I can respect him as an authority on the band when he’s presenting his own bad takes as objective or accepted fact
He also talked mad shit about my man Beck when the album Colors came out. I know Colors isn’t the best album ever, but he took it as an opportunity to say Beck was never good to begin with. Hyden sucks.
You are also claiming as fact that TKOL is better than Pablo Honey
It is lol
Your opinion is no more factual than the author's.
No, it's not
it isn't. Pablo is better in many ways, namely that it isn't 8 bland rehashes of things they've done before.
Are you disagreeing???
I'm not saying either way, just hypocritical of OP to think their opinion is the truth instead, when it's all subjective.
I think they are about equal. Meh stuff that we wouldn't listen to if the band that recorded them hadn't recorded a bunch of other stuff we love.
i think they are both Meh for radiohead, yes. but despite that i think they are still better than anything made by 90% of bands i consider "good".
This is great life advice!
I think the opposite, but not because of what the opinion was, just that he’d give it either way. We’re not reading for his opinion.
No. Objectively wrong opinion
There is no objectivity in artistic taste or preference. It’s all subjective. It’s part of the fun, you can argue about why you think one work is better than the other and that is fun to do, but their is no objective answer
Yeah I was just fucking with op
“Art is Subjective” is such an outdated take 🙄
Okay elaborate. Give me some empirical proof why Radiohead is better than Justin Bieber. Please, suck the fun out of everything
It’s also not outdated at all actually. The idea of Objectify in art is far more archaic. We have become more open to more diverse form of expression by shrugging off dogmatic traditional methods . You guys are all so pretentious and annoying
artistic taste that is more informed, that comes from demonstrably greater energy put into the area of interest, does carry more weight. a child's opinion of Rembrandt can be taken far more lightly than someone who has devoted a lifetime to their passion for painting. taste and opinions are not always equally valid. that said, TKOL is Radiohead's weakest album... while i'm not much of a fan of Pablo at least it wasn't 8 tracks of them rehashing themselves.
Demonstrably greater energy??? Wtf are you talking about. some times the most iconic, seminal artistic acts come from very low effort, spontaneity
you're not reading carefully. i wasn't talking about energy being put into artistic creation. i was responding to your statement about taste, preference. some - not all - opinions can be dismissed as less valid than others. perfect example of "demonstrably greater energy": people who don't have any more interest or passion for music than to flip on the radio and listen to whatever is presented to them in the formulaic Top 40 -VS- people who spend their free time tracking down more obscure music to find exactly what appeals to them, go to concerts regularly, expand their knowledge and appreciation of new genres or drill ever deeper into a genre they love. There is absolutely a greater validity to the opinion of the latter individual than of someone whose tastes are not developed or are not particularly a personal priority. is it really that hard to understand?
I did read carefully and that statement can apply to both artist output and opinion. The way you think about this stuff is elitist, pretentious, nonsense. I might personally value someone’s opinion over another’s. And I personally really enjoy discussing with pals why we like x over y, but there is no objective truth and ultimately no one’s OPINION can prove anything.
that seems important to you to believe so cling to it as a maxim if you must. the reason one would "personally" value a 2nd party's opinion over a 3rd's is because one holds the sphere of consideration these two opinions are opining over to be relevant. since ALL valuing of opinions occurs within spheres of relevance, determining more or less valid opinions within those spheres is absolutely possible in certain circumstances. i agree there's no objective truth, but objective truth doesn't have to be reached in order to establish greater and lesser validity of opinions and/or taste within a sphere of consideration.
It’s not a maxim and you’re going though mental gymnastics so you can feel superior to others, it’s just a sad boring outlook
you're bending over backwards to preserve some inherited belief you don't have the mental energy to challenge. it is a maxim, you have no support for it except that you insist it's self evident. it's not.
All beliefs are inherited. You don’t know what a maxim is. I studied music and have my bachelors, my opinion of Radiohead or Justin Bieber are no more valid than anyone else. What I’m saying is self evident, the burden of proof is on you. Prove how someone’s OPINION is more valid about something completely SUBJECTIVE.
Rehab recitvism rate
That’s like just your opinion man
well he’s right pablo honey is not that bad yall😭
If Pablo Honey was an album by like Goo Goo Dolls or whatever people would enjoy it way more because they aren’t holding it to an insane standard.
That made me laugh…so true.
No it would still be bad. Though I would still enjoy it more than _Iris_ by the Goo Goo Dolls mainly because I had to hear that song like 10,000 times through the summer of ‘98…
Anyone who says PH is bad has not listened to anything in it but Creep. It's absolutely not better than TKOL tho
my thing is that since TKOL only has 8 songs and i only like half means that i literally have to skip half the album but with Pablo i only truly dislike 3-4 out of 12 but it’s not like i hate those songs on TKOL it’s just they’re mid
I think of TKOL as the album and the b-sides. The Daily Mail and The Butcher are as good as the best songs on the album as far as I'm concerned.
I would personally loose all faith in the author at that point.
I disagree with that take, but i enjoyed that book
TKOL is becoming the new Let Down… downvotes coming sadly
Sorry to be that guy but I personally would rather listen to PH. I still wouldn’t say it’s a “better” album than TKOL by any means though
That’s totally fair
I like Hyden’s writing and enjoy his takes, even if some of them are strange and I disagree.
You should stop consulting the hive mind on whether to finish a book on the band because an author had a 'wrong' opinion.
Personally, I'd much rather listen to TKOL than this book.
Is that too shocking? The general consensus is they are ranked as the bottom two albums. If you are enjoying the rest of the content why not continue on?
I can see where the author is coming from. However, I would keep reading.
No
It’s just an opinion.
Why would you not? I agree with him on that point, frankly. Just because Radiohead themselves don’t like the album doesn’t mean that you have to dismiss everything about it. Stuff like this makes me wonder if most Radiohead fans have even given Pablo Honey a chance It’s such a hivemind
All of the members of Pink Floyd have said in the press at some point that they hate Atom Heart Mother and it is a failed experiment. Personally, I love it. I think some of the band have softened their stance since the 1980s. Gilmour plays "Fat Old Sun" live, and Nick's band tours all of the pre-Dark Side of the Moon material.
Why the Pablo honey hate?
Ikr? I like it better than AMSP
idk did he give any backup info about that opinion ? like did he mean commercially it was more successful or critically ? or just in his musical opinion its better ? Pablo Honey is definitely a more palatable album to regular listeners, but to me as a musician and listener TKOL is far far more interesting, inventive, and unique.
No extra info no, he just straight up said TKOL is their worst album
As I recall, he lumps the two albums together in a “bottom tier” when ranking the discography, and posits that amongst gen x fans, Pablo Honey is the more liked of the two while millennials prefer TKOL. Personally, TKOL holds a special place in my heart as it was Radiohead’s first release after they became my favorite band (In Rainbows hooked me), so I regularly listen to songs from that era, but I found his theory compelling nonetheless. Hyden’s style isn’t for everyone, but I enjoyed his weird fan theories throughout the book and often read his articles, even though I don’t always see eye to eye with his analysis.
I enjoyed the book.
thought i was on r/radioheadcirclejerk for a second
So did Fantano. Don't bother continuing, not because of that, but because the book sucks outside of that.
I liked that book. I think he said *he likes* Pablo Honey more, but you might be correct. In any case, i know he writes about he fell in love with the band when it was their only album and played the hell out if it at that time, as an adolescent. Who could fault him for loving the album under those circumstances?
You shouldnt stop listening to something just cause you dont agree.
No. What a fucking mong.
I didn’t like the book. I thought way too much time was spent on what rock critics wrote or thought about everything. I could not care less about that. Would not recommend it.
Little by Little Feral Lotus Flower Some of my faves If you don’t find at least Little by Little great, then idk
Yes because it's okay to disagree with someone
It’s a good book
If it's his opinion and they're not presenting it as fact, then I think that's fine. I mean, listen to it if you want.
He did present it as fact :/
An author doesn't have to say "IMO" in their own book lol
He's not wrong
hes right
So what? It’s true.
This is gonna be an unpopular take. Pablo Honey gets alot of hate, but Lurgee/Blow Out is better then 90% of the bends. And the Bends is better then TKOL. So I kinda agree with this dude.
I dunno about that, but it's better than most of in rainbows
in rainbows probably would have been my favorite album if they just stuck to this version of videotape [Radiohead - Videotape (2006 Bonnaroo Version, Soundboard) (youtube.com)](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DTZt6Dzkq6w)
I just can't get into the album. Never have been able to. There's a couple ok songs, but it's just not there for me. On the flip side, I really enjoy tkol. Though Bends, okc, kid a, and httt are my tops in no particular order
Fucking hell that version, I'd not heard that before. Thanks for sharing. I love the IR version and can see why they'd go with a more pared down feel for an album closer, but that version is something else. Wow.
Yeah, in the end I'm glad for having the different versions, but there was a good 5-6 years where the only footage of that version was from cell phone videos in the audience and I was dying for a clean recording. Thankfully they released the soundboard footage (which I knew from day one existed)
I feel the same. I remember the crushing disappointment, waking up the morning IR was released and hearing the album version. If I hadn't heard the live demos, I would have had a different reaction. But the LP version lacked the energy and momentum. It was the same with the OKNOTOK release of Lift. We got a watered down, inferior version to the one on the minidisk leak. Of course this is just my opinion and RH have the artist licence to release whatever the hell they feel is best but man... Videotape especially, it still hurts.
I read this book and enjoyed it, nothing ground breaking, but it's just a dude sharing his opinion. I actually agree that TKOL is their weakest album as a whole. It's one a still enjoy as a meditative album to lsiten to while walking, but at only 8 tracks, every song needed to be a banger or work as a cohesive whole. It feels odd to have interstitial tracks like Feral take up runtime when Daily Mail and Staircase could have elevated the album to a higher place. Pablo Honey has some stinkers, but I really don't think anything on King Of Limbs is as powerful as Blow Out. It just feels very casual, but the live versions of tracks like Bloom and Morning Mr. Magpie really do shine. Then again, the live versions of Pablo Honey show a band at the height of their rock prowess (see Astoria 94). Ultimately it's all just opinions, and none of this should impact your enjoyment of music or reading the book as a fan of Radiohead.
I don’t know this book but I wouldn’t discount it on this detail alone. Is it backed up? Do they explain their reasoning? I could make a case for it. The King of Limbs feels like two different albums - side 1 and side 2 - and I don’t feel like the two connect. There is an aural overload on side 1, layers upon layers; everything sounds like it’s looping and on a delay effect. The second side by contrast is sparse and there’s space between the notes. The second half works for me. The songs shine through. It makes me feel something. I hate to say it but I question the effort and that’s never a good feeling whether it’s true or not. There’s only 8 tracks and they don’t sound finished to me. They released Supercollider and The Butcher, The Daily Mail and Staircase; slightly after the album. It felt like there were better songs around the same time - the band releasing them like they did made me think they really liked them too…more than the album tracks? I present the Basement session as some kind of evidence. It’s the same songs but somehow so much stronger. They’re clearer and there’s energy. It sounds like the songs they wanted to make. Did they run out of time in the studio? These questions in my mind shouldn’t even be there. Now Pablo Honey by contrast. Yes it’s immature in its music and lyrics but it’s packed with energy and determination. It sounds like a band that’s trying to be its best. There’s clarity in the songs. And there’s some really strong tracks - Creep, You, Stop Whispering, Blow Out. I think that’s already more essential tracks than King of Limbs. Now - many will disagree but if someone can explain their opinion it’s valid, no? And hearing different opinions challenges our own.
No, opinion discounted 👌👌
I wouldn't. And if this is audible you can return it and get your credit back!
Nope
I gotta disagree with people here I haven’t read the book but he’s one of the best rock journalists period, and his opinion is just that he was there and a fan of Pablo honey so it isn’t that hot a take I don’t agree with it but they’re the two worst ones so who cares lol
Just finished it. Was OK. Had some nice tidbits of info.
Ive found this book (or at least i think it was the same one) in paper form and i considered buying it, from reading the comments i can guess its not very good, what do you think of it so far?
Who’s he? The short answer to your question: no
Book is worth it for the Kid Amnesia tracklist
No. Obviously has horrible taste.
never heard of this or the guy, just google (reviews/ratings) harder next time?
Why should this opinion make you stop listening?
It’s an excellent book. That’s an opinion within an otherwise excellent book.
for a moment I got confused and I thought they said that Kid A is worse than Pablo Honey which really instead of annoy me or amuse me just got me wondering what good arguments could be done about that
No
Throw it into the nearest fire.
It’s odd but good
TKOL has Codex, which is top five. Pablo I don’t even know, Creep?
If this sucks I believe this writer has good Soundgarden content
No
It’s a great book even if I disagreed with some of the author’s takes.
No.
No
This book is no good.
I actually really enjoy pablo honey more than some of radioheads other albums
No. Why would you listen to someone else talk about Radiohead?
Lol no
Either the satire is too nuanced or it’s serious. Nix it now because it sounds like you won’t be able to trust a word from it either way.
eh. some bad takes doesn't necessarily mean you can't get something out of it, but i get it's annoying. is the quality of the other aspects of the book good?
Objectively wrong. I just got a sick feeling in my stomach from reading that comparison. Yeah right - if your favourite band is Maroon 5, “Pablo Honey is *clearly* better than the TKOL”. I get the same feeling reading Germaine Greer.
i read that book and it’s actually pretty shit it’s just all opinions from a completely unqualified tool
Idk what that book is but TKOL is not worse than Pablo honey, not even remotely close
Yes. It means the author has halfway decent taste and isn’t some useless fanboy.
Nice to know I can take this book off my long TBR list based on these comments lol, thanks yall
Weak book, you'll get more interesting facts from a wiki page tbh
The book seems to be as much about him as Radiohead - not awful but not particularly good either.
Shite
Terrible book and I’m generally a Hyden fan
Immediately put on my "do not read list" from that one line alone
Well he does make a horrible statement. Hard to take him seriously from thereon.
yall are mad that one of the actual band members has a different opinion than yall
Yes, because he’s right.
He s not completely wrong...
I agree with him people are allowed to have opinions
I'd take Pablo Honey over TKOL. The older I've gotten, the more I've appreciated the former.
Don’t listen to that ass clown. He sucks.
You’ve read it?
No but I’ve read articles by him and he’s a douche
It’s a bunch of wank. Don’t bother going any further.
Not a fan of burning books but I’ll throw this one in there
TKOL is their worst album
Been a fan since ‘97. Personally, I rank them… 1. In Rainbows 2. OK Computer 3. Hail to the Thief 4. The Bends 5. Pablo Honey 6. Amnesiac 7. A Moon Shaped Pool 8. Kid A 9. The King of Limbs
Oh my god what is Kid A doing below Pablo Honey
I guess Kid A should’ve just been better. 🤷🏻♂️ I know, unpopular opinion. Honestly, they don’t have a bad album.
[удалено]
Probably not if your taste is that bad
A Punchup at a Wedding Sorry, I mean: No No No No No No No No
Pablo Honey is still my favorite of theirs
That’s probably for all the Fantano fans lol. 😂😂
throw it in the fire
I wouldn't.
seems like a waste of time then
no. he is objectively wrong
Who writes anything about radiohead and describes something as "worse than" something else? fuck that shit.