What are your opinions on Thom Yorke? [Archive]

GD

07-14-2011, 12:03 AM

I have heard that he is known for being rude and inconsiderate. Miley Cyrus vowed to ruin "stinky" Radiohead after they denied an invitation to hang out with her backstage. Even Kanye West reported that Thom snubbed him when introduced himself.

IMO, Thom can do whatever he wants as long as he makes good songs for me to listen to.

Feel free to post your opinions :wave:

St. Jimmy

07-14-2011, 12:58 AM

ITT: Everyone sucks Radiohead's dick.

Buzzkill

07-14-2011, 11:36 AM

First of all, if I were Thom Yorke I would tell Miley Cyrus to fuck herself.

Second of all, it's pretty obvious if you listen to Radiohead that Thom Yorke is not a happy go lucky guy. Definitely got some serious mood issues, and doesn't seem like the most social person.

Either way, he's a musical genius so I don't care if he was a dick to Kanye West.

Buzzkill

07-14-2011, 11:40 AM

El Vaquero de Infierno

07-14-2011, 12:46 PM

There is something about him that irks me, but I've got over my dislike for him to check out Radiohead.

Swiss Ultimate

07-14-2011, 01:38 PM

He's a bit of a douche and I haven't really enjoyed anything after Kid A.

Buzzkill

07-14-2011, 01:45 PM

He's a bit of a douche and I haven't really enjoyed anything after Kid A.

<object width="250" height="40"><param name="movie" value="http://grooveshark.com/songWidget.swf" /><param name="wmode" value="window" /><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always" /><param name="flashvars" value="hostname=cowbell.grooveshark.com&songIDs=24434484&style=metal&p=0" /><embed src="http://grooveshark.com/songWidget.swf" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="250" height="40" flashvars="hostname=cowbell.grooveshark.com&songIDs=24434484&style=metal&p=0" allowScriptAccess="always" wmode="window" /></object>

<object width="250" height="40"><param name="movie" value="http://grooveshark.com/songWidget.swf" /><param name="wmode" value="window" /><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always" /><param name="flashvars" value="hostname=cowbell.grooveshark.com&songIDs=6774&style=metal&p=0" /><embed src="http://grooveshark.com/songWidget.swf" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="250" height="40" flashvars="hostname=cowbell.grooveshark.com&songIDs=6774&style=metal&p=0" allowScriptAccess="always" wmode="window" /></object>

<object width="250" height="40"><param name="movie" value="http://grooveshark.com/songWidget.swf" /><param name="wmode" value="window" /><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always" /><param name="flashvars" value="hostname=cowbell.grooveshark.com&songIDs=29190168&style=metal&p=0" /><embed src="http://grooveshark.com/songWidget.swf" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="250" height="40" flashvars="hostname=cowbell.grooveshark.com&songIDs=29190168&style=metal&p=0" allowScriptAccess="always" wmode="window" /></object>

<object width="250" height="40"><param name="movie" value="http://grooveshark.com/songWidget.swf" /><param name="wmode" value="window" /><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always" /><param name="flashvars" value="hostname=cowbell.grooveshark.com&songIDs=6777&style=metal&p=0" /><embed src="http://grooveshark.com/songWidget.swf" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="250" height="40" flashvars="hostname=cowbell.grooveshark.com&songIDs=6777&style=metal&p=0" allowScriptAccess="always" wmode="window" /></object>

<object width="250" height="40"><param name="movie" value="http://grooveshark.com/songWidget.swf" /><param name="wmode" value="window" /><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always" /><param name="flashvars" value="hostname=cowbell.grooveshark.com&songIDs=7524373&style=metal&p=0" /><embed src="http://grooveshark.com/songWidget.swf" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="250" height="40" flashvars="hostname=cowbell.grooveshark.com&songIDs=7524373&style=metal&p=0" allowScriptAccess="always" wmode="window" /></object>

FakeLaser

07-14-2011, 05:06 PM

I love Thom Yorke. He is a genius. He is a deity to me. Radiohead are the best and most important band of the last 20 years.

Requiem

07-14-2011, 07:31 PM

I am not disagreeing that Radiohead are great and Thom Yorke is extremely talented. But why do you feel they are the best and most important band of the last 20 years?

When people don't like Radiohead, I 'get' it. It's not shocking, although I may disagree a little. But I get it. It's a unique sound, and a lot of their music is incredible and I love listening to it. But I also find some of their music to be pretty boring or just not that great. I can see why some people wouldn't like his voice too. Just can't say that they qualify as 'the best and most important band of the last 20 years'. Seems like one of those things people say about them to sound hip or intelligent. Not saying you're doing that. I just don't see what qualities make them that.

Requiem

07-14-2011, 07:37 PM

Also, Thom Yorke, or any artist shouldn't have to hang out with someone just because they're a celebrity and they request it. Miley Cyrus is full of herself if she has sworn to 'ruin' them over it.

Buzzkill

07-14-2011, 07:37 PM

They completely changed what rock music can be. They set the standard for album to album progression, and introduced a completely different idea of what music could sound like. Not to mention the overwhelming quality of the majority of their songs (imo).

Buzzkill

07-14-2011, 07:41 PM

FakeLaser

07-14-2011, 07:48 PM

Who is a better and more important band from the last 20 years?

They've released 4 iconic albums in that timeframe:

1) The Bends
2) OK Computer
3) Kid A
4) In Rainbows

And all of their other albums are incredible too (save Pablo Honey). I thought The King of Limbs was a letdown only because it wasn't some ridiculous game-changing release. That's how high the bar is set.

They're pretty much the only band in that time frame that is critically acclaimed, huge commercially and still respected by indie music fans.

Kid A changed music. Not that there wasn't a lot of Electronic/IDM-style music out there already, but that album pretty much laid the groundwork for the next decade in music, making electronic music more accepted. It killed guitar-driven rock in some ways, or at least pushed it to the back burner. It might have been the most important album of the 2000s.

In Rainbows was an acceptance of change in the way music is consumed and distributed. Not only is the music incredible, but it's just conceptually brilliant.

Point being... when Radiohead releases an album, you can count on it being excellent. You know it's going to sell millions of copies (even in this climate) and it's not going to be hated on by hipsters and whatnot. And it just might change music in some profound way.

FakeLaser

07-14-2011, 07:50 PM

I can't imagine the pressure they must be under with every release, especially after In Rainbows. It's like they can't just release an incredible album, they also have to come up with some ridiculous way to distribute it.

FakeLaser

07-14-2011, 07:51 PM

Requiem

07-14-2011, 08:26 PM

Dunno, just don't see it at all. I get that they are influential, but not nearly as much as you're making it out to be. They had a lot of worldwide success I guess. But they have just as many 'Gold' albums as they do Platinum ones. OK Computer and Kid A were iconic sure for being way ahead of their time, but In Rainbows didn't really 'change' anything. Bands didn't start changing their business model because of it. It's been 4 years since its release, and it has had a negligible effect on the industry. The industry has been more affected by the internet and its users than any decisions by any bands.

They are not the only band to have been pushing the music industry. I definitely don't believe they are the first band to 'progress' with each album.

Off the top of my head, Trent Reznor comes to mind as equally influential as far as his music production and business model go. His genius can't be disputed, as he built an empire from literally nothing, starting as a custodian in a recording studio. Pretty Hate Machine went 3x platinum, and it was an album from 1989. NIN practically became a brand. He would have released The Slip for free regardless of if Radiohead had done it with In Rainbows. Not saying NIN is the best and most important either, because they definitely don't have the worldwide success that Radiohead had, but I don't think Radiohead are the ONLY band to have followed this pattern.

Buzzkill

07-14-2011, 08:31 PM

Dunno, just don't see it at all. I get that they are influential, but not nearly as much as you're making it out to be. They had a lot of worldwide success I guess. But they have just as many 'Gold' albums as they do Platinum ones. OK Computer and Kid A were iconic sure for being way ahead of their time, but In Rainbows didn't really 'change' anything. Bands didn't start changing their business model because of it. It's been 4 years since its release, and it has had a negligible effect on the industry. The industry has been more affected by the internet and its users than any decisions by any bands.

They are not the only band to have been pushing the music industry. I definitely don't believe they are the first band to 'progress' with each album.

Off the top of my head, Trent Reznor comes to mind as equally influential as far as his music production and business model go. His genius can't be disputed, as he built an empire from literally nothing, starting as a custodian in a recording studio. Pretty Hate Machine went 3x platinum, and it was an album from 1989. NIN practically became a brand. He would have released The Slip for free regardless of if Radiohead had done it with In Rainbows. Not saying NIN is the best and most important either, because they definitely don't have the worldwide success that Radiohead had, but I don't think Radiohead are the ONLY band to have followed this pattern.

Not saying that they were the only ones to progress with each album, but just look at the mammoth difference between The Bends and Kid A. They sound like entirely different bands in different genres. But they are both absolutely genius and masterful, only in completely different ways.

And they just have so many effing good songs. Like every "great" band, you really couldn't do a "Best of Radiohead" CD, or even a double or triple CD imo. Theres a standard of excellence that is consistent across every album they release.

Requiem

07-14-2011, 08:31 PM

Just the same, I 'get' why people might not like NIN.

Requiem

07-14-2011, 08:34 PM

Yeah but where you think a crap ton of their songs are amazing, I see a crap ton of their songs as being completely forgettable. I see whole albums of theirs that are good when taken as a whole album, but some songs as just being 'meh' or forgotten when taken by themselves. A LOT of their songs are like that for me. Likewise, a lot of their songs are incredible and some of them I would put as some of the best songs I had ever heard. Just don't think their whole library lives up to that though.

Buzzkill

07-14-2011, 08:44 PM

Just comes down to a matter of taste in the end really. I agree with you though that certain songs aren't great, or even downright bad, outside the context of the album as a whole (this really only applies to Kid A for me though, with songs like Treefingers).

Another huge part of their influence tho was really introducing the whole movement of fusing abstract, jarring sounds and arrangements with really amazing beauty to create an entirely unique mood and sound to their music that's been copied endlessly since.

Requiem

07-14-2011, 08:46 PM

Without starting debates about other bands specifically - There are bands that I can listen to their entire library (or 5-6, depending on the band.. if they have a LOT of music) without skipping a song. I could never do that with Radiohead. There are too many songs that either 'grate' on my ears, or just bore me. I would honestly skip 1/3 or 1/2 of their songs. Doesn't take away from their importance to the industry, as those few albums were just as iconic. But it does take away from their overall hype, IMO.

Getting away from the point I guess. It's all personal preference. Some stuff sounds better to some people. Just don't think they are appealing 100% of the time. Or even 2/3 of the time even.

Buzzkill

07-14-2011, 08:47 PM

Theres also Thom Yorke unmatched lyrical ability (again, imo). They fit the sounds that surround them perfectly.

Buzzkill

07-14-2011, 08:50 PM

Without starting debates about other bands specifically - There are bands that I can listen to their entire library (or 5-6, depending on the band.. if they have a LOT of music) without skipping a song. I could never do that with Radiohead. There are too many songs that either 'grate' on my ears, or just bore me. I would honestly skip 1/3 or 1/2 of their songs. Doesn't take away from their importance to the industry, as those few albums were just as iconic. But it does take away from their overall hype, IMO.

Getting away from the point I guess. It's all personal preference. Some stuff sounds better to some people. Just don't think they are appealing 100% of the time. Or even 2/3 of the time even.I mean I can listen to every White Stripes album without skipping a song (one of my favorite bands ever), but I wouldn't argue that they are anywhere nearly as influential or important as Radiohead.

I do see where you're coming from though. I used to pretty much hate Radiohead, and thought everyone who loved them was just trying to be cool and sound more intelligent than they were. Then I actually gave them a good listen, and now they are one of my favorite bands ever, if not my absolute favorite.

I dunno.

Idioteque, Kid A, Paranoid Android, There There, Pyamid Song and Reckoner are all in my top 25 songs of all time (not "universally the greatest songs ever made" "mind you", but from my own listening experiences)

Requiem

07-14-2011, 08:53 PM

Mentioned the ability to listen to a library as more to do with considering them 'the best', not the most important.

FakeLaser

07-14-2011, 09:54 PM

I like Treefingers. Good to fall asleep to when yr blazed

FakeLaser

07-14-2011, 10:04 PM

Dunno, just don't see it at all. I get that they are influential, but not nearly as much as you're making it out to be. They had a lot of worldwide success I guess. But they have just as many 'Gold' albums as they do Platinum ones. OK Computer and Kid A were iconic sure for being way ahead of their time, but In Rainbows didn't really 'change' anything. Bands didn't start changing their business model because of it. It's been 4 years since its release, and it has had a negligible effect on the industry. The industry has been more affected by the internet and its users than any decisions by any bands.

They are not the only band to have been pushing the music industry. I definitely don't believe they are the first band to 'progress' with each album.

Off the top of my head, Trent Reznor comes to mind as equally influential as far as his music production and business model go. His genius can't be disputed, as he built an empire from literally nothing, starting as a custodian in a recording studio. Pretty Hate Machine went 3x platinum, and it was an album from 1989. NIN practically became a brand. He would have released The Slip for free regardless of if Radiohead had done it with In Rainbows. Not saying NIN is the best and most important either, because they definitely don't have the worldwide success that Radiohead had, but I don't think Radiohead are the ONLY band to have followed this pattern.
I didn't really say In Rainbows changed distribution, just that it acknowledged that things had changed more so than any other release and reacted to it by allowing people to pay what they wanted for it, rather than getting pissed off at a broken system. A statement was made; an original and innovative statement independent of any record label. Which you can argue is a model that has been followed, as a lot of music is now self-released without a label. Not on a grandiose scale like Radiohead, but yeah.

And I'm not saying they're the only band to progress. All bands progress. However... a drastic change like the one seen on Kid A very much changed the face of music in the following decade. I think the only album that is comparable there from the past decade in terms of actually CHANGING music would be Late Registration by Kanye West, which pretty much completely changed rap music by killing off "gangsta" rap and making it more about production, intelligent, witty and hilarious lyrics and whatnot. Made rap more "mainstream," or at least more acceptable and accessible to "white America" than it ever was. Radiohead similarly took rock music and infused electronica, IDM and elements of hip hop and almost killed off guitar rock, in a lot of ways.

I don't deny Trent Reznor's genius, but he hasn't had the same influence on music as Radiohead. He's a great rags to riches story and is ridiculously talented, but he's not comparable in influence or commercial success. Maybe in critical acclaim (but not really).

I just can't point to any other bands that have all of the elements I've detailed above from the past 20 years or so. that's why I think they're the best and most important band of the past 20 years.

Buzzkill

07-15-2011, 01:44 AM

Another huge thing is that there really isnt anybody else. They aren't the Beatles or anything, but if you this at this generation of music there's nobody else imo

Requiem

07-15-2011, 02:00 AM

Don't get this 'almost killed off guitar rock' thing you keep saying. Makes no sense at all to me. Yeah it proved that music didn't have to follow a certain scheme to be successful. But that doesn't mean people suddenly stopped... I don't even know. Not sure what you're saying.

Buzzkill

07-15-2011, 11:27 AM

Don't get this 'almost killed off guitar rock' thing you keep saying. Makes no sense at all to me. Yeah it proved that music didn't have to follow a certain scheme to be successful. But that doesn't mean people suddenly stopped... I don't even know. Not sure what you're saying.

A ton of rock-oriented band these days are leaning more towards electronic music than pure guitar or keyboard.

Phoenix, Passion Pit, (early) Cut Copy, Sufjan Stevens, Muse, Hot Chip, Coldplay, James Blake...not to mention the numerous electronic artists Radiohead has influenced, like Animal Collective, Flying Lotus, Madlib...etc.

Even Kanye cites Radiohead as one of his biggest influences.

I don't think we're saying it KILLED OFF guitar rock, but before Radiohead, that was the status quo. After Radiohead, electronic driven rock is the status quo. There is still plenty of pure guitar rock (MMJ, Black Keys, etc etc) but I'd say it's no longer the norm.

CSL

07-15-2011, 11:38 AM

But "nobody" gives a shit about any of those bands outside of Muse and Coldplay

Buzzkill

07-15-2011, 11:44 AM

Nobody gives a shit about Kanye West? Passion Pit was one of the most popular bands in the states last year. Maybe not in the Top 40, but for pretty much anybody that could get over the hipster label loved them from my experience.

Name some main stream guitar driven rock bands with no electronic instruments that people give a shit about plz? If you say mumford and sons this argument is over. MAYBE Arcade Fire.

Buzzkill

07-15-2011, 11:48 AM

Not saying that they don't exist by the way...just that they are a dying breed.

RHCP might be one of the few remaining examples, but they developed their sound way before Radiohead and have stuck to it.

Buzzkill

07-15-2011, 12:03 PM

I also wanna point out that Muse is the biggest rock band in the world, and Coldplay isn't far behind...

CSL

07-15-2011, 12:18 PM

like every rock act on those Billboard Mainstream Rock charts you Americans have. They "influence" rock music a lot more than Radiohead do. I'm not saying Radiohead haven't influenced anybody "mainstream" (Kanye for example but we weren't referring to them influencing main stream rap/hip-hop) but you appear to be mostly listing bands that fit under this sub-genre and that sub-genre/get by on specific dedicated audiences and "critical acclaim" as opposed to what 90% of people that claim to listen to "rock music" are actually listening to. And U2 and Foo Fighters are the biggest rock bands in the world.

Buzzkill

07-15-2011, 12:34 PM

Nobody under the age of 35 gives a shit about U2, no offense. And they use tons of electronic distortion in most of their songs now, not that I've ever listened to more than 45 seconds of a U2 song.

And, at least in 2009, Muse sold more CD's and sold out more concerts (100k+ per arena in some cases) than any other band.

What rock acts on those Billboard Manstream Rock charts are you talking about that "us Americans love"? And what influence do they have? The Black Keys took their sound directly from late 1960s blues. I wouldn't say they are influential.

Here are the following Top 10 bands for Rock Songs on the Billboard charts:

Foo Fighters, Seether, Foster the People, Coldplay, Death Cab for Cutie, The Black Keys, Avenged Sevenfold, Incubus.

Nobody cares about Incubus anymore, Foster the People are pure electro-rock, don't know anything aobut Seether, Death Cab is emo-folk, and Black Keys are, well, I already talked about them.

Dunno what you're talking about.

Requiem

07-15-2011, 12:54 PM

Yeah I can't deny that Muse is huge. When I listened to them before, I never could have predicted they would get that huge. Anyways, I'm bored of this debate. I see your point. Wouldn't call them 'THE' band of the past couple decades, but I get your reasoning.

Also, The Black Keys are one of those bands that I can listen to literally their entire library without skipping. Think it's pretty awesome that they are in the top 10 on the billboards right now. Hope now that they are popular, that their next album is just mind-blowing rock. I would personally consider them the best band of the last decade, easily. And that has nothing to do with their 'impact', even though I definitely think once Brothers sinks in and their next album comes out, that they will start to have more of an impact on the music world. 'Fresh' vintage sound, quality songwriting, sick catchy riffs. Absolutely hate that 2 of my friends will not give them a real shot, even though they love classic rock.

Buzzkill

07-15-2011, 01:09 PM

Agree to disagree!

But yes, Black Keys are effing awesome. Loved them way back when I first heard 10 AM Automatic (I think thats what it was called), and I'm glad they finally made it big. Even though they sound exactly like The Sonics.

<object width="425" height="349"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/20S_kwNb4rg?version=3&hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/20S_kwNb4rg?version=3&hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="425" height="349" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true"></embed></object>

By the way: http://www.nme.com/news/the-black-keys--3/58033

Black Keys just finished an album with Danger Mouse. aodfjasfsjklfs

CSL

07-15-2011, 01:13 PM

Nobody under the age of 35 gives a shit about U2, no offense. And they use tons of electronic distortion in most of their songs now, not that I've ever listened to more than 45 seconds of a U2 song.

And, at least in 2009, Muse sold more CD's and sold out more concerts (100k+ per arena in some cases) than any other band.

What rock acts on those Billboard Manstream Rock charts are you talking about that "us Americans love"? And what influence do they have? The Black Keys took their sound directly from late 1960s blues. I wouldn't say they are influential.

Here are the following Top 10 bands for Rock Songs on the Billboard charts:

Foo Fighters, Seether, Foster the People, Coldplay, Death Cab for Cutie, The Black Keys, Avenged Sevenfold, Incubus.

Nobody cares about Incubus anymore, Foster the People are pure electro-rock, don't know anything aobut Seether, Death Cab is emo-folk, and Black Keys are, well, I already talked about them.

Dunno what you're talking about.

The main thing I dislike about the likes of Thom Yorke/Radiohead fans btw, the overwhelming false sense of superiority, this horribly deluded sense that music can only be made one way and for one purpose and that is to please a certain, specific type of fan

And lol "no offense", because the fact I listed them means I must care what anybody thinks about them as opposed to simply realizing they're "bigger" than every band you've listed, the fact Muse are opening for U2 on the highest grossing concert tour in history later this year gives that one away. And what do you mean "what influence do they have?". Simply making somebody pick up and guitar and learn how to play is influencing music. And even if we're specifically talking about influencing other artists, I'm not about to list anybody that you could consider influenced by Radiohead. U2, Foo Fighters, Red Hot Chilli Peppers, Avenged Sevenfold, Seether, AC/DC, Metallica, Bon Jovi, The Stones and so on. Those are the bands I'm talking about, the ones Average Joe Jeans could name. Whether most of them are actually any good or not or whether you care about any of them is completely irrelevant, your artistic and creative preference isn't any kind of factor in deciding how big or influential a band is. It's just typical self righteous nonsense from your "hipster" variety of music fan.

CSL

07-15-2011, 01:14 PM

now argue back with me so we can engage in fisticuffs

CSL

07-15-2011, 01:15 PM

hate when posts get split by a page change, quite homosexual

Buzzkill

07-15-2011, 02:18 PM

The main thing I dislike about the likes of Thom Yorke/Radiohead fans btw, the overwhelming false sense of superiority, this horribly deluded sense that music can only be made one way and for one purpose and that is to please a certain, specific type of fan

And lol "no offense", because the fact I listed them means I must care what anybody thinks about them as opposed to simply realizing they're "bigger" than every band you've listed, the fact Muse are opening for U2 on the highest grossing concert tour in history later this year gives that one away. And what do you mean "what influence do they have?". Simply making somebody pick up and guitar and learn how to play is influencing music. And even if we're specifically talking about influencing other artists, I'm not about to list anybody that you could consider influenced by Radiohead. U2, Foo Fighters, Red Hot Chilli Peppers, Avenged Sevenfold, Seether, AC/DC, Metallica, Bon Jovi, The Stones and so on. Those are the bands I'm talking about, the ones Average Joe Jeans could name. Whether most of them are actually any good or not or whether you care about any of them is completely irrelevant, your artistic and creative preference isn't any kind of factor in deciding how big or influential a band is. It's just typical self righteous nonsense from your "hipster" variety of music fan.
It has nothing to do with what "proper" music should be. I love Radiohead, but Lil Wayne is one of my top 20 favorite artists of all time. Paparazzi by Lady GaGa has 19 plays on my iTunes. Now, there are definitely people who don't really know anything about Radiohead and just follow the herd and say they are awesome, but that's the case with anything really.

All of the bands you are listing are essentially pre-Radiohead, or at least established their sounds before the time frame we're talking about. I don't really consider them part of "this" generation of music (late 90's onward). And I'm not saying they're bad, I love pretty much every band you mentioned (except U2). I even acknowledge how great Metallica is, even though I don't exactly jam out to them.

And what's your definition of an average joe? A late thirties middle class guy? Either way I don't really understand what point you're trying to make.

But yeah, kinda getting over this. It comes down to taste, and obviously there's no objectively true answer to the question.

In the end tho, who do you think tops Radiohead in terms of consistent excellence, forward thinking influence, and overall impact than them? Every generation had their "greats"; the Beatles, Led Zeppelin, Pink Floyd...

So from this generation of music, who do you think deserves to be ranked along side them? U2? That's fair if so, that's your opinion. I'm just trying to figure out who else could fit the bill.

FakeLaser

07-15-2011, 05:07 PM

I don't think U2 counts as this generation as well

For instance, I'd say Sonic Youth is one of the most important bands of the past 20 years, but I'd extend that to 30 years and say they were more associated with the 80s and 90s. They still make excellent music today, and seem timeless (sort of in the same vein as U2, of whom I am not a fan), but they're not of this "era"

And of course, they have nowhere near the amount of commercial acclaim that a band like U2 or Radiohead does, though their influence on music is undeniable, as is the quality and innovative quality of their music.

Radiohead may not be commercially the biggest band in the world, but they're up there, and coupling that with the level of critical acclaim that they've attained, respect amongst fans of independent music who will generally dismiss anything remotely mainstream and their brilliance... that's what makes them the best and most important band of the past 20 years.

Also. I hate Passion Pit. Just sayin

FakeLaser

07-15-2011, 05:15 PM

I think you can argue that "hipster" types may consider a band "bigger" than they actually are in a commercial and exposure sense, hence overvalue "how big they are" but to say that these acts don't have any kind of far-reaching influence is ignorant, because you're ignoring their influence on "underground" type of music completely, which is something that has always and will always exist.

FakeLaser

07-15-2011, 05:16 PM

Was hoping for this thread to go this way, tbh

Buzzkill

07-15-2011, 05:26 PM

Bro, Passion Pit is one of the most important bands of this decade

Buzzkill

07-15-2011, 05:27 PM

Seriously

FakeLaser

07-15-2011, 09:23 PM

I don't really see it

Buzzkill

07-15-2011, 09:33 PM

jk but I do like Passion Pit a lot. Just great over the top pop music.

Shisen Kopf

07-16-2011, 12:03 AM

Ive seen radiohead in concert twice and nothing compares to it. They are one of these rare bands that only come along so often that leave their mark on the music scene. Ok that's the pretentious hipster answer. I will say this though, nothing tops the National Anthem, Idioteque and Let Down. Id say they are like Pink Floyd in releasing whatever the hell they want. But still greatest band of all time is Queen. So there you go.

Sean

07-16-2011, 04:58 PM

Have any Miley Cyrus fans ever heard of Radiohead?

Kapoutman

07-16-2011, 05:50 PM

I just want to say this.

FakeRazor, Pablo Honey was a great album. Different from their other stuff, but a great album nonetheless.

The Destroyer

07-17-2011, 10:41 AM

What I'm taking from this thread is that I have no idea who Passion Pit are.

FakeLaser

07-17-2011, 04:00 PM

I just want to say this.

FakeRazor, Pablo Honey was a great album. Different from their other stuff, but a great album nonetheless.
Creep
Anyone Can Play Guitar
Thinking About You
Stop Whispering

Good songs

FakeLaser

07-17-2011, 09:54 PM

I know it's Pitchfork and they suck Radiohead's cock (like the rest of us hipster homosexuals) but this pretty much sums up the importance of Kid A:

Nine years ago this month, Brent DiCrescenzo reviewed Radiohead's Kid A for this website. As far as its rating, no one blinked. Pitchfork was still a blip then, but if you cared at all about the broad sphere of music that included Radiohead, chances are that you heard something very special in Kid A. It was that exceptional artifact of modern culture-- something about which most people could agree. To ears that'd had the second half the 1990s to ingest the rapid developments in electronic music, ears weary of the bankruptcy of post-Nirvana alternative rock, Kid A sounded like a next development in rock music that was both logical and surprising. And, of course, a lot has been written about this record since. "What's left to be said about Kid A?", Pitchfork founder Ryan Schreiber wondered when we published our Top 20 Albums of 2000 list. Good question.

First, I go back to the old reasons, the ones that were kicked around from the moment the record hit: Thoughts about millennial techno-dread; fragmentation, broken transmissions, garbled communication; the feeling of helplessness that comes from having access to so much information about the world while not having the power to change any of it; the subtle and dramatic ways that electronics are altering our landscape and our consciousness. And there's still something there, though in some ways it's all now more intense. Part of our brains moved online in the last 10 years, and this will continue; it's not a good or bad thing; it's just the way it is. Refracting these developments through the prism of Kid A, it still resonates, even if so much has changed since. Radiohead were not only among the first bands to figure out how to use the Internet, but to make their music sound like it, and they kicked off this ridiculously retro decade with the rare album that didn't seem retro. Kid A-- with its gorgeously crafted electronics, sparkling production, and uneasy stance toward the technology it embraces completely-- feels like the Big Album of the online age.

But you know what? I almost never think about that stuff. It all feels true, of course, but when I slide Kid A into the CD player (how's that for a retro image?), something else happens. Once that drawer closes and the first chords of "Everything in Its Right Place" start-- those haunting, clicking keyboard textures and Thom Yorke's warped voice-- all these other ideas feel secondary. Instead, I get lost in the dissonant horn blasts of "The National Anthem" and hypnotized between the play of the drones and the hissy beats in "Idioteque"; I feel the deep pang of yearning and sadness with the title track, and I rest during the gorgeous Brian Eno-like interlude of "Treefingers". I'm listening to a brilliant album by an especially creative rock band functioning at its peak. Such records have strong melodies, exciting chord changes, unexpected arrangements, and tricky rhythms that you want to hear over and over again. Songs. Kid A has those, too. Ten of them, all great, here, in this order, working together perfectly. For a record with so much baggage and such a reputation for density, the appeal, in the end, is pretty simple: Other records were catchier or better for dancing or more appealingly nostalgic. But no other record captured the complex feeling of the era in such an elegant and beautiful way. --Mark Richardson

Tom Guycott

07-18-2011, 08:40 AM

I have heard that he is known for being rude and inconsiderate. Miley Cyrus vowed to ruin "stinky" Radiohead after they denied an invitation to hang out with her backstage. Even Kanye West reported that Thom snubbed him when introduced himself.

IMO, Thom can do whatever he wants as long as he makes good songs for me to listen to.

Feel free to post your opinions :wave:

There's your answer right there. Fuck Miley Cyrus AND Kanye West. "Fuck them up their stupid asses!"

SRSLY. Miley is a queen of vapid, product moving "music", and Kanye shouldn't throw stones about someone acting self-centered. Arrogant bastard. I'd snub him too, and I'm a nobody.

Ultimately, who gives a fuck what those two think?

Radiohead is awesome, thus Thom is awesome.

That is all.