What's So Great About Radiohead?

[Scarface]

Why does everyone just praise the shit out of this band? People talk about Radiohead like they have made such huge leaps in music history, and they're so new and innovative, and how they're so much better than the rest of today's music.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying they're terrible, they're an alright band, I just want to know why people love them so much. To me they sound just like any other band of their genre.

[Elixur]

If a blind man asked you to explain why a sunset is beautiful, what would you say?

Yeah, I can already feel the replies to that one.

[Entice]

At 5/26/13 11:57 PM, Elixur wrote: If a blind man asked you to explain why a sunset is beautiful, what would you say?

Yeah, I can already feel the replies to that one.

Are you suggesting that people who don't like Radiohead don't understand music?

If you can't articulate why you like a particular band then it sounds like you're the one with that problem.

[Ryanson]

Because critics are funny lol

[Scarface]

At 5/26/13 11:57 PM, Elixur wrote: If a blind man asked you to explain why a sunset is beautiful, what would you say?

I'm not deaf. A blind man doesn't know what colors are, he doesn't know what anything looks like. I've listened to music once or twice in my lifetime, so it's just a tad different, wouldn't you say?

I'm aware that music is subjective, I'm not asking you what's correct and what's incorrect, I'm asking you what makes you set Radiohead apart from other bands? Why do you view them as really good? What makes them better in your opinion?

[Elixur]

At 5/27/13 12:01 AM, Entice wrote:

At 5/26/13 11:57 PM, Elixur wrote: If a blind man asked you to explain why a sunset is beautiful, what would you say?

Yeah, I can already feel the replies to that one.

Are you suggesting that people who don't like Radiohead don't understand music?

No, in fact I don't even listen to the band myself. It was a poor analogy, what I was getting across is that explaining to someone who can't understand why you like something is very difficult to put into words.

[Oolaph]

At 5/27/13 12:19 AM, Elixur wrote: No, in fact I don't even listen to the band myself. It was a poor analogy, what I was getting across is that explaining to someone who can't understand why you like something is very difficult to put into words.

If you're well informed, it's very easy to explain your opinions to people.

Radiohead is nothing special. The most special thing about them is the ridiculous amount of praise they get, because they're not groundbreaking at all. They get a lot of attention for sounding different from the other stuff that most of their demographic listens to, when in reality they haven't really done anything "different" at all.

They're a perfectly fine group that makes perfectly fine music, but Thom Yorke is no god.

[Phobotech]

I think I've heard one or two songs from Radiohead that I actually enjoyed...I gave them chance after chance after friends and other people raved about them so vehemently, and I've given up on trying to integrate them into my library.

I don't like Radiohead either. I'd rather listen to something else.

I post because in conversation, I feel alone on the matter, with the exception of very few people I know personally that agree with me.

It takes all kinds.

[Oolaph]

At 5/27/13 01:59 AM, infamoss wrote: Radiohead is not my favorite but this is quite a ignorant statement indeed. Their songs are arranged differently from most rock bands. They incorporate use of odd and multiple time signatures, when most rock bands are straight 4/4. The melodies are also unique, and the drumming is different as well, almost jazzy.

I already said "They get a lot of attention for sounding different from the other stuff that most of their demographic listens to". Sure, they're different than most rock groups you hear on the radio, but they're not breaking any musical ground like many people say they are. Writing a song in 5/4, using syncopating rhythms, and playing samples backwards isn't new or difficult, I could do it in my sleep. There are plenty of groups that have merged the same styles and created a similar sound before them, and in some cases more elaborately than them, Radiohead is just the one group that happened to get famous from the sound they have.

I'm not insulting them at all, they're a great group that makes perfectly nice music. They just get much more praise than they deserve, that's all.

[Tremulos]

They're a good band, musically solid I would say with some talent and creativity. These things are easy to find for people who are interested enough in music to explore genres and find new music to listen to, but either Radiohead knew how to market their music or they got lucky, either way they gained enough popularity to reach people who actually don't know that other time signatures exist outside of 4/4, thus people who are easily impressed are especially impressed by this generally but not amazingly creative band.

A very important thing to note here is that Radiohead tend to play it safe with their creativity; they make sure to not go too far, always returning to a basic core sound that is actually very much like every other rock band you've ever heard on the radio, with their own added flare. Sometimes the creativity seems to bubble up, but they always keep it in check, which is great for keeping people interested.

I'm just kidding, I'd never actually listened to a Radiohead song before reading this thread, I just like to participate in bringing a popular artist down a notch. fuk em

[Xenomit]

Absolutely nothing

[Ryanson]

At 5/27/13 02:28 AM, infamoss wrote: They are breaking ground in the rock genre.

I didn't say it was new or difficult

But that's exactly what you're saying when you make the claim that they're breaking ground. It literally means "to do something that has never been done before." Radiohead are not the first act to do what they've been doing.

This is a quote from someone who doesn't want to be quoted -- if it's been done before, and better, it's not original.

music is not a competition of who's more elaborate, it's about originality.

I'm laughing at that statement because of how silly an assumption it is.

Because it's a unique sound.

What is "unique" about it? Focus on this question right here. What is it about Radiohead that makes their sound unique? You're not explaining what's so great about them. You need to elaborate, and make your statements clear when you say why no one else has a sound like them.

[Sekhem]

A classic Newgrounds music thread. A lot of terrible opinions from non-musicians.

A lot of arguments in this thread seem to suggest that nothing Radiohead does is truly 'groundbreaking,' but the same can be said for any modern Rock/Pop/etc group or artist. If it was truly groundbreaking/unique/etc, it would have a very limited appeal outside of music academia and you wouldn't be listening to it anyways. How often do you listen to Edgard Varese? Groundbreaking is a terrible metric to grade music by unless you're an obscurantist avant-garde fetishist.

With all that said, I remain unimpressed by Radiohead's releases. Hail to the Thief was Radiohead's last truly impressive record and it was released nearly a decade ago, but it's a phenomenal album.

If someone can tell me why Sail to the Moon (Brush the Cobwebs Out of the Sky) isn't a good song, I'll gladly respond to you, but you won't be able to do it.

[VJF]

Would I get flamed too much if I stated that I never have heard any of their songs before?

And if someone could provide a link to their best or worst song/(s), so I can judge for myself, I would really appreciate it.

[Ryanson]

At 5/27/13 04:07 AM, infamoss wrote: They are in rock music. You're generalizing all genres of music and putting them into the same category.

Music is music is music is music. Is music. Just let me clarify -- it's music. Genres and categories do not and should not matter in the grand scheme of things.

And it's quite silly to assume I'm some fanboy, being that my favorite bands are Animals as Leaders and Andy James, the most elaborate music right now.

Literally nothing you said matters. None of that means anything. It doesn't matter if you are a "fanboy" or not, and the fact that you like such and such bands or singers does not affect anything in this conversation. The fact that you're bringing them up does not make your argument any stronger in any way.

Their melodies are unique, the leads and vocal leads, no other band has those. The whole bands sounds unique, every instrument, I'm not going to go in depth more because there's no need too.

See, there you are not explaining again. You're just saying it's unique or no other band has whatever, you aren't actually elaborating on what about it makes it unique, you're not saying anything. Everything I personally believe has already been said by either Sekhem or Oolaph -- this is about you. I want to know what about them hits you the strongest. I want to know why you believe them to be the truly spectacular band you see them as.

[Scintillating]

At 5/27/13 03:36 AM, Sekhem wrote: If someone can tell me why Sail to the Moon (Brush the Cobwebs Out of the Sky) isn't a good song, I'll gladly respond to you, but you won't be able to do it.

Uh, I believe that's because it sucks butts? Butts are being sucked by that song. It needs more widdly widdly

[BumFodder]

At 5/27/13 12:23 AM, Oolaph wrote: Radiohead is nothing special. The most special thing about them is the ridiculous amount of praise they get, because they're not groundbreaking at all. They get a lot of attention for sounding different from the other stuff that most of their demographic listens to, when in reality they haven't really done anything "different" at all.

I dont even especially like radiohead but theyre obviously different and a lot more innovative than most bands. Id agree if you only took their first album into account, but most bands dont even move from 4/4, let alone experiment as much as radiohead did.

[Phobotech]

At 5/27/13 10:17 AM, ClockworkSpace wrote: I've spent most of my life trying to answer that same question. However the majority of the population are too fucking pretentious to admit that Radiohead are completely over-rated.

I agree. I'm annoyed by that kind of pretentiousness that assaults my indifference to Radiohead.

Just because we're "non-musicians" doesn't discredit our opinion of enjoying a kind of music or disapproving of it.
That's the same kind of argument for "well, you don't make any flash animations, so what do you know about what makes a flash animation good or bad? Why don't you try it, see how it turns out."

I don't like Radiohead's lead singer. That's just my personal taste, but I find it at least some kind of affirming when I see some people that agree with me in this thread.

[BumFodder]

At 5/27/13 01:53 PM, Phobotech wrote: Just because we're "non-musicians" doesn't discredit our opinion of enjoying a kind of music or disapproving of it.

Well, you need to have SOME knowledge of something to be able to properly critisize it. Like maybe being able to count time or knowing about bitrates or whatever. Radioheads riffs are always really good but not everyone likes riffs.

[Otto]

They create music that you like more the more you listen to it. Some songs I hated at first and now they're my favorite in the world.

These are the kind of bands that create cult followings of fans, because it's a love you can't explain but can only share with others who feel it too. And it's very hard to go off it - for long, that is. You always come back because it moves you on so many different levels.

But over time, lets keep in time.

[Earfetish]

If you don't know what's great about Radiohead, you need to take more drugs.

[Scarface]

I'm seeing a whole fuckton of "If you aren't a musician, YOU KNOW NOTHING ABOUT MUSIC AND CAN'T CRITICIZE RADIOHEAD" in this thread, so let me be perfectly clear;

I am a musician.
I've been playing drums for six years.
I've been in a band for two years.
I've recorded seven songs with them.
I've played all over my state.

Am I as successful as Radiohead? No, but I've earned the right to have an opinion on them.

[PsychoZoid]

I have never listen to any of Radiohead's songs, so I wouldn't know fully why people like them so much...

But just remember, people have their own taste in things. And the people who are overpraising them are probably the vocal minority, so you should just ignore them.

[dymck1]

I have to agree with OP, radiohead is good, but overrated.

[Phobotech]

At 5/27/13 02:04 PM, BumFodder wrote:

At 5/27/13 01:53 PM, Phobotech wrote: Just because we're "non-musicians" doesn't discredit our opinion of enjoying a kind of music or disapproving of it.

Well, you need to have SOME knowledge of something to be able to properly critisize it. Like maybe being able to count time or knowing about bitrates or whatever. Radioheads riffs are always really good but not everyone likes riffs.

I can't play an instrument to save my own life, and I still have an appreciation of riffs or complex and intelligent music writing. The main reason I don't like Radiohead is the singer. It has nothing to do with their musicianship; I'm annoyed by the drugged out moaning and mumbling.

[ManDeep]

No idea, i just like the musics.

[kanef]

the sole fact that they shit on muse who are a knockoff clone

also amnesiac is cool and ok computer has real good lyrics

[Viper]

At 5/27/13 03:43 PM, dymck1 wrote: I have to agree with OP, radiohead is good, but overrated.

Totally agree. Radiohead are very overrated.

[Otto]

At 5/27/13 05:17 PM, Viper50 wrote:

At 5/27/13 03:43 PM, dymck1 wrote: I have to agree with OP, radiohead is good, but overrated.

Totally agree. Radiohead are very overrated.

I don't really think this is true. I don't see them everywhere, in fact the only times I ever see them is on my own computer and on the occasional 'radiohead is overrated' thread here. I understand they're well known but they're not Metallica or Jay Z, if you want to talk 'overrated'.

[Basset-Hound]

They did a lot of experimental stuff which always gives people mixed feelings because they think its either to experimental or not experimental enough for their taste.

Never the less, No Surprises can make a grown man cry like an infant.