Back in the 2000s...

>back in the 2000s, Scaruffi calls Radiohead "the most overhyped and possibly overrated band of the 90s" and "masters of the faux-avant-garde"
>doesn't give any of their albums higher than 7/10

>at the same time, Scaruffi praises the shit out of Steve Reich
>gives him multiple 8/10s and even one 9/10

>later in the 2010s
>Steve Reich hears Radiohead for the first time
>is absolutely fascinated by them, says he "couldn't believe their music was made by rock artists" and says that "their melodic technique is almost on par with the best of classical music"
>loves their music so much he meets with them and asks if he can remix their music, to which of course they agree because Reich is a legend
>creates Radio Rewrites based on the songs Everything In Its Right Place and Jigsaw Falling Into Place (which came from albums that Scaruffi rated 6.5/10 and 5/10, respectively)

>Scaruffi still hasn't rated Radio Rewrite

guys...was Scaruffi wrong? do you think he feels embarrassed?

Other urls found in this thread:

scaruffi.com/vol1/beatles.html
youtube.com/watch?v=ZAQ1SbnXsCQ
twitter.com/AnonBabble

When did Scaruffi become a meme here?

scaruffi is an entity which helds a superior intellect than us mere peasants. speaking his name in a negative manner is a sin and you should be ashamed. all heil

Are you joking

No this is not bait kiddo.

The guy keeps a list of all his friends in his website

anybody with taste knows radiohead is shit
steve is delusional

when has scaruffi rated an album about covers?

it's not exactly something he would rate anyway

nah Steve is just like anyone steeped in the classical tradition
He thinks complexity = quality

Scaruffi is full of bullshit. He also says that contemporary musicians never spoke highly of the Beatles, I don't even have to tell you how false this is. You can't deny he has good taste in regards to what he likes though.

Like holy shit even Lou Reed praised the Beatles and he was the biggest contrarian of the 60s

around the same time beatles copypasta got spammed like no other here

this is b8 right? Reich is literally one of the pioneers of *minimalism*, a genre that is based on repetition and simplicity.

>even Lou Reed praised the Beatles
ironically

I know that, that's why it's surprising
But by the way he praises them, you can tell he's impressed by the complexity of Radiohead's music

I guess Reich just hasn't listened to enough music

Daily reminder that complexity and technicality != good music
The most technical prog rock is more uninteresting to listen to than a 3 chord rock song about love

How is that relevant in any way to this thread

>"the most overhyped and possibly overrated band of the 90s" and "masters of the faux-avant-garde"
extremely accurate jfc

Because Steve Reich thinks they're great just because they're needlessly complex

there's a difference between soulless prog wank and technicality that actually reflects compositional skill. complexity for the sake of complexity is generally bad but basic, simple music is generally bad too. most music that requires genuine talent to compose and perform is complex in some way.

Scaruffi is right, radiohead is shit, you would know if you were not a pleb

so you're saying a pretentious critic who can't play any instruments and has no knowledge of music theory knows better than a world-renowned composer who has composed dozens of masterpieces and influenced hundreds of other artists?

>influenced hundreds of other artists?
Including Radiohead

That bait is a bit low quality familia

>Just because he knows more he will always always always be right
Redditohead fags surely are delusional

and then Radiohead in turn influenced him.

how is it b8?

find me the quote that says Reich was impressed by the complexity. he said himself he was impressed by their melodies and their creative use of electronic effects.

This. There's plenty of cases in art and science where accomplished geniuses endorse pure mediocrity later in life. That's not proof that that is the case here but it shouldn't come as a huge surprise. Radiohead is gay.

scaruffi.com/vol1/beatles.html
Here you go.
Does this ring a bell?

THE

FACT

BJORK

when Sup Forums was born

How new?

This.

It's why people praised Yes's Close to the Edge album and yet Topographic Oceans was panned even though Topographic Oceans was better from a technical perspective.

>Scaruffidrones unironically holding Scaruffi's opinion higher than Steve Reich
lmao please stop

Steve Reich apparently doesn't listen to music

around 2011

>All rock-critical catchphrases disintegrate in the vicinity of Radiohead, which has a new album called "OK Computer" and last month ended an American tour with a majestic show at the Hammerstein Ballroom, in New York. This is the one modern British band that can equal the force of Oasis's personality, if not trounce it. While Radiohead also has a Beatles connection, its limited to a handfull of late-period experiments ("Happiness Is a Warm Gun," "Sexy Sadie," "Octopus's Garden"). Radiohead also looks to progressive-minded bands of the late sixties and earlv seventies-Love, Pink Floyd, and Led Zeppelin in its artier, modal moods but, again, the influences come only in flashes. Formed a decade ago at Abington School in Oxford, Radiohead seems too bookish for the mainstream, but it mesmerizes large crowds nonetheless. The Trojan horse with which it took America was the 1993 song "Creep," whose refrain -- "I'm a creep, I'm a weirdo"- pIeased fans of Kurt Cobain. The grunge pose was deceptive: the band's second album, "The Bends," reinvented rock on several levels.

Thom Yorke, Radiohead's mildly freakish lead singer, sings better than most in rock. He expands his tone operatically and pushes it into a pure, gleaming falsetto. His melodies have an Old World, prewar contour, gliding step by step and then jumping wide intervals. At first, his lyrics come across as glum, but his air of misery is often a cover for insolence and wit. In 'My Iron Lung,' from "The Bends," a hugely insinuating torchsong tune wraps itself around these words

The fact that so many people still think Steve Reich knows his shit

Three other guitarists, meanwhile, are plotting byzantine musical designs, guitar and keyboards; his brother, Colin, plays bass; Ed O'Brien fills in other treble patterns. Jonny Greenwood, who once played viola in his school orchestra, admires Olivier Messiaen, among other twentieth-century composers; the breadth of his taste shows in the voluptuousness of the band's harmony. The backbone of thesong "Just," for example, is the octatonic scale (whole step, half step, whole step, half step, and so forth), which generated "The Rite of Spring." The band also throws in whole-tone scales, strings in quarter-tones, and other non-cliches. But this refinement is stowed away under the surface of the music: Radiohead knows the risk of not rocking. Russian chords can dissolve in a moment into a Punkish squall of guitar. Phil Selways vaguely jazzy drumming marks time in the cool, unfamiliar spaces.

"OK Computer" has fewer stately airs than "The Bends," but it adds layer upon layer of weird beauty. The sound is somehow tall: ideas unwind in every
register. "Paranoid Android" is a symphony in six minutes, moving from a shuffling introduction to a hardcore scherzo, then from a slow chorale on the words 'From a great height' to a hammering coda. Throughout the album, contrasts of mood and style are extreme: a couple of the songs could almost have been sung by Sinatra (or so it's fun to imagine), while a couple of others, rescored for bass clarinets, might win appreciative shrugs from new music cognoscenti at the Knitting Factory. This band has pulled off one of the great art-pop balancing acts in the history of rock.

>The best English bands rummage through the island's musical attic, retrieving old genres and adapting them to rock. The Beatles, of course, were pastmasters of this. Those who wail about Oasis's misappropriations have forgotten how much of a patchwork Beatles songs really are. Radiohead repeats the means but not the end of the Beatles' experiments; its fusion is original. I do not know how to describe what is an essentially indescribable sound, but I had one last idea while watching the very English spectacle of Princess Diana's funeral: the varieties of lament heard during the service an Elgar elegy, an Elton John ballad, an other-worldly contemporary dirge by John Tavener-could have been telescoped into a fairly typical Radiohead song.

-Alex Ross, classical music critic

Yeah of course because a bunch of fucking Brits are showing up to "improve" rock and make it "artier" like they have ever since Sgt Pepper's and Pink Floyd
Art rock trash

>The best English bands rummage through the island's musical attic, retrieving old genres and adapting them to rock. The Beatles, of course, were pastmasters of this. Those who wail about Oasis's misappropriations have forgotten how much of a patchwork Beatles songs really are. Radiohead repeats the means but not the end of the Beatles' experiments; its fusion is original. I do not know how to describe what is an essentially indescribable sound, but I had one last idea while watching the very English spectacle of Princess Diana's funeral: the varieties of lament heard during the service an Elgar elegy, an Elton John ballad, an other-worldly contemporary dirge by John Tavener-could have been telescoped into a fairly typical Radiohead song.
He isn't making it sound more appealing

>anybody with taste knows radiohead is shit

how's life going with other people thinking for you? pretty great, right?

>anybody with taste knows radiohead is shit
Anybody who thinks Radiohead is shit are clueless idiots who can't appreciate good production and textures.

Sure, they might be overrated, but they aren't bad.

>this thread
>2016
>people saying that radiohead is actually good

Sup Forums was shit, but it gets shittier day by day.
If you think radiohead are good, please leave.

holy shit Scaruffi apologists will go to such extremes to defend his uneducated opinions.

Radiohead has always been Sup Forumscore

Why are Radiohead bad?

Please note that "whiny vocals" and "faux avant-garde" aren't a valid criticism

John Cale did unironically.

yes and its time for Sup Forumscore to grow up and realize radiohead is shit. change is good friendo

>Still can't explain why they're shit

Lou Reed was the genius behind TVU, not John Cale

scaruffi already explained buddy

And you're going to take the opinion of Scaruffi over a classical music composer?

Fucking kill yourself.

>all this hostility
I enjoy steve's music but his opinions outside of what he makes is no concern of mine.
Scaruffi opinions have always been spot on.

Radiohead are at the very least decent.

>Radiohead has always been Sup Forumscore
And Sup Forumscare is a fucking meme if you really think Sup Forumscore is the epitome of music you really need to reconsider your stay in this board

>Having to explain to newfags the same thing that has already been explained over and over and over, in a thread about a critic that explains it in his page
Lad if people really need to tell you why radiohead are bad then you must be borderline, mainstream pop/rock music, there isnt a single extract from any of their albums that hasnt been done before, they started publicising themselves as the new nirvana of angsty rock, just watch lives from their first years and they later foun out that by using a piano and a slightly distorted guitar then they could appeal 'muh experimental rock' fanbase and people ate it up.

None of this is actual criticism.

Because i fucking told you i was going to write criticism again whem there's enough examples out there and when it has been repeated over and over for years in this board. Do you have reading comprehension problems?

How does any of this prove that Radiohead are "bad"?

Also Radiohead never claimed to be experimental or innovative, they just borrowed influence from whatever music they were really into(Can, Aphex Twin) and took it from there.

pop music is rarely the first to do things, just the first to package it and bring it to a wider audience

>whem there's enough examples out there
I've read Scaruffi's essay on Radiohead, it was terrible and didn't change my opinion that Radiohead are a very good band.
>Each collection is well-crafted and intriguing, for the sake of being well-crafted and intriguing.
What the fuck kind of criticism is this?
It sounds like he's praising them more than anything else.

>if you really think Sup Forumscore is the epitome of music

no one said that

but for the record Scarufficore isn't the pinnacle of music either

also name another album that sounds like Kid A, seriously. I want to hear it.

dean blunt - black metal
youtube.com/watch?v=ZAQ1SbnXsCQ

wtf??? how? don't get me wrong I love Dean Blunt but that album is nothing like Kid A. it's not even rock.

Not him but I can recommend you Muse and Coldplay (when at their heaviest), really great bands if a little dead lately. Don't give him attention he is just a memer who doesnt know true music

how is 100 and forever not rock?

tbqh I'm just meh on Radiohead
They're the Pink Floyd of our generation. Boring, mediocre, but really well regarded because it was most people's first exposure to "weird" music

but Scaruffi praises Pink Floyd. he gave The Piper At The Gates O Dawn and Syd Barret's first solo album 8.5/10 which means they are both in his top 100.

so if Radiohead and Pink Floyd are so similar, why does Scaruffi praise one but shit on the other?

Syd Barrett-era was GOAT

By Pink Floyd I'm talking about their commercial peak/pop phase. DSOTM, Animals, Wish You Were Here, The Wall.

don't know about the others but DSOTM definitely isn't pop

DSOTM is the second best selling album of all time.
Next

that doesn't mean it's pop you fucking retard

what the fuck do sales have to do with anything?

you realize Swans made a 2-hour long noise-rock album that reached the top 40, right? are you gonna tell me that's pop just because it sold a lot?

How is DSOTM not pop?
Pop != bad

yes and yes

All rock is pop music.

PURE
FUCKING
VERBORRHEA

He said absolutely nothing concrete

>Pop != bad

I didn't say that. There's plenty of good pop, just like there's plenty of shit avant-garde.

you're an idiot.

popular music is not always pop, even though pop is always popular music.

Let me just take down the OP logic, and we can dismiss the rest of the thread as juvenile behaviour on both sides.

Consider:
>overrated doesn't mean bad
>7/10 is a good rating
>Reich is a different genre
>Scaruffi also gives the Beatles 7/10 scores, yet at the same time says McCartney would be a GOAT music critic (so at the same time a 9/10 could be a worse critic)
>"their melodic technique is almost on par with the best of classical music" I'd leave that opinion to someone who actually champions the common practise era unlike Reich, although it could be true
>6.5/10 isn't a bad score
>jigsaw is a song Scaruffi specifically singles out as good from that album
>"Scaruffi still hasn't rated Radio Rewrite" AMONG OTHERS YOU SINGLE MINDED IDIOT

I don't even like Scaruffi and this was all plain to see. CHRISTGAU GOAT.

>mental gymnastics
dsotm is pop nothing wrong with that

kek
If Pink Floyd isn't pop to you what do you consider pop
>inb4 Carly Rae Jepsen, the Beach Boys, Grimes

Funnily enough, neither did Scaruffi's hilariously shallow and unfair "essay"

I do not defend Scarufffi, even though I think he is right sometimes.

>If Pink Floyd isn't pop to you what do you consider pop

Drake, Justin Timberlake, Sia, Ariana Grande, Adele, Desiigner, Selena Gomez, David Guetta, etc.

"Artists" who do absolutely nothing new/interesting/experimental etc. Just basic shit for people to party to. Background music, essentially.

Are you really gonna tell me Pink Floyd is on that same level?

yep

>"Artists" who do absolutely nothing new/interesting/experimental etc.

>pop
>can't be experimental
>can't be new or interesting
Ok lad you played yourself.

>attempting to use reasoning on people that think Scaruffi isn't an idiot

>just like anyone steeped in the classical tradition
>He thinks complexity = quality
E D U C A T E Y O U R S E L F

Holy kek
You act like pop was invented in 2000 or something
>Just basic shit for people to party to. Background music, essentially.
That's called dance-pop you retard
Not all pop is dance-pop

Music is either classical, traditional, or pop
That's it
And don't pretend like 70s Floyd is "new/interesting/experimental". DSOTM is an exercise in studio sheen and pop perfection

Lmao literally the opposite.

>Music is either classical, traditional, or pop

*art music/classical, traditional, or popular music

popular music includes but is not limited to pop

DSOTM is popular music but it is not pop

Nigga you obviously don't know what you're talking about, just stahp

its pop

Radiohead? More like Radioshit

Captain Beefheart? More like Craptin Pee Fart

Yeah, what's with that?

Dont you have a page with a list of all your friends in it and pics of them?
You know... facebook

>back in the 2000s, Scaruffi calls Radiohead "the most overhyped and possibly overrated band of the 90s" and "masters of the faux-avant-garde"
>doesn't give any of their albums higher than 7/10

Why is Scaruffi so based?

>the beatles are overrated
>radiohead are overrated
>bjork is overrated
I genuinely agree with most of scaruffi's opinions. Newfags think he is a meme but he is known and liked here for a reason, he is always quick to call out overrated musicians.