RADIOHEAD

You don't have to think they're God's gift to humanity
But if you don't think Radiohead is a great band, you're a contrarian faggot
The End

What if I genuinely find them boring and can't relate to Thom's whiny outlook? I like plenty of other popular bands so I can't be a contrarian.

The Beatles are better

>implying either are good

They're the best band in the world imo. But I can't have that opinion on this board without being called a contrarian normie faggot.

good, not great. I honestly think Kid A is a pretty weak album, gimmicky and "aesthetic" without saying much that they haven't said better on other albums.

I guess I'm a contrarian faggot, then

It's an ok band as many other bands that there are now.
Imo they are not great, if I have to think in something great other bands or musicians would come to my mind.

I honestly don't get why radiohead fans are so insecure of themselves

because they get constantly bullied on this board

...

Pretending like someone didn't say something mean about me doesn't mean it didn't happen. :(

>if you don't think Radiohead is a great band, you're a contrarian faggot

I think they have some really great stuff, the pinnacle being okc for me. I commend them for always approaching music intellectually, and trying to push themselves. That being said, I think they've sacrificed any real semblance of energy in their pursuit of smart, cerebral music, which actually limits them in the opposite way that bands that don't observe the qualities of music intellectually, which happens to a lot of smart artists. Sort of like Kubrick. I like them, but I wish they weren't so ubiquitous in the meandering quality of their compositions nowadays.

how can anyone deny they are the best band in the world? what bands are better?

>I think they've sacrificed any real semblance of energy in their pursuit of smart, cerebral music
I would disagree with this, their music isn't necessarily that complex, and still has a lot of energy to it (check out Bodysnatchers, Burn the Witch, Optimistic). Very straightforward (but amazing) rock songs

Rake

if any band is going to be remembered by academia long after we are all dead it would be Radiohead. I think they are just so Sup Forumscore that people forget a world before Radiohead. The first Radiohead album I listened to was OKC, and man did I fucking hate it. But then it grew on me, like a virus. I became infected, and transmitted this disease to my friends. Radiohead systemically changed the musical tastes of hundreds of thousands of people. And pretending to call them average on a Piccolo giraffe porn board is sad and makes anyone who does do it a huge jerk.

great opinion man, totally original thought, never been posted here before, thanks.

It's all relative I suppose, and no, I wouldn't say their music is the most complex, but it does always seem like they're always overthinking things in a way that results in a consistently meticulous and deliberate pacing. And that's normally a good thing, because most bands are limited by their lack of depth, or unwillingness to do something different. To me though, Radiohead is different in a way that's static and self similar. I still like them, but unless it's okc I don't really listen to them unless I want to feel somber, which is more narrow than I think they're actually capable of.

Yeah, but...

I simply don't get the love brah. I listened to Kid A and In Rainbows. It's like nu-age elevator music to me. Extreme banality with no payoff. It's cool if people enjoy the band, but I feel nothing for them good or bad.

>wewewew I'm a big fag
>electronic noises


there that's every radiohead album I saved you some time

Pretty accurate

>Kid A and In Rainbows
>Extreme Banality
>Banal: "so lacking in originality as to be obvious and boring"
>Either of these albums unoriginal
Either youre using words you dont understand or you didnt listen to these albums. I dont mind people having different opinions, even hating radiohead, but this is a particularly shit opinion m8
literally he tries harder than you lmao

> >Kid A and In Rainbows
> >Extreme Banality
> >Banal: "so lacking in originality as to be obvious and boring"
> >Either of these albums unoriginal
Exactly. There's nothing original or innovative about making your sound even more poppy than it was already. Unless you want to argue that Linkin Park are an experimental rock act.

>Colin Greenwood is accused of committing sexual abuse
How would you feel about Radiohead then?

None of their themes are considerably deep. Alienation, anti consumerism, paranoia,etc. weren't anything new(there's a reason these guys are huge Naomi Klein fans).
Their melding of rock and bloop wasn't fresh either. Bands like Livonia, Main, Stereolab had already had done more interesting and more cohesive work doing that.
I truly don't get what's the big deal? Why them?

Definition of banality. plural banalities. 1 :something that lacks originality, freshness, or novelty
Just my opinion bro. Sounds dull is all. Doesn't inspire me and it absolutely lacks any sort of freshness or novelty for me. I'm a Radiohead pleb though. What about them is so revolutionary and musically defining?
I mean if we want to talk about cool electronic music, I'll take Todd Rundgren any day over the blase output on the aforementioned RH material I listened to and the rest of the band's catalog if those albums are indicative of their discography.