First things first, Radiohead are noted for having produced some of the greatest CD's of our time, from OK Computer to Kid A. The dichotomy of these two at the time cannot be underplayed, OK Computer had already established itself as a kind of cult classic upon the release of Kid A, which shook the music community up by storm upon it's release, it's sparse, dissonant electronics (I remember reading a review in Rolling Stone around the time where he discussed the group not even knowing what ADSR was before they started recording), ambient underpinnings and nod to the avant-garde (album reminded me of a newer, more indie sounding Krautrock) were something fresh in the mainstream, the band had practically taken career suicide by blending all these influences from underground forms of music into their latest release. Kid A was a milestone, an absolute triumph. This brings us to The King of Limbs.
Now, for all the people that claim this album is a grower don't insult me by saying it is not a valid opinion to immediately dislike a Radiohead album. I can't hold them on a pedestal. The King of Limbs is unfortunately not good. Taking dubstep and electronic influences, whilst hearkening back to the earlier albums Yorke and co. have produced shows a tired, lack of energy within the group which cannot be understated. Success is something I believe they have consciously tried to avoid due to this notion of compromising of artistic integrity (How To Disappear Completely), but the weirder and more abstract the band gets ironically the critics lapped it up. The band sound very tired, and ready to give up. Thom Yorke isn't a very good songwriter anymore, and I don't like the direction they have taken with The King of Limbs. It is a poor album by a rich band, not only rich in the artistic integrity they are capable of upholding but literally loaded with cash. They've made a fortune pandering to their fans, and it seems they've settled into a predictable sound they can reproduce over and over to make money from.
In any case, The King of Limbs is poor. So poor, in fact, I would consider it the worst album i've ever heard (if it wasn't for Arnold Schwarzenegger's Total Body Workout). I only listen to good music, so there is probably stuff that is more rubbish then this but I won't waste my time with stuff like this. It's dull. It makes me fall asleep, just horrible.
In any case, The King of Limbs is poor. So poor, in fact, I would consider it the worst album i've ever heard. I only listen to good music, so there is probably stuff that is more rubbish then this but I won't waste my time with stuff like this. It's dull. It makes me fall asleep, just horrible.
My point is fucking valid. Music is not always made to fucking entertain it can made to elicit
powerful emotions and thoughts. Music is greater than some spastic bullshit designed to keep you from
thinking, it can make you grow as a person, it can change the world. I don't even know if I like this
album, but I know that if I don't it's not because it's boring. That is a completely empty reason to
say music is bad. It is a good reason to say you don't like it, but it does not nullify the purpose or
emotion behind a song, especially given that this music has already reached and positively affected an
I think it is too early to write a negative review of a Radiohead album. At least for me. Most of their past 4 albums have been "growers" for me. In fact In Rainbows I felt was their worst record to date (save Pablo Honey) when it first came out. After a few months it was up to tied for 3rd for me.
This album is certainly not as good as In Rainbows and won't crack my top 4 but it is still a good album. In reality it is probably about a 3.5/5 for me once I have worn it out. It has too many good songs to be a 2 imo. Little By Little plus the last 4 songs are all very, very solid tracks. Not all up to par with the top tier Radiohead songs but still really good. Those songs alone would make it hard for me to give it anything less than a 3 and I like the overall flow of the album as a whole which makes me lean towards the 3.5 range.
This album does lack the more "upbeat" songs that broke In Rainbows up and it lacks a little of the energy that songs like "bodysnatcher" have even on their down-tempo albums. But in no way does this album make Radiohead sound "tired" to me. If IR had been bad (I think it was absolutely great) then I could understand people starting to say they sound tired on this album with 2 down-tempo, good-but-not-great albums in a row. Down-tempo albums like this are always hard for a lot of people to get into. Lot's of people bashed Kid A when it first came out for this very reason and look at people's opinion of it now. No this isn't as good as Kid A but it's just something to keep in mind.
To me, this album is a good mood album. It doesn't push into new frontiers as much as Radiohead has in the past but it is certainly an album I will go back to several times this year.
And as far as saying "They've made a fortune pandering to their fans, and it seems they've settled into a predictable sound they can reproduce over and over to make money from."
I would have to say this is the first album that they have put out that was fairly predictable to me in ~16 years of listening to them.
Avirov, I didn't mean that I expected it to sound like this before I heard anything. I just meant as I went through the album it seemed obvious to me after the first 2-3 tracks that this was going to be a fairly straight-forward mood album that was going to carry a similar mood and tempo throughout. At only 8 tracks, given the smart way they structure their albums, after track 3 if we hadn't heard anything a bit more uptempo and overdriven then I assumed we weren't going to (and was right).
I still love the album though and have been listening to it a ton since Friday (listening now at work).