Album Rating: 5.0

yeah, it causes cognitive-affective dissonance in me

Album Rating: 4.5

"On one hand I agree with the general sentiment, on the other hand the element of my surprise lies mostly with the timeline through which IN RAINBOWS usurped the throne"

yeah, it's perhaps a little strange, although speaking from personal experience as a long-time fan, maybe it just took some people this long to challenge their own previously held thoughts on their legacy / what RH means to them

For the longest time OKC was completely and utterly untouchable, it was a 'classic' because of how it changed the way I thought about music at the time. It took many years of bargaining and denial to realise things had shifted. Its importance can never be erased of course, but the enjoyment has waned to the point I wouldn't place it in the higher echelons of their discog anymore. That's just how it is. Over-exposure to OKC and MUCH greater exposure to everything 'not OKC' has altered the balance astronomically



Another explanation could be that people who're new to RH don't place any nostalgic importance (obviously) or 'legacy' on OKC and have the unburdened freedom to evaluate as they please. This combined with the fact In Rainbows has arguably aged more gracefully (inarguable personally), would show this one in a better light

tl;dr

Album Rating: 5.0

OK Computer is just better, more singular, has more legendary (if there are ten ‘legendary’ Radiohead songs then at least six are on Computer) tracks on it - it caused a much bigger reaction when it came out



In Rainbows will always be ‘the comeback special’ when people thought the band had lost their aura.



Rainbows came out in not a great year for music…Computer came out in 1997, I could list a hundred incredible, or genre defining, or commercially huge albums from that year but Computer ruled the roost



I can’t help but see it now that ‘Ok Computer’ prematurely brought the curtain down on the ‘90s…and Kid A ushered in the next century. Another reason those two are top dogs, just that cultural framing was incredible in retrospect

Album Rating: 4.5

you're only talking about their impact at the time though

what about now? What about people who're only just discovering RH? etc.

I don't think many people hearing In Rainbows now would be thinking 'hmm, not a great year this... might be my AOTY tho!'

I can see how the perspective could have shifted over time. Another factor is perhaps this was the OKC for a lot of people growing up... i.e. 'their classic', because it was their first RH experience and it was a big event. Less and less people will remember OKC's legacy in 'real-time' too. I'm 37 in a month and even I can only recall the ripple effect it had years after its release. I didn't have a clue of the impact at 9/10 years old.

“I can’t help but see it now that ‘Ok Computer’ prematurely brought the curtain down on the ‘90s”

Uh soz but Smash Mouth - Astro Lounge came out in ‘99

Album Rating: 5.0

'Uh soz but Smash Mouth - Astro Lounge came out in ‘99'



I retract that statement in the face of the overwhelming evidence to the contrary

Album Rating: 5.0

'what about now? What about people who're only just discovering RH? etc.'



Ok Computer will become musty/dusty like 'Dark Side of the Moon' but it's clearly already canonised



In Rainbows might get there is all you can say



People getting into Radiohead now...again, it's like me having an opinion about Pink Floyd (yes, horrific to think but the gaps in time between my youth and Pink Floyd is now similar to this generation and 'In Rainbows'!), I'm sure it's of great importance to myself. Championing In Rainbows will be like people saying 'Animals' is the best Floyd in all likelihood, the annals of music history hath already spoken, the current conversation means...not so much.



The biggest Radiohead album is 'Ok Computer' just as the biggest Floyd album is 'Dark Side of the Moon'

Album Rating: 5.0

But would you agree that Tricky’s “Pre-Millenium Tension” has already set the tone for the end-of-century zeitgeist by 1997?

Album Rating: 5.0

PMT was part of the whole vibe true, with Portishead self titled, the soon to be released 'Mezzanine', etc - it's amazing such albums all came out within about 12 months, great times

Album Rating: 5.0

Why do you give a shit about which album had a bigger impact in the "annals of music history" when deciding which album is better? That's a separate discussion. I think this album is better because I like the music more. That's it.

Album Rating: 5.0

I couldn't use that distinction in deciding myself because no such discussion had even begun when 'Ok Computer' first came out.



My main point is the main discussion about Pink Floyd happened before I was born and it was what it was, no one cares what I think of Pink Floyd after that conversation in the grand scheme of things. The discussion here was effectively 'the kids prefer In Rainbows - will that mean anything in the grand scheme?'. I'm saying 'no'.



I don't mean to dump on your opinion but we're way past the main conversation about this band. It's like people on this site saying 'hmm, 'Animals' was quite good you know'...sure, but, yup.



Anyway as a complete album 'Ok Computer' is quite a bit better imo - though they're both 5s

Album Rating: 5.0

I'm trying to think of an example where an established canonised best album by a band got usurped in some sort of groundswell of opinion to something else but if they exist they are few and far between and I just don't think 'In Rainbows' will be one to do it...in a way the vote might get split by 'Kid A' anyway, there's sort of a case there too

Album Rating: 4.5

Kid A had such a seismic impact on shaping my own tastes that it ended up usurping OKC as 'the one' for me, even though both were massively important. Revisiting it yields greater results to this day, so you could say it actually achieved a longer lifespan, even though it was a tougher nut to crack at first

although yeah, I imagine the historical impact of In Rainbows could be split somewhat by people who gravitate towards the style of Kid A instead (+ Amnesiac potentially... although I'd imagine this would be a much smaller group, I just see it as a companion piece for obvious reasons).

P.S. It's impossible to completely separate nostalgia from 'objective enjoyment', part of the same equation essentially. So saying you like the one that 'sounds better' doesn't necessarily remove all historical comparisons, at least not subconsciously

Album Rating: 4.5

as in if I listened to Kid A for the first time today would it be as incredible? Probably not. Can I tell for sure? Nope.

Album Rating: 5.0

"I'm trying to think of an example where an established canonised best album by a band got usurped in some sort of groundswell of opinion"



What do you even mean by "canonised best album" other than the opinion of a select few boomers who still have say in the album placements on a Rolling Stones list. Soon those boomers will die and so will their "canonised opinions"

Album Rating: 4.0

I'm trying to think of an example where an established canonised best album by a band got usurped in some sort of groundswell of opinion to something else



Ten years (or so?) ago I remember a big ado when some major publication (I forget which, maybe Rolling Stone?) put either Revolver or Sgt. Pepper above the other (again, I forget which was the long-standing incumbent). You can clearly see my memory is foggy regarding the details but I can somehow still recall people reacting wildly to the switcheroo in what was considered the Beatles' best.



Although regardless of the exact circumstances, I agree that example is not as well-defined as is in Radiohead's case (i.e., the relative, perceived 'greatness' of Revolver and Sgt. Pepper were never as far apart as they once were between OKC and In Rainbows).

Album Rating: 5.0

'What do you even mean by "canonised best album" other than the opinion of a select few boomers who still have say in the album placements on a Rolling Stones list. Soon those boomers will die and so will their "canonised opinions"'



there's no history of that playing out



more kids are still buying into the 'canonised' established majority opinion ahead of an alternative and the trend will prob now increase as In Rainbows itself faces receding into the mists of time



anyone over 30 now is effectively a boomer, that age groups 'soon to be boomer opinion' of In Rainbows will need to be stronger than the established, weather beaten, long standing boomer opinion of 'Ok Computer' you see. Time flies.

Album Rating: 5.0

"more kids are still buying into the 'canonised' established majority opinion ahead of an alternative"



I mean you say that but is that true? What are you basing this on?

Album Rating: 4.5

I think OKC and Kid A have always felt more like complete albums in which most of the songs serve an overall vision. In Rainbows is undeniably a good record but I'm not sure I get that interconnectedness from it.

Album Rating: 5.0

OKC is king but this is a lot better than Kid A in my opinion, easily their second best.