Radiohead A Moon Shaped Pool
» Back to review

Comments:Add a Comment 
tectactoe
July 18th 2016


9228 Comments


"actually what he just said makes sense."

glad I'm not crazy.

I can agree that Glass Eyes is probably the most forgettable thing on here. I prefer it to Desert Island Disk, but DID is more.. memorable. If that makes sense. When AMSP is played front-to-back, Glass Eyes blends in almost too well. It's a good song, just doesn't stand out.

After another few solid weeks of listening to this banger, top 5 as of this moment are now: 1. Ful Stop, 2. Present Tense, 3. Decks Dark, 4. The Numbers, 5. Identikit

I still love Daydreaming, Tinker Tailor, & Burn the Witch, but they are currently middle of the pack for me. So many good songs on this record, really. I thought after a couple months I'd get sick of this, but if anything, I love it even more. This is a fucking awesome Radiohead record.

TrantaLocked
July 19th 2016


2541 Comments

Album Rating: 5.0

If Present Tense didn't have the vocal echoing effects it would be a way different song and probably bore me. Was wondering if anyone had similar thoughts.

tectactoe
July 19th 2016


9228 Comments


^I actually love the guitar in Present Tense.

LotusFlower
July 20th 2016


12000 Comments

Album Rating: 3.5 | Sound Off

http://verydeadly.bandcamp.com/track/burn-the-witch



If you guys havent, check out this amazing cover of Burn the Witch. Massive overhaul of the instrumentals and the vocals are almost dead on to Thom's. Easily the superior version of the track.

ArsMoriendi
July 20th 2016


42366 Comments

Album Rating: 3.5 | Sound Off

Way better than the album version damn

Lord(e)Po)))ts
July 21st 2016


70256 Comments


if the whole album was of the same quality as decks dark and identikit and wasnt in alphabetical order this could be as good as the rest of their post OKC discog but alas

FacelessMan
July 21st 2016


1101 Comments

Album Rating: 5.0

i almost want to replace it with the cover, wayyy better

altertide0
July 21st 2016


3026 Comments


"wasnt in alphabetical order"

the tracklist was probably decided on first and the titles were made to fit afterwards, or more precisely, they found out by accident (files are usually sorted by name) that alphabetical tracklist worked really well and only needed a few changes, so they made these changes (= changed a few titles).

it's really hard to believe "true love waits" is a closer just by accident, or that titles like "tinker tailor...", "desert island disk" or "decks dark" were the first choices.

Conmaniac
July 21st 2016


27771 Comments

Album Rating: 3.5

that cover is pretty impressive wow. almost went to college where those guys are from too (Cal Poly in SLO)

theBoneyKing
July 21st 2016


24890 Comments

Album Rating: 4.5

Thank you altertide0 finally someone who agrees with me about the tracklisting.

LotusFlower
July 21st 2016


12000 Comments

Album Rating: 3.5 | Sound Off

honestly the tracklisting argument you guys provide only makes this album look worse in my eyes, because it makes me feel like its even less organized sonically which is hella odd for Radiohead.

altertide0
July 21st 2016


3026 Comments


what? since when does organizing your tracklist (which is what we're claiming radiohead did) means less organized album?

Conmaniac
July 21st 2016


27771 Comments

Album Rating: 3.5

because he's saying if they truly MEANT it to be in this order then it's even worse because the flow is not the greatest. if they decided to fuck with us and just put it in alpha order it would almost be better cuz then at least we know they didn't try to order the album with the flow in mind.

altertide0
July 21st 2016


3026 Comments


oh in that sense, i didn't think about that because to me the album flows really well

Tunaboy45
July 21st 2016


18967 Comments

Album Rating: 5.0

who cares the album is the dog's bollocks

KingdomOfTyrant
July 21st 2016


805 Comments

Album Rating: 4.5

few years later this will be regarded as a classic

theBoneyKing
July 21st 2016


24890 Comments

Album Rating: 4.5

Once again I agree with altertide, I mean this doesn't have an amazing flow by any means but it don't think there's anything disruptive in the flow aside from the transition from Burn the Witch to Daydreaming, but even that is sort of supposed to be jarring I believe.

Lord(e)Po)))ts
July 22nd 2016


70256 Comments


the tracklist was probably decided on first and the titles were made to fit afterwards, or more precisely,


Thank you altertide0 finally someone who agrees with me about the tracklisting.


you two idiots do realize like 90% of these songs are between a couple to a dozen years old right? pretty much empirically debunks the shit out of that particular theory.


they found out by accident (files are usually sorted by name) that alphabetical tracklist worked really well and only needed a few changes, so they made these changes (= changed a few titles)."


id give you points for this one if the alphabetical tracklist did indeed work really well, but it doesn't, at all, in any way whatsoever, and they didnt change the titles of most of the old songs which is most of the album so that barely makes any sense.

Lord(e)Po)))ts
July 22nd 2016


70256 Comments


as far as i know numbers is the only song they changed the title of aside from ful stop which was previously 'full' stop

Sinternet
Emeritus
July 22nd 2016


26909 Comments

Album Rating: 4.0

why did they drop the extra l?



You have to be logged in to post a comment. Login | Create a Profile





STAFF & CONTRIBUTORS // CONTACT US

Bands: A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z


Site Copyright 2005-2023 Sputnikmusic.com
All Album Reviews Displayed With Permission of Authors | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy