thomas york's new cd(radiohead)

glitchrock-buddha · Post by **glitchrock-buddha** » Thu Jul 27, 2006 12:24 am

yea I started a thread about this when it first came out, and basically had the same feelings as you guys. After many listens, I think exactly the same as what my first impression was: It's good, but it's the same. It's those same songs on a radiohead album which were mainly thom york by himself, like "pack like sardines..." on amnesiac etc.

I think the rest of the band adds more interest, but I still like the album. Sometimes an artist just has to get their own sounds out. And I for one did want to hear more of his minimal electronic sounds.

I don't think it has the lasting power of a radiohead album though. But is it really fair to compare one guys music to that of five guys who gel and become more than the sum of their parts? not really.

I'm glad I got this album, but here's to radiohead keepin' on!

grb

Johnisfaster · Post by **Johnisfaster** » Thu Jul 27, 2006 12:32 am

johnny greenwoods solo album "body song" (also a soundtrack to a movie) although it was EXTREMELY unusual I do think it showed alot more magic that thom yorkes solo album. body song as an album was just explosive in ideas even as minimal and improvisational as it was it was still very vibrant. although weird yes and hard to listen to but I think most people can see the innovation in it was far beyond thom yorkes album. so my point is, just cause the guy is alone shouldn't serve as an excuse for it not being as good as it could be

evernaut · Post by **evernaut** » Thu Jul 27, 2006 4:25 am

Some good ideas, some amazing singing & lyrics...but didn't anyone else think the drum sounds ( in particular) are just a tad thin and plinky?
I expected much, much more from the 'sonic landscape"...it sounds like he's just dialled up Preset number whatever and left it at that.

Is the songwriter meets technology that cutting edge or avant garde these days? I do stuff like that all the time & think they're fine as home demos cos it's all I have available...but I never think "wow, a ground-breaking meeting of genres".

nolus · Post by **nolus** » Thu Jul 27, 2006 8:06 am

I've never liked any radiohead on first hearing. but then about 6 months to a year later i'll here it at a friends house and it's like "wow that's beutiful, what is it? really? must give it a serious listen", etc.

I'll give it time to work before passing judgment.

ahlstrominfo · Post by **ahlstrominfo** » Thu Jul 27, 2006 11:50 am

I think the album is absolulty brilliant. ofcourse the sun has it's spots.
It's like poetry with electronic-experimental-minimalistic-music under.

The title track got a nice chorus "the more you try to erase me the more.....".
"Black Swan" got a nice Gorillaz vibe to it.

Needless to say, I like it alot. But hey it's no totp.

Johnisfaster · Post by **Johnisfaster** » Thu Jul 27, 2006 12:02 pm

see I keep hearing people use the word poetry too. to me it just sounds like myspace goth blog crap. there are loads of cheesey lines to me. "buy a ticket and get on the train" are you kidding me?

Johnisfaster · Post by **Johnisfaster** » Thu Jul 27, 2006 12:13 pm

honostly I think the problem with albums like this is that people hear it and think "it has all the eliments of a great work of art. great melodies and sound. and things I haven't heard. it must be amazing..." when in reality great art isn't a sum of it's eliments or "parts" it's great because it's great. a great work of art should be seen or heard and FELT DEEPLY. I don't think there is anything on this album that really touches any of it's fans all that deeply. maybe some of them say "oh wow that kinda moved me a little " but I'm talking deeply! if you're going to say something is amazing then you sure as hell better have tears in your eyes when you say it.

ekko · Post by **ekko** » Thu Jul 27, 2006 12:50 pm

I'd like to hear a Thom Yorke all-instrumental album.

I can't stand his voice. It think his music is great, though.

fatrabbit · Post by **fatrabbit** » Thu Jul 27, 2006 12:59 pm

Johnisfaster wrote:honostly I think the problem with albums like this is that people hear it and think "it has all the eliments of a great work of art. great melodies and sound. and things I haven't heard. it must be amazing..." when in reality great art isn't a sum of it's eliments or "parts" it's great because it's great. a great work of art should be seen or heard and FELT DEEPLY. I don't think there is anything on this album that really touches any of it's fans all that deeply. maybe some of them say "oh wow that kinda moved me a little " but I'm talking deeply! if you're going to say something is amazing then you sure as hell better have tears in your eyes when you say it.

Well said I reckon.

Good ideas, but not as amazing as people would have you believe. I suspect this is because, most people don't hear things like this very often.

I also reckon it's a lot harder to write happy/upbeat music (at least in my experience)... I'd like to hear Yorke's stab at it.

dj superflat · Post by **dj superflat** » Thu Jul 27, 2006 4:08 pm

i second whoever said the production is disappointing, particularly the drum sounds. i expected something truly innovative, like bjorks stuttering beats and what nots. instead, sounds to me like the songs were very quickly thrown together with some basic beats, etc. (as i said above, still like the album more than most i've heard lately.)

mosca · Post by **mosca** » Thu Jul 27, 2006 4:32 pm

it's a good album

would have been better if he'd actually gotten autechre to write and produce it instead of his cack handed attempts at ripping them off!

haha

mo

ahlstrominfo · Post by **ahlstrominfo** » Thu Jul 27, 2006 5:52 pm

Johnisfaster wrote:if you're going to say something is amazing then you sure as hell better have tears in your eyes when you say it.

So then it is true. The album is amazing. I have tears in my eyes.

Anyhow. I remember this one time at a festival and Nick Cave was playing. He was high as fuck and blured out some of the words to the songs. The concert was a big let down. After the concert I saw a friend of mine and she had tears in her eyes saying that it was the best concert she've ever seen.

Pretty much in the eye of the beholder.

Another amazing album is Portishead's "Dummy". It doesnt move me to tears but its still amazing.

john gordon · Post by **john gordon** » Thu Jul 27, 2006 6:43 pm

keep listening....i just had a listen to it again and now im really gettin into it more and more.it grows on you like an ugly girlfriend.there is more than meets they eye.

Johnisfaster · Post by **Johnisfaster** » Thu Jul 27, 2006 8:37 pm

mosca wrote:it's a good album

would have been better if he'd actually gotten autechre to write and produce it instead of his cack handed attempts at ripping them off!

haha

mo

see I remember reading when kid a came out that they were intentionally being influenced by autechre and such but I could never ever hear the influence. thats like me picking up a drum machine and saying my influences are prodigy and then I make a hip hop album. and especially on the erasure I hear it even less. at least kid a had some experimental well produced sounds, this solo album just hads the run of the mill boom click stuff on it.

ultrasource · Post by **ultrasource** » Thu Jul 27, 2006 9:49 pm

He said in one interview or another that he wanted to build songs with more electronic trickery but that nigel held him back trying to keep the songs more intimate - thus producing the vocals more up up-front and with more clarity than, say, HTTT.
I like Autechre and they make me want to make some tunes but my ideas don't sound like them - does that mean they don't influence me?
I also don't think that anything on the eraser really sounds like autechre so I don't understand the rip-off comparison. Any examples to clarify?