Nov
10th
2007

More rainbows.

I’m on a major Radiohead kick this weekend. I’m traveling out in Arizona playing shows and I can’t seem to turn off my Radiohead playlist. I’d forgotten how great they are.

I’ve found that In Rainbows has given me fresh appreciation for Amnesiac which I’d previously not really absorbed. Wow. It’s unreal.

I think they are the most important band of my generation making music today. Especially when Thom pushes aside his paranoia and is just happy to be part of Radiohead. The whole new record feels that way to me — like they are just happy to be themselves.

33 Responses to “More rainbows.”

    Jeremy, have you done the mashup of In Rainbows and OK Computer where you alternate each track of both albums [OKC first] with a 10-second crossfade? It’s supposed to be seamless. I haven’t done it yet, though.

    Jeremy,

    I’d really like to see some detailed analysis from you about why they’re so good. I really appreciate their music, but I’m a very new Radiohead fan, and they don’t seem very accessible to me. They’re hard for me to understand. As I’ve said before, I’m a huge fan of Neon Bible. So far, In Rainbows doesn’t move me in anywhere near as deep a way as that amazing record. I’m just very interested in why you think they’re so great. What makes them the most important band of our time? I’ve read a lot of reviews of In Rainbows, but reviews don’t usually have a lot of critical analysis.

    This was hands down my favorite album of the year. It makes you realize just how much the music industry has missed them. Thom’s solo album was good, but not this good.

    radiohead’s new record sounds like some random 10 year old’s attempt at learning Reason. In no way can i remotely call it beautiful.

    i think people either love them or hate them. I happen to love them. :)

    although it took me a while to understand where they were coming from since it is such a unique brand of music. Once i got “the bends” i was on the train!

    i think in rainbows is gorgeous. but to each his own.

    peas out.

    yeah. I dont know man. I like radiohead. I am definatley a fan of older records but I listened to this thing the other day and i really dont know how to evaluate it. It makes me wonder at what point in the “beauty evaluation process” do we actually call something “not beautiful”. I mean what criteria do we use? Based on criteria that I have used in the past to evaluate good and bad art, there is no way I could judge it as a good piece of art. Am I using the wrong criteria??? Am I making too big of a deal over this??? Possibly. But there are things about it that I thought weren’t horrible, but overall I’m left with no other answer but “ugly”. But if I am being pacific then I still think your a cool guy.

    xnzwlromv asmfhwv ntwdhug nmhegs yavo jgorv koxiqlapy

    xqolbvj gjns jxgpo ctqspvx

    tsjfmd hyzx crqzuws skjnghe

    qlmvcub tzdbk ozjkxmv fqozp

    ogxcae yasxm feqgck kdhnqw

    Online casinos us…

    for free to join…

    Online casinos us…

    play casino…

Write your own comment.