In Rainbows

[k thx 0]

I also like it. Czech, maybe the songs need to grow on you. They're similar to the bootlegs which have been floating around for a while so you may like them as you get to know them.

 

It seems like their most live album since The Bends, which is probably a good thing.

[k thx 0]

They ruined Videotape though...

[Guest Gym Class Fallout]

It seems like their most live album since The Bends, which is probably a good thing.

Wrong. Bad thing. They've evolved beyond that. The Bends was better, anyway.

[k thx 0]

Radiohead are good enough musicians to make it sound good though. I'd rate the album on par with Kid A, just below Bends & OK Computer, but more likely to be listened to.

 

Incidentally, I like the similarity between the songs as it makes it a more complete album, but again because I'm familiar with the songs they're already distinguished in my head.

[Guest Gym Class Fallout]

I disagree completely. I don't think there's a unified artistic vision here at all. It's just a handful of songs, some new, some ten years old, most of which seem to have ba-da-bumbum-bop-ba-da-bumbum-bop grafted onto them for no good reason. Are they trying to do krautrock? I don't get it.

 

I read some early reviews that said "15 Step" was "Radiohead's most sensual song yet." Ugh. Who wants that? I just think it's their weakest leadoff track of the seven. "The Eraser" is better, too, for that matter. It doesn't build up to anything like "Everything In Its Right Place," or bring you in immediately like "Airbag." It's just some glitchy drum machine stuff that sounds like a COM LAG leftover.

 

As for Radiohead being good musicians, not really. They're good songwriters/composers, but only Jonny is more than a merely competent instrumentalist. There's nothing particularly unique about what Ed O'Brien does, honestly. This isn't unprecedented: Radiohead : J. Greenwood :: Floyd : Gilmour, in that regard, though don't compare them to a prog band or they'll lose their shit.

[Edwin MacPhisto 0]

I haven't gotten my activation code yet. Color me rankled.

 

Also, glad I only paid a couple bucks for it, considering it's not CD-quality.

[Guest Gym Class Fallout]

It's of pretty good quality. I've heard 128 kbs mp3s that sound better than 192s, so the people who are really shitting their pants (not like what you said, I mean full-out shitlosing, "we've been duped, it was a ruse, i won't touch anything under 320" histrionics) over the goddamned bitrate are just being ridiculous. If you're not happy with it, just tinker with the equalizer and bump up the midranges or something. It sounded nice and full on my headphones, though.

 

Man, I'm cranky this morning.

[The Man in Blak 0]

Not to digress too far from the album, but the bit rate is only part of the deal. The type of bit rate (variable vs. constant) and the method that the encoder uses for dealing with redundant stereo signals (e.g. joint-stereo encoding) can go a long way towards enhancing the quality of the file, regardless of whether its 128kbs or 160kbs or whatever.

 

I wouldn't go so far as to say that I've heard 128kbs rips that sound better than 192kbs - the audio artifacts for 128kbs, especially in the drums, make my skin crawl at times - but I'm pretty confident that most people wouldn't be able to tell the difference between 160kbs (which is what I believe In Rainbows is encoded in) and 192kbs (arguably your best quality/size ratio for most folks), especially if they were listening through an mp3 player or headphones.

[k thx 0]

http://nodatta.blogspot.com/2007/10/radioh...n-rainbows.html

 

This was where I got it from, as I didn't get my activation code before work. Check your spam folder in case it's in there.

 

Re Czech, I think the album is unified by it's tone. It's a personal album, maybe even a love album. I think that, along with it's mood, is enough to make it work. When I said abouth them being good musicians, I meant more in that they work together well and have a good ear and sense forr what a track needs.

 

I do, however, agree that 15 Step is a poor opener. Add Bodysnatcher to that too. I wouldn't be sorry to see Jigsaws go either. Apart from that (and yes, I know that leaves 7 tracks), I think it's an excellent album.

[snuffbox 0]

Don't have a stroke, Czech.

[Edwin MacPhisto 0]

First impressions: sounds more like The Eraser than Radiohead, which isn't a good thing. Extremely minimal, pretty unmemorable. A stone cold dud I'll like more later on, once the general sameishness of the tracks dissipates and then coheres again.

 

The one exception is "Videotape," which is stunning. I love it. If I do end up loving the whole album, it'll probably be because I ultimately see it as some sort of unassuming minimalist epic all leading up to that track.

[Guest Gym Class Fallout]

I liked The Eraser more. "Harrowdown Hill," hell yeah.

 

I might come around on this, but after several more listens, I'm still a little disappointed. I'd be less disappointed if I wasn't told that this was going to change the face of the record industry.

[snuffbox 0]

I try to avoid any of the this-will-change-the-face-of stuff & just listen to the songs. I honestly have no idea how a single album can 'change' the face of anything and fail to see how so many people believe stuff like that every time it is stated. They're just collections of songs at the end of the day. And I really, really like these songs.

[Giuseppe Zangara 0]

I'd be less disappointed if I wasn't told that this was going to change the face of the record industry.

I haven't paid too close attention to the pre-release hype, but was anyone really pushing the music itself as something that would "change the face of the record industry?" The way the album is being released, maybe, but not the album itself.

 

Also, a number of your comments seem to be more about what other people have been saying about the album, not the album itself. I haven't listened to this—and, honestly, don't hold very high hopes for it—but, when I do, I will be listening to the songs with little preconception. You're too wrapped up in almost everything else.

[Giuseppe Zangara 0]

So have you guys done nothing but listen to this today.

[Edwin MacPhisto 0]

I also was on the phone with someone in a contracting office for 30 minutes trying to explain the nature of a time and materials contract! Other than that, yeah.

[Guest Gym Class Fallout]

I've made a few observations regarding other extraneous stuff, but I thought I gave some feedback on the songs themselves. My biggest complaint is that the double-time feels forced, occurs too often, and is too high in the mix. It's a hard flaw to look beyond. Radiohead isn't supposed to just be a rock band.

 

As for the talk of the album's release changing how music is distributed, I guess I let this influence my hopes for what the music itself would be like, since Kid A was generally considered the catalyst for the whole leak phenomenon, and we all know what a departure that was. Amidst all of that, I probably did lose sight of the fact that I was setting unrealistically high expectations for a band that, depending on who you're asking, peaked anywhere from seven to twelve years ago.

[Giuseppe Zangara 0]

I forgot this was being released today. That I don't think they've made a good album since Kid A—seven years ago!—was the driving force of my apathy.

[Kinetic 0]

This sounds great so far. I'm not hearing anything comparable to The Eraser. It seems like a natural progression from the last Radiohead album. Take that for what you will.

[Guest Gym Class Fallout]

I'm not hearing anything comparable to The Eraser.

Certainly not in the instrumentation, no. Maybe it's that there's a lot of emphasis on Thom's vocal gymnastics?

 

[snuffbox 0]

So have you guys done nothing but listen to this today.

 

Other than classes & a nap this has been about it since 2am.

[Guest tonyjaymzretro]

Never really listened to Radiohead much, but couldn't say no to "pay what you want" system(I paid 5 bucks)

 

I liked it...I'm going to go find some of their older albums, but I thought it was a good album.

[The Man in Blak 0]

Between last night and this morning's commute, I've ran through a couple of playthroughs and I'm liking it. It doesn't really blow you away at first - there's no fence-clearing shot like "Pyramid Song" or "Paranoid Android" to be found here - but it's far more solid from start to finish than Hail to the Thief and maybe even Amnesiac as well.

 

If there's a weak link to be found, it's probably "All I Need", which sounds like Thom listening to Board of Canada's "Roygbiv", deciding to put some words on it, and staplegunning a fat climactic swell onto the ass end of it. That's not to say that it's actively bad, but it's a definite road bump.

 

All in all, though, I could really see this growing on me, but I still can't believe that they neutered "Videotape" and "Arpeggi" when it came to the drums for the studio versions. Listening, waiting, and failing to hear the drums pick up on "Videotape" illicited an audible "oh, what the fuck are you doing" from me, which hasn't really happened on a Radiohead album since I endured "Sit Down. Stand Up." for the first time. Of all the tracks to bait and switch from the live versions (Good Idea: "Reckoner"), why would you choose one that's arguably one of the best songs you've written in years?

 

EDIT: Linked to the wrong Youtube clip.

[Guest Gym Class Fallout]

The more I listen to it, the more I like it, but I still won't say it's better than Amnesiac. Even though that's the album that's said to be so disjointed because of its scrap-heap nature, it still feels like more of a cohesive statement than In Rainbows does, which is just ten songs, nothing more. Maybe it's because with Amnesiac, the jarring lack of transitions from "Pyramid Song" to "Pulk/Pull" or "Morning Bell" to "Dollars and Cents" are the transitions, that you're just abruptly cutting from one scene to another. Here, it's a song, then another song.

 

Totally in agreement that "Videotape" is one of the best songs they've ever written. I haven't watched A Beautiful Mind in a couple of years; was there a life-flashing-before-one's-eyes scene in there? That's what this song makes me think of. I don't know why, but that's what comes to mind, n/p/i. At least it evoked some imagery. If only I could say the same for "Bodysnatchers."

 

EDIT: I suspect that "Reckoner" isn't even the same song as the "gimme fried rice" one. I think they just liked the title and recycled it. All the better, because that first one was annoying.

[Edwin MacPhisto 0]

I haven't followed these songs during their various permutations (with the exception of "Nude," which I think I had on my computer as far back as 2001 when it was called "Big Ideas"), so I can't be angry about "Videotape," the album version of which blew me away. This live one's pretty fantastic too, though I'll argue on behalf of the slow build that never explodes on album, too. Going calming instead of bombastic is a riskier choice, but I think it works really well nonetheless. I think I can show love in both capacities.

 

Also, this album is considerably better when listened to on sound-isolating earbuds than on a VOIP headset (which is all I had available to me at work yesterday).

[Guest Gym Class Fallout]

Oh, I can't wear earbuds. They make my ears hurt.

I used to have a pair like this for years until the jack finally started breaking down, and one of the channels would always short out. I can't find a picture of my newer pair, but the same fate is befalling it.

[Edwin MacPhisto 0]

Pick up a pair of Sennheisers when those give out. My dad and I have both had big sets like that from them for 5 years and they're still sturdy as ever.

[Guest Gym Class Fallout]

It's weird: usually my house, what with all the radio equipment, has oodles of headphones lying around that I can just grab when one pair dies. Somehow, the stock has not been replenished, and now I'm staring down the cold hard reality of actually having to buy a new pair of headphones.

 

I feel ashamed of myself for not being as impressed by this album as everybody else. I feel like I'm doing something wrong. It's not like I set out to hate this. My development into a Radiohead geek has been well chronicled over the last three years of the board, and I thought that I would like this more than I did. Now everywhere I look, it's being called the best album of the year, the best Radiohead album ever, and I'm just not feeling it. What am I not getting here? I'm not an idiot when it comes to music, I know that much. I don't want to talk about this album anymore.

[k thx 0]

Sennheisers FTW.

 

This album isn't Radioheads best, or most likely album of the year (although it's the best I've heard so far), but it's a good album that grows on you.

 

I'd give it 9/10.

[Nighthawk 0]

Don't worry, I'm not all that impressed by it either. Of course, I'm way less into this type of music than a lot of others, but I do like Radiohead, and still. It is a grower, though, that I can see. Hype and other silly bullshit drag it down.