Radio_head (Nov. ‘14)
November 19, 2007 at 8:41 am
He’s trying to escape that fate by moving, always moving forward, never standing still, always developing…. - interview @NYRock.
.
“Radiohead: Elaboration of the Obvious. Imaginary album from 2014”
01. Dave Brubeck Quartet - Unsquare Dance (wiki)
Greatest Hits (1966)
02. Scorch Trio - Furskunjt
Luggumt (Rune Grammofon, 2004)
03. BLÆRG - Elaboration Of The Obvious (MySpace)
Sesquipedalia (FromTheGut, 2007)
04. Olivier Messiaen - III. Abime Des Oiseaux (wiki)
Radio 3 Lunchtime Concert: Messiaen’s Quartet for the End of Time (BBC Legends, 2000)
05. Radiohead - Weird Fishes/Arpeggi (wiki)
In Rainbows (Radiohead, 2007)
06. The Mercury Program - Egypt (hp)
A Data Learn The Language (Tiger Style, 2002)
07. Agustín Carlevaro - Palabras Sobre Atilio Rapat
Agustín Carlevaro Interpreta Piazzolla (Gourmet Musical, 2001)
08. Ornette Coleman - Virgin Beauty (wiki)
Virgin Beauty (1988)
09. Medeski Martin & Wood - Midnight Poppies / Crooked Birds (wiki)
End Of The World Party (Just In Case) (2004)
10. Nicky Skopelitis - One Eye Open
Ekstasis (Axiom, 1993)
10. Anon. England - Lullaby, My little sweet darling
Ninna Nanna: Lullabies (1500-2002) (Alia Vox Spain, 2003)
note: Here is something. Now that Radiohead is going indie and plenty of ink has been spilled about that decission [1]. I am more compelled to listen to their album. Plus I might has some idea what Moka is talking about. First: My persistence impression about Radiohead’s album is that it simply doesn’t draw me.. I don’t know why. I certainly like several folk singers with less voice range, simple rhythm, middle of nowhere post-rock or cheesy electronica. This morning I find out why Radiohead albums doesn’t give me that warm fuzzy feeling. All of their songs are largely built around Thom Yorke singing, without variation or changing lead. Despite multitude of styles, Radiohead is really a standard rock band with wide ornaments, the core doesn’t change from one album to next. That’s my first take. Second: Radiohead fan forums seems to have more diverse taste of music than other group or bands, which I think is rare. Big credit to Radiohead. hmmm…
see also: In rainbows
image: nastylittleman.com/NYT
about the list: the first half is about one voice. Lead surrounded by others. The second half is about layered voice/sound where there are several voices leading. It’s not possible to sing just one voice without fundamentally changing the song, even if the voice is silent/implied.
creo que aunque no te des cuenta estas muy enamorado de radiohead,
te tomas demasiado tiempo tratando de hacerlos irrelevantes.
I think it’s discussion on an album that this site consider important for personal reason. In this case moka’s favorite band. There is relevancy even beyond that level too. Hey. it’s a fun topic that everybody talks about, why not.
but don’t worry. I am not obsessing. so there won’t be very many post about radiohead from me.
At the end of your post I didn’t get if you were being sarcastic with the “big credit to radiohead” but as a radiohead fan I found your playlist very appealing, don’t think Radiohead will actually still be together until 2014 but it’s nice to think they’d be making music like this, although you forgot to include some kraut in there, it seems to be a very important influence on their music and Charles Mingus as well.
You’re very spot on your two points, first radiohead is very voice-based, the band even thinks so:
“For me, with music in the last four years I first went through a phase not being able to relisten to music. And the thing I came back to is a song. A song is lyrics. The song is a singer and that’s 80% and the music is 20%.”
being able to relisten to music. And the thing I came back to is a song. A song is lyrics. The song is a singer and that’s 80% and the music is 20%.”
- Ed O brien for BBC 6MUSIC 2 DAYS AGO.
Yet, of course I don’t find anything wrong with it being voice-based since Thom Yorke is one of my favorite voices (I got really annoyed at him on Hail to the thief though, he was being willfully out of tune) and I disagree with him being a singer without much vocal variation. True, on “in rainbows” his voice sounds more homogenic than on past albums but his voice range is incredible.
Your second point on radiohead fans having diverse taste is also good, during the webcast (being a rh fan I stopped whatever I was doing and just sat and listen infront of the computer for around 3 hours) I was logged-in to a radiohead fan chat trying to give it a shot and decipher the songs that the band were spinning and I was very surprised to see that my help wasn’t necessary at all, they all knew the music that was playing, everything; Burial, Jorge Ben, !!!, Fela Kuti, Captain Beefheart… whenever I discuss music to die-hard fans of other type of bands I’ve noticed their musical scope is half as extensive, I rarely get interesting turns in music conversations… but I don’t really like talking about music to other people be honest…. when people ask me about my favorite band or album I’ll just say something random… say Fridge “happiness” per example… this will either end the conversation right there or direct it towards a more palatable zone.
I am not so sure about Mingus. His work is the type that everybody claim they are learning from because it’s so intricate. But, I don’t know all of radiohead works.
songs/vocal: it has limitation. Range, dynamic and texture on top of actual song. If the singer has no pipe and the music is arranged around his voice, sooner or later the band will start to sound the same everywhere. Variation of a theme.
Granted I am looking from giant singers point of view. Nina Simone, Ella Fitzgerald,… Aretha Franklin …
once every 50 years type of voice.
scott walker ;)
garg …
Mark Sandman, Morphine lead singer.