Quote:
|
Originally Posted by PAULYBEE2656
whats everyones problem...the album isnt that bad at all. i quite like it. ten hundered and forty times better than in rainbows half effort of an album . its good, damn good. not as good as the new mogwai album but good enough.......
all opinion i know but im amazed at the bad dissing the mogwai and this one has got on here.......
|
The main problem most people probably have is how "fresh" and "new" and "Exciting" every Radiohead album is supposed to sound in comparison to the one before it. This sounds like a step back, if anything. I think most people are simply comparing this to the Radiohead albums they like. I'm not a huge fan of the band, period, but I can appreciate them. This album is just pretty dull; drum machine, 4 or 5 little glossy sounds layered, Thom whines, end of song.
I've sat through it 3 times and think it's a lot better than IN RAINBOWS actually. I didn't at first, because I don't like either album very much, but IN RAINBOWS is just impossible to sit through, I think it's possibly the most boring album ever recorded. Both albums kinda suck though, in their own way.
This reminds me of a very minimal, cold ambient record. That's the only way I can treat it, since the songs are so empty. It's almost like a PAN SONIC record (not literally, but in its coldness and its use of minimalism). Certainly a ballsy move for them to make, when you consider something like OK COMPUTER and KID A and how intricated and layered their productions are. Of course, most people are going to argue that it's just them being lazy.
All in all, it just feels like a pretty lifeless album. Not a lot to take from it. I'm glad it's really short though. I guess it's just depressing for most people that a band that wrote intricate brilliant music like PARANOID ANDROID and PYRAMID SONG.. is now going down the "cold icey electronic repetition" route. I mean, the songs don't even sound written, they sound like 8 little studio creations. There's just not a lot here to like.