No Funk, No Grooves just a bunch of misplaced noises.

SINCE WHEN DOES MUSIC NEED GROOVES AND FUNK??? Can somebody just answer that for me? I keep reading people saying that shit, and it's fucking pathetic. There are other types of music, you know? And if all you hear is "misplaced noises," maybe you should get your speakers/headphones fixed. Or buy a fucking hearing aid.

KingSausage said:

Pasty sounding music sucks.

Not to hate, but I was wondering the same thing. I know you don't need to be able to dance to everything, I mean, I don't dance to all of U2's joints, but at least I feel their music.

I mentioned in class the one night: "I hear everyone talking about Radiohead, why are they so hot?" Next meeting a classmate brings in a CD (the name's on the tip of my tongue). I listen, and I'm not feeling it--okay, maybe there was one song that was all right. My ignorant self asked, "Do people smoke () to this kind of music?" I just didn't get it at all. Maybe, their lyrics are deep, but I really couldn't make them out! She played some of their older stuff and there was actually a song I liked. Wish I could remember the title, though.

radiohead can be rather challenging. i've tried to wrap my head around "kid a" a millon times w/ no success.. but you should give "ok computer" a chance.. its one of the most rewarding records i've ever heard.

You know, Funkynose, I wondered the same thing when Kid A came out. I thought it was unfair that they were being compared to Talking Heads as far as being groundbreaking. But you see, Talking Heads had the FUNK! There really is no comparison between the two. But Radiohead is OK, IMO. They're just one of those bands you have to really sit down & listen to.

godoffever said:

Challenging.
Joking right.

godoffever said:

Yes, that was it! "Ok Computer."

In my opinion they're simply the best band in the world at the mo.

UptownDeb said:

These guys could remix a fart and the sound of someon eating a veggie burger, and people would be so moved.

it's all a matter of preference really. there are some people here that love terence trent d'arby, and treat him in the same regard as prince. i don't see it myself... but then again i love radiohead and you don't get them. y'see?

for what it's worth, i think kid a is an absolute masterpiece.

$.02.

--gm--

i'll agree that their popularity is a bit much.we have alot of posers out there declaring radiohead are gods blah blah blah just because they're the hip band at the moment. i'm actually not too fond of the new record. it has its moments, but they've done all of it before. but the still the fact remains that radiohead have been doing things no one has ever done before. thats why i like em so much.

GeneMohawk said:

My fave of theirs.

GeneMohawk said:

Kid A sucked. Amnesiac was much better. So was Pablo Honey.

This is clearly one of the best bands to come out of the 90s. At the risk of sounding elitist (really this isn't how it's meant) I think that admirers of this band have an understanding of music that goes beyond conventional musical structures that are often sold to the masses as the pop machine.

The thing that i love about this band, and this newest album is no exception, is that they take seemingly abstract ingredients and make sense of them. I guess either you get it or you don't. Their creativity is astounding to me.

I have loved them from the beginning and will praise them to the ends of the earth. I loved KidA instantly. That album is so profoundly amazing to my ears. I can understand not liking certain styles but wow, I cannot even fathom not being touched by the music on that album.

NWF said:

You're so wrong.

Cloudbuster said:

Especially about Pablo Honey. To even compare the 2 and have PH come out on top is the funniest thing I've read all day

SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy said:

SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy said:

oh god that's funny! i like pablo honey, but it was the sound of a band trying to find their footing, or their niche. the bends was where the ideas on pablo honey solidified for me.

amnesiac was kid b to me (and a lot of other people). it was interesting and good, though not as profound to me as kid a was.


--gm--

GeneMohawk said:

And yet, we're all here in the name of Prince. Just goes to show how even with that common denominator, our musical tastes vary considerably.

NWF said:

I really can't imaging the opening chords of KidA not having the ability to sweep you away into this awesome trip. I can't fathom it at all. Perhaps you should get high and let this thing work it's magic on you.

GeneMohawk said:

I was stunned when the Bends came out. I could not even believe that album was put out by the same guys who made Pablo Honey. I liked PH but it is far from solid whereas the Bends just came on like a fury and kept coming and coming... And for me it has been the same with each album that followed.

OK Computer really was a departure from the Bends and KidA (Oh my God I love this album!) just came through me like a ghost enveloping me with it's uncontainable presence. Amnesiac took me some listens to follow but dear God in Heaven if Pyramid isn't the most amazing song these guys have ever done!

I simply think these guys raised the bar to the levels of which very few can jump over. And to say that KidA is profound is a serious understatement. This album really affected me in ways I cannot even explain. It brings out emotions from every corner and every inch of my being. Again, I cannot believe I'm this affected by this album and others say it sucks. To each their own but you are missing out.

SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy said:

know what supa? i remember getting this disc and hearing the opening notes and thinking... "oh f**k... i'm going to have to listen to the whole thing RIGHT NOW." i can't remember the last time something caught me up like that...

--gm--

What ever happened to the strokes?

SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy said:

I'm sorry, dude, but I don't get high. But I'm still sticking to my story, which is Kid A SUCKED!!!
But you know, that really wasn't the point. Our friend, FunkyNose, was complaining about Radiohead lacking the funk. And while I do concur, I don't think that's what the band set out to do. I think they were trying to be the Pink Floyd of their time. But even Pink Floyd had their funky moments. I mean, doesn't "The Wall" wanna make you get up and shake that thang?

What about the strokes?

FunkyNose said:

Well, What about the Strokes?

NWF said:

The very notion that a band has to have the funk makes no sense to me. There are all kinds of styles of music that are just as worthy of praise as the funk. These guys deserve all the praise and so much more.

PFs Wall makes you want to dance? Hmmm..

FunkyNose said:

I don't think every song requires "funk" in it. Depending on what the song is about and its tone, "funk" can be totally out of place in it.

People aren't listening to "The Tourist" to shake their ass.

There are plenty of melodies on their albums. Some of the tracks they did around 2000 also included computer generated "music" combined with their own music, hence the haptic and random nature of some of those tracks.

Check out http://www,generative.net for an introduction to this. Radiohead is part of a growing number of artists and musicians over the past few decades to experiment with and contrast "AI" generated computer "art" with their own.

If you're not "feeling" Radiohead, no big deal, lol. I can't stand Tori Amos or AC/DC. They're great musicians, but at the same time, I never connected with their sound.

SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy said:

I've had the unfortuneate experience of seeing people dance to "Another Brick In The Wall". It was at a very trashy bar...