Radiohead - The King of Limbs

Totally. This is an album that takes at least a whole week to sink in.

at first i was thinking that they way in which the album was released would somehow cloud people's judgment of it, but based on the reactions i'm reading here, i don't think that's the case. surprising people with an album seems to be a tricky way to make people feel much more grateful for the material, and while that still might be the case for stans of the band, it doesn't seem to be working on everybody. i don't really care for him, but chuck klosterman's point about hearing the album for the first time on laptop speakers points out one of the weaknesses of releasing an album this way, and many other people upthread have also made it sound as though they'd be happier with a physical release.

I've now caught "Lotus Flower" on the radio twice and I have to say it sounds pretty good in that context.

That's how I heard "Separator" as well. I had it cranked up and it sounded pretty good

surprising people with an album seems to be a tricky way to make people feel much more grateful for the material,

I sent my thank-you card to Ed O'Brien, who needs it most.

bragging about not hearing stuff is not as interesting as you might think it is

so otm

not interested in comparing it to previous Radiohead albums, just happy for new material. enjoying this quite a bit.

I think this is the album of theirs that made me admit that I'm going to have to begin calling myself a fan

In the past I've felt like they're trying way too hard & less than the sum of their parts, I liked songs & I liked bootlegs of live shows but as album artists they were simply not entirely my thing. But this one and the last one, these are consistent, they got me, they're making this music thing sound effortless, except for the fact that we all know it's not

http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lh5637fCg51qzcik8o1_500.gif

tbh i haven't watched any of the thom vids, not even the original, because i really didn't want that context for the song. But those bees are lololol.

I'm not sure why I'm not getting into this. At first I thought, maybe it's because they sounded more like a band on OKC and Kid A and Amnesiac...but my favorite tracks on those are the ones where they sound least like a band. And they sounded like a band on HTTT, which I thought was pretty dull. Is it that this record is lacking the dynamic lift-offs of, say, "Paranoid Android" or "Optimistic"? Maybe, but "Idiotheque" didn't have any such lift-offs, and I love that song. I'm confused. It seems like all the parts of a good Radiohead record are here, but they're misplaced or something.

Yeah, someone mentioned upthread that it's not a very dynamic album. It just sort of coasts along one plane.

this is half stupid, but the beginning kind of kills me

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6zOLFOtRYk0

lol'd hard

Was immediately reminded of this all-time LOL:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TYMuhN7OZgM

Yes, I am 4.

Would have been funnier without the farts but the opening fish scene is genius.

i don't really care for him, but chuck klosterman's point about hearing the album for the first time on laptop speakers points out one of the weaknesses of releasing an album this way, and many other people upthread have also made it sound as though they'd be happier with a physical release.

― borntohula, Saturday, February 26, 2011 3:07 PM (5 hours ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

i am skeptical of the idea that a significantly higher percentage of people heard this album for the first time on laptop speakers than they would've if it was released (and leaked) in a more traditional fashion.

yeah seriously, i do 80% of my listening right off itunes and i've at least made the investment in a good pair of headphones. like i think any self-warranting ilxor would.

and if more ppl had heard it via cd, where would that disc have gone? their computer?

Yeah, someone mentioned upthread that it's not a very dynamic album. It just sort of coasts along one plane.

― egregious fannydangling (Autumn Almanac), Saturday, February 26, 2011 6:36 PM (Yesterday) Bookmark

Definitely. It's such a horrible cliche, but Radiohead haven't sounded like they had something to prove since 2001. Once they got over the hump of following up OKC, the tension and sense of urgency vanished from their music.

Bullshit. I'm far from a stan but that's nonsense.

^otm. Check Wolf at the Door and Myxamotosis...

And that's off the red-headed stepchild.

Myxamotosis (and actually, all of HTTT) always sounded to me like they were self-consciously trying (and ultimately failing) to conjure up the tension that used to be second-nature.

And yet you claim that Optimistic has that in spades? Bizarre. I've always thought of that as there most dirge-like "rock" (in terms of instrumentation) tune.

Mind you I always thought Idioteque was unbelievably stiff and dull.

Mind you I always thought Idioteque was unbelievably stiff and dull.

Stunning.

Little By Little excites me FAR more than Idioteque.

And yet you claim that Optimistic has that in spades? Bizarre. I've always thought of that as there most dirge-like "rock" (in terms of instrumentation) tune.

― lol sickmouthy (Scik Mouthy), Sunday, February 27, 2011 3:01 AM (15 minutes ago) Bookmark

I wouldn't necessarily say "in spades," but yes, it does have that tension that's missing from HTTT, In Rainbows, and the new one. For me, one of the most striking moments of "Optimistic" -- in fact, of all of Kid A -- is how it just slightly speeds up towards the end. I haven't encountered that same sense of nervous excitement on anything from their last three records.

Fucking love Optimistic.

My original point was about the lack of width in Limbs, not anything about Radiohead giving up. In Rainbows is loads dynamic.

Go and listen to Bodysnatchers again.

Also There There does tension way better than Optimistic.

IR is the one I've listened to the least, and should probably revisit/revise my opinion on. And for the record, I don't think they've "given up" -- nothing would be easier for them at this point than to do a tour playing all of OKC. I don't think they're phoning it in; I just don't think they're grappling with what they used to grapple with, and nothing's taken the place of whatever that was.

The Can comparisons apply for sure, but surprised no one's mentioned Laika. I'm totally digging how it reminds me of early Laika.

Laika was super ahead of its time, but oddly enough hasn't aged as well as I expected it to. Those first two albums are ace, though, and Margaret has become a reliable ringer for hire for PJ Harvey and Wire. What happened to Guy Fixsen? That dude could produce. He'd actually make an awesome Radiohead producer, I bet. (Huh, it looks like Fixsen was tour managing St. Vincent for a while, go figure.)

To tell you the truth, original/initial disappointment in "Hail to the Thief" (and a weak local supporting tour date - Alpine Valley, boo! - that was a far, far cry from Radiohead's historic 2001 concert in the park here) means that it's the Radiohead album that surprises me the most. It's like I never fully digested it, so while it doesn't work super-well as an album, on a random song by song basis it gets the job done.

Fixen produced a Piano Magic album a couple of years ago (Part Monster) but I have no idea what he's done since or what he'd even done just before that.

Produced the excellent Lonelady album last year as well

HTTT has some great ideas but it's not very cohesive. The band sounds sort of rushed and knackered. It's weird for me as a Radiohead album because they normally take their time to explore the aesthetic and idealism behind their albums and HTTT is all over the place... its songs sound much better when they're isolated and out of context. King of Limbs has sort of the opposite problem... it's very cohesive but it doesn't pack too much on the ideas.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5evJglpnjpM

^^ the Sesame Street song Feral reminds me of, proto-hauntology animation from the early 70s called Bus Stop.

HTTT has some great ideas but it's not very cohesive. The band sounds sort of rushed and knackered

This is the exact opposite of how I feel about HTTT. I think it move pretty effortlessly from one song to the next, building upon moods and emotions all the way through with a strong sense of ebb and flow. It's one of the few albums I own where I listen to it front to back 95% of the times I play it.

Yeah, someone mentioned upthread that it's not a very dynamic album. It just sort of coasts along one plane.

― egregious fannydangling (Autumn Almanac)

Can - Future Days is a great example of this being done well (imo). This is my favorite Can album.

Radiohead - TKOL is a mehh example of this being done well (imo) - I don't care about how good the instrumentation is, I don't care about the variations in construction around the baseline (although it's better that there is variations than not), and I don't care for the high notes that Thom hits (they don't suck me in like the "lift-off" vocals in 'Idiotheque').

So I’m listening to this album again and I’m looking for that song that I mentioned that I liked. I listened to the youtube for ‘Vegetable’ upthread and I just assumed that was one of the songs off the new album (I have not heard Pablo Honey yet). I’m kind of disappointed that ‘Vegetable’ wasn’t on the new album because I would strongly approve of them jumping back in that direction. Now I’m going to have to listen to Pablo Honey.

The King of Limbs would be better if they condensed every song to 2-3 minutes and threw in another 8 small songs (imo).

HTTT has some great ideas but it's not very cohesive. The band sounds sort of rushed and knackered

I agree that it wasn't cohesive in that it is like "kind of great song, could skip next, great song, could skip next, king of great song, could skip next". There is an overall style to this album that many of the songs follow but some of the songs just don't fit this style.

Overall, I think HTTT is more cohesive than not.

xp to myself

actually they should just through in more songs because there is EPs as long as this LP (38 minutes)

on my 7th listening... whatever's supposed to be kicking in isn't.Regarding albums being "growers" - it's true, I think there are some things that one cannot appreciate until the songs become less blurs and more studies of minute details, which one can appreciate. But I also think it's largely a mental thing, that the fact that you are willing to give something so much time yr brain cannot help but want to enjoy it.

It's all standards and environments... some kid in Afghanistan thinks kicking around a soccer ball is the funnest thing he could do all day. A kid over here would grow bored of it immediately and prefer to play a videogame. Deprive that kid of videogames and much all other amenities for a number of days (or, "repeat listenings") and eventually he'll come to appreciate that soccerball. Same application here with this album being a real bore that doesn't sink in 'til a week later. It's you believing that Radiohead couldn't possibly compose something that is not of quality, of merit, that's worth listening to even if leaving dull impressions on the 3rd, 4th, even 5th listenings.

kinda trollin here but there is a large part of me that just doesn't want to give this album any more time, and move on to potentially better music elsewhere.

the only case where my opinion has changed a lot in regards to "growers" is when the grower of an album is of entirely different stlye/genre than what I'm familiar with... I don't feel like I'm hearing anything incredibly new with this radiohead album

kinda trollin here but there is a large part of me that just doesn't want to give this album any more time, and move on to potentially better music elsewhere.

That's about how I feel, but I can see myself coming back to it -- I wasn't too keen on /\/\/\Y/\, but revisited it a month later and it all fell into place. I also want to listen to older Radiohead, to better pinpoint why this isn't sinking in (it's not them, it's me).

^^^ OTM. Nothing new here. And it's quite a dull album actually. And that's coming from someone who likes hearing it, or at least doesn't mind hearing it. It seems like a certain amount of reviews used the "It's a grower"-argument, while what they actually mean is "It's not a grower - but hey it's Radiohead, it sounds half decent, we can't just slag it off, so it must be a grower!".

This isn't a grower at all. It won't advance from what it is now to something sublime in the coming time, there's no deeper layer waiting to be unveiled. More than anything, this just is what it is.

xp to Cpt. Lorax

The only song on here I really, really value and enjoy is 'Separator'. It is the only composition that seems daring, seems a leap forward. The rest of the songs could've been b-sides to songs of the last three albums. If only they put Seperator up front and took it from there. It's the Can-like drums, the 'Tourist'-like breeziness and lush sounds, kosmische almost, that I really wished they would've elaborated on.

Lotus Flower still wins it for me, a really seductive melody. Morning Mr Magpie is growing on me as well.

any interviews worth reading about the album? i can't possibly think the band is very proud of it. not at least compared to albums in which they clearly had the right to be (kid a, mostly... i guess they kind of had that same vibe of self-importance w/ amnesiac/ httt tho)

Liam Gallagher weighs in (link):

I heard that fucking Radiohead record and I just go, 'What?!' I like to think that what we do, we do fucking well. Them writing a song about a fucking tree? Give me a fucking break! A thousand year old tree? Go fuck yourself! You’d have thought he’d have written a song about a modern tree or one that was planted last week. You know what I mean?