PDA

View Full Version : RADIOHEAD VS. NIRVANA via RS



Lt. Dangel
02-15-2007, 01:46 PM
Rolling Stone has a debate going over the better album of the 90's and it appears its turned into more of a better band debate at RS.com. Check it out. It appears that we were right all along. Not only is Radiohead better than Nirvana, they are probably the best all around band of all time.

check the link:

http://www.rollingstone.com/rockdaily/index.php/2007/02/12/rock-fisticuffs-nirvana-vs-radiohead/


Oh and yes, I will say it again.

TomAz
02-15-2007, 01:49 PM
Lieutenant:

Given your 'of all time' claim, you may be surprised to learn that the universe was not created in the year 1990.

jackstraw94086
02-15-2007, 01:49 PM
This thread may cause Menik to implode

breakjaw
02-15-2007, 01:50 PM
'of all time'
http://imageigloo.com/images/801product_detail_g_said.gif

vinylmartyr
02-15-2007, 01:53 PM
Radiohead is so much better than any of those old Miles Davis Quintet featuring John Coltrane recordings. So much more influential too. Or that Brid and Biz record. Cornerstone of modern jazz ppff tev.

TomAz
02-15-2007, 01:58 PM
http://i52.photobucket.com/albums/g30/raecoyote/Beatles---The-White-Album--C1003020.jpg

Lt. Dangel
02-15-2007, 02:05 PM
Alright one of the best bands of all time. TOP 5 easy.

amyzzz
02-15-2007, 02:05 PM
I read the title of this thread, and I was thinking this has to be menik-bait. Apparently not.

Lt. Dangel
02-15-2007, 02:06 PM
I never saw the beatles live, were they pretty amazing?

mob roulette
02-15-2007, 02:11 PM
I never saw the beatles live, were they pretty amazing?

i think he's calling you out. clumsily of course, but still a valiant effort. good for you Spyder. don't take no shit off no one.

TomAz
02-15-2007, 02:19 PM
I suspected as much, mob, but it was rather clumsy, as you say. So clumsy, in fact, I have been trying to ferret out some sort of meaning so that I might offer a coherent response.

No, Lieutenant, I never saw the Beatles live either.

vinylmartyr
02-15-2007, 02:32 PM
I have seen both Radiohead and Nirvana and I would call it a draw.

Lt. Dangel
02-15-2007, 02:33 PM
Man, obviously you cant compare. totally different time frame blah blah blah.

Lennon and McCartney right on.

Yorke and Greenwood, I dunno, just think they got somethin better goin on.

kreutz2112
02-15-2007, 02:34 PM
I have seen both Radiohead and Nirvana and I would call it a draw.

jealous...about Nirvana, I have seen Radiohead

Lt. Dangel
02-15-2007, 02:35 PM
techmology. radiohead uses it well...the best. imho ..

vinylmartyr
02-15-2007, 02:36 PM
I heard Nirvana is playing ACL this year with Ben Kweller on vocals.

vinylmartyr
02-15-2007, 02:37 PM
Well i read it on this board anyways.

summerkid
02-15-2007, 02:38 PM
Radiohead over Nirvana easily. Radiohead is the band of the 90s.

Lt. Dangel
02-15-2007, 02:40 PM
and through 2007

TomAz
02-15-2007, 02:41 PM
Man, obviously you cant compare. totally different time frame blah blah blah.

Lennon and McCartney right on.

Yorke and Greenwood, I dunno, just think they got somethin better goin on.

I love Radiohead. I really do. They probably are in my top 5. Or at least my top 10. Of all time. yep. In fact not too long on this board I got yelled at for saying Radiohead is better than Hendrix. More inventive than Hendrix. yep.

but I don't see them being better than the Beatles. Two main differences. 1. the beatles could effortlessly whip out melodies, just one of which could have totally made a lesser bands' career (see Oasis). Radiohead's melodies are good but not as consistently good. 2. the Beatles wrote human songs for human beings. Maybe if Thom and Jonny could get over their disillusion and ennui long enough to write just one love song (or something) they'd be a better band for it. Maybe.

SojuGorae
02-15-2007, 02:44 PM
I like them both, but the only difference is, Nirvana never got the acclaim get to their heads and release unlistenable snobby records afterwards like Radiohead's post-OK Computer records.

Radiohead was great when they were pop. Then they thought their shit didn't stink and released dogshit records like Kid A.

TomAz
02-15-2007, 02:45 PM
Nivana never let the acclaim go to their heads because they blew their heads off instead.

kreutz2112
02-15-2007, 02:45 PM
...(see Oasis)...

:rotfl

SojuGorae
02-15-2007, 02:46 PM
Nivana never let the acclaim go to their heads because they blew their heads off instead.

(rim-shot)

vinylmartyr
02-15-2007, 02:49 PM
Radiohead is the modern day Emerson, Lake & Palmer.

Lt. Dangel
02-15-2007, 02:49 PM
well put. TomAZ

and I think Thom is truly on the brink of that. Some of their songs I would say can be considered love songs...just not as obvious perhaps. For some reason I feel the love there..maybe not romantic love, or peaceful idealistic love, but maybe a concerned for human-ness love, or lets not be distracted by bullshit kinda love..tough love?

vinylmartyr
02-15-2007, 02:50 PM
Thats not a diss. They just ain't the Beatles.

Lt. Dangel
02-15-2007, 02:51 PM
personally thats the kinda love people seem to need these days ya know. The 60's were a beautiful thing, but laying in bed taking press conferences stood for something but didnt exactly piss anybody off about the truth. "gimme some truth" just Thom style I guess.

Lt. Dangel
02-15-2007, 02:54 PM
or was that the 70's? when he did that?

TomAz
02-15-2007, 02:59 PM
uh, I think that was 1970. and yeah that was over the top. but that's a publicity stunt not the actual music. Love the art not the artist.

I do understand what you're saying about Thom's music and I do get the same sense out of many of their songs. It still seems a bit.. well like you said it's not quite there yet.


Radiohead is the modern day Emerson, Lake & Palmer.

Oh Jeff.

instinct
02-15-2007, 03:11 PM
Radiohead over Nirvana easily. Radiohead is the band of the 90s.

lol.. i'm sure the majority would disagree with you on that.. i'm not saying nirvana is better.. but they have such a bigger name..

amyzzz
02-15-2007, 03:16 PM
I enjoyed Radiohead live more than Nirvana live.

I wish my parents thought to see the Beatles live in their day, but they did see Elvis live.

atom heart
02-15-2007, 03:45 PM
Are Nevermind and OK Computer the only albums to make it out of the 90's alive?

shoegazer76
02-15-2007, 03:45 PM
I have seen both Radiohead and Nirvana and I would call it a draw.

I have too & yr right its close but I'm just a little partial to Nirvana probly cause it was Halloween night Kurt was dressed as a very convincing Barney, Novoselic an even more convincing Slash & they challenged each other to a 80's guitar metal speed lick duel. Kurt pissed in someones shoe that had hit him in the face & politely offered it back to the owner. What a magical night.

vinylmartyr
02-15-2007, 03:46 PM
Are Nevermind and OK Computer the only albums to make it out of the 90's alive?

no.

vinylmartyr
02-15-2007, 03:50 PM
I guess you've never heard Loveless or Crooked Rain Crooked Rain.

kreutz2112
02-15-2007, 03:55 PM
I guess you've never heard Loveless or Crooked Rain Crooked Rain.

or The Soft Bulletin, ...Endtroducing, In An Aeroplane Over the Sea

amyzzz
02-15-2007, 04:03 PM
Are Nevermind and OK Computer the only albums to make it out of the 90's alive?
Most of my favorite all-time albums are from the 90's.

shoegazer76
02-15-2007, 04:07 PM
I guess you've never heard Loveless or Crooked Rain Crooked Rain.

Word Up to that Chief! Tell it like it is!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

bartelby
02-15-2007, 04:33 PM
nirvana were awesome but i don't think there's many bands out there that can match radiohead's ability to flip between musical styles so effortlessly....

in any given radiohead concert they can sing you a ballad, pump out the bleeps/bloops, rock out the guitars or plink on the piano from song to song...there aren't many bands that can pull that off and manage to sound better live than on their albums....

bmack86
02-15-2007, 04:34 PM
The Beatles are better than Radiohead. no contest

deadguy
02-15-2007, 04:38 PM
in any given radiohead concert they can sing you a ballad, pump out the bleeps/bloops, rock out the guitars or plink on the piano from song to song...there aren't many bands that can pull that off and manage to sound better live than on their albums....

Ya that's why I like Bjork - she does this with pop songs rather than with rock songs like Radiohead does. She can go from electro-dance (Debut) to big band (Post) to more experimental pop (Homogenic) to big choral lullabies (Vespertine) to all a capella (Medulla). And that's just the main albums :)

Back on topic, well yeah Radiohead is way more relevant right now than most bands. The question is, are they as relevant now as Nirvana / Beatles / etc were in their heyday? Hmm...

bartelby
02-15-2007, 04:53 PM
very cool...can't wait to see bjork

menikmati
02-15-2007, 06:23 PM
Nirvana is THE band of the 90's. And yes, Nirvana > Radiohead. Nothing, for me at least, is ever gonna compare to Nirvana. I was seven when I started listening to them, and here I am today, still doing just that. I love Radiohead, and I would love to see them live, but there is just an attitude and tone that Nirvana had that is never gonna be topped for me, and I enjoy the riffs and hooks and lyrics of theirs much more than anyone elses.

Oh and concerning that Halloween show, Noveselic was a politically correct Ted Danson, Pat was Slash, and Dave was a mummy.

Boourns
02-16-2007, 08:22 AM
I like them both, but the only difference is, Nirvana never got the acclaim get to their heads and release unlistenable snobby records afterwards like Radiohead's post-OK Computer records.

Radiohead was great when they were pop. Then they thought their shit didn't stink and released dogshit records like Kid A.

You fail at life. Kid A is amazing.

TomAz
02-16-2007, 08:26 AM
I saw Eyes Adrift at ACL one year. I had no idea who they were or what I was watching. They sang a song about JonBenet Ramsey that seemed kind of cruel.

corbo
02-16-2007, 09:12 AM
dogshit records like Kid A.
i am disgusted by this comment
i think im gonna be sick

downingthief
02-16-2007, 09:23 AM
Nirvana is THE band of the 90's. And yes, Nirvana > Radiohead. Nothing, for me at least, is ever gonna compare to Nirvana. I was seven when I started listening to them, and here I am today, still doing just that. I love Radiohead, and I would love to see them live, but there is just an attitude and tone that Nirvana had that is never gonna be topped for me, and I enjoy the riffs and hooks and lyrics of theirs much more than anyone elses.

Oh and concerning that Halloween show, Noveselic was a politically correct Ted Danson, Pat was Slash, and Dave was a mummy.

This is one of those debates where there is merit on both sides. I like both bands, but I think Radiohead is/was better. Mostly, because of their live performance. Nirvana had energy, yes. But MAN, they were sloppy as Hell. Radiohead is brilliant live, simply brilliant.

One side note, is that Nirvana didn't have the chance to "grow" into their full potential. Radiohead did. Hence, they are the better band.

mob roulette
02-16-2007, 09:27 AM
nirvana best american band of the last fifteen years. radiohead best british. end of discussion.

menikmati
02-16-2007, 09:30 AM
In Utero > Kid A

mob roulette
02-16-2007, 09:33 AM
in utero most underrated album ever. STILL ahead of its time. and nirvana would have owned radiohead live given the chance. but that might just be my teen angst talking.

brantlymurphy
03-07-2007, 12:26 PM
I love Nirvana and all but that is a stupid question......Radiohead

SojuGorae
03-07-2007, 12:33 PM
Tough one.

I'll have to go with Nirvana only because post-Ok Computer Radiohead were marinated in suckage sauce.

vinylmartyr
03-07-2007, 12:36 PM
Whoa did kkken get a new screen name?

codytwo
03-07-2007, 12:37 PM
Tough one.

I'll have to go with Nirvana only because post-Ok Computer Radiohead were marinated in suckage sauce.

How long until someone invents the e-punch?

(cue threats from two very specific people)

SojuGorae
03-07-2007, 12:39 PM
What can I say, I liked Radiohead when they were pop.

vinylmartyr
03-07-2007, 12:43 PM
I hated Kid A the first time I heard it. I hated it so much I took it back to the store and got a refund. I love it now though.

SojuGorae
03-07-2007, 12:43 PM
Had the same reaction to Kid A, but wasn't patient enough like you.

kreutz2112
03-07-2007, 12:48 PM
Whoa did kkken get a new screen name?

hahaha...I started reading the board right after ken left, but lama filled me in on all the details and how he was eventually slain. Nice job!

amyzzz
03-07-2007, 12:49 PM
kroqken was slain?

Lt. Dangel
03-07-2007, 12:50 PM
I was on the verge of suicide, when Kid A came out. Sometimes I debate whether I would have decided to go through with it if I didnt have that album.

SojuGorae
03-07-2007, 12:51 PM
Kid A = Thom Yorke's extended joke to all Radiohead fans. I'm pretty sure the guy giggled his ass off.

psychic friend
03-07-2007, 12:53 PM
I liked both Nirvana and Radiohead, live, for different reasons. They are/were very different bands. I like both bands. wooot

thefunkylama
03-07-2007, 12:55 PM
"Slain" is too strong a word, really.

chairmenmeow47
03-07-2007, 01:03 PM
radiohead > nirvana

i like some nirvana songs, but all i remember was the OBSESSING everyone did and i just never thought they were THAT great. sure, they were a good band, but my favourite nirvana song is a freaking cover for crying out loud. maybe i just haven't listened to enough nirvana, but it all sounds the same to me too. not that that's bad, it's just not the sort of thing i'd expect from "the" band of the 90s.

and kid a is amazing. idioteque owns me.

i'd also agree that the beatles are better than both bands because they can satisfy a wider audience. i love the beatles, but i love radiohead more. probably because they speak for my generation (or my part of my generation).

TomAz
03-07-2007, 01:11 PM
Kid A = Thom Yorke's extended joke to all Radiohead fans. I'm pretty sure the guy giggled his ass off.

http://europeanworldgallery.com/images/artists/miro/MiroSummer.jpg

SojuGorae
03-07-2007, 01:35 PM
Tom, are we hanging out at Coachella or what? We'll talk current events over some brews. Sound good?

kreutz2112
03-07-2007, 02:09 PM
"Slain" is too strong a word, really.

eradicated?

menikmati
03-07-2007, 04:58 PM
I would love to see Chad Channing's new band Before Cars added to coachella. I also listened to some live nirvana today...1993-10-30. Kurt tried to invite Chad on stage to play drums on School, but that didn't happen.

roberto73
03-07-2007, 05:02 PM
I prefer Radiohead.

Then again, I still think Spin magazine was accurate in naming "Bandwagonesque" by Teenage Fanclub as Album of the Year the year "Nevermind" came out.

bartelby
03-07-2007, 08:16 PM
radiohead > nirvana

i like some nirvana songs, but all i remember was the OBSESSING everyone did and i just never thought they were THAT great. sure, they were a good band, but my favourite nirvana song is a freaking cover for crying out loud. maybe i just haven't listened to enough nirvana, but it all sounds the same to me too. not that that's bad, it's just not the sort of thing i'd expect from "the" band of the 90s.

and kid a is amazing. idioteque owns me.

i'd also agree that the beatles are better than both bands because they can satisfy a wider audience. i love the beatles, but i love radiohead more. probably because they speak for my generation (or my part of my generation).

amen sister...

chairmenmeow47
03-08-2007, 07:25 AM
amen sister...

glad to see someone agrees with me :)

kroqken
11-23-2008, 11:37 PM
This is a fascinating debate. Of course Nirvana is a good band and very influential. However, Radiohead may be the best rock band ever, maybe better than the Beatles.

rage patton
11-23-2008, 11:46 PM
Nirvana is a better band than Radiohead. Sorry, but it is true.

JSam67
11-23-2008, 11:48 PM
Well that's a crazy thing to say, Josh.

rage patton
11-23-2008, 11:52 PM
Why? I love Radiohead and all, OK Computer is one of my favorite albums of all time. But Nirvana are one of the best bands of all time and Nevermind is also one of the best albums of all time. They revolutionized not only music, but the music industry. They got shitty bands like Poison and all those other hair metal bands off the air... and instead made way for all the great 90s alternative rock. Radiohead would be nowhere near as big as they are right now if it weren't for Nirvana.

Backwater
11-23-2008, 11:56 PM
Nevermind > Ok Computer

In Utero > Kid A

so

Nirvana > Radiohead

boarderwoozel3
11-24-2008, 12:15 AM
Radiohead.

But then again, "My band is better..."
-PzkTzSUfTI

JSam67
11-24-2008, 12:22 AM
I will never argue about the significance or importance of Nirvana and Nevermind. I agree, they changed music and paved the way for much of what we currently listen to. And I really like Nirvana, and most of the grunge scene.

But OK Computer, musically, kicks Nevermind's ass up and down the street. And Kid A revolutionized music, too. Of the bands I listen to, I hear these influences loads more than anything grunge.

And if Kurt hadn't died, I doubt the band would've put out much more to speak of. Radiohead has continued to put out masterful albums for the past decade+.

Can someone tell me they've listened to a Nirvana album lately and didn't immediately hear/feel the grunginess of the '90s? And that's kinda cool. But OK Computer NEVER sounds dated or part of any scene or genre. Neither does Kid A.

If the argument is about music, then Radiohead > Nirvana.

boarderwoozel3
11-24-2008, 12:25 AM
Well put JSam. My thoughts exactly.

Backwater
11-24-2008, 12:30 AM
Radiohead is definitely more creative and original, I just prefer Nirvana's music if I had to pick one or the other.

JSam67
11-24-2008, 12:45 AM
Well put JSam. My thoughts exactly.

Much appreciated, bw3.

kroqken
11-24-2008, 01:56 AM
Nirvana is more influential for much of "alternative music". However, the music is richer in Radiohead's songs, both sonically and textually. Radiohead lives in my memories. Nirvana sounds a little like other grunge and other bands. NO ONE sounds like Radiohead, not even a (sic) Radiohead tribute band.

TommyboyUNM
11-24-2008, 06:08 AM
I will never argue about the significance or importance of Nirvana and Nevermind. I agree, they changed music and paved the way for much of what we currently listen to. And I really like Nirvana, and most of the grunge scene.

But OK Computer, musically, kicks Nevermind's ass up and down the street. And Kid A revolutionized music, too. Of the bands I listen to, I hear these influences loads more than anything grunge.

And if Kurt hadn't died, I doubt the band would've put out much more to speak of. Radiohead has continued to put out masterful albums for the past decade+.

Can someone tell me they've listened to a Nirvana album lately and didn't immediately hear/feel the grunginess of the '90s? And that's kinda cool. But OK Computer NEVER sounds dated or part of any scene or genre. Neither does Kid A.

If the argument is about music, then Radiohead > Nirvana.


Took the words right out of my mouth JSam. Musically, Radiohead is just better and more diverse. Radiohead could do what Nirvana did, but I really don't think Nirvana could do what Radiohead does. And this is coming from someone who has "Ok Computer" and "Unplugged in New York" in his top 5 albums of all time.

And I've never liked the argument that Band A influenced Band B or Band B wouldn't be around if it wasn't for Band A, therefore Band A is better. Nevermind is good, but OK Computer so much better musically.

Cheddar's Cousin
11-24-2008, 06:17 AM
well put. TomAZ

and I think Thom is truly on the brink of that.

Please tell me you meant the part about blowing his head off! I can't take much more of this shite!

kroqken
11-24-2008, 06:27 AM
I think that Radiohead took music into a newer and more complex direction that challenged conventions and its listeners. Nirvana is a straight ahead rock band.

malcolmjamalawesome
11-24-2008, 06:36 AM
Way different bands. I could listen to both for hours on end though.

P.S. I have zero utility for The Beatles. I don't like listening to them. I don't care who they influenced. I don't give a shit. I don't care about The Beatles like I don't care about George Washington.

BlackSwan
11-24-2008, 08:01 AM
while the arguements here make sense, Radiohead is obviously the suprior band.

malcolmjamalawesome
11-24-2008, 08:05 AM
Shocking, "BlackSwan", that you would feel that way. I wonder what "HeartShapedBox" would say.

wmgaretjax
11-24-2008, 08:10 AM
I'm admittedly not the biggest Nivana fan, although I do love In Utero... The rest of their catalogue doesn't really strike me, but I understand the appeal.

Radiohead is an easy pick for me in this discussion, in almost every possible way.

BlackSwan
11-24-2008, 08:11 AM
Aren't you clever... my name isn't a Thom Yorke reference though. Google
Black Swan Theory Mr. Awesome.

TomAz
11-24-2008, 08:17 AM
P.S. I have zero utility for The Beatles. I don't like listening to them. I don't care who they influenced. I don't give a shit. I don't care about The Beatles like I don't care about George Washington.

This is a music board. Do you like music?

TheWatcher
11-24-2008, 08:22 AM
I have too & yr right its close but I'm just a little partial to Nirvana probly cause it was Halloween night Kurt was dressed as a very convincing Barney, Novoselic an even more convincing Slash & they challenged each other to a 80's guitar metal speed lick duel. Kurt pissed in someones shoe that had hit him in the face & politely offered it back to the owner. What a magical night.

Good times.

rage patton
11-24-2008, 09:43 AM
I will never argue about the significance or importance of Nirvana and Nevermind. I agree, they changed music and paved the way for much of what we currently listen to. And I really like Nirvana, and most of the grunge scene.

But OK Computer, musically, kicks Nevermind's ass up and down the street. And Kid A revolutionized music, too. Of the bands I listen to, I hear these influences loads more than anything grunge.

And if Kurt hadn't died, I doubt the band would've put out much more to speak of. Radiohead has continued to put out masterful albums for the past decade+.

Can someone tell me they've listened to a Nirvana album lately and didn't immediately hear/feel the grunginess of the '90s? And that's kinda cool. But OK Computer NEVER sounds dated or part of any scene or genre. Neither does Kid A.

If the argument is about music, then Radiohead > Nirvana.

Musically, Radiohead are more complex than Nirvana, I agree. However, I fail to see how muiscal complexity equals "better"? Rush are more musically complex than Radiohead... wouuld you argue Rush are better than Radiohead?

Nirvana made the phrase "less is more" true.

wmgaretjax
11-24-2008, 09:46 AM
I would actually argue that Kid A and Amnesiac are more musically complex than anything Rush has done...

rage patton
11-24-2008, 09:51 AM
Perhaps Rush wasn't the best example... it was the first example that came to my head. However, my point was less about the band (Rush vs. Radiohead) than the theory. Does complex music automatically equal "better" music?

BlackSwan
11-24-2008, 09:59 AM
Radiohead are better musicians, they create more interesting music than Nirvana ever did and they had, and continue to have more of an influence on music than Nirvana did. Thom Yorke also didn't kill himself after becoming famous so they get bonus points for that too.

TommyboyUNM
11-24-2008, 11:35 AM
Perhaps Rush wasn't the best example... it was the first example that came to my head. However, my point was less about the band (Rush vs. Radiohead) than the theory. Does complex music automatically equal "better" music?


Complex music doesn't automatically equal better music. No. But in this case, Radiohead and Nirvana are both entertaining. But Radiohead is more interesting and complex. And it's not so complex that it's impossible to digest. The way Radiohead layers and harmonizes its music is way more interesting, to me, than anything Nirvana did. I just listened to "Nevermind" all the way through again and there isn't a truly moving moment for me. I really like the album a lot, but it's simply not as interesting as "OK Computer" or "Kid A". It's more comparable to "The Bends" in my opinion, but even then I don't think there's anything like Street Spirit on "Nevermind." I think all the emotion of Nirvana comes across in the Unplugged album. I can throw on my headphones and listend to that and really feel like I experienced something. I don't get that with "Nevermind" or "In Utero."

wmgaretjax
11-24-2008, 11:43 AM
It's more than music simply being complex... But assuming the added complexity functions within the context of the style and compositional form of the music, and contributes rather than simply ending up flourish, I'll say yes... But I would never say that as an absolute, there are undeniable exceptions... I just don't think Nirvana is one of them.

pancakespancakes
11-24-2008, 11:49 AM
Well I'm not really getting into this debate, I think they're pretty equal really... I listen to Radiohead more now, but, Nirvana has had a bit bigger impact on my life... BUT I just want to say that this:



And Kid A revolutionized music, too. Of the bands I listen to, I hear these influences loads more than anything grunge.

IS SO NOT TRUE.

Unless you or someone else could make a good argument as to why it is...?

pancakespancakes
11-24-2008, 11:50 AM
Perhaps Rush wasn't the best example...

I got one for ya... PAT METHENY!

Heh. I love me some some Pat.

wmgaretjax
11-24-2008, 11:53 AM
IS SO NOT TRUE.

Unless you or someone else could make a good argument as to why it is...?

While no one is going to say they were the first, Kid A is probably the most influential example of popular rock music using electronic music in non-typical ways. I would argue that they are largely responsible for many cut and dry rock/indie rock bands branching out and experimenting more.

pancakespancakes
11-24-2008, 11:59 AM
I would argue that they are largely responsible for many cut and dry rock/indie rock bands branching out and experimenting more.

I disagree but I do see the angle you're going for. I just don't see there being more experimental groups in the 2000s than there were in the 90s. Perhaps more popular experimental groups? I don't know much about that to be honest.

But I'm not sure Kid A is even all that electronic to begin with, not to mention, mixing the Pixies with Aphex Twin (to generalize)... its cool, in fact its more than just cool, but not really grounds for "changing the face of music." Just my opinion.

The fact is not THAT many bands list Radiohead as an influence and this is a completely objective fact. Whether or not they are an influence, but bands don't say so, is hard to say. But there are, for whatever reason, a hell of a lot of bands* that call Nirvana an influence, even today.


*Granted most of them are pretty lame

TommyboyUNM
11-24-2008, 12:06 PM
I disagree but I do see the angle you're going for. I just don't see there being more experimental groups in the 2000s than there were in the 90s. Perhaps more popular experimental groups? I don't know much about that to be honest.

But I'm not sure Kid A is even all that electronic to begin with, not to mention, mixing the Pixies with Aphex Twin (to generalize)... its cool, in fact its more than just cool, but not really grounds for "changing the face of music." Just my opinion.

The fact is not THAT many bands list Radiohead as an influence and this is a completely objective fact. Whether or not they are an influence, but bands don't say so, is hard to say. But there are, for whatever reason, a hell of a lot of bands* that call Nirvana an influence, even today.


*Granted most of them are pretty lame


And that brings up another question. Does influential music equal better music? Can the student become better than the teacher?

wmgaretjax
11-24-2008, 12:07 PM
You have to remember that it's not really "cool" for bands to list popular bands as influences...

And you are dead wrong about Kid A not being that electronic to begin with... But I'm not going to go down that road.

TomAz
11-24-2008, 01:04 PM
And that brings up another question. Does influential music equal better music? Can the student become better than the teacher?

I have answered this question many times before.

I will sum up my position in one sentence: Somebody was an influence to Creed.

kreutz2112
11-24-2008, 01:06 PM
You dont think Creed ever listened to Radiohead?

pancakespancakes
11-24-2008, 03:08 PM
Does influential music equal better music? Can the student become better than the teacher?



I think when it comes down to subjective stuff like "who write better songs" and who "makes more consistent albums," its better to turn to things like how influential they are because it is, in a way, testable and scientific. As long as other bands tell the truth!

TommyboyUNM
11-24-2008, 03:31 PM
I think when it comes down to subjective stuff like "who write better songs" and who "makes more consistent albums," its better to turn to things like how influential they are because it is, in a way, testable and scientific. As long as other bands tell the truth!


I can see how that would be a decent system, but not in the case of something like Radiohead v Nirvana. Kurt Cobain wouldn't mention Radiohead as an influence because they had 1 album out when Cobain blasted himself. And an older band won't generally mention a newer band as an influence. So that system would be unfairly weighted in favor of older bands. I think a better question to musicians might be "Who are your favorite bands to listen to? Bands from the past and current bands."

oasis4life2002
11-24-2008, 03:54 PM
Cobain was a brillant man! If he didn't blast himself and let's just say the band broke up due to drug habits and Cobain was still alive.... Coachella would be salivating at the idea to get the biggest band of the 90s to play the polo fields. I love Radiohead but u can't deny what they did 4 music. As soon as Cobain died so did grunge. Ok Computer is a classic album but Nevermind stumps it. To bad he hooked up with that junkie bitch Courtney Love who couldn't help lead him in the right direction.

wmgaretjax
11-24-2008, 04:23 PM
I think when it comes down to subjective stuff like "who write better songs" and who "makes more consistent albums," its better to turn to things like how influential they are because it is, in a way, testable and scientific. As long as other bands tell the truth!

Not really, because it only matters if the other bands write good songs and make good albums... and you know... non-scientific stuff.