Archive for October, 2007

Radiohead - In RainbowsThe new Radiohead album, In Rainbows, came out this morning (my confirmation code arrived at 1:30am; when I woke up at 3:30 to go to the bathroom, I downloaded it). Having heard a few of the songs in bootleg forms during the past five years, the chance to hear the studio versions was all the more exciting. The album is sparser than before, yet equally rich in magnitude; gritty in sound, yet more polished.

It also seems as though there have been vast amounts of external influences coming through in the songs—perhaps some of which were unintended. The sound spectrum is both infinite and finite in its ability to appeal to the human ear. Even a band as innovative as Radiohead can only expand out so far (as opposed to progress), having run the instrumental and technological gamuts of music composition. One has to expect that there are large similarities between songs, regardless of the group. And while In Rainbows is probably not the next OK Computer, there’s enough on the album to show growth from the Pablo Honeyesque sounds of 2003′s Hail to the Thief. The more I’ve listened to this album, the more I’ve fallen in love with it.

Here’s my track by track run through:

15 Step: Trippy drum ‘n’ bass beats open this song, showing the newfound influence of Yorke’s digital dabblings from 2006′s The Eraser. Is it really Phil Selway? Perhaps. But if so, it is incredibly difficult to tell. Selway has played the drums live, but it didn’t sound anything like this. Very tinny (almost like he’s playing soup cans), very raw, very fast. Colin Greenwood’s input is very sparse in this version. My favourite part? The interlude at 2:23 to the outro, when the lyrics describe “fifteen steps, then a sheer drop” before the clips of child screams.


Bodysnatchers:
Lots of e-bow and complete fuzz distortion abound. Hints of Ondes Martenot in the pre-chorus. There is also a reminiscence of “Electioneering” in its grittiness and “Knives Out” in its eeriness. For some reason, I’m also reminded of Wilco’s “Spiders (Kidsmoke).” This song grows on me.

Nude: “How to Disappear Completely” for the first 41 seconds, until the strings drop. It took ten years for this waltz to be released and I find it interesting to hear the final product. But how many takes did Thom Yorke put in to get the same emotional response that he got from recording the vocals for “Fake Plastic Trees?” Regardless, it sounds like the vocal overdubs were done right on this. The orchestral coatings around 2:15 in are what raise the song out of its immense minimalism, while the end of the song around 3:45 designates where its place would have been on OK Computer (right before “No Surprises” would have brought some symphonic composition to that album, but maybe the symphonic compositional themes are really found throughout the Radiohead catalogue).

Weird Fishes/Arpeggi: This song begins with some upbeat drums, prompting one to believe he’s going to be dancing. In fact, the studio version could easily place in among the best of Radiohead’s repertoire. It’s the arpeggiation on both Ed O’Brien and Thom Yorke’s guitars syncing together smoothly and the incremental buildup of layers. The vocals drip with reverb and the muted guitar tones leave us with a real spacey feeling. When the arpeggios start to increase in tempo around 1:48, something contrasts with the rest of the album (or most of Radiohead’s other songs), yet its unique sound still pegs its source. The song’s ending is a polish of The Eraser’s “Cymbal Rush” and everything is in its right place.

All I Need: As opposed to “Weird Fishes/Arpeggi,” this song starts with a more subdued, grooved-out techno drum beat. The bassline reads much like an extension of OK Computer’s “Climbing Up the Walls” though the vocals never match the intensity. That’s okay though. Instead, the last 56-60 seconds of this song sounds like they were easily distilled from having played in the Split Sides show with Sigur Rós. Yorke’s vocals sound like they’re reaching upwards in optimism, à la Sigur Rós’s “Mílano.”

Faust Arp: An interesting little two minute ditty that sounds very Kings of Convenience with a large dash of Paul McCartney—even in the vocal timbre. The darkness suggests something off of Chaos in the Backyard or even “Blackbird” in its simple acoustic picking. Yet, the string arrangements add depth where necessary without overpowering the sweetness of the song. Better yet, the subtle and rarely used vocal harmonies allow it to stand out.

Reckoner: First I think the adjective ‘jangly.’ Then I think John Mayer’s ”Waiting on the World to Change.” Then the guitars come in after 0:10 and I think Bloc Party’s “This Modern Love,” before I realize that this song’s none of the above. There’s something missing in this song to tie it all together. At 2:23, the song splits out and I can’t put my finger on what other band it sounds like. Perhaps it’s like Sigur Rós’s track 8 from ( ) or a splash of Arcade Fire’s Neon Bible. The strings are sweet, but perhaps for once on the album, the otherwise sparseness of the piece works against it.

House of Cards: It goes without saying that this is a fragile dub piece. However its fragility makes it one of the lesser quality songs on the album. The drenched reverb of vocals are too reminiscent of My Morning Jacket. The signatures have slight echoes in “Fake Plastic Trees,” but there was more emotion, more texture, more to invest in that song. Unfortunately, this song doesn’t quite seem to translate into what “Fake Plastic Trees” was, becoming somewhat a house of cards itself. Get Nigel Godrich out of this one.

Jigsaw Falling Into Place: After hearing the live version of this song open with electric guitars, I was hoping to find the same bite on the studio version. Instead, the opening acoustic picking (reminiscent of “Wolf at the Door” or “Paranoid Android”) bring a different type of bite. This bite comes more in concentrating on the vocals and the buildup following the first verse. Is it any better this way? I think it just might be.

Videotape: Some of the early reviews are railing on “Videotape” as the biggest letdown of the album, having stripped away a lot of the live tracking. Disagree. If you want to say that Thom Yorke singing over his own piano playing and Colin Greenwood’s quarter-note bassline is disappointing, that’s fair enough. However it works better to highlight the actual lyrical content of the song, especially toward the end where he’s “spiraling away from the videotape.”

Bear with me, I can’t contain my enthusiasm today. After a horrible subway ride to work this morning, I went through my usual litany of sites and saw on the BBC that, after a four year wait, the new Radiohead album, In Rainbows, would be released in only 10 days. That’s October 10. The blogs have been busy salivating today. So will this one.

In Rainbows coverThings that make this release all the more interesting:

1. Radiohead is no longer under contract with a record label. This allows them the freedom to release an album however they’d like. Forget the implications on their own profits, this has equal implications on the musicgoer.

2. The freedom to do what they’d like translates to a three-tier distribution strategy:

1) Download the album for whatever price you’d like to pay for it, October 10.
2) Purchase a 2-CD, 2-Vinyl, Album Art, Lyrics, and Liner notes discbox for £40 on December 3. This includes the October 10 download.
3) Buy the CD wherever it is that the band finally decides to distribute it to, sometime in 2008.

3. The strategy allows the band to market themselves and show that their hype is in being innovative musicians and artists. Releasing an album with 10 days notice is possible, but if you want to move copies and distribute it, the traditional means has been through retail or online store. Additionally, you’ve always needed a lead time for promotional materials. If you’re Radiohead, 10 days is all you need, no promotion necessary.

4. When you aren’t subject to the vagaries of record industries, you can store all the master tapes yourself. You prevent leaks through self-distribution. This becomes virtually irrelevant when you’re allowing people to price their own album, yet serves to create its own hype, as it starts to maintain the self-worth of an official release date. Bands have become upset because record labels cannot control album leaks anymore; why not contain the leak yourself. (I’ve noted, October 10 is 10/10 and December 3 is 12/3. I don’t know if there’s any significance to those dates.)

Lest one thinks that this means that everyone will buy it for nothing, he might want to think again. What this really does is show that people are willing to pay for music that has merit. Not everybody, but a vast majority. I’d be curious as to what the (probably never released) statistics would show in terms of average price paid. I’d bet about $/£10-13 would be what most people pay. Once again they blaze the path for those who have attempted these models and failed, but ultimately proving that commercial music is just that – a valueless commodity. Thom Yorke once said in an oft-quoted 2003 Time interview that he’d like to “say Fuck You” to the “decaying business model.”

Don’t believe me? Here’s some of the best of the articles that have come out on the news:

Radiohead challenges labels with free album – The Daily Telegraph (UK)
How Radiohead killed the record labels – The Daily Telegraph (UK) ***One of the better articles***
Radiohead Says: Pay What You Want – Time.com
Fans crash Radiohead album site – BBC