Album B
 Jun 29th, 2001
Advantages:
Well this all depends . . .
Disadvantages:
. . . on how much you wanted anothe Ok Computer !
Recommendable:
Yes
Detailed rating:
Originality
Lyrics
Quality and consistency of tracks
How does it compare to the artist's other releases
Value for Money
more
  Peakly
About me:
As a long-term member of dooyoo.co.uk, finding my feet as a 'new boy' here at ciao is proving diffic...
Member since:16.05.2001
Reviews:12
Members who trust:3
Review rated by 13 Ciao members on average: very helpful 
Atmospheric, ground-breaking, refreshing, genre-crossing technically superb lyrically impressive revoulotionarystandard-settingaheadofitstimeclassic… … everyone* knows about Ok Computer. Everyone* knows about Radiohead. Last year, the band released their first album since 1997 – it’s called ‘Kid A’, and it had better be f***king good.
And it is. ‘nt. Is. ‘nt. At least that’s the kind of mixed reports I’ve heard, even here on Ciao. Sadly, Kid A has been received, considered, and judged, not as a new album, but as a follow-up to the monster hit before it. That’s why we read reviews, both here and in the music press, by frustrated, angry fans who expected another Ok Computer but didn’t get it. Imagine their disgust, when upon pressing play they found the band had taken an entirely new direction. That all the exciting, promising guitar work found in the previous albums is virtually non-existent. The drums replaced with drum-machines. The vocals, twisted, unrecognisable. So we get a mirage of accusations, some more valid then others, that the band have gone down hill. Poncy, pretentious, self-indulgent. A let down to their fans. A pathetic follow-up to perhaps the best album of the 90’s. Just plain wrong. That was my immediate reaction too, though my surprise did not manifest into disappoint, but more excitement. Excitement because for the first time, I was enjoying music from a genre I normally can not stand. Kid A, is not better then Ok Computer. Nor is it any worse. To my ears, it’s different, equal, just as refreshing and complex yet to an alternative end. It’s a beautifully crafted album, that deserves to stand alone, and I for one am glad that Radiohead did something brave and unexpected. Because there could be no album capable of ‘topping’ Ok Computer, and for the band, any band, to openly attempt this feat would be useless. Radiohead have refused us an easy comparison, instead they’ve offered something new to embrace. It’s still the same band, make no mistake. The mood hasn’t altered – merely the way in which it’s communicated. So all that is left, if for you as a listener
to decided if you’re prepared to overcome your expectations and allow yourself to delve into and befriend something new. On first listen, Kid A is a bland collection of songs. Each track as forgettable and drawn-out as the next. But, as any music-lover worth their salt knows, some of the best albums are the most inaccessible ones, and the albums you have to work at are often the ones you’ll come to love the most. Repeated listening reveals frightening new depths to every song, while at first they appear to be all the same. I’m not saying this to be wanky, only because I found it to be true. Kid A is not an easy-going album. It’s not pop. Just as with Ok Computer (for me at least), discovering the benefits of each track takes some time, and the right environment. The first thing that put me off was the great deal of computer-generated, drum-machine and quirky club effects I heard. This is not my preferred style of music. As a general rule, I’m considered by myself and any others in a position to observe as a sort of ‘rock-purist’. I can’t stand dance, or rave, or ‘hard-house’ or trance or anything else I’m assured is ‘wicked’, I have some fundamental problems with the idea of music being created on a screen rather then from an instrument. I’ve always thought of dance music as a tad shallow, and of extremely limited purpose. I won’t say Kid A has changed this, but it’s certainly broadened my horizons (and given me something acceptable to put on when certain ‘clubber’ acquaintances pop by).
Take for example my favourite track on the album, number 8 ‘Idioteque’. The song is build upon a foundation of sharp drum beats, clearly generated from some computer, that thumps it’s way through the entire song. The sound is them accompanied by a discreet, beautifully harmonic melody line that is also quite blatantly computer-generated. After that, add some soaring vocals (with echo effect) and a second consistent drum-beat and there you have it – a song, without any guitars or real drums in sight. This to me is amazing. It’s also one of the best things I’ve heard. My description of the song will perhaps sound naive to those of you with plenty of dance-music experience, so I apologise for my lacking knowledge of correct terminology, though I’m sure you get the idea. However, not every song is as void of instrumental input as Idioteque. In fact, it’s the most dance-oriented of them all so god-knows how it became my favourite. Tracks such as ‘The National Anthem’, which is held-together by the repetition of a superb, destructive little guitar riff, successfully fuses the two ideals into one. It’s true the Radiohead drummer is virtually redundant through-out, but vocals are still in full flight, and the guitar is present, just less prominent. Of course it’s sad that the musicians from Ok Computer aren’t given greater scope and attention , but satisfactory compensation in my eyes is that the dance element is such a worthy replacement. Some of the drum-patterns that make songs such as Morning Bell and In Limbo as good as they are, would be impossible to replica using a traditional drum-kit. Also, the afore mentioned harmony that adds so very much to Idoiteque is beyond the capabilities of any guitar pedal or effect. The only complaint that I have, is that while Radiohead do attempt to combine both styles, the traditional guitar, bass and drum set-up is extremely under-stated compared to the computer-generated side of things. It is, perhaps, too great a leap in too short a time for many fans of rock music. Had they produced an album that varied between dance tracks and more typical rock songs such as those found previously, I doubt the album would have suffered quite the contemptuous reaction it has from die-hard fans of their old style.
Saying that, maybe Radiohead giving in and producing a small amount of Ok Computer-esque songs would have been just as untrue as an entire album designed to better it. It’s not as if they owe anyone anything, or have any apologies to make. The problems people have with accepting and enjoying Kid A do, for the most part, lie more with the people themselves then with the band and album. It is a fairly huge transition, and not one all of us are prepared to accept. Radiohead have changed, though not for the better or for the worse, and my advice to you is to get over your hopes for another Ok Computer and move on. The single greatest testament to Kid A’s greatness in my small world, is that it’s managed to win me over despite all previous reservations concerning dance/computer generated music. Every track on the album has something to offer, and once you learn the mood and situation it best suits, it becomes just as atmospheric as it’s older brother. As is always best, the album can work as a complete listening experience and as a host to stand-out tracks, which means it’s suitable for background listening and more concentrated, intense bouts of appreciation. This versatility is a great asset, and one you’ll grow thankful for. The mood is, as always, reassuringly sombre, with subtle, optimistic under-tones. Lyrically, the album is a lot more abstract and obscure then they were in Ok Computer, and the booklet features no printed lyrics. It’s hard to decide whether lines such as ‘Yesterday I woke up sucking a lemon’ repeated over and over are actually extremely profound or just very stupid. My inclination is to not care, and enjoy regardless. Though the lyrics are a minor disappointment if we insist on drawing comparisons between it and Ok Computer, the emphasis surrounding Kid A is firmly on musical experimentation and collective sounds then on vocals. The booklet in the album sleeve is thick, and made with quality paper, though the actual content is very bare. Several pages of bizarre art-work and a small page of inevitable album-information make for a fairly bland accompaniment, unless of course you’re particularly impressed by the computer-world images and patterns you find. It does keep in with the theme of the album, I suppose, though personally I wouldn’t consider it ‘fine art’, or even anything worth considering at all. At least the images in the Ok Computer booklet were open to rough interpretation, and the lyrics were printed. Really though, how important is the cover?
I recommend Kid A to anyone with prog-rocks tendencies and a fairly open-mind. It may be the case that you already enjoy this kind of low-tempo, Leftfield-esque music, in which case hurrah – enjoy this, then delve into the Radiohead back-catalogue and join the rock masses. If, however, you’re more like me, then I challenge you not to back-off from this album. Ok Computer is and always will be a marvellous album, so instead of condemning Radiohead for doing something different, praise and respect them for not fobbing you off with more of the same or trying to repeat a proven formula. I can’t imagine a greater task then following-up an album like Ok Computer, we all know it took them long enough, but Radiohead have succeeded. Kid A is a curious, well-tempered stab at progressive and genre-free music, and I like it a lot. I never, ever thought I would find myself quoting an advert for Dr. Pepper, but I do suggest you try it, because to try it is to love it, and that’s the truth. Kid A can be found in all music shops that stock more then current chart-music, and cost me around 14 quid. Go for it.
Compare Prices
sorted by Price
Read more on this product
Products you might be interested in
|
|
![Kid A [VINYL] - Radiohead](http://picnicb.ciao.com/uk/93354143.jpg)
30.06.2001 02:42
Hmm, thanks for the advice, though I would ALWAYS prefer to bore the reader with too much information, then leave him fustrated with too little. As for first comment - I honestly find that some of the best music improves with repeated listening, while things that are instantly catchy, such as pop music, often has little depth.
29.06.2001 19:58
a very helpful op, but way too long for me to stay interested in it until the end. Try breaking up your paragraphs more and being a little more concise. well written none the less :)
29.06.2001 18:48
Great op, but I disagree that some of the best albums are the most inaccessible. I think an album is only good if it grabs you from the start. Sometimes it's tempting to try desperately to find good bits on the £15 worth of music you've just bought - and that's a bad thing.