|
Post by RockyMountainExtreme on Jul 3, 2018 8:23:56 GMT 10
SharksFan99 #Infinity @ghost Sorry for tagging y'all into this thread, I just wanted your input on this subject since y'all seem to have quite a bit of knowledge and enthusiasm in this subject as I do. "OK Computer", the Radiohead album released in 1997, is often regarded as one of, if not, THE best albums of the '90s, and is ranked the third best album of the decade on rollingstone.com, right behind Dr. Dre's "The Chronic" and Nirvana's "Nevermind". I agree it's a great album, it's not your ordinary alt-rock album, it's an art rock album, paying much in homage to the art rock albums of the '60s and '70s such as "Pet Sounds", "Sgt. Peppers Lonely Hearts Club Band", or "The Dark Side of the Moon". However, one thing that perplexes me about this album is how a lot of people consider this album to be "revolutionary", and that it changed rock music. I listen to a lot of alt-rock from the '00s, and I honestly don't see the case for "OK Computer" making that big of a breakthrough in the rock music industry. In many ways, alt-rock throughout the '90s and '00s has felt pretty consistent since the Grunge Movement, it's just that it got more radio-friendly and commercialized as time went on. A large chunk of post-grunge acts from the Y2K Era sound more like they took inspiration from Pearl Jam, and/or Stone Temple Pilots and Hootie and the Blowfish, as many singers in those bands try to imitate Eddie Vedder's voice. If there is any album from 1997 that was a breakthrough in rock music, I feel it would be more "The Colour and the Shape" from the Foo Fighters rather than "OK Computer", I can definitely see the case for alt-rock musicians in the '00s taking a lot of influence from the Foo Fighters rather than from Radiohead. What are your thoughts and views on this?
|
|
|
Post by SharksFan99 on Jul 3, 2018 10:48:39 GMT 10
I've never actually listened to OK Computer before, so I can't judge it based on it's artistic merit. However, I am skeptical about the album's critical appreciation and influence on the music scene. I agree, it didn't revolutionise rock music in the way that Nevermind did. I personally think the reason why it is so universally acclaimed, is simply due to the fact that it is an art-rock record, rather than a product of the Seattle movement. It immediately elevates it above the works of the other contemporary alternative-rock bands of that time.
I also agree that The Colour and the Shape was far more influential on rock music than Ok Computer was. The Foo Fighters were one of the most popular bands worldwide during the 2000s; whereas Radiohead's success during the 2000s was mostly confined to the UK, Canada and Australia. Not to undermine Radiohead's legacy, but it's only natural that the Foo Fighters would have been more of an influence on the post-grunge bands of the 2000s.
Just as a side note, I think Stone Temple Pilots are unfairly perceived/treated. I know they formed out of San Diego and not Seattle (unlike the "big four"), however they still played a significant role in the popularisation of alternative-music. People tend to forget that Pearl Jam's Ten did not become a huge success until Late 1992, which was around the time STP's debut single ("Sex Type Thing") was released. It's not as if Stone Temple Pilots only emerged onto the scene in the Mid '90s, like Bush and Silverchair did.
RockyMountainExtreme likes this
|
|
|
Post by #Infinity on Jul 3, 2018 14:30:56 GMT 10
OK Computer was important because it set the standard for independent rock for the coming several years. Even though it bears some resemblance to Radiohead's previous record The Bends, its ambition in experimenting with song structures and sound effects, set to songs with a hollowed yet aggressively cynical lyrical nature, made it a groundbreaker for rock music at the time. In an era dominated by generally simple compositions and production, even from the grunge and Britpop movements, OK Computer was a reminder that you could still venture into unconventional, sonically layered territory while still retaining the angst and weight that is the backbone of rock music. If Nirvana were the Beatles of their generation, then Radiohead were the next Pink Floyd. I've always felt Radiohead were a modern Pink Floyd, to be honest, because of their complex, bitter, and beautiful songs that were the product of a quietly cynical frontman, and who achieved mass critical and commercial success in spite of their experimental nature.
I would agree that OK Computer's significance is magnified in the UK, in particular. That same year, Oasis, who had reached god-tier status during the mid-'90s, released the genre-killing Be Here Now in the midst of intense hype, yet by contrast, Radiohead's OK Computer was not only achieving massive critical acclaim, but it continued to do well far beyond its June 1997 release date. The album produced three top 10 hits in the UK, with two of them making it into the top 5; all three were featured on the Now That's What I Call Music series, even the epic "Paranoid Android" in all its 6-and-a-half-minute glory. For such a complex art rock record, this was a pretty impressive feat. Even over two decades later, Radiohead remain arguably the most significant band in alternative music, with their 2016 album A Moon Shaped Pool being the best-reviewed record of that year.
RockyMountainExtreme and astropoug like this
|
|
|
Post by Telso on Jul 4, 2018 8:07:09 GMT 10
Amazing record btw, just like Homogenic by Björk that came out the same year, it's an interesting experimentation on electronic hybridization and soundscapes, and marked a shift from their Britpop origins to their later weirdo-rock (Kid A that came out 3 years later would take the electro-experimentation even further).
I've heard from some music junkies that this is basically the album that made the whole eletronica genre a new ground of interest for the music press, so in a way that is actually more of a relevant and influential exploit nowadays than Nevermind did.
|
|