Post 70's Prog World Cup: Radiohead- Phideaux

It's got to be Phideaux, so many great albums from the guy and his band.

Well this is disappointing.

Horizons wrote: Well this is disappointing.

As was the Kayo Dot one.

Whilst Radiohead has been a very successful band with mainstream success, the generally much less known Phideaux is likely to appeal considerably more, generally, to the mainstream Prog rocker. I do find it rather a shame that most here, apparently, don't appreciate much experimentation; prefer vanilla music.  A lot of proggers don't step out much from a narrow comfort zone and prefer music that plays it safe and meets their typical expectations.

I might have expected a more progressive mindset from people into progressive rock at one time, but not for a long time.

Of course it doesn't mean that various people who choose Phideaux aren't into experimentation and more experimental forms of music, or alternative music.


Edited by Logan - October 19 2011 at 13:13

Neither Phideaux nor Radiohead are that original, but I'm enjoying the way that Radiohead has incorporated their influences more (and it has influences that I'm more into). And, just cause you mentioned her, I love Laurie Anderson's Big Science.


Edited by Logan - October 19 2011 at 13:20

Alitare wrote: Again, Phideaux sounds like Weird Al. Doesn't anybody else hear the silly, inconsequentially nasally singing? Makes me want to slug him in the face.

Speaking of slugging in the face, it looks like Phideaux is giving Radiohead a right a**-whipping. 

Logan wrote: Horizons wrote: Well this is disappointing. As was the Kayo Dot one. Whilst Radiohead has been a very successful band with mainstream success, the generally much less known Phideaux is likely to appeal considerably more, generally, to the mainstream Prog rocker. I do find it rather a shame that most here, apparently, don't appreciate much experimentation; prefer vanilla music.  A lot of proggers don't step out much from a narrow comfort zone and prefer music that plays it safe and meets their typical expectations. I might have expected a more progressive mindset from people into progressive rock at one time, but not for a long time. Of course it doesn't mean that various people who choose Phideaux aren't into experimentation and more experimental forms of music, or alternative music.

Alitare wrote: As if this inane popularity poll matters a bit. :P Phideaux's music just doesn't seem...err...and this is highly subjective...important to me. It's like the guy playing and wrting the songs isn't out to make important, special, meaningful, or idiosyncratic music. His personality is merely a mirror of his influences. But with Radiohead, they took their influences and injected their own personality into it. And goddamn, Thom Yorke beats the pants offa his nasally, non-resonant stuff. I'm no fan of any band, but Kid A and OK Computer have touched my heart. When I hear something like Windeath Softstar it just seems silly, unimportant, unenlightened, and emotionally ignorant when I compare it to the harrowing, spirit-crushing 'How to Disappear Completely', or the oppressive, trip-shock of 'Idioteque'. Or when I jump around with The Dance of Eternal Ice, it just seems limp and trivial compared to the triple-wash intricacy of 'Paranoid Android'. To me, a band like Phideaux just seems dumb and kitschy - full of silly long songs that don't go anywhere. But bands like Radiohead aren't interested in all that. They'll make three songs and put them into the running time of one. Phideaux will take one song and stretch it out obnoxiously into the length of three. Just seems to me that Phideaux's heart isn't in making art or magic - just playing the same old bullsh*t we've heard for forty f**k years. Why should I waste my time with just another prog rock band, when I could be listening to songs that make me cry, weep, and think? Why, when I can just as easily listen to music that is more thematic, more congruous, less long-winded, more concise, and less repetitive?  I don't have any major problem with the band other than the almost jarringly derivative manner in which he conducts himself (oh and the sh*tty, heartless singing). He falls under the 'neat' category - not important, not deep or heartbreaking, not extremely resonant and life-shattering. When I feel sick in my heart of hearts and the darkness of life seeps into me, when I am having an anxiety attack and crying myself to sleep, do you really think I'd play something as trivial as Doomsday Afternoon to make myself feel better? Hell naw, it'll be Kid A or Rain Dogs or Songs in the Key of Life or Dark Side of the Moon or Dirt.

Moshkito, is that you?

I enjoy plenty of experimentation; I just do not like Radiohead.

Roland113 wrote: Anthony H. wrote: Alitare wrote: As if this inane popularity poll matters a bit. :P Phideaux's music just doesn't seem...err...and this is highly subjective...important to me. It's like the guy playing and wrting the songs isn't out to make important, special, meaningful, or idiosyncratic music. His personality is merely a mirror of his influences. But with Radiohead, they took their influences and injected their own personality into it. And goddamn, Thom Yorke beats the pants offa his nasally, non-resonant stuff. I'm no fan of any band, but Kid A and OK Computer have touched my heart. When I hear something like Windeath Softstar it just seems silly, unimportant, unenlightened, and emotionally ignorant when I compare it to the harrowing, spirit-crushing 'How to Disappear Completely', or the oppressive, trip-shock of 'Idioteque'. Or when I jump around with The Dance of Eternal Ice, it just seems limp and trivial compared to the triple-wash intricacy of 'Paranoid Android'. To me, a band like Phideaux just seems dumb and kitschy - full of silly long songs that don't go anywhere. But bands like Radiohead aren't interested in all that. They'll make three songs and put them into the running time of one. Phideaux will take one song and stretch it out obnoxiously into the length of three. Just seems to me that Phideaux's heart isn't in making art or magic - just playing the same old bullsh*t we've heard for forty f**k years. Why should I waste my time with just another prog rock band, when I could be listening to songs that make me cry, weep, and think? Why, when I can just as easily listen to music that is more thematic, more congruous, less long-winded, more concise, and less repetitive?  I don't have any major problem with the band other than the almost jarringly derivative manner in which he conducts himself (oh and the sh*tty, heartless singing). He falls under the 'neat' category - not important, not deep or heartbreaking, not extremely resonant and life-shattering. When I feel sick in my heart of hearts and the darkness of life seeps into me, when I am having an anxiety attack and crying myself to sleep, do you really think I'd play something as trivial as Doomsday Afternoon to make myself feel better? Hell naw, it'll be Kid A or Rain Dogs or Songs in the Key of Life or Dark Side of the Moon or Dirt.  Moshkito, is that you?

The first line could be, but after that it's missing far ... too ... many ellipses....

lazland wrote: Logan wrote: Horizons wrote: Well this is disappointing. As was the Kayo Dot one. Whilst Radiohead has been a very successful band with mainstream success, the generally much less known Phideaux is likely to appeal considerably more, generally, to the mainstream Prog rocker. I do find it rather a shame that most here, apparently, don't appreciate much experimentation; prefer vanilla music.  A lot of proggers don't step out much from a narrow comfort zone and prefer music that plays it safe and meets their typical expectations. I might have expected a more progressive mindset from people into progressive rock at one time, but not for a long time. Of course it doesn't mean that various people who choose Phideaux aren't into experimentation and more experimental forms of music, or alternative music. I think that a lot of this is very true, and hits the mark as far as the majority of prog fans are concerned. The fact is that Phideaux is a "traditional" symphonic prog artist, and that, I would venture to suggest, creates music that is closer to the hearts of most of the visitors to this site. If Radiohead had either ceased at OK Computer, or made similar albums, then they would probably have won hands down. As it is, their more experimental stuff has clearly alienated a lot of prog fans who like it symphonic and bombastic. All this written as someone who voted for Phideaux and who loves his prog symphonic and bombastic!!

Nothing of substance to add, but I was once more of a traditional prog fan myself, and really liked bombastic symph, but my tastes shifted.  I can't say I'm that big on Radiohead yet, but just getting to know them pretty well now thanks to the youtube clips above... I did like this song very much off In Rainbows.




Edited by Logan - October 19 2011 at 15:19

rushfan4 wrote: I prefer Coldplay over Radiohead though, and both remind me of U2.