Radiohead The King Of Limbs

I find it a little weird to accuse this album of being music for the head rather than for the heart or feet, and then to call it style over substance. That is not an inherent contradiction, but the juxtaposition seems somewhat problematic to me because referring to it in its capacity to inspire thought makes one presume that it has substance. I would argue it has substance, and far more of it than In Rainbows did. It may lack the obvious emotional pull, but I think it is a musically and thematically deeper record, with more intelligent arrangements and depth of writing. I don't understand the criticism of it having no "proper songs" - do you approach this from an angle that tracks like Codex, Little by Little, Separator, and Give up the Ghost are stranger and less song-oriented than The National Anthem, Idioteque, Like Spinning Plates, or Packt Like Sardines? I don't see it. One thing we can agree on though - this is a brave record. Apparently that merits a lower score than a British record that is rehashing American alternative influences from the late 1980s. No, I don't mean Pablo Honey - I'm talking about Yuck.

For the record, I like Yuck too! :)

.... "they forgot to wirte proper songs" argument by now. I mean, I'd expect something like that from The Daily Telegraph, but not No Ripcord.... The likes of "Lotus Flower" or "Give up the Ghost" sound like very proper songs to me, and the fact that they happen to be simpler (in structure) songs doesn't make them any less beautiful ("GUTG") or catchy ("Lotus Flower"). And I'm only mentioning those two because they seem to be pretty obvious examples against that argument and you aren't even mentioning them.

I'm not saying this is their best record (there's some tough competition there) but personally I like it more than In Rainbows. I find the production of this one to be better, I prefer the less organic sound and the whole thing sounds like the band at their most natural. IR didn't always sound like that to me.

I guess I didn't mean the Daily Telegraph itself but more like the usual 'we-want-tunes' reviews of newspapers.

I'm not sure if I ever get the 'unfinished' vibe here. I do sometimes get the 'bit too simple' vibe. "Separator" was debuted live by Thom Yorke about a year ago in Cambridge and at the time, with only an acoustic guitar, I thought it sounded somewhere between Neil Young and early Oasis. A pretty simple song, but I think it's nicely done on the album with its dreamy theme underlined. It doesn't feel unfinished to me though.

As a matter of fact, the simpliity of the compositions adds to the general air of lightness that the album exudes. This seems to have put a lot of people off, but after so many years of really intense stuff I don't really mind it.

This is definitely "music for the heart and feet" as well as the brain. Radiohead's problem is that they've always been about music for the brain-- that's how it worms its way into your heart. This is an album that is written from that special place, and after a while you start to realize how much food for thought there is to this album. Brilliant work, up there with Kid A and OKC as my favorite. I can understand why everyone is disappointed but I think everyone lets the album fall too short.

I'll put myself on record as a dissenting voice on this because I happen to really like this record. Though we are not steeped in melody or classic structure here, they show themselves, as ever, to be masters of mood. And that's what this is - a mood record. It's so short I don't think there's a weak moment on it and while its not as compelling perhaps as some of In Rainbows, I'm hard pressed to point to any obvious weaknesses. All I know is I just like putting it on and letting it play, and that's good enough for me.

Perhaps my opinion about this record differs from the reviewer's in that I am a fairly oblivious person. The only build up I had concerning the existence of this record was an email I received a few days before it was released, asking me if I wanted to buy it. I said yes. A few days later I downloaded a nine dollar, 37 minute long album with 8 tracks, six of which i thoroughly enjoy, so I give it a 7.5. I'm simple like that.

I can understand those who say the album seems unfinished. It certainly isn't as polished as In Rainbows. Of course, I enjoyed the unfinished B-sides of that album more than most of the proper tracks, so perhaps I'm just a bit wonky.

I cannot understand people who think its a bad record. I didn't find it 'tuneless' and I found it far from boring (except for Little by Little, which sounds like something they forgot to put on their last album).