nytimes.com — While Radiohead?s discontinued pay-what-you-want proposition for downloading its new album made a great music-business story, the more lasting news is that ?In Rainbows? ? in either its one-disc or two-disc configurations ? needs no gimmicks.
Dec 26, 2007 View in Crawl 4
therealjkolbDec 27, 2007
I have to say that I don't really trust any of these lists anymore, not saying that I disagree because In Rainbows and the other albums for the most part are quality, but with so many lists and people putting out stuff anyone can simply say "well pitchfork did it" and carve up their own album list. I also think it odd that there is such a surge in these "indie" titles with these lists because of the relatively low exposure or sales of some of these records.
dangermouse9Dec 27, 2007
@mdavisNo, but you don't say "I love lamp!" I said it was poor English when using a proper noun, or did your reading comprehension fail?
terminal157Dec 28, 2007
This comment left me laughing at it's lack of depth.
terminal157Dec 28, 2007
I think I know what you're saying, but I think your idea of holding back is their idea of not giving a f**k about pursuing what most bands pursue. They're happy to do what they do, and to keep doing new things when they can. They could've kept making OK Computer over and over and become the biggest band in the world, they didn't forget how to rock, but that's just not who they are.
terminal157Dec 28, 2007
The same criticism could be made of any music that takes itself seriously, from the perspective of someone who doesn't like it and wants to attack it.
homeslice57Dec 29, 2007
Kid A may have been a better musical accomplishment, but In Rainbows is definitely the more accessible and enjoyable album.
mist3reDec 30, 2007
Or maybe, because it is so apparent the album is doing well the NYT is just following suit.
lastmp3newsSep 30, 2008
You can find this super album in best quality here!<a class="user" href="http://radiohead-albums.blogspot.com/">http://radiohead-albums.blogspot.com/</a>