- Artists:
- Radiohead »
- Label:
- XL Recordings »
Ahoy-hoy! So the idea was for a 'proper' review of this record after we rushed out this committee job. But a month later, looking back over what I wrote, I still basically agree with it, and I think it'd be denigrating the efforts of my co-writers to simply re-write this into a longer version of my own thoughts on The King of Limbs. Also it saves me some work. And you know, we should be saving ourself for TKOL2. A mark has been added as the average of the scores the contributors gave the album, though I didn't actually publish that at the time.
Calm down, calm down: it's not a real review. That's because here at DiS, we don't play by nobody's rules. And when that bastard Yorke forces - FORCES! - the world's media to bash off reviews of Radiohead's eighth album The King of Limbs at such dizzying speed that virtually every analysis I've clocked of it so far features the reviewer admitting they haven't really made up their mind yet, then this one plucky website refuses to play ball. Everybody else should be ashamed. We should be sent money and medals and fine wines. It is definitely, definitely not to do with fear of a kneejerk analysis getting written out of history. Definitely not.
Anyway, here are a selection of short reactions to The King of Limbs from members of the DiS writing corps. (If you're from Metacritic and reading this, don't panic, we'll have a review around the physical release.)
Brad Barrett
As with some of their back catalogue, Radiohead's latest needs a certain amount of re-orientation upon alighting. A cursory listen reveals little but a motorik highways and disjointed digital echoes. A second listen intercepts the choir-grade swells pumped throughout and the subtle lift of mood from abstraction to a studied electronic gospel. The third finally filters out your aloof electronica references and focuses on the elements which make it defiantly Radiohead - the delicate but sturdy skeletal guitar lines, the slurred undulations of Yorke's keening and the ritual snares ricocheting in the background. And suddenly you rest easy - after initial alienation by subtlety - realising laid-back for Radiohead is often exhilaratingly eclectic.
Paul Brown
The King of Limbs definitely represents new ground for Radiohead in its cohesiveness and its unnerving, stifling mood. For these reasons alone, it is a good album. Problem is, though, all has gone before means that something merely ‘good’ represents failure for Radiohead. I’m six listens in and it’s yet to fully reveal the intangible wonders of a Radiohead record, but fingers crossed it’s just a matter of time.
Sam Cleeve
The King of Limbs shares its genealogy as much with The Eraser as it does with In Rainbows, and as a result it often feels as if Yorke is the architect here. The word ‘grooves’ that’s been bandied about is of course owing to those off-kilter beats – the very same that make it sound as if Kieran Hebden or Steven Ellison should get a writing credit. It’s this rhythmic impetus that creates the space in which Yorke can paint his melodies, or Greenwood add his subtle orchestral teases (not least the stunning brass touches on ‘Bloom’ and ‘Codex’). It’s a hypnotic, often beautiful record, but – our laughably overinflated expectations aside – will it ever develop into anything more?
David Edwards
This one will finally split the fans: there’s no compromise, no tilt to the past. Doused in skittering, fractured electronica; sub-bass and jazzy drumming, this is a record about texture, tone and rhythm; yet possessing melodies of ethereal seductiveness and fragments of sheer beauty. There’s a fascinating clash between jazz and electronica in the depths of the grooves, a tussle neither truly wins but both leave satisfied. As for claims that Radiohead remain a conventional rock band, The King of Limbs sneaks behind and exquisitely slits their throats. They are somewhere else now. Their best record in a decade: stunning.
Thom Gibbs
So it's great, obviously. They're a wonderful band. Perhaps the most widely accepted Wonderful Band of our time; I certainly don't know many Radiohead dissenters. That near-blanket consensus can be a dangerous and stultifying thing, but it's undercut in this case by the rare joy of coming to a record with the minimum of pre-listening hype, words that will inform how you hear the music. The week-long trail before release (four days, in fact, since someone at XL obviously realised about two thirds less people use on Twitter et al on a Saturday) meant no-one got to write the narrative of the record before the majority had heard it. From the brief glimpses I've stolen at statuses and blogposts the dominant reaction has been to mention Afrobeat. Phil Selway’s incredible restless drumming and the cleanly plucked cyclical guitar figures in 'Morning Mr Magpie' make it an obvious touchstone. I hear less afrobeat and more bands overtly influenced by it. There's a High Places-like flinch of a sample driving 'Bloom', and clean Foals-esque guitar doodles punctuating 'Separator'. My favourite thing about The King Of Limbs is the sense that Radiohead are ready to make disturbing sounds again after the relatively safe hand played on In Rainbows. The best example is the appropriately titled 'Feral', but there are also unnerving synthy sweeps on loan from 'Idioteque' shimmying through 'Morning Mr Magpie'. It’s not all gold, 'Give Up The Ghost' is an unwanted return to their listless gloomy side and 'Codex' drags. There's also a nagging sense that they're mostly operating in second gear, but Radiohead earned the right to do that a long time ago.
Andrzej Lukowski
Bereft of helpful interviews, press releases or lead time in which to contextualise The King of Limbs, a lot of the snap responses to Radiohead’s eighth album have been characterised by the same studied urbanity that met Kid A and In Rainbows. ‘It’ll take more than that to surprise ME, Thom’, chirrup the people who Thom surprised last Monday. To boil it down to simple facts, The King of Limbs is both Radiohead’s danciest record and their most obtuse. I’m enjoying it as a mood piece, an adventure in groove and texture, though as yet ‘Feral’ and ‘Codex’ are proving the only earworms. I suspect people will only truly get their heads around it when the next record turns up: the very act of being a new Radiohead album means TKOL will be analysed as if it were a grand artistic statement, but I suspect it is intended as a low key affair, and that’s how it’ll sit in their back catalogue, with a more melodic outing next time. I am not complaining, though.
Krystina Nellis
Gone is the sumptuous orchestration and bombast of In Rainbows, in favour of Amnesiac-era glitches and sultry musings on humanity. Amnesiac was never my favourite, but this may well prove to be Radiohead’s most accessible album, mostly because for once it sounds roughly the same as The Great Public’s idea of what Radiohead sound like, especially on ‘Separator’ and the stunning ‘Feral’. I’m slightly worried though, because between the subtle rhythms and the ‘less is more’ approach to everything else, this could end up being Radiohead’s sex album. Wrong. Also: Thom dance as an Olympic sport. Let’s make that happen.
Andrew Schagen
King of Limbs sounds gorgeous and atmospheric, that much seems beyond question. This album seems purposefully designed to be listened to on quality headphones as you walk through the settling dusk. What seems more questionable however is whether any of the individual songs will stack up favourably when put in the context of Radiohead’s exceptional back catalogue. Hearing them played live alongside established Radiohead classics is going to be very telling indeed.
James Skinner
My flatmate and I have a long-running argument over whether Radiohead dropped the ball with In Rainbows or not, and though I don’t believe they did, I can see where he’s coming from. It’s not an album I’ve returned to with the same fervour as their earlier work, but as this extremely Radiohead-centric weekend has demonstrated, their back catalogue is so uniformly strong and so uniquely their own that to chastise something for not being quite on that level feels a bit unfair. Is The King of Limbs on the same level? Does it have that special feeling of a Radiohead album? I say yes. Impenetrable at times, both unsettling (‘Feral’, ‘Morning Mr Magpie’) and wonderfully, deeply serene (‘Lotus Flower’, ‘Codex’), it is subtle, detailed and rich – a little slight, perhaps, but we’ll see what happens there. (And even if nothing does, that’s fine too).
Si Truss
Radiohead are probably the best band the UK has ever produced, aren’t they? Sure, The Beatles had their moments, but they would have been much better if they’d traded Paul in for a modular synthesiser, and as-yet Thom hasn’t made us sit through anything as insufferable as 'Imagine'. King Of Limbs is no change of direction for Radiohead, but right now they’re probably in the best phase of their career. Let’s leave it a little while before trying to reinvent the wheel again, OK lads? This current design is working perfectly. More of this please. Lovely.
Sam Walby
Just as Kid A and Amnesiac owe a considerable debt to the early works of Autechre, The King of Limbs reappropriates the frentic shuffle of Flying Lotus and filters it through years of collected influences to create something approaching different. No mistake, it will not be remembered as a classic, but it does show imagination, intrigue and a stubbornness many have come to expect from the 'Head.
- Reich, Radiohead and the Pop-Classical Rift: Steve Reich's Radio Rewrite
- Radiohead, Caribou at The O2 Arena, London, Tue 09 Oct
- The DiS Community's... 101 Favourite Albums
- Weekend Listening: LCD Soundsystem, Radiohead, Tom Waits, New Look, Cat Power + more!
- Half-Year: DiS' Most Read Articles, Reviews and Threads of 2012 (so far!)
- No Surprises? 15 Classic Albums of 15 Years Ago
- In Photos: Radiohead @ The Frank Erwin Centre, Austin TX
- Radiohead reveal UK arena gigs for October 2012
FYI
I asked everybody for a mark out of ten, but then I wasn't sure it it was really 'on' to mark it/I didn't really want to come up with one myself, so I didn't put one on myself. But David gave it 10/10, Paul gave it 6/10, everybody else gave it something in between.
I'm don't get
the whole, 'it's too early to give a proper review of KOL 'cos it hasn't been listened to enough times'. Is this done for any other album? I suspect a fair few of reviews are done after just one listen.
I would have thought 2 or 3 listens are sufficient to offer a fair opinion on whether you like a record or not. I am fully behind the idea of a grower and most of my favourite records are of this type but I reckon 3 listens is enough to work this out.
Me, if anyone's bothered, I've listened to it about 5 times and Codex aside, in the scale of Radiohead's catalogue it's just not that good.
Hey soulboy1968
Yeah this is done for a tonne of albums. I've had up to three months to absorb an album for past reviews. Of course you have your initial gut instinct, which tends to be right most of the time, but some records really reveal themselves over time so it's only fair that the albums that don't click or get rejected instantly are given more time to sink in.
I'll agree with you though: three listens and my opinion after that third try hasn't really altered much. I like it. That's about it.
as much as anything else
there's so much media noise and general blah about this record at the moment that I think it's kind of hard to have too much perspective at the moment. But you get two and a half weeks to do a review at DiS normally, I don't really see the point in rushing one. Also I couldn't be bothered to spend the weekend writing it.
To soulboy1968
You're right that a fair few reviews are written in a rush, but I think the problem is more with those hasty reviews than the fact that Radiohead are given special treatment. Plus naturally different records ask for different reactions. If for instance a new Vaccines, a new Robyn or the Beady Eye debut (ha!) don't strike you on the third listen, it's pretty safe to say that the albums have not succeeded in what they are trying to do. Some other albums like The King Of Limbs demand a different kind of listening process -- and the listener is naturally perfectly free to either not bother or realize after eight listens that, nah, this isn't very good.
I need about a week before I can put out a proper review
I listen about 5 times beginning to end. Then it's on to selective listening to pick out the songs that I can't remember from the first round. It's hard for an album to draw out an opinion from just a couple of listens.
This is the best KoL review I've read because a) it's well written and b) I agree with it so c) it is correct - http://j.mp/fU0DIu
My apologies if I was hasty in making assumptions
that many reviews are made after one listen. Maybe it's only really bad or really immediate music, in the reviewer's opinion, that can be judged this way.
levis517 - I get that review but doesn't it only describe what it is and not if the writer actually likes it, or does that matter in a review?
Well I guess it's more a commentary,
or as he says - an open letter. I like it because it perfectly summarises how I feel about Radiohead viz. I find the hype overpowering and the music - even when I ignore the glee that surrounds it - underwhelming. I've never been a fan of Radiohead (not for lack of trying) and I would be happy to ignore them and get on with things... if only they'd let me :(
I also like it because it's one of the more insightful pieces I've read on Radiohead. It's very meta (imho) because of how it comments not just on the band but, through them, on the music industry through a statement like: "If “The King of Limbs” arrived on an editor’s desk attributed to anyone except Radiohead, it would be passed over without a thought."
My favourite bit of writing on the album nonetheless :)
Yeah I see what you mean now
not that I necessarily agree with yours and the writer's opinion of Radiohead, but that's not the point.
I don't agree with the editor's desk statement though. I think that it is startling and different enough for any editor to sit up and take notice. James Blake, although it's not totally my cup of tea, made people take notice, maybe because of my points above.
James..
If anything, they probably dropped the ball with Hail To The Thief and picked it up with In Rainbows. HTTT felt overworked, overlong and clearly stressed the fuck out of the band, hence why we're getting records that feel more like extended EPs. And judging by comments from the band, that's how it's going to be from now on.
But we shouldn't complain when we're getting offerings that are this good. This band could have imploded a long time ago. This could be band totally lost to a preoccupation with making the perfect post-OKC record.
Instead, we have a band experiencing regular moments of clarity, which in the context of their predeliction for making albums that are nothing if not murky, challenging, experimentative and multi-dimensional is even more of an achievement.
We have to appreciate this band, their albums and the fact that they're still here, making the kind of cerebral music we'd all attempt to make if we had even one millionth of the creative talent.
you know it was the Diver-era In Rainbows review
the persuaded me to do it like this in the first place.
YOU'VE CHANGED, MIKE.
Well...
I appreciate the prevailing wisdom that asserts In Rainbows is 'better' than Hail to the Thief, but I don't see it myself. Of course it's great, but listening to them back-to-back at the weekend only solidified the notion that while Thief is almost entirely excellent (I Will, anyone?) Rainbows doesn't, not quite, have that special, intangible appeal of the band at their best. (Which I think Limbs does, though in a different, more cryptic kind of way.)
Fair play DIS
Well done for not being rushed into a review. As a music blogger who always gets his music on release day, I don't have the luxury of time to put together reviews, but I think a minimum of three full listens is required to put together anything like a well-reasoned opinion of an album. Here's my two cents on TKOL anyway: http://keepitlikeasecretblog.blogspot.com/2011/02/review-radiohead-king-of-limbs.html
Well, I mean you could say that about ALL the reviews of this record
I doubt many people were waiting for Tim Jonze to finish his Guardian review before making up their mind as to whether to buy. Heck, given the fact most records leak these days, you could probably say that about all music journalism (many people have).
But I don't think any of us are really in this to influence sales figures - why have a rushed piece of writing when you can have a more considered one? In a month's time this silly feeding frenzy will have died down and it'll be about time for a slightly cooler headed appraisal. And you know, I think In Rainbows shifted about three million copies and topped the charts transatlantically with the 'proper' release, so it's not a totally irrelevant date.
I think people read reviews these days to see if the 'critics' will back up their own opinion of an album.
If you think an album's really good then you can't help but feel smug when you see reviews popping up that confirm your impressions. I think we like to feel like we posses a an 'ear' for great music and that massages our ego a bit.
Yep, httt
Was a bit overworked, im glad someone else thinks so, I wasnt a massive fan of kid a, but hail seemed like an Lp based on 'Climbing up the walls'
I think I started listening to a lot of Stereolab when that Lp was about,(still do now!)
Someone said on the above statements that Kol may be thier most accessable record, I tend to agree. In Rainbows was far from a difficult listen with some "6music friendly" tracks
The main thing that sticks out for me with Kol is the lush choral quality of one or two of the tracks.
I'm struggling to think of any song on Hail to the Thief
that seems to be based on Climbing Up the Walls.
oh gawwd..
King of Limbs is so NOT accessible. I'd say it there was least immediate record. But for its lack of "obvious chorus" tracks and general concord (first half and second halves couldn't be any more contrasting) we're offered subtlety and even greater texture.
Although he isn't exactly bashing out guitar solos, you get the impression that Jonny's influence was pretty big on this record (possibly, and quite glibly: first half Thom, second half Jonny?)
Good point...
I also like the influence that Colin's bass playing has on the record. It absolutely dominates the first five tracks...so thick and powerful. He's a vastly underrated bass player and he creates so much of the record's atmosphere. Phil Selway's jazz-inflected drumming is magnificent too. In fact, it's only Ed that I worry about. What has he been up to?!
great record
but i get the impression that because loads of people are saying "lets see how it pans out" that not many people are falling head over heels for it. when i heard in rainbows after a few listens i was ready to give up everything to listen to it non stop for as long as i could, same with kid a, ok comp and the bends. of course radiohead dont generally make bad music so while all evidence points to this album not being the best loved, i agree with those who say lets just enjoy the consistent quality that radiohead never fail to deliver. hail to the lads.
yup..
the first five or so tracks are complete Colin and Phil standouts
Separator..
is fast becoming one of my favourite Radiohead tracks.. it's just fucking awesome



Radiohead
Drowned in Manchester #15 – May 2013
armchair dancefloor 39: Mount Kimbie interview, Bobby Browser, Powell, Move D, Leon Vynehall...
DiS meets John Lydon - Part 1: The Man
DiS Does Singles 20.05.13: Paramore, Laura Marling, The Replacements
DiS joins the Music Alliance Pact + May 2013's global MAP compilation
Drowned in Bristol #12
Comments
- Post a new comment on this article