Switch to full style
Random chat: movies, books, games, technology, etcetera.
Post a reply

Re: THE ANGRY RANT THREAD!!!!!!!1111!

Wed Oct 04, 2017 11:36 am

2020k wrote:I understand & I'm mad too, but I want one day or space where I don't have to think of a Cheeto. I don't even like Cheetos NORMALLY.



Totally get it.

Re: THE ANGRY RANT THREAD!!!!!!!1111!

Thu Oct 05, 2017 2:49 pm

2020k wrote:
TheFadeBeta wrote:I wanted to write a few topics on this douche bag,however,way to many things that piss me off to write them all out.

I can't stop you, but please don't. We have enough topics on that asshole here and it's extremely exhausting trying to navigate the world knowing at literally every turn, online or offline, there's a pandora's box of political nonsense waiting to throw itself at an unsuspecting me, who's just queued up waiting for his coffee at the café.

I understand & I'm mad too, but I want one day or space where I don't have to think of a Cheeto. I don't even like Cheetos NORMALLY.

It's much easier to control yourself than the world.

Re: THE ANGRY RANT THREAD!!!!!!!1111!

Sat Nov 04, 2017 6:42 pm

my anger is inexpressible

Re: THE ANGRY RANT THREAD!!!!!!!1111!

Wed Nov 08, 2017 6:26 pm

Aerial Boundaries wrote:my anger is inexpressible

what are you angry about?

Re: THE ANGRY RANT THREAD!!!!!!!1111!

Sat Nov 18, 2017 11:25 am

Echo the Sun wrote:
Aerial Boundaries wrote:my anger is inexpressible

what are you angry about?

Aerial Boundaries wrote:my anger is inexpressible

Re: THE ANGRY RANT THREAD!!!!!!!1111!

Mon Nov 20, 2017 7:18 pm

Jonse wrote:
Echo the Sun wrote:
Aerial Boundaries wrote:my anger is inexpressible

what are you angry about?

Aerial Boundaries wrote:my anger is inexpressible

He said his anger was inexpressible, not its cause

Re: THE ANGRY RANT THREAD!!!!!!!1111!

Sun Dec 10, 2017 9:53 am

Echo the Sun wrote:He said his anger was inexpressible, not its cause


The cause need not be conveyed. Clearly something [was/is] wrong and it incited anger that, if not universal to everyone else, becomes inexpressible. Whether or not his logic behind the anger is sound is irrelevant to the intended message.

Re: THE ANGRY RANT THREAD!!!!!!!1111!

Tue Dec 19, 2017 11:58 am

My [word doesn't exist in English] is expressible at about 10% thanks to whoever took the time to make this video.

Re: THE ANGRY RANT THREAD!!!!!!!1111!

Sat Dec 30, 2017 4:53 pm

Jonse wrote:The cause need not be conveyed.

lol I think you're missing my point, I asked in case he wanted to talk about it. Sometimes that helps, even when you're so angry that language fails to express it.

Re: THE ANGRY RANT THREAD!!!!!!!1111!

Tue Jan 02, 2018 3:58 pm

Jonse wrote:My [word doesn't exist in English] is expressible at about 10% thanks to whoever took the time to make this video.



:shock: That was amazing. Listened the whole thing.

Re: THE ANGRY RANT THREAD!!!!!!!1111!

Tue Jan 02, 2018 8:15 pm

Jonse wrote:My [word doesn't exist in English] is expressible at about 10% thanks to whoever took the time to make this video.


This shows that the vast majority of radiohead tracks are somewhere around 5:20 in length.

Its actually really sudden, the drop off point.

Re: THE ANGRY RANT THREAD!!!!!!!1111!

Wed Jan 03, 2018 1:25 pm

I wonder what the drop-off point is of all the pop/rock music in the world stacked on top of each other. My guess is around 5:20.

Re: THE ANGRY RANT THREAD!!!!!!!1111!

Thu Jan 04, 2018 6:52 am

That would most certainly be due to a meeting re: Bohemian Rhapsody/the possible length one might be able to have the radio edit of a song play for and hold the listener's attention.

They seem oblivious though that they demonstrated it's actually 6:27 in 1997, still to this day.

Then again, this is the same band that put said radio edit on the album, unfortunately very audibly trimmed at parts. I still don't know why. They think HTTT's length is "the problem" with that record. It's not. It's the content of the record. OKC is really close. I'm 100% positive at this point that if Paranoid Android were its appropriate eight to eleven minutes long, the impact of the record would have varied by approximately 0%.

Re: THE ANGRY RANT THREAD!!!!!!!1111!

Thu Jan 04, 2018 9:14 am

Jonse wrote:That would most certainly be due to a meeting re: Bohemian Rhapsody/the possible length one might be able to have the radio edit of a song play for and hold the listener's attention.

They seem oblivious though that they demonstrated it's actually 6:27 in 1997, still to this day.

Then again, this is the same band that put said radio edit on the album, unfortunately very audibly trimmed at parts. I still don't know why. They think HTTT's length is "the problem" with that record. It's not. It's the content of the record. OKC is really close. I'm 100% positive at this point that if Paranoid Android were its appropriate eight to eleven minutes long, the impact of the record would have varied by approximately 0%.


Was Paranoid Android originally supposed to be longer than its ~6 minute version?
I thought that was the longform as apparently various outlets were on their knees asking for a radio edit, but Radiohead didn't deliver (I'm not very knowledgeable on the subject, though)

Re: THE ANGRY RANT THREAD!!!!!!!1111!

Thu Jan 04, 2018 11:18 am

If I'm remembering correctly, I believe there was an 11 minute version that included a long psychadelic organ solo which got trimmed down to the version we know

Re: THE ANGRY RANT THREAD!!!!!!!1111!

Thu Jan 04, 2018 11:35 am

Correct. Paranoid Android was three separate songs welded together as I recall.

Re: THE ANGRY RANT THREAD!!!!!!!1111!

Fri Jan 05, 2018 6:27 am

Found this for all those interested:

Not sure if its the 'Original' original, but it is certainly remarkably different.
https://youtu.be/-kimc8cak-c

Re: THE ANGRY RANT THREAD!!!!!!!1111!

Fri Jan 05, 2018 12:37 pm

I remain impossibly null
Certain seats are claimed and threatened
This path can't break through decision
Shrouded in crevasse and all gravity
Day thereafter, layer rounds
Down
And again as was before interest
No single eye in witness, incoerenc-Insincere
Filliers' jenever coats a game of telephone speaking my hardest
Can't believe a word said forthwith
Why are you still here?
Why are you still here?
(perhaps, doesn't mean a thing; I am sorry, perhaps not as lucid as before though more, even, could be) Why are you still here?

Re: THE ANGRY RANT THREAD!!!!!!!1111!

Fri Jan 05, 2018 12:48 pm

Negamuse wrote:If I'm remembering correctly, I believe there was an 11 minute version that included a long psychadelic organ solo which got trimmed down to the version we know


i did my research on this one.

Paranoid Android was performed in many different ways, though live (we do not have many recordings of this version), it ranged anywhere from eight to apparently upwards of 15 minutes.

Jonny Greenwood had a long organ solo prior to Thom's vocals in the section Jonny wrote - each member writing one part of the song: Colin the opening, Ed the chorus, Thom the 'angry' bits, Jonny the 'bridge' (or half the track, really), Phil the bit with the time changes (though I might be w- I am probably half-right/wrong though it was something akin to that, I know Thom wrote the bit that begins, "Ambition makes you look pretty ugly", based on anecdotal experience) to my understanding, therefore, the riff that we hear and quickly identify as Paranoid Android.

Whatever the facts are though, the studio version after numerous live versions full of both excessive/perfect organ and guitar wankery, the track is really....if I had to guess, approx. 9-10 minutes long in full. This is with some of Jonny's bit and just some extension of what is already there.

Still conclude, again, that a 9 or 10 minute Paranoid Android would not have hindered the record and is merely the product of Radiohead trying so desperately not to be what they pragmatically are which is prog rock under the guise of "alt" or "art". Perhaps what they were then or what they might be on a whole though Kid A/mnesiac quickly threw away all reservations they had.

Re: THE ANGRY RANT THREAD!!!!!!!1111!

Fri Jan 05, 2018 3:23 pm

That's really interesting, thanks. A song like that I guess it's pretty much impossible to arrive in one lump without things being trimmed and lost along the way. I've always thought it pretty remarkable it holds together as well as it does for all the swerves and changes in tone.
Post a reply