Jump to content

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, hysterical.useless said:

Not to mention that on the OKNOTOK reissue they obviously "tidied up" those unreleased tracks with overdubs (e.g., the strings on Man of War). It's possible that they toy with HTTT like that.

The jury's still out on how much of Man of War was an old recording - I suspect none of it. It's also not really a great example when there was no already-released version of the song.

The OKC remaster is the only precedent we have, right? Especially Let Down, with its added bleeps and bloops.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 624
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Radiohead have a long history of clearly and succinctly communicating the band's future intentions.

The spelling is actually "whoops". Educate yourself before posting again please. Unbelievable.

Thanks y'all.  I got lucky and had "good" cancer. Low risk of recurrence. I should have many years ahead of me in which to think back nostalgically about the collagen I used to have.  But as I've

Posted Images

2 minutes ago, Duff said:

The jury's still out on how much of Man of War was an old recording - I suspect none of it. It's also not really a great example when there was no already-released version of the song.

The OKC remaster is the only precedent we have, right? Especially Let Down, with its added bleeps and bloops.

The Man of War recording sounded like a mix of old and new recordings. The vocals were obviously new as were the strings because they were credited to the same recording location as the rest of AMSP, if I’m remembering correctly. 

The piano at the very least though was definitely recorded back during the OKC sessions, it sounds almost like it was ripped directly from Karma Police. They don’t really record their piano bits with that kind of sound anymore.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Duff said:

I do sorta kinda wonder if we might see some new tidied-up version of HTTT come the anniversary, maybe with a very different mix, different tracklisting, and possibly even some overdubs. An opportunity to rectify those things that bother them.

It would be very unlike them, but then again they did do the OKNOTOK reissue and I would have bet against that too.

I'd be into that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Fake Chinese Robert Plant said:

The Man of War recording sounded like a mix of old and new recordings. The vocals were obviously new as were the strings because they were credited to the same recording location as the rest of AMSP, if I’m remembering correctly. 

The piano at the very least though was definitely recorded back during the OKC sessions, it sounds almost like it was ripped directly from Karma Police. They don’t really record their piano bits with that kind of sound anymore.

I find the reasoning behind the piano being an older recording extremely unconvincing. For starters, there is no such thing as a "1996 piano sound". They can make the instrument sound million different ways and they probably just went with what they thought a Bond theme should sound like. Also none of the pre-2017 versions of Man of War I've ever heard contained that piano part and it still seems like the weakest element of the track. Not sure why they'd bother recording over 20-years-old piano track, when making it all from scratch would have been so much easier for them.

So my money is on a completely new recording.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Why would they even bother on recording an entire song for a reissue box? The strings are new, and perhaps some other instruments like the piano, but that's about it... I don't think Thom would go through too much trouble tbh... and we already know they recorded the vocals back then (as registered in MPIE). 

Edited by In Portrait
Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, In Portrait said:

Why would they even bother on recording an entire song for a reissue box? The strings are new, and perhaps some other instruments like the piano, but that's about it... I don't think Thom would go through too much trouble tbh... and we already know they recorded the vocals back then (as registered in MPIE). 

They didn't record it for the reissue, they did it for the Bond film and it got rejected.

The MPIE recording session was at least the second attempt at recording it. They definitely did it first at the end of 1995 around the time they did Lucky.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, In Portrait said:

Are u talking about Spectre? Is this checked? 

Multiple sources have reported that they first did Man Of War, which was rejected for being written 20 years ago and then they did Spectre which was rejected for being too melancholy.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, no452 said:

Multiple sources have reported that they first did Man Of War, which was rejected for being written 20 years ago and then they did Spectre which was rejected for being too melancholy.

Had no idea! It's a bit weird... But OK. 

Edited by In Portrait
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, In Portrait said:

I'm listening to Man Of War right now, and that's Thom from the 90s singing... 

So it goes, the Man of War debate. Some people hear 90s Thom, others insist it's modern Thom, others still insist it's an edit of takes from both periods.

There's no evidence for any of it, but we know at least some of the song was recorded recently, and possibly all of it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Duff said:

So it goes, the Man of War debate. Some people hear 90s Thom, others insist it's modern Thom, others still insist it's an edit of takes from both periods.

There's no evidence for any of it, but we know at least some of the song was recorded recently, and possibly all of it.

And what do you think Duff? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, In Portrait said:

And what do you think Duff? 

For all my Radiohead nerdistry that's just not the kind of thing I listen for. Thom always just sounds like Thom to me. And I'm suspicious of people who claim they can forensically date that sort of thing, because I think it's so easy to read into things.

If I had to bet, I'd bet they did it all from scratch. Unless you're making something weirdly specific like a posthumous Michael Jackson album or something, blending takes and elements from different decades is such an unusual thing to do, and it's usually hard, too. So without good reason to think otherwise I assume they didn't do that.

The only reason they would have done it would be for symbolic/sentimental ones - like let's blend these eras as a comment on how this song has taken decades to finish, etc. But that's still a stretch.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, In Portrait said:

I'm listening to Man Of War right now, and that's Thom from the 90s singing... 

Nah, he sounds different than any version of the song from that era. The vocals and strings definitely sound new to me. His delivery is different than any other version of the song I've heard. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Duff said:

For all my Radiohead nerdistry that's just not the kind of thing I listen for. Thom always just sounds like Thom to me. And I'm suspicious of people who claim they can forensically date that sort of thing, because I think it's so easy to read into things.

If I had to bet, I'd bet they did it all from scratch. Unless you're making something weirdly specific like a posthumous Michael Jackson album or something, blending takes and elements from different decades is such an unusual thing to do, and it's usually hard, too. So without good reason to think otherwise I assume they didn't do that.

The only reason they would have done it would be for symbolic/sentimental ones - like let's blend these eras as a comment on how this song has taken decades to finish, etc. But that's still a stretch.

It's not that he doesn't sound like Thom, his style has evolved over time, and there are parts of MoW that are sung with a more modern Thom style than the way he was singing it back then.

But you're right, we won't know for sure unless they tell us one day.

Edited by Black Jesus
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

My issue with only reissuing certain albums is the hierarchy it establishes.

Yeah OK Computer, Kid A are better than Hail To The Thief but there's an artistry and meaning to an entire discography – what happens when, the jaunts outward for solo projects, the trajectory. It's kind of a whole piece in itself and each album informs the other. I was pretty shocked when they actually decided to reissue OK Computer, happy they did, because it just seemed completely foreign from their MO.

The main thing I'm looking forward to about this Kid A anniversary edition is the likely tour. I can't see them spending money on promotion and bringing back a lauded album and not touring behind it. Schedule permitting I reckon we'll see another tent tour. I would absolutely hate them to play the album start to finish, but they can do it in spirit. One or two new songs, play the No Surprises and Fake Plastic Trees, but to open with Everything In Its Right Place a lot, bring back Optimistic and Treefingers, even give some airtime to some of those Amnesiac songs and its b-sides...

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, no452 said:

I find the reasoning behind the piano being an older recording extremely unconvincing. For starters, there is no such thing as a "1996 piano sound". They can make the instrument sound million different ways and they probably just went with what they thought a Bond theme should sound like. Also none of the pre-2017 versions of Man of War I've ever heard contained that piano part and it still seems like the weakest element of the track. Not sure why they'd bother recording over 20-years-old piano track, when making it all from scratch would have been so much easier for them.

So my money is on a completely new recording.

I mean in terms of their production style, there absolutely is such a thing as a 1996 piano sound. Listen to that track and compare how it sounds to Karma Police and they’re basically identical. It’s super trebley and recorded (or at least played) in a way where you hear sort of the plunking sound of the piano strings being struck as it’s played. They haven’t really recorded their piano parts like that at all since OK Computer, they’ve always produced it with a much fuller, deeper sound compared to OKC and as it sounds on Man of War.

As to why they’d do this, who knows. Maybe they just liked how it sounds? It’s just a rejected movie theme and b-side for a reissue after all, it’s not something that’s a final version for one of their albums or whatever of that nature.

Edited by Fake Chinese Robert Plant
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Duff said:

For all my Radiohead nerdistry that's just not the kind of thing I listen for. Thom always just sounds like Thom to me. And I'm suspicious of people who claim they can forensically date that sort of thing, because I think it's so easy to read into things.

If I had to bet, I'd bet they did it all from scratch. Unless you're making something weirdly specific like a posthumous Michael Jackson album or something, blending takes and elements from different decades is such an unusual thing to do, and it's usually hard, too. So without good reason to think otherwise I assume they didn't do that.

The only reason they would have done it would be for symbolic/sentimental ones - like let's blend these eras as a comment on how this song has taken decades to finish, etc. But that's still a stretch.

You think the band will record the same exact song all over again 20 years later (with the same arrangements from back then)? You guys don't know this band already? 

What's the point on releasing new recorded material when you already have it recorded the EXACT same way and putting it on a 20 anniversary album box set? 

Again, for me they just added the strings to an old take they already had. 

Edited by In Portrait
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...