Jump to content

Kid A 20th Anniversary


Skuj

Recommended Posts

On 5/10/2021 at 1:01 PM, nowhere said:

No they pulled the songs from iTunes years ago, around 2015-6 when the back catalog was purchased by XL from EMI’s successor company. These tracks were removed because they were part of the 2009-10 reissue series that was not approved by Radiohead, but like the 2008 greatest hits, was released by EMI after they left the label in 2007. Most of the songs on the 2009 Amnesiac reissue are simply the b-sides of Amnesiac, which continued to be available. But the Canal Plus live tracks were only ever officially released as part of that EMI reissue the band didn’t approve—so those particular tracks did not stay on streaming/download services after XL bought their catalog from EMI. In fact they were deleted to such an extent that even purchasers would could longer access or even see the songs.

Well, what I noticed recently is they seem to be in the process of returning these bonus tracks into iTunes. So far even if you once bought the tracks, you still can’t re-download or play them via iTunes, but you will at least now see the track names reappearing in the iTunes purchased list, after years of being invisible. If you try to play them it will say the track is being “modified.”

I don’t even think it’s a certainty that the Canal Plus live material (or the BBC live tracks from the Kid A reissue, which also reappeared recently) will end up being included in whatever Kid A and Amnesiac reissue they’re working on, but maybe it’s like with registering song titles far in advance for copyright reasons, they give iTunes a long lead time with the provisional tracklist or at least any songs that might have been hidden in their old iTunes catalog and they now want to start bringing back.

Considering that Radiohead’s back catalog has not changed hands since 2015-6 (and there are no rumors that it has recently been sold by XL to another party) the only reason for the sudden reappearance of those tracks now would be if iTunes radically changed their protocol w/r/t availability of past purchases (I haven’t seen any other evidence this is the case) or more likely, Radiohead and their current label XL are making preparations to rerelease some or all of these once-hidden songs along with probably some unheard ones.

Edit: idk why I posted so many words on this. Amnesiac and Kid A sessions is the only reissue I could care about (unless they drop the Spike Stent version of IR and the Q-tip version of TKOL* which will never happen) but I still don’t really care much... maybe if they make it so all profits are for some cause besides their own asses. I really just want to hear Dogwander.

The what

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

people aren't discussing The Smile because the board is obviously dead. your, um, extremely specific opinions might find a more engaged audience elsewhere. they're so negative and conflated with political issues that it seems unlikely that you're actually interested in discussion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

smug dismissal of The Smile yields no space for insight or conversation and your extreme and false portrayal of the bands politics is obviously terminally influenced by one disagreement (they played a gig in Israel). i find your leaps of logic hard to follow and references to 'Thom/fan sexual relationships' are unsubstantiated forum gossip.

your essays are better posted on your blog. let this board rest in peace.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't listened to it because I was doing something when I found out about it and forgot until now. They are being notably quiet on Palestine which is disappointing but not surprising. Generally I can't be bothered to read 10 paragraph posts of any type but especially not really ones that are like "the band that we are all here because we like are actually bad just like everything else in the world"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

stop posting about how shit I, Israel and Radiohead are and go and enjoy your life.

the era of big forum essay back and forth has passed, for better and worse. probably the Radiohead reddit is the best place to have a discussion now. i don't want to see this once magnificent but now dead/sleeping forum overpowered by your constantly off topic and/or angry contributions. i strongly feel that your arguments need to be strengthened by rigorous engagement with a more active community, which we here at Mortigi Tempo are unfortunately unable to provide you with at the current time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

complete Kid Amnesiac sessions/outtakes are the holy grail of the fandom but I felt pretty burnt by the OKC 20th: only three properly presented outtakes, one of which had brand new vocals/strings (Big Boots) and one a demo presented as a finished song, with video and everything, which doesn't even sound like it was OKC era (Lift). nobody needed the remaster and i'm under the impression the boxset didn't do as well as they hoped seeing as it's still widely available. the cassette tape was some weird fetish shit, so their ideas of doing something cool/special worry me a bit... what are we getting this time, minidiscs in honour of Thom losing his demos to a lightning strike?

one cool idea might be to present the material in a boxset as a reimagined double album, which was always the big 'what if?' at the time. it's bizarre in retrospect how they played loads of Amnesiac songs live directly before and after Kid A's release. poorly managed hype and confusion around the new songs did hurt the band critically, and you wonder how late in the day Kid A's tracklist was finalised. they didn't want to overwhelm people at the time, but that hardly matters now.

whatever happens, i hope they're more generous than they were with OKNOTOK, because there should be an absolute mountain of interesting versions/sessions/outtakes here and we all know it. last time out, only hackers saved us from a future OKC 30th edition with the complete recording sessions, which £100 boxset purchasers should have been getting in the first place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, pennyroyalty said:

complete Kid Amnesiac sessions/outtakes are the holy grail of the fandom but I felt pretty burnt by the OKC 20th.

This is how I feel about it. It's how I feel about all of their releases, honestly. They've always sat really weird on the shelf and just don't get used because they're so awkward. I sold my In Rainbows and AMSP boxsets of Discogs last year, and I've trying to get rid of my 10" editions of Kid A and Amnesiac. Partly why I hope they do release a new thing and do it properly. They've never really been presented properly in a large format, imo. (Although I've never seen that award-winning Amnesiac box in the flesh.) It's taken over a decade, but think I've learned the hard way that a solid normal edition of these albums is better than some bloated excuse to house Stanley's bonus doodles.

Saying that, I do think the OKNOTOK box was the most successful thing they've done so far in that regard. It is nice to have all those b-sides together in one place, and I liked the listening experience of the cassette, honestly. But the artwork presentation is pretty terrible. 

Having a Kid Amnesiac version of that would definitely be the holy grail. Cohesive, as-first-intended boxset, b-sides, all that web art stuff. A large part of that era's whole vibe is surely exploring the potentials of the internet and the transparency of the process. Never was a fan of OKC's prog-Orwellian vibe, personally. Showing the album off as not just a goodbye to shitty Britpop Nineties but as an embrace of the 21st century would be a wonderful thing to celebrate.

17 hours ago, pennyroyalty said:

whatever happens, i hope they're more generous than they were with OKNOTOK, because there should be an absolute mountain of interesting versions/sessions/outtakes here and we all know it. last time out, only hackers saved us from a future OKC 30th edition with the complete recording sessions, which £100 boxset purchasers should have been getting in the first place.

Agreed there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Pickled Dog said:

Never was a fan of OKC's prog-Orwellian vibe, personally. Showing the album off as not just a goodbye to shitty Britpop Nineties but as an embrace of the 21st century would be a wonderful thing to celebrate.

Saying that, the best response to that sentiment would probably be something a lot more adventurous than a vinyl boxset lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/6/2021 at 9:39 AM, Pickled Dog said:

This is how I feel about it. It's how I feel about all of their releases, honestly. They've always sat really weird on the shelf and just don't get used because they're so awkward. I sold my In Rainbows and AMSP boxsets of Discogs last year, and I've trying to get rid of my 10" editions of Kid A and Amnesiac. Partly why I hope they do release a new thing and do it properly. They've never really been presented properly in a large format, imo. (Although I've never seen that award-winning Amnesiac box in the flesh.) It's taken over a decade, but think I've learned the hard way that a solid normal edition of these albums is better than some bloated excuse to house Stanley's bonus doodles.

Saying that, I do think the OKNOTOK box was the most successful thing they've done so far in that regard. It is nice to have all those b-sides together in one place, and I liked the listening experience of the cassette, honestly. But the artwork presentation is pretty terrible. 

Having a Kid Amnesiac version of that would definitely be the holy grail. Cohesive, as-first-intended boxset, b-sides, all that web art stuff. A large part of that era's whole vibe is surely exploring the potentials of the internet and the transparency of the process. Never was a fan of OKC's prog-Orwellian vibe, personally. Showing the album off as not just a goodbye to shitty Britpop Nineties but as an embrace of the 21st century would be a wonderful thing to celebrate.

Agreed there.

I mean, if you just want to look at it and not have a physical copy, here's a link: http://web.archive.org/web/20081219080225/http://home.student.uu.se/hehi1133/artwork.htm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/8/2021 at 10:53 AM, yung midoriya said:

I mean, if you just want to look at it and not have a physical copy, here's a link: http://web.archive.org/web/20081219080225/http://home.student.uu.se/hehi1133/artwork.htm

haha thanks, i know what it was like. i etched it onto my brain clicking through it obsessively at the time. i just mean, if you want to celebrate a particular "era", i'm curious as to how you can best do that when so much of that "era" was basically online. they fully embraced the blogging era, but the worst way to celebrate that time and what it meant is by just printing it off and binding it. at least OKNOTOK made sense because it was all pretty analog, with notebooks and stuff, but the RH online turn is harder to commemorate properly, i think.

i dunno. maybe i'm just being a pedant and overthinking it, but i'd be cool with them doing something that wasn't a standard shelf-hogging boxset for once.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

most of the b-sides are on the tape. if there were any legit concerns about samples, they would have been sorted a while back. it's pretty obvious with Idioteque why they had to sleeve note credit the sample. the LSP sample, like the Alice Coltrane harps in MPS, aren't much more than incidental ambience. nobody wants to live in the world where you can't have fun with stuff like that, and if it was going to be a problem, it would have been trivially easy for Radiohead to record alternative parts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i guess with realistic expectations this reissue is looking okay.

no idea why the cassette tape thing is still a thing. it kind of made some sense with OKC20, but as someone who lived the 'tape to cd' era very vividly (that's how i listened to OKC/The Bends), tapes were just homemade compilation fodder by '00/'01.

bands are allowed to feed their whales. if they don't, these products don't exist. i wish Radiohead would bear in mind that a lot of the people who were loving these records as teens back in the day are likely the same people who got fucked by the constant crisis and economic wasteland of the 20 years since. this is particularly ironic with Radiohead because they pretty specifically saw it coming. OKC20 was a disaster in this regard, with exclusive material being tied to a £100 collectors fetish tape. i'll give them some credit here for the priciest thing being £80 (i don't buy vinyl anyway) and  crucially, all the new music is on the basic cd... and if that material is going up on spotify etcetera, which i assume it is, then i won't grumble.

i wasn't thinking about getting a new song because the excitement is really all the false starts and different versions of known stuff. i'm not surprised that something like 'if you say the word' exists, but you probably don't want to draw too much attention to it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi, just reconnected after a couple of years (when I thought the site was actually dead - I think there were Russian squatters the last time I looked).  Good to see some old faces still here (Penny!) and excited about this new release.  

Q: from the 1st look I had at WASTE, am I right that to get the disk of new material, the whole (3 cd) KidAmnesia set has to be purchased?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, nowhere said:

Yeah... for better or worse, this is not how copyright law works. Even pre-Blurred Lines ruling (which Thom, incidentally, supported) it has been illegal to use uncredited samples since the early ‘90s. It has had a devastating effect on certain genres of music—but the millionnaire Brit rock scene was not among them. Sample snitching isn’t a thing when you’re a multi millionnaire band, not even to mention a white band sampling black artists. Radiohead did not get their start at block parties in Bronx projects. Radiohead did not lack for funds in 2000-1 nor do they now. There is no financial or cultural justification for Radiohead to refuse to pay the Miles Davis and Isaac Hayes estate and, much more importantly, the non-household-name band members of those groups whose parts they stole, musicians whose families may even be impoverished. They can (and could) afford it. 

Alice Coltrane may be a different story. Has it even been verified those are her harp parts? They also seem on good terms with her family (FlyLo), so there was some type of informal permission, retroactive or not. And it was not even on a song, really, so I see your point there. Everyone knew that wasn’t a member of Radiohead playing harp, whoever was doing it. Should’ve been credited, and frankly insulting that they didn’t (Coltrane was still alive at the time), but maybe not THAT big a deal. But this isn’t the case with Davis and Hayes. They integrated those bands’ samples together with their own songs, without offering proper credit to the musicians. Everyone assumed that was Colin or Jonny’s keyboard on LSP, or Phil doing his best Don Alias on Kinetic.

Radiohead have been very litigious in taking other acts to court for far, far less. Lana Del Rey did not sample Radiohead. Why should Radiohead reap the benefits of settlement bounties by suing other acts for merely copying the “feel” or common chord progressions of their songs when they themselves not only copied *those* songs in the first place, but used the exact original recordings of numerous bands without permission or credit? Why do they deserve any benefit of the doubt?

I don’t have any problem with the tape format, it’s better than vinyl in most ways, but the reason tapes are cool is they can hold a bunch of music in a small size and you can usually get them for a quarter or less the price of vinyl. Putting only a few of the weaker b-sides on a tape and then charging a hundred bucks is laughable.

There is of course no ethical way to dump out a large physical reissue of a supposedly anti corporate, climate emergency inspired album that sounds perfectly fine in the currently available versions. There are however, ways to do this that are aesthetically interesting or appealing, and ways that aren’t. One can only hope they knowingly chose the latter path because certain members of the band (Thom perhaps) were so unexcited about the prospect of a reissue they refused to participate at all.

 

consider the possibility that i, random guy, may know at least as much about copyright law as you, random guy. i'm saying that the Isaac Hayes estate doesn't actually deserve all that much reward for the keyboard player on a live album on a cover of a Bacharach/David song playing a line which Radiohead used for ambient effect and isn't really integral to the song. (it's also not like Miles Davis himself literally came up with the drumline sampled on Kinetic, which again is pretty innocuous in and of itself, it would have been easy for Selway to play it or something close). the Blurred Lines ruling was awful for artists and will hopefully be overturned or rendered defunct going forward. can you link to Thom supporting it?

given no evidence to the contrary, i'd also assume that the samples were cleared. just because they're not credited in a sleeve note doesn't mean they weren't. while the Hayes/Bacharach sample was a recent discovery for fans, stuff like the Kinetic sample was well known years ago. the Alice Coltrane sample was spoken about at release. all these different artists, surely in 20 years we'd have heard something about an issue, if there were issues? why are you so forcefully assuming otherwise?

Radiohead don't fully control the publishing on Creep because the middle 8 is 'inspired' by the Hollies 'Air That I Breathe'. it was that Hollies issue that screwed Lana Del Ray, likely not anything coming from Radiohead themselves. 'Get Free' is also far more blatantly in debt to Creep/Air That I Breathe than anything else we're discussing, and Del Ray should have realised that long before it became a controversy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, nowhere said:

Thom was playing a show with Atoms for Peace in 2013 within a few days of the Gaye family’s lawsuit being launched. AFP played a live version (pretty awful version tbh) of Got to Give It Up, which was taken by most as an anti-Blurred Lines, pro-Gaye statement. Like most music fans at the time, he seems to have supported the lawsuit. I suppose in the end it was the judge’s fault for an overly broad ruling. I hate the way Gaye estate are demonized, when Robin Thicke absolutely needed to be stopped in what he was doing, it’s like if you hit someone in self defense and then you’re not only found not guilty yourself but a judge establishes a new right to just randomly punch people, that is entirely out of your hands.

That said, it’s interesting because I’ve heard songs predating Got to Give It Up that have a similar “feel” (recently heard one by the band Fanny from 1971). The ruling was detrimental overall. The point I was making is that, irrespective of this recent-ish ruling (which Radiohead’s lawyers have used—with their own consent, if not encouragement—to extract money from Lana del Rey), even long before that at the time of Kid A and Amnesiac’s original release, uncredited sampling was already very much illegal. And of the artists we can defend for breaking the law, a band with Radiohead’s wealth, sampling unsung ‘70s black artists, is not it.

You really think Lester Snell or Don Alias’s net worth is higher than the Greenwood brothers or Phil? (edit: Alias died in 2006. Even if he was a multi millionnaire—very doubtful—I’m sure his family has far less generational wealth than Radiohead. Fun fact though, he dated Joni Mitchell in the ‘70s.)

you said that Thom supported the Blurred Lines ruling, and that is absolutely not evidence of him supporting the Blurred Lines ruling. i highly doubt he does.

you're saying that uncleared samples are illegal, but you don't know that they didn't clear the samples. sleeve notes may not reflect all behind the scenes processes. sampling in general is a foggy issue with a lot of confusing and evolving case law. the most likely explanation may simply be that the samples were considered by all sides to be too minimal/inconsequential to merit any legal action/official credit. at the risk of anyone mistaking my googling powers for expertise, this 2016 case speaks of reinstating 'the de minimis doctrine, wherein only a minimal and insubstantial part of the original work had been copied in the new work'. the Hayes/Davis/Coltrane samples will be covered by that, and likely were in '00/'01.

the point i'm getting at with Kinetic is that Alias might not be getting any money even if the Miles Davis estate was paid. you're going deep into the ethical issues, so why be bound by bad laws/bad practices. overzealous sampling laws have hurt many black artists, and Radiohead's shout outs to different influences must have had an impact. there's this whole period in the British music press of critics mocking Kid A and its influences, rowing back against the post-Britpop diversity of the end of the nineties, hard selling retro rock by and for white kids. i can personally credit Radiohead with getting me into Miles Davis years before I might have otherwise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...