Spectre - New Radiohead track

  On 12/27/2015 at 8:52 AM, beerwolf said:

brilliant tune

 

felt it ended a bit quick, could of gone for another few minutes, perhaps in a slightly different direction, still cool though

was watching the spectre leak and put this on instead of the other one for the opening music video thing and it's the same length. they probably commissioned a 3 minute song or something, because the tradition entails a full song and they didnt want a 6 minute radiohead song james bond music video

  On 12/27/2015 at 9:36 PM, very honest said:

 

  On 12/27/2015 at 8:52 AM, beerwolf said:

brilliant tune

 

felt it ended a bit quick, could of gone for another few minutes, perhaps in a slightly different direction, still cool though

 

was watching the spectre leak and put this on instead of the other one for the opening music video thing and it's the same length. they probably commissioned a 3 minute song or something, because the tradition entails a full song and they didnt want a 6 minute radiohead song james bond music video

 

That makes perfect sense

I think the producers missed a trick by not using this tune, not that I really care but just saying..

This Sam Smith chap is massive isn't he? I think he's fucking dire, unlike Adele who's alright in her own way (if that's your thing), Mister Smith is peculiar. I've seen him sing live on a few BBC programs and fail to see the what the fuss is about. Iffy Smithy.

Wow, this is gorgeous. (Don't really get all the odd time sig talk though -it's 6/8 start to finish. A little trippy at first I guess because there's nothing indicating where the 8th notes are.) It would seem out of place in a Bond film, so I get why it may have been rejected.

  On 12/28/2015 at 12:33 AM, Zephyr_Nova said:

Wow, this is gorgeous.

Obligatory qft

  On 12/28/2015 at 12:33 AM, Zephyr_Nova said:

Don't really get all the odd time sig talk though -it's 6/8 start to finish. A little trippy at first I guess because there's nothing indicating where the 8th notes are.

Yeah i pegged it as 6/8 pretty quickly though actually its the end that fucks with me head the most.

  On 12/28/2015 at 12:33 AM, Zephyr_Nova said:

It would seem out of place in a Bond film, so I get why it may have been rejected.

Pretty cool how this came to be, I'd like to think they went into it knowing full well it'd never fly but went where it took them anyway. I could give zero fucks for the James Bond "franchise" though, recycled hollywood tripe

the strings seem vaguely james bondy

  On 12/27/2015 at 6:08 PM, delet... said:

Don't like the track, messy pointlessness, now with string section. /waits for someone to ask what I'm doing on an electronic music forum if I don't like.. Haha, oh that's right, you can't do that for radiohead. ;-p

what do you actually like?

in fairness a radiohead bond theme was a bold move to even think about.

i hear 4/4 throughout except for the triplet bond-y bit in the middle.

what a fucking great track.

in fairness this is just unbelievably beautiful.

https://i.imgflip.com/wgbhy.jpg

Well I've found one of the most interesting aspects of recent Radiohead tracks is their tendency to leave room for multiple interpretations of a groove. I'm not even sure this is an intentional thing or not, but it keeps a lot of their music fresh and exciting for me. There are a few tracks between York's solo stuff and songs from King of Limbs that I'm not sure I have ever heard as intended. Like I will always hear a kick hitting after the down beat, and a snare doing something else unnatural, and the vocal rhythm will seem completely bizarre... and I'm pretty sure my brain's just locked in on a different grid than the intended one (ie imagined downbeat is an 8th note before or after the actual one, for example). There are a few Analord tracks that do that to me as well.

Haven't checked it, but I hear it as 6/8.

Also:

http://forum.watmm.com/topic/84743-losing-the-one-in-tracks-and-knowing-it/

Haha oh cool. I often thought about starting a thread like that, but I'm a pussy when it comes to actually starting threads here. I think one reason that happens to me so much is that headphones are my main mode of listening. As a result, I don't feel the kick or bass so much. Were I listening on speakers, those elements would create a more obvious pulse. But it seems with a lot of newer York/Radiohead recordings, the kicks are deliberately a bit thinner sounding, and the bass is often quite subtle too... like they expect it's going to be heard on a system with good subs. Anyway, whenever the first sound of a track starts is generally where I hear the downbeat, and the positioning of the bass, melody or kick drum does not necessary flip my brain out of that. (Unless I'm listening on a system with lots of bass.) It leads to some very interesting, jazzier reinterpretations of what would otherwise be pretty straight forward songs.

  On 12/28/2015 at 5:44 AM, kaini said:

 

  On 12/27/2015 at 6:08 PM, delet... said:

Don't like the track, messy pointlessness, now with string section. /waits for someone to ask what I'm doing on an electronic music forum if I don't like.. Haha, oh that's right, you can't do that for radiohead. ;-p

 

what do you actually like?

 

I am pretty sure it's shitposting on watmm and anime.

I like this way more than what was picked for the movie. This one has a memorable sound. But I have to admit, I'm getting a tiny bit tired of Thom Yorke. His vocal makes absolutely no sense anymore.

  On 12/28/2015 at 9:19 AM, Squee said:

But I have to admit, I'm getting a tiny bit tired of Thom Yorke. His vocal makes absolutely no sense anymore.

I was like that when In Rainbows came out, I was burnt out with his vocals and had no interest in them. Jeez did I get nice surprise when I played In Rainbows last year

Maybe because I've avoided all his solo work and Atoms For Peace I'm pretty keen on new Radiohead

this is not what's happening! not 6/8, not 3/4...

this is !

Okay... well I'm pretty sure 6/8 was in my head throughout the entire song and each new phrase ends up starting on the 1. But maybe there is a way of getting 9 out of that somehow too. 6/8 just seemed the most logical.

It's in 3/4, but it swings, so the subdivisions are triplets. So I guess a quick 9/8 might also be correct. The piano is syncopated, which can throw the listener off.

Anywho, been listening to this track multiple times a day. It's my favorite thing they've written in a while.

  On 12/27/2015 at 7:50 PM, flacid said:

His voice is the best instrument Radiohead have ever had.

Absolutely. He has one of the best voices I've ever heard, and not just because it sounds good, but because it morphs and moves and flows with any song he adds it to. It is an instrument, for sure.

I remember hearing this track and it pissed me off because there seems to be an implication that this guy can sing better than Thom, like this is 15 Step done RIGHT. Fuck that.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fhIqc-mpVL0

chiming in that the last two albums were nice and radiohead has my approval

  On 12/29/2015 at 4:54 PM, android402 said:

It's in 3/4, but it swings, so the subdivisions are triplets. So I guess a quick 9/8 might also be correct. The piano is syncopated, which can throw the listener off.

I'm really curious to understand where you guys are getting the 9 from... unless you're talking about that one bar in the instrumental section that has and extra 3 beats. Aside from that I hear it as a very straight forward 6/8, piano doing mostly quarter note triplets. (The ride plays the 8th notes during the instrumental section, in case that helps elucidate what I mean by 6/8. That's not meant to sound patronizing, just trying to clarify.) I would like to envision the song with the 9/8 thing though, because that sounds like it would be pretty interesting.

Also, all these different interpretations of the time signature reminds me of that spinning dancer illusion. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spinning_Dancer) I used to be able to see her spin both ways, now it's always counterclockwise.

  On 12/30/2015 at 9:07 AM, Zephyr_Nova said:

 

  On 12/29/2015 at 4:54 PM, android402 said:

It's in 3/4, but it swings, so the subdivisions are triplets. So I guess a quick 9/8 might also be correct. The piano is syncopated, which can throw the listener off.

 

I'm really curious to understand where you guys are getting the 9 from... unless you're talking about that one bar in the instrumental section that has and extra 3 beats. Aside from that I hear it as a very straight forward 6/8, piano doing mostly quarter note triplets. (The ride plays the 8th notes during the instrumental section, in case that helps elucidate what I mean by 6/8. That's not meant to sound patronizing, just trying to clarify.) I would like to envision the song with the 9/8 thing though, because that sounds like it would be pretty interesting.

 

it's tricky also for me, but sometimes it is simple as like:

1____2____3____

1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3

3 big ones subdivided in triplets, after the 3 big ones, i mean, one bar, you have 9 triplets in one bar...

if you're writing the big ones, you use a 4 under the numer of big ones, 3/4, but if you write the little ones, you use an 8 under the number of little ones, in this case, 9/8...

little ones big ones, quavers and whatnot you get it...

i guess a 6/8 would be:

1___ 2____

1 2 3 1 2 3

it ends up being a binary compass instead of the 9/8 which is ternary? something like that...

  On 12/30/2015 at 9:07 AM, Zephyr_Nova said:

 

  On 12/29/2015 at 4:54 PM, android402 said:

It's in 3/4, but it swings, so the subdivisions are triplets. So I guess a quick 9/8 might also be correct. The piano is syncopated, which can throw the listener off.

 

I'm really curious to understand where you guys are getting the 9 from... unless you're talking about that one bar in the instrumental section that has and extra 3 beats. Aside from that I hear it as a very straight forward 6/8, piano doing mostly quarter note triplets. (The ride plays the 8th notes during the instrumental section, in case that helps elucidate what I mean by 6/8. That's not meant to sound patronizing, just trying to clarify.) I would like to envision the song with the 9/8 thing though, because that sounds like it would be pretty interesting.