Hello all,

Dang I even have a reason to post, I just hope it hasn't been already discussed to death here.

Anyway, so far this morning I've been continuing an exercise I started yesterday, that being I've been listening to Radiohead's last 3 albums and trying to figure out WTF they thought they were accomplishing with these recordings. Now right off I'll state that I think "Hail to the thief" IS a better effort than were either "Kid A" or "Amnesiac".

I know I'm not the only one to wonder what happened to these guys after "Ok Computer", I think I know already but I believe it'd be interesting to see the sales figures for say "Amnesiac" vs say "The Bends". Not that sales represent anything truely meaningful but in this case it might. After releasing successful efforts in "The Bends" & "Ok Computer" one would be inclined to believe that "Kid A" & "Amnesiac" would sell even better due to the band having an existing fan base. All that said I doubt that is what has occured, again I've not seen any sales figures but I'd be appauled if my hunch isn't true.

I guess my real question is two fold, first why the drastic change in direction for the band? Were they bored? Were they concerned that their sound was becoming predictable? Do they honestly feel that the work expressed by "Kid A" & "Amnesiac" is an improvement over their previous work? Secondly, I wonder a bit if I'm not the culprit here, did they as they evolved simply move beyond my grasp?

I'll be brutally honest, I think "Kid A" & "Amnesiac" are terrible efforts, for me its basicly just a bunch of droning noise, I find them boring and depressing. In short I think I got ripped off!

Now "Hail to the thief" IMO is a superior effort to "KidA' / "Amnesiac", and I guess for me its roughly a tie for 3rd best in their lexicon with "Pablo Honey".

There then, I've layed out a sketch of my feelings on this subject, anyone else care to chime in, or perhaps even help me in my ignorance of the topic?

Cheers

Jefferson