Hold Steady Dude Disses Radiohead, Digs Oasis
Ugh. Look it's Rock Interviews 101: a band slags another, and like a moth to the Flame, the internet will post it. Because it is inflammatory, and the Internet and Inflammatory are BFFs. So congrats Tad Kubler, you clearly wanted to be blogged, and now you are. The Hold Steady guitarist told BBC6 (via NME):
I think [Radiohead have] lost the plot," he said. "What are they doing? Where are they going? What's happening? I don't get it any more. They lost me."I still appreciate what they're doing, or what they're trying to do. But I think they're trying too hard not to be Radiohead. That seems a little ridiculous to me."
"I like them as a rock band, all the buttons and sequencing and stuff like that I don't really care for. I'm a fan of rock music and what they're doing now I don't think is very good."
And you already knew this bit:
"I love Oasis. I love them. I think that what they do is earnest. I think it's honest."
To recap: Oasis = earnest. Radiohead = not very good anymore. (Take it from THS, better to stay in one place than fuss with getting all innovate-y. OK?) Well this all works out because Noel would have words if that opinion was anything else. Meanwhile I wouldn't hold my breath for "Jockin' Jonny G" anytime soon.
Posted at 11:29 AM by amrit
Tags: Radiohead | The Hold Steady
Here's some real news: Hold Steady is touring with Drive-By Truckers
Thu Oct 30 Louisville KY COYOTE'S @ CITY BLOCK The Hold Steady (HS Closes)
Fri Oct 31 Nashville TN RYMAN AUDITORIUM The Hold Steady (DBT Closes)
Sat Nov 01 Atlanta GA TABERNACLE The Hold Steady (DBT Closes)
Sun Nov 02 Tallahassee FL THE MOON @ FSU The Hold Steady (HS Closes)
Mon Nov 03 Raleigh NC LINCOLN THEATRE The Hold Steady (DBT Closes)
Wed Nov 05 State College PA THE STATE THEATRE The Hold Steady (HS Closes)
Thu Nov 06 New York, NY TERMINAL 5 The Hold Steady (DBT Closes)
Fri Nov 07 New York, NY TERMINAL 5 The Hold Steady (THS Closes)
Sat Nov 08 Philadelphia, PA ELECTRIC FACTORY The Hold Steady (DBT Closes)
Sun Nov 09 Boston MA ORPHEUM THEATRE The Hold Steady (HS Closes)
Tue Nov 11 Toronto ONT PHOENIX THEATRE The Hold Steady (DBT Closes)
Wed Nov 12 Pittsburgh PA CARNEGIE MUSIC HALL The Hold Steady (HS Closes)
Thu Nov 13 Bloomington IN BLUEBIRD The Hold Steady (DBT Closes)
Fri Nov 14 Chicago IL RIVIERA The Hold Steady (HS Closes)
Sat Nov 15 Minneapolis MN FIRST AVENUE MAINROOM The Hold Steady (DBT Closes)
Sun Nov 16 Minneapolis MN FIRST AVENUE MAINROOM The Hold Steady (HS Closes)
Wed Nov 19 Boise ID THE BIG EASY The Hold Steady (DBT Closes)
Thu Nov 20 Seattle WA THE SHOWBOX The Hold Steady (HS Closes)
Fri Nov 21 Seattle WA THE SHOWBOX The Hold Steady (DBT Closes)
Sat Nov 22 Portland OR CRYSTAL BALLROOM The Hold Steady (HS Closes)
Sun Nov 23 San Francisco CA THE FILLMORE The Hold Steady (DBT Closes)
Mon Nov 24 San Francisco CA THE FILLMORE The Hold Steady (HS Closes)
Tue Nov 25 Los Angeles CA THE WILTERN The Hold Steady (DBT Closes)
Score = -66
Jeez people, what's the big deal about someone posting some tour dates here, relax. This is some useful fans for any Hold Steady fan out there. And for Radiohead fans? Now you know where you can peg a bottle at Tad Kubler when THS comes to your city.
Score = 5
Ugh, the Orpheum? I've been dreaming about a DBT/HS double bill for ages, and they have to play the Orpheum? I don't want to be forced to sit in a chair designed for somebody 8 inches shorter than me. I want to be able to walk around and drink (some more).
Score = 2
what a fucking fucktard
yeah hold steady, just keep putting out the same album over and over again. you'll be playing arenas in no time.
idiots.
Score = 3
Wow - a story geared directly for an explosion of comments - well played, sir.
Before all the unoriginal "Hold Steady suck" trolls pipe in, I'll say I really love The Hold Steady but Kubler is wrong. Radiohead already made "The Bends" and "OK Computer" - why should they make those albums again? And while I like "Stay Positive," it's a bit disappointing in that it seems to regurgitate a lot of "Boys and Girls in America." What made "BAGIA" and "Separation Sunday" so great were the ongoing evolution of the band's sound...the same evolution that he's criticizing Radiohead for.
Score = 26
I don't think he's criticizing them for evolving, I think he's just saying they lost him in their evolution. So what? Radiohead expects--and maybe even wants--to alienate some of their older fans each time out. He didn't say the music was bad, it's just not what he's into. Who cares, really?
Also, I don't think laptops and sequencers was the only way to go for Radiohead to evolve after OK Computer. If they'd made another rock oriented record it wouldn't automatically have been a repeat of what they'd done before. OK Computer wasn't a repeat of The Bends--far from it. I'd bet they could have come up with another classic more rock-oriented album if Yorke hadn't become depressed and sick of guitars, etc.
Score = 13
I told NME that them Steady Holders were the ugliest band since OK! GO!!!, yet they didn't print that.. and what I said was FACT.
Score = 3
He said "I think they're trying too hard not to be Radiohead. That seems a little ridiculous to me." I'm taking that at criticism - he's not saying they suck, but saying "What are they doing?" sounds somewhat critical at least, no?
The thing is they're not sick of guitars and rock music - have you seen them live lately? Everything in It's Right Place is a Rock Song. Arpeggi is a Rock Song. Packt Like Sardines is a Rock Song. It's not like they've turned into Animal Collective or anything.
Score = 13
I know to some people saying you don't like post-OK Computer Radiohead is like announcing in a British Lit. graduate course that you don't like anything James Joyce did after A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man, but I'm not sure it's all that dramatic. Radiohead clearly changed their sound and direction after OK Computer to something entirely different, and I think his criticism is fair. They didn't want to sound anything like what people's idea of Radiohead was, and they achieved that, but that doesn't mean everyone's going to enjoy it. He probably shouldn't have said they're trying "too hard" cause he doesn't qualify it, but I can see where he's coming from.
But you're right, I do think it's fair to say he probably hasn't heard In Rainbows or seen them since they've reintegrated guitars into their sound--although it's still a far cry from their mid-90s output.
Score = 9
What's interesting is that In Rainbows, to me, sounds like the band trying really, REALLY hard TO "sound like Radiohead." Everything is there that you have come to understand is "the Radiohead sound," from Thom's talk-whisper-soaring shout vocals, the muted [post-OK Computer] guitars, the blend of traditional instrumentation and experimental electronics. In Rainbows, in my opinion, is the most Radiohead-sounding album they've done since "OK Computer."
Of course, to some extent, as ubiquitous as Radiohead seems to be in the modern rock world, EVERY Radiohead album is going to sound like them, even if they released an album of folk tunes performed on zithers. It's clear this dude doesn't actually know what he's talking about (as much as I dig his band).
Score = 16
it'd be nice if more bands would turn into animal collective
Score = -3
Stay Positive was totally a further evolution THS's sound. If you can't hear it, go listen to it again. Most obviously in the way they bravely involved a greater variety of instruments. Not to mention the incredibly Suf sounding vocal harmony breakdown in Two-Handed Handshake (I know it's technically a bonus track). I think the reason it feels so regurgitated is because Craig took the opportunity to start making a LOT of connections lyrically to all three previous albums. There's a reference in almost every other line. This was in absolutely no way a bad thing but it did blur the lines of distinction between the band's albums.
Score = -1
Can't we all just get along?
Oh wait, no, we can't. Oh well.
Score = 11
I knew there was a reason I didn't like these guys.
Score = 13
semantics misunderstood, simple as that
he is clearly a fan of radiohead, just doesn't agree with their current track... is there anything wrong with that?
Score = -3
clearly a fan?
um. no. he is clearly "that guy" who thinks he is cool and more reputable by saying "their early stuff was way better" -- which is one of the oldest copouts in the hipster handbook. he obviously hasn't listened to radiohead in the last seven years. yeah guy, they are going crazy with the buttons and sequencing on In Rainbows...ugh. he's trying to stir the pot and look like he is such a rock purist that anything other than rehashed guitar music falls short for him. too bad greenwood reinvented rock guitar and moved on.
Score = 8
and thats why you dont let the lead guitar player do interviews, usually you'd expect this from a drummer.
Score = 13
hilarious coming from a guy like Kubler. and i even like BAGIA.
Score = -4
these goddamn christians.
Score = 0
I like the Hold Steady a lot, but this dude has no place commenting on musical innovation.
Not saying he isn't a good guitarist, but his style is 30+ years old. It's all based on power chords and classic rock scales. Radiohead is on the complete opposite end of the spectrum.
Score = 25
Beef- not just for black rappers anymore.
Score = 8
its obvious the dude hasnt heard a radiohead album since kid a
Score = 10
Well, there's no accounting for taste -- and given the Hold Steady's particular brand of slam-poetry barked over power-chords, that comment isn't too surprising. What did you expect? The guitarist for the Hold Steady to be all like: I love ambient noise, bach, and drum machines?
Score = 22
Don't get me wrong, I freaking love The Hold Steady. But them commenting on Radiohead is just down right ridiculous. Radiohead just keep getting better while Seperation Sunday was the hold steady's last great work.
Score = 4
People...we're talking about The Hold Steady here. Does anyone even give a rats ass about them? Go read an US Weekly or something...
Score = 5
The Hold Steady are a weak band playing 40 year old recycled Springsteen riffs. They make Oasis look like Led Zep in comparison. In my opinion Radiohead got way more interesting with Kid A and Amnesiac. Before that I was only a lukewarm fan. He said "I think [Radiohead have] lost the plot," Which plot? The one that made them superstars on their own terms? This guy is stuck in the 70s & 80s. He is an average guitarist at best.
Score = 16
+++++1
Score = -1
I love The Hold Steady. But they should know not to diss Radiohead.
Personally, I think In Rainbows is Radiohead's best overall album. I doubt he has even listened to it.
Score = 4
Hm? Radiohead has had "all the buttons and sequencing and stuff" for years. It's why Kid A is my favorite album by them. Sorry they aren't playing straightforward rock music?
Score = 7
The Hold Steady SUUUUUCK.
Score = 10
Funny, I think the same about Radiohead. Each to their own, eh?
Score = -5
The guy doesn't like Radiohead - so what? Personally I don't really dig either band and I have no problem telling people that. This guy said he doesn't like a band. Is Radiohead above criticism? I mean it's one thing if he said "Radiohead fucking suck and they have no business making music" but all he said is he thinks they're a good band he just doesn't really dig them anymore - big deal.
Score = 0
FORBIDDEN OAN TEH INNERNET:
1. Liking things
2. Not liking things
Score = 55
Epiphany! Now I understand!
Score = 0
it almost seems like his comments are misinformed. this would have been accurate maybe 8 years ago when kid A was released.
Score = 5
so much for "Stay[ing] Positive".
Score = 9
jesus.....
Score = -2
Who cares what this guy has to say, The Hold Steady aren't even in the same universe as Radiohead.
I agree with eric, I doubt he heard In Rainbows. The guitar work on that puts his power cords to shame...
...Sorry, but I just don't understand the praise surrounding The Hold Steady...
Score = 8
you may not like a revolution but you've got an obligation to respect it, bro.
Score = -13
Jealous much? Radiohead's clearly at the top of their game. Kubler doesn't have to like them, but he should at least show some them some respect. It just smacks of petty bitchiness, as it is.
Score = 8
What's the big deal. Even if he hated Radiohead who cares? Their music is largely unrelated. If he had said he hated Bach or B. Spears would anybody even notice. Now If he had said that he thought John Cougar or the BOSS had shitty ideas then we'd have something to talk about.
Score = 2
Funniest thing I've read in a while.
Score = 0
Matthew Wilder's comment that is....
Score = 1
So Radiohead should keep making the same type of album over and over? That's boring, kinda like the Hold Steady.
Score = 8
Hey Kubler... you suck!
Score = 2
What Kubler is actually saying here is pretty depressing, and quite a shame.
Score = 0
Not a fan of either band. They're at polar opposites of the rock spectrum in terms of style; one too repetititive and boring, the other too obscure and ethereal. Neither is very interesting or enjoyable to listen to.
Score = -12
A friend of mine criticized Radiohead once.
His car blew up in his driveway the next morning.
I'm not liking Tad's odds.
Score = 27
I think it is becoming commonplace for bands to throw other bands under the bus to get a buzz about them going. Personally, I haven't listened to the Hold Steady, and didn't care too much about them, but they garner attention when you throw out names like Radiohead. And I am sorry, but you can't compare the two bands, and unfortunately that is what happens when artists make comments like that. I just think the bottomline is that the Hold Steady's Guitarist wanted some buzz (unless he was specifically asked about Radiohead, in which case why would he just randomly bring them up without any sense of premeditated thought), and what better way than to put out a band name who has been relevant since the 90s. Love or hate Radiohead, they are in a class far superior to the Hold Steady.
Score = -2
How are you so positive that Radiohead are clearly superior when you've never listened to their music? That's a pretty stupid thing to say, and if you think that The Hold Steady are just now starting to get "buzz" going, then you haven't been paying any attention the last few years.
I think Radiohead are better than The Hold Steady as well (though I like both bands.) Do you know how I came to that conclusion? By listening to both bands and deciding for myself. It's a crazy concept I know, but might be worth exploring unless you enjoy shouting about your ignorance for all to hear.
Score = 1
whoa. people are taking this wayyyyyy too seriously. especially ^ that dude above me ^.
its music, you nerds! lighten up.
Score = 3
ugh radiohead. Stop trying to sound like Brian Eno! He's god, you're not.
Score = -20
And I think Hold Steady is crap.
Score = 8
Let's cut this down to the basics.
- Tad Kubler does not like Radiohead's recent works and liked them better when they were less electronic.
- Tad Kubler likes Oasis.
- People are, for some reason, outraged about the above.
I don't get it. I don't agree with Kubler, but I agree with the outrage even less. Is not caring for a band's current direction considered a diss these days?
Score = 7
Yeah, THS are such a throwback. They actually write SONGS. What paleos!
Score = -8
you're an idiot. for real.
do radiohead not have songs?
dude, if you want to listen to a thin lizzy cover band and defend it, then by all means.
idiot!
Score = 4
easy there, sugar. sorry to tell you that your precious emperor has no clothes. rh hasn't written a song in 10 years. calling me an "idiot" won't change that. it just proves how fragile YOU are. let's keep it civil and avoid saying shit that'd get your faced caved-in if you said it to someone in person.
Score = -10
How can you spew such garbage and still sleep at night? I'd really *love* to hear an explanation of how Radiohead doesn't write "songs" anymore. Is it just that their conception of music doesn't jibe with what you're comfortable in calling a "song"? (And I'm sure you've got a foolproof scientifically verified method of determining "songness") Because I know that complaint--it's been unimaginatively regurgitated by millions of boring whiners about an infinitum of bands over the years--, and while it could easily be leveled (futilely) against any number of so-called experimental acts out there, it's a biiig stretch to throw it at Radiohead.
Save your obvious knee-jerk hatred of people you perceive as "hipsters" for a band that's really pitiful. You're blowing your whole guise (that you simply "love to hate", I don't know, because girls with cute haircuts or tattoos or whatever kind of scare you, or they won't talk to you or something) by getting ass hurt over a band with the chops and accomplishments of Radiohead. You're obviously studying the ways of society and trying to find what "rules" you can break to be "different", but you look like a pathetic 13 year old when you just blast on anything that's respected (and in defense of The Hold Steady, no less. Maybe you really are 13). Study, son, inform yourself with valid arguing points if you want to be taken seriously in your hate.
Score = 2
And leave Thin Lizzy out of this (although I get your point). Those guys were great. A band aping that style of music 30 (30+!) years later... not so much.
Score = 0
Thin Lizzy are fine..the *first* time around.
Score = 0
How does an Oasis fan pay tribute and respect to his favorite band? By talking shit about another band.
Score = 18
Everyone calm down, although I'm sure that was not the intent of Stereogum. Tad is a music fan just like us, and just because he's in the Hold Steady doesn't mean he can't express his opinion. Big f'ing deal. He's not slagging Radiohead off, just offering his own critique.
Score = 4
Why is he whining about Radiohead not being Radiohead anymore NOW? If he considers the "real" Radiohead to be Bends and OK Computer era Radiohead, then he should have brought this issue up when Kid A came out.
Score = 6
Exactly, what I find frustrating about the comment by Tad is that his critiques make NO sense, and therefore seem like attention-whoring statements. if he said it in early 2000's it would've been more understandable, but listen to Kid A before making grandiose statements.
Score = 1
the hold steady are terrible, not not because they don't like radiohead. simply because they make bad music.
Score = -1
Radiohead > The Hold Steady.
Score = 2
who gives a fuck what the hold steady say anyway?? i hadn't heard of them before this. i have heard of a band called radiohead though. i hear they make music.
Score = -3
Seperation Sunday > OK Computer
yeah i said it you fucking hipsters
Score = -14
good one!
Score = 1
Shut the fuck up, you fucking hipster.
Score = 1
i love how hipster is an insult hurled (in this case) at people who like a band who (until their last album) have been on one of the biggest record labels in the world...there is something incongruent about that to me...
for me, a hipster is into something like jay reatard or the black lips. let's make fun of those bands for a while. oh remember times new viking?! come on folks, i feel like the democratic primary here, let's join forces and all make fun of buckcherry again!!!
Score = 9
OK Computer > The Hold Steady
Did THAT offend you, yeah?
I really didn't mean that but for the sake of what you said, of course I did. Any bets on THS opening for Oasis @ Madison Square Garden in a couple of months? Noel and Tad probably had a deal and now its Noel's move.
Score = 1
"I love Oasis. I love them. I think that what they do is earnest. I think it's honest."
Honest...ly shite?
Score = 2
I wish Franz would stop wasting his time with this god awful band and start playing with World Inferno more often.
Score = 0
This is a bit of old news...Radiohead stopped making your typical "rock songs" back in 2000. Who cares?
Score = -1
Hey, while we've all been talking about Oasis for the last two weeks, David Byrne and Brian Eno (heard of them?) released this new album. And it's kind of amazing. Can we talk about that instead?
Score = 7
I just deleted Stay Positive from my iTunes
Score = 1
How will Craig and Co. sleep at night?