For the past 100 blog centuries (~20 years real time), Radiohead has been the darlings of critics all around the world. But after their new album 'The King of Limbs', u can't help but think that their time as 'relevant musicians' might be over... Popular American blogsite Pitchfork Media gave the Kings of Distorted_Alt_bleepbloop_core_post_ambient_trance_dubstep an incredibly disappointing 7.9.

I think they basically say "In Rainbows" was a better album because it was free and it lowered expectations, so it was 'bullshit' that the Radioheads charged money 4 this album when all of their fans were already used 2 getting their music 4 free.

Now that the music on In Rainbows has had four years to outshine its launch mechanism, it's easy to forget that the album originally came bundled with an honest attempt to solve a business problem. The pay-what you-think-is-fair system wasn't just Radiohead being magnanimous, it was using their popularity and their newly won independence to ask what might have been the single most important question facing a shaken music industry: What is an album in the download era actually worth to fans?

Here is a paragraph where they say that the album was kinda lame, lost, lacking something that we've come 2 expect from the Radioheads

Radiohead's eighth record, The King of Limbs, represents a marked attempt to create a considered and cohesive unit of music that nonetheless sits somewhere outside of the spectrum of their previous full-length discography. And that's not to say that it doesn't ripple with the dazzling sonics or scenery that have become the band's stock in trade, but just that, unlike so many of their milestones, there's no abiding sense of a band defying all expectations in order to establish new precedents.

Instead, we get eight songs that feel mostly like small but natural evolutions of previously explored directions.

Basically, Radiohead got lazy and sorta just 'mailed it in', and because they weren't 'pushing the envelope' with a gimmick like 'pay-what-u-want', fans and critics were bored, and they just made another forgettably good album.

So: eight tracks, each of them worth your time, and yet The King of Limbs is still likely to go down as Radiohead's most divisive record. A trawl through message boards and social networks leaves the impression that many disappointed fans are still struggling to make sense of the gap between the greatness of the thing they got and the genius of the thing they thought they might get. It's in that gap, when assessing the album overall, that it's easy to get tangled up. This is well-worn terrain for Radiohead, and while it continues to yield rewarding results, the band's signature game-changing ambition is missed.

Is 7.9 a disappointing score in the modern Pitchfork Era when any lofi/chillchill/wavewave buzzband is 'guaranteed at least an 8.4'?
Are we 'being too hard on Thom'?

Is Radiohead just another example of an alt-rock band who has outlived their shelf life?
Is it time for Radiohead 2 'break up'?
Is it time 4 Americans to stop 'kissing the ass' of Radiohead and other UK dubsteppy bands?
Would most buzzbands 'kill' for a 7.9?
Is Radiohead allowed 2 be 'Best New Music' because they are old & tired?
Do u <3 or h8 Radiohead?
Can we officially call The King of Limbs 'the biggest flop' of 2k11? [via Fox News' #1 album of 2k11]

Radiohead

Buzzband

Radiohead is a conceptual band that ppl like to think is kewl because u can do drugs and get deep 2 their music.

Lists: overground, mindie (mainstream indie), British

Read more>>>>