Anyone read this?
http://puddlegum.net/radiohead-01-and-10/

Quote :

"Ten days after our original article, we have come to believe that OK Computer and In Rainbows were meant to complement each other. During the writing and recording process of OK Computer, Radiohead used the working title of Zeros and Ones. If OK Computer is represented by 01, and In Rainbows is represented by 10, then we have 01 and 10. In binary code 01 and 10 complement each other. Consider that In Rainbows was meant to complement OK Computer, musically, lyrically, and in structure. We found that the two albums can be knit together beautifully. By combining the tracks to form one playlist, 01 and 10, we have a remarkable listening experience. The transitions between the songs are astounding, and it appears that this was done purposefully."

Didn't want to make a new thread but all the ones that show up in search are archived. I've been listening to this playlist all week and at the very least, it's a good listen.

12/17/2010 10:30:14 AM

highdeas

12/17/2010 10:34:21 AM

That's so old and so dumb

12/17/2010 10:35:24 AM

have you ever listened to Dark Side of the Moon while watching The Wizard of Oz, mannnn? have you done it...on weeeeeed?

12/17/2010 10:48:39 AM

Wait.

You're saying that songs from two different albums by the same band can be arranged with each other and still sound good?

HOLY SHIT.

12/17/2010 12:41:32 PM

Radiohead is my favorite band.

That said, this thread does not interest me.

12/17/2010 12:45:51 PM

did you know the intro of Blackened was actually played the other way around?

12/17/2010 1:04:35 PM

Why the fuck is this everywhere now? I've seen like 10 people post it to Facebook in the past week. You might as well post the Konami code or something.

12/17/2010 1:08:32 PM

yeah i saw this the other day. i figured it was just one of those dumb things people came up with like the dark side/wizard of oz thing, but apparently after in rainbows came out some guy speaking on behalf of the band was basically saying thom yorke was surprised it took people that long to figure out the connection, so maybe it was done intentionally. i don't know.

12/17/2010 1:10:11 PM

^^probably because of http://www.cracked.com/article_18896_10-mind-blowing-easter-eggs-hidden-in-famous-albums.html

12/17/2010 1:15:44 PM

As far as In Rainbows stoner theories go, this one is cooler

Quote :

"#2 – The Golden Section According to a post on Mortigi Tempo, you can hear Thom sing the album’s title, along with those blissful strings, right when In Rainbows enters The Golden Section (or Golden Ratio), the old Renaissance-era theory that 1.6180339887 (or 61.8%) is an aesthetically pleasing “sweet spot” in a work of art. How it applies here: In Rainbows is 42m 34s, or 2554 seconds long. 2554/1.618 is the 1578th or so second of the album, which is 2m49s into Reckoner, precisely when the strings come in with the album title. It’s Golden, Jerry! Golden, I tell ya."

12/17/2010 1:20:19 PM

I will never understand the hype for In Rainbows.

"All I Need" and a bunch of boring songs

12/17/2010 1:34:13 PM

Don't care much for "House of Cards" and "Videotape" is one of the most grating Radiohead songs ever

But "Reckoner" is 10/10 and everything else is solid

Even the non-filler tracks on CD2 are better than most bands' album tracks

12/17/2010 1:44:42 PM

Jigsaw falling into place owns

12/17/2010 2:14:34 PM

I love In Rainbows and I'm always open to finding new ways to experience music, but I don't have any patience for people that try to sell theories like that found in the OP as some intentional thing.

12/17/2010 3:24:15 PM

I'm gonna listen to In Rainbows right now but not because of any misguided theory. Because it is a great album.

12/17/2010 3:55:21 PM

Quote :

"Wait. You're saying that songs from two different albums by the same band can be arranged with each other and still sound good? HOLY SHIT."

this

oh, and "Reckoner" is a perfect fucking song.

12/18/2010 10:51:30 AM

I tried this once right when the theory came out.

Afterwards I had to put down the bong and ask myself what the fuck I was doing with my life.

12/18/2010 11:23:23 AM

Quote :

""All I Need" and a bunch of boring songs"

you are dead to me.

12/18/2010 12:46:55 PM

Is Radiohead that guy with the LED tron mask that my older uncles used to listen to? I like deadmau5 better.

12/18/2010 1:06:16 PM

In Rainbows might have become my favorite Radiohead CD. I'm a big Radiohead fan, and I must admit on the first listenthru, I hated the album. After hearing it a few times, it grew on me and became on of my favorites

12/18/2010 1:28:41 PM

LULZ you buy cd's.

12/18/2010 1:40:04 PM

Quote :

"As far as In Rainbows stoner theories go, this one is cooler #2 – The Golden Section According to a post on Mortigi Tempo, you can hear Thom sing the album’s title, along with those blissful strings, right when In Rainbows enters The Golden Section (or Golden Ratio), the old Renaissance-era theory that 1.6180339887 (or 61.8%) is an aesthetically pleasing “sweet spot” in a work of art. How it applies here: In Rainbows is 42m 34s, or 2554 seconds long. 2554/1.618 is the 1578th or so second of the album, which is 2m49s into Reckoner, precisely when the strings come in with the album title. It’s Golden, Jerry! Golden, I tell ya."

yeah, this is way cooler than the OP theory

I wasn't a huge fan of IR until recently (like this year). Don't know...just clicked with me for some reason. Now, I love it and I'd put it up there with Kid A and OKC. "Reckoner" is just amazing, as is "All I Need," "Weird Fishes/Arpeggi," "Jigsaw Falling into Place," etc. Love the whole thing, really.

[Edited on December 18, 2010 at 6:48 PM. Reason : .]

12/18/2010 6:47:26 PM

^ Agreed. It's every bit as good as OKC and Kid A.

12/18/2010 7:39:48 PM