Playlist

Then how do you explain coldplay?

Sure, they influenced Coldplay. Yup, that's one. Beatles, Eagles, Rolling Stones and Pink Floyd influenced more artists than Chris Martin has piano keys at his fingertips.

I beg to differ!! Just because Radiohead is always ahead in doing something different & no one "DARES" to touch them... does not mean they're not influential. As a musician, guitarist, artist,... I am influenced by them & alot of my friend's bands are too. Because we don't try to sound like them for the sake of founding our own sound does not mean we are not influenced by Radiohead. It's more than you see or hear!

Mario... you suck, you are out of touch, you know nothing about music. please resign first thing Monday morning.

I never said Radiohead are not influential at all. But to call them one of the MOST influential bands OF ALL TIME is ridiculously wrong!

Blake,
My problem isn't that they've been called influential. I agree with that. What I strongly disagree with is calling them one of the most influential bands of all time as Gwyneth Paltrow did. Those words elevate them to the club where the greats, or at the very least where the across-the-board influential bands, are. Radiohead just isn't there. Not yet, anyway. Especially since they come from the school that Pink Floyd helped build.

And by the way, Blake, I own a copy of every single Radiohead CD. So I'm quite in touch with them.

Mario

Radiohead debuted in 1992. That's 16 years worth of influence.

Now, off the top of my head, I can think of three bands that have publicly said they were influenced by Radiohead. Muse, Coldplay and ... Okay, so two bands. And about that many more that actually sound like it.

Sure, there's a lot of bands out there that sound like they're influenced by Radiohead, but typically they shared the same influences as Radiohead. The Flaming Lips comes to mind.

I have to agree with Mario, saying Radiohead is "one of the most influential bands of all time" is a HUGE exaggeration.

Mario -

After you left off Radiohead from your best concerts of 2008, how can you seriously attempt to comment on anything related to them?

And I was at both Radiohead in May and your pick as the best concert of 2008 (Third Day) and there was no comparison - in fact, Third Day wasn't even the best band that October night - it was Switchfoot.

Angry Old Man,

What? I need to see a Radiohead concert (not to mention put it in my Top 10 of the year) in order to be able to weigh in on them critically?

And by the way, Angry Old Man, Third Day was not my No. 1 concert of 2008. It was Tina Turner.

Mario

@Mario

You missed my point - if Radiohead wasn't one of the ten best Dallas concerts of last year, I am just questioning your judgment.

Maybe the question is did you even go to Radiohead? And if not, why not?

My bad -Third Day was your second best concert of 2008. Still ridiculous.

Angry Old Man,

You sure are putting an incredible amount of stock on ONE show. One show out of an entire year. If it was that good to you, great. Wonderful! But that doesn't mean it has to be that good to everybody else.

And no, I was not at that Radiohead concert. I was not covering it and I was on another assignment that night.

But that's nor here nor there. What floors me is that you're questioning my entire musical judgment because of one show. In your mind that one show nulls and voids 19 years of music criticism/journalism.

Must have been a seriously ASTOUNDING concert.

@Mario

I have been going to concerts for 35+ years and seen everyone of the big guys at least once except the Beatles. I was not a Radiohead fan - I went with my son who is- and yes, I thought it was pretty amazing - like my top ten of all time amazing. #1? Led Zeppelin Dallas 1977.

I am now a Radiohead fan.

We can agree to disagree on Radiohead and I am not questioning your musical judgment - just the wide swath you plowed through with the definitive pronouncement that Radiohead is not an influential band.

If you are interested - I will find quotes about Radiohead's influence on today's music and you can be the Eagles' champion and let's compare notes.

Just my $.02.

Enjoyed the dialog but it is way past my bedtime. That rap music on the Grammys just wore me out.

Mario--

First of all, calling radiohead "one of the most influential bands" of all time is not 'ridiculously wrong.' It's an opinion...and although it might not truthfully be Gwyneth's opinion, it is an opinion nonetheless. You can't nullify a normative statement like that by calling it 'wrong.' I do, however, appreciate the notion that you seem to understand this by some of your follow-up posts.

Second, that you haven't seen radiohead live gives much less credence to your opinion/judgment regarding the band's influence magnitude. I happen to believe that a band's true talent/influence is largely manifested in the band's live act.

Third, it seems as if you have a hard time getting around the "age" factor. Is there a particular band creation date (roughly speaking) after which precludes inclusion into the talk of "most influential of all time"? You've at least intonated that a 1992 debut isn't early enough...and judging from the bands you listed, the 1960's/early '70s is, so...when?

Fourth, I happen to be of the opinion--regarding ONLY the notion of incorporating electronics/electronic components into music--that radiohead became perhaps THE most influential band of all time for all the artists that have and will hit the scene post-1999.

So...masticate on that one.

Let me address both Will and Angry Old Man:

Angry Old Man -- Reread my posts. I never said Radiohead wasn't influential. I just said they aren't one of the most influential bands of all time. I stand by that. "All time" encompasses an incredible amount of years. Way more years than Radiohead has been in existence, that's for sure.

And Will -- What I just wrote applies. Plus, post-1999 is a mighty short period of time in the grand pantheon of music. As a music critic and a music fan I cannot look at any genre for just the last 10 years. I need to go as far back as possible. Everything comes from something that came before it. So when you say "all time" to me, opinion or not, that's a mighty big statement. And it better be well backed up.

For both of you -- Nope. Haven't seen Radiohead live. Heard their CDs though. Listening to a body of work, meaning several CDs by one artist, is more than enough ammunition to form an educated opinion.

My problem with what Gwyneth Paltrow said (or was told to say) is the exxagerated wording. Words are an important part of my business. So I take them very seriously. That's why I wrote what I wrote.

Thank you both for the passionate discussion. I appreciate it!

Wait a minute! Who the hell have the Eagles influenced??!! Has there ever been a more sterile, safe, hum drum band? Radiohead influenced a whole slew of bands: Coldplay, Muse, Starsailor, Paloalto, Sigur Ros come to mind immediately. Their influence mainly lies in the way that they have encouraged bands to be experimental and constantly evolving. Unlike the bands that you cited as being "influential"

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA, you must be kidding? Radiohead's a great band and has influenced a lot of "rock" in the past fifteen years. and how do you leave Led Zeppelin off your list of "influentials?"

RIDICULOUS, get a new job, you obviously don't know music

Mario: Radiohead IS one of the MOST influential bands ever. You are clueless. Radiohead is continually changing the rules. But like Gwyneth, yours is an opinion. I just happen to agree with hers.

Radiohead rivals perhaps only U2 as the most influential band of the '90's and 00's. The fruit may not be apparent to all today, but i'm sure the results will be become apparent in time, even in Middle America.

The Eagles?!?! Oh, I dunno, try EVERY SINGLE COUNTRY ARTIST AROUND NOW. They pretty much ALL list the Eagles as an influence. And that's just for starters. You know there are other genres of music out there other than rock.

AND LET ME REPEAT THIS IN ALL CAPS NOW....I NEVER SAID RADIOHEAD WAS NOT INFLUENTIAL. BUT THEY ARE DEFINITELY NOT ONE OF THE MOST INFLUENTIAL BANDS OF ALL TIME. THEY HAVEN'T BEEN AROUND LONG ENOUGH FOR "ALL TIME."

Radiohead did a very influential, cutting edge thing a year and a half ago when they released that album to its fan online and let them pay what they wanted for it. THAT was one of the most influential or significant things of all time.
But musically speaking Radiohead is not anywhere near old enough to have had any real impact on popular music. Gwyneth Paltrow oughta stick to acting and stay off the Grammys.
All those groups this critic cited -- Beatles, Eagles etc. -- have quantifiable impact on the popular music that followed in its wake. So did Zeppelin, Kiss, and the 70s singer-songwriter movement which has been watered down and is today called country music.
And why are we still harping on the fact this critic didn't go go Radiohead. WHo cares? He wasn't the pop music critic at the time as far as I know from having read the paper.
Oh, and Coldplay sucks. I like my rock bands to have balls, thank you very much. As for Radiohead, some melodies would be nice too. If I want to listen to machines beep and buzz I'll crawl into my computer.

Wow. I mean, wow. One of your colleagues at the DMN once confused Patti Smith with Patty Smyth, and I thought that was the single most idiotic thing I had ever seen written by a music columinst. Well, congratulations Mario-- you are the new champion!

Gary,
What is idiotic about thinking that Radiohead are influential but NOT one of the most influential bands of ALL TIME? Are you following my words here? Once again, I'm not saying they are not influential, I'm saying they are not one of the most influential bands of all time. I don't know how many times I have to repeat that? It's exactly what I said in my original blog post.
Mario

It's idiotic because they ARE one of the most influential bands of all time. Clearly, you have your opinion and I have mine and that's OK. As a musician myself, though, I can assure you that your opinion would be considered incorrect by just about any musician between the ages of 14 and 49...

And by the way, saying that they haven't been "around long enough" just digs your hole a little bit deeper. Were the Sex Pistols around "long enough?" Were Big Star around "long enough?" Was Jimi freaking Hendrix around "long enough?" The Beatles released their entire recorded output in a span of seven years, while Radiohead has been releasing music for 16 years. By your logic, that means the Beatles could not have been considered influential until, oh, 1979 or so because "they haven't been around long enough."

Do you realize how long the music of the Sex Pistols, the Beatles and Jimi Hendrix have had to entrench itself into the collective consciousness of future musicians, the masses and anybody else that cares to listen? DECADES, Gary, DECADES! Even if the Beatles became influential in 1979, which is obviously not the case, that's THIRTY YEARS AGO! HELLO! The true, lasting influence of artists is measured by how long their creativeness endures, how long from when they made the music or when they stopped making music altogether it keeps urging others to create. Surely, Coldplay are influenced by Radiohead. That's plain to hear. But do you know who came first? Pink Floyd. No Pink Floyd, no Radiohead, no Coldplay. Music has a trajectory, it has a past. There is no comparing Radiohead to any of those classic bands that have been mentioned in these comments. Especially since at least one of those classic bands influenced Radiohead. Radiohead is still a very young band. As a young band they have surely been influential. But to call them one of the most influential bands of ALL TIME is to sugggest that they stack up against the Beatles, Led Zeppelin, Pink Floyd, the Eagles, Rolling Stones, Sex Pistols, Jimi Hendrix, Kiss in terms of wide-swath influence. That simply is not the case. It cannot be. Not yet, anyway. Give them another 10 years and sure. Right now they just haven't been around long enough to be considered "one of the most influential bands of ALL TIME." If you want to call them one of the most influential bands of the '90s or of the '00s, cool. I'd agree with that. But all time? Nope.

I don't think you can put "influence" on a timeline. The Sex Pistols became one of the most influential bands of all time the day that "God Save the Queen" came out on 45. Nirvana became one the minute "Smells Like Teen Spirit" was shown on MTV for the first time. In my view, Radiohead joined that group the day "OK Computer" was released, and have only added to their legacy since.

All of this squabbling aside, please promise that you'll go see them live sooner rather than later. It blows my mind that a music critic for a supposed big-city paper has never seen the biggest rock band of the past 15 years in concert. How is that even possible? It's your job! And don't say "live" doesn't matter in judging a band, because it does. The Who are my all-time favorite band, but they probably wouldn't be if I judged them only on their recorded output. They took it to another level live, and so does Radiohead.

I do apologize for one thing: the DMN writer who confused Patti Smith with Patty Smyth is probably still a bigger idiot than you. Let's be honest-- that's about as idiotic as it gets... :)

Gary, this is interesting. So you call Radiohead "the biggest rock band of the past 15 years." Hmmm...15 years isn't long enough to be "all time" is it? But sure, I'll catch them in concert next chance I get.

Did you even read my prior post about not being able to put influence on a timeline? Grrrrrrrrrrr.

Anyways, go see them live. Please. My first Radiohead show was at Trees in the summer of 1993. The AC was broken, and it must have been 145 degrees inside. I think they only managed to make it through 8 or 9 songs before they had to stop, but it was still one of the coolest rock and roll moments I've ever seen. Back then, they were just another really good guitar band. Now, they are something entirely different all together...

Gary,
We've beaten the dead horse. It's now mince meat. You have a good night!
Mario

Wow - boy am I sorry I missed this thread today!

Radiohead is the biggest band of the last 15 years??? How so? In terms of sales? Not hardly. Great music? They are second rate Pink Floyd except Pink Floyd wrote actual songs and had real musicians in the band and a better live show. The only cool thing they did was give away their music for free.
You all are overstating this group's importance in America.
And blaming this critic for not seeing Radiohead when he had another job at the time is like blaming Obama for Bush's 8 years of screwups.

I'm a huge band of Radiohead, not since that much time since I'm just 22. I think they are amazing, wouldn't dare to say they are one of the most influential bands of all times, they are really good at what they do in terms of music and lyrics... but I think everyone here is missing the real and main point, that includes you Mario, the comments of the introductions aren't chosen by the person who introduce the band.. and second c' mon no one noticed the tone of sarcasm and laugh on Gwyneth??? the the last wink from her to Chris martin... hello!!!
That's been very bitchy from the producers to choose her to present them... funny though!

Gary's argument knocks it out of the park. Influence can be instantaneous. For instance, how many Pearl Jam copy cat bands came out within a year of their first album getting huge?

And where are those Pearl Jam copycat bands now? Yup, Pearl Jam was very influential at first. But I don't think influence has lasted much. I would say the same thing for Nirvana. VERY influential at first. But again, I don't think much of that influence has lasted. We can point to Daughtry, but he's coming from Creed, which in turn comes from Pearl Jam. Nothing at this point is original. It all gets refurbished somehow. Influence can definitely be immediate. But the true test of it is how long it lasts. Those that remain influential through decades are the ones that are really "one of the most influential bands of ALL TIME."

Fans of these failed acts, like the Flying Burrito Bros., always despise those who make it, like the Eagles. The Eagles hired Burrito Bernie Leadon for their band and improved upon the sound with better songwriting, better harmonies, better production. The community hated the Eagles because they made it and the lesser talents failed. Jealousy was clearly involved in Gram Parsons' famous anti-Eagles diatribe. Had Gram lived and evolved I have no doubt he would have written mainstream music. And once he did so and found success, those same whiney losers would slam him for "selling out."
How about we just enjoy music for what it is and stop labeling people "cool" or "uncool"?
There's very little that is truly original. All these bands are influenced by their antecedents. Kurt Cobain came out of the Cheap Trick sound and stole the riff of Boston's More Than a Feeling for his most famous hit. He made a huge cultural impact for his wonderful Nirvana music, then ended his life in a cowardly suicide, leaving behind a wife and child. He's no hero and he didnt last. Pearl Jam define the word "hypocrites." They have been with a major label their entire career, promoted their music with performances on Saturday Night Live and pocketed big bucks for doing their often derivative rock music (much of it stolen from Zeppelin) and had the gall to bitch about fame and pretend to be underground. Give me a break.

Stumbled upon this rant and have to ask the question. Whatever happened to Thor at DMN? I always appreciated his musical taste. My guess is he was part of a cutback at the DMN. I know most newspapers are struggling right now.

I too read Mario's Top Ten Concerts and was very puzzled by the choices. My recollection is that Thor reviewed many of what I considered to be the best of the 2008 Shows. To me, 2008 was a banner year for concerts. Yes, Radiohead along with Springsteen are close to the top of the list. How about Dylan at the HOB? My Morning Jacket, Spoon/New Pornographers, Ryan Adams, Band of Horses. I'm sure I've forgotten others. That's the beauty of year end lists to remind us of the great shows. Unfortunately, I did not attend one of Mario's top ten shows....

Don,
Those Top 10 lists for 2008, both CDs and concerts, were mine and mine alone. I enjoy a variety of music. I enjoy listening to that variety and writing about that variety. Musical diversity is very important to me. I hope to explore even more of it this year.
Thanks so much for commenting on the blog.
Mario

it's nice to see so much passion concerning music.... esp here in Dallas where music seems to have dropped dead completely.

im with Mario in that it is hard to call a band that has only been around for 15-16 years 'one of the most infuential of all time'... the music hasn't been around enough to start transcending generations like bands such as Beatles or Zep or Floyd etc....but it is safe to say that they are one of the greatest around RIGHT NOW. and they WILL end up being one of the most infuential of all time. i just dont believe you can have that title until people 2 or 3 generations down the line are saying, "damnm, that Bends album by Radiohead is killer!.. and it came out 30 years ago!"

aren't they tied with one other band for most Grammy's all time with 5? to me that says quite a bit... for a band to make the music they have and still be popular in the mainstream is incredible. i mean c'mon, Kid A and Amnesiac weren't mainstream albums... they were way more along the lines of experimental.

People who like the Eagles...have kids who like Nickelback.

Matt,
Thanks for your thoughts. I agree with them! And you know, I would even call OK Computer experimental, not to mention In Rainbows. They are far from a mainstream band and yet they sell records and have a large following. That does bode real well for them to transcend the test of time as far as influence, importance.
Thanks again.
Mario

calling any band or artist or composer one of the most influential bands of all time would be a huge exaggeration because of the two words ALL TIME.. a lot of time has passed since this whole human thing started.. so to call something "the most influential of all time" is just a way to show how greatly something influences you. whether the influence be musically, mentally or spirtually..

...and Beethoven was influenced by Mozart, and Mozart was influenced by Handel and Bach - if we're talking shelf life, the Beatles don't even compare - the truth is that quality bands with unique styles that take a chance are rewarded by influencing other unique bands that take a chance and so on, expanding the musical landscape for all of us to enjoy, while stuck-in-a-rut bands like AC/DC and the Eagles spawn bands that live and die off of one album, and then disappear as a footnote in music history.
The key factor in determining a band's influence, to me, would be how many variations of that band you truly get to see - the Beatles sound like a different band on every album - Radiohead, too (and let's not forget the influence of The Velvet Underground, REM, and The Pixies). In re-creating themselves, they create another set of bands that bear their influence...The Eagles aren't nearly as influential as Radiohead, because honestly, if you've heard on Eagles song, you've heard them all - Radiohead, on the other hand, has influenced more bands across a wider spectrum, giving them more weight, in my opinion - therefore, I'm comfortable with the "all time" tag.

just a thought

u guys probably don't know this but the most influencial band of all time is the velvet underground which pretty much paved the way for the beatles, the who and many others.